Michael Spencer continues his drift from orthodoxy and again he seems to feel he needed to take a shot at me here at Apprising Ministries as I go about my labor for the Lord he claims to serve. He and I have been through it before as you can see in The Internet Monk Defends Thomas Merton and in Internet Monk Michael Spencer and the “Mert-Dude”.

UPDATE: Judging by Spencer’s recent post at Boar’s Head Tavern the Lord has apparently struck a nerve.

In any event, God had originally led me across iMonk’s article the morning I wrote this post through a blog from Waterloo, Ontario, CA called On Coffee by “the lead pastor @ Trinity EMC” Pastor Mike. But in his brief piece Karl Barth Links (KBLs) iMonk includes my own article Rob Bell and Karl Barth. Spencer though just can’t seem to help himself in making a dig in the end of this post where he says, “Barth outed as a heretic by Apprising Ministries, which pretty much settles all questions.”

However, at the top of KBLs iMonk states: “Those who are forever explaining me to their loyal readership should know this: I rarely disagree with Barth, and whatever names you have for him probably apply to me without exception on my part. (Other than ‘Lutheran.’)” (emphasis mine) Then one commenter put it quite astutely when he said, “As in, neo-orthodox?” Well, yes.

And I also left the following comment as well because I wanted to make sure everyone knows iMonk himself said it, not me:

iMonk,

For the record you say: “Those who are forever explaining me to their loyal readership should know this: I rarely disagree with Barth, and whatever names you have for him probably apply to me without exception on my part.”

You do know Barth’s work is a big influence on Brian McLaren in particular and within the neo-liberal cult of the Emergent Church itself. Particularly Barth’s wrong view of Scripture upon youngbloods like Rob Bell.

And as far as the “heretic” label, I will remind you that I quote Dr. Francis Schaeffer’s, as well as Dr. Walter Martin’s, assessment of Barth’s heretical denial of verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture as opposed to Barth’s existential approach to the text of the Bible.

Just wanted to make sure your readers know the company that helped make sure the questions were all “answered” correctly. :-)