> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.dashhouse.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Why I don’t warn as much as some would like me to
- URL: https://www.dashhouse.com/2005116why-i-dont-warn-as-much-as-some-would-like-me-to-html/
- Published: 2005-11-06T00:02:17.000Z
- Updated: 2022-08-15T15:34:07.000Z
- Author: Darryl Dash
- Tags: Blog, Emerging Church, Faith, #DashHouseCom, #wp

A [couple of posts ago](https://www.dashhouse.com/darryl/2005/11/jesus%5Fthe%5Ffirst.htm), [Jacob](http://www.jacobthedreamer.blogspot.com/?ref=dashhouse.com) wrote on my lack of criticism of the emerging church:

> If my memory is correct, perhaps a few passing comments. Darryl, I think you’re in a great position to warn about some of this “flaky theology” in a more specific and direct way.

> (just a little challenge bud)

There certainly is a role for warning against flaky theology, and there certainly is a lot out there of all types. Here are a few reasons why I don’t tend to do this a lot:

**My personality and calling** – I really believe that some are called to this type of ministry. Certainly as a pastor I need to warn about error when it affects the local church. But I am not as skilled or as interested in doing this other times, by personality and also probably by calling. I tend to be more interested in finding common ground than taking one side against the other. It’s a dangerous place to be as you usually end up getting shot by both sides.

Even when I find myself strongly in one camp, I tend to gravitate toward mediating the conflict than defending one side. Is that a weakness? I don’t know. Not everybody is feisty.

**My history** – I grew up among fighting Baptists. As with many others, my desire to avoid unnecessary conflict stems in part from seeing conflict handled poorly sometimes as a youth. This is not always healthy since it would be much better to learn how to handle conflict appropriately than to avoid it, but that is probably where I find myself at times.

Actually, in a way I actually like to provoke debate and then sit back. I don’t know what that says about me, but in my defense it is usually a necessary debate, and motivated by a bit of trouble-making but also a desire for both sides to learn from the other.

**Others are doing a good job warning** – There are great people out there who are doing a good job warning. I love reading [Internet Monk](http://www.internetmonk.com/?ref=dashhouse.com), [Challies](http://www.challies.com/?ref=dashhouse.com), [PyroManiac](http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/?ref=dashhouse.com), and even [Steve Camp](http://stevenjcamp.blogspot.com/?ref=dashhouse.com). I don’t necessarily agree with everything they write but I appreciate their approaches and they certainly are good at what they do.

**I like a learning posture** – I have found that occasionally (as in the emerging discussion) both sides have much to offer the other. I have also found that in these cases, a genuine desire to learn from the other side can lead to an acknowledgment of the weaknesses of the other position more than a full-on debate.

Some (not all) critiques can be a waste of time because they speak only to those who are already convinced of the problem. It takes skill to break through and generate learning and not just controversy.

**I don’t necessarily read the bad stuff** – I self-select what I read and have not finished more than one book if it looks shabby. (No I’m not going to mention names.) Some are drawn to read and to critique. I find that if a book is flaky I end up abandoning it rather than finishing it and then pulling it apart.

As I write this I realize that I am inconsistent in how I apply this. But these are the reasons, for what they’re worth, that I don’t do more warning than I do.