A Despicable and Cowardly Letter Will Delay Our Post Until Tomorrow

This will be brief. 

A letter about TWW's coverage of Dr Iain Campbell, Tom Chantry, and Al Mohler's ill advised CJ Mahaney joke was sent to, get ready:

  • Dee's church-pastors and people on the leadership team
  • The denomination's President, etc
  • A community board of which Dee sits with her husband
  • Former pastors
  • The person who sent it even pretended it was sent from a regional denomination headquarters. 

It is requesting that Dee be disciplined and thrown out of church, etc. It claims to have been written by a number of members from my denomination.The individual didn't have the guts to sign his name.

Thankfully, I have some great friends and contacts. As one well known person on that list said "What a bizarre letter." 

The Deebs are pretty sure they know who sent this. We have been receiving some threatening comments behind the scenes which we have not approved by someone who knows how to use a proxy server. However, we are pretty sure we know who it is. We will be advising people about the issue and who we think is behind it.  

We will post the letter after we get some input and advice.

Dee

 

Comments

A Despicable and Cowardly Letter Will Delay Our Post Until Tomorrow — 218 Comments

  1. First…to say: sorry that you are going through this hassle. Some people are stuck in grade school…”Imma tell on you and you’ll be in such Bad Truh-bull!”

  2. Dee,

    I just finished reading the letter, and bizarre is right!

    For someone to go to such an extreme confirms for me that our posts are being widely read and making quite an impact.

  3. ah yes, I’ve gotten similar behavior from the Chris Rosebrough family and so have others. It’s all so insane. They are all a bunch of juvenile brats who cannot admit when they have been wrong.

  4. It is requesting that Dee be disciplined and thrown out of church, etc. It claims to have been written by a number of members from my denomination. The individual didn’t have the guts to sign his name.

    i.e. “Concerned Citizens(TM)”.
    With or without a bogus Organizational Title to look larger.
    And the FRAUDULENT “address from Regional Denom HQ”.

    Do the Deebs have a tort lawyer under consideration?
    Because I’m sure such a poison pen letter might be legally actionable.
    An Attorney? LawProf? Judge Tim?

  5. Yes if your posts we're not having impact, no one would care what you wrote about. This reminds me of several other blog situations, when the blog isn't having any effect, no one cares what you write, think Wade and IMB, or FBC Jax Watchdog or Pajama Pages, but as soon as you begin to get too close to the man at the top or your words start to impact money, all hell breaks lose. Keep at it , I admire everything you do and all the effort you expend. Thank you for continuing to stand up for what's right, good and noble and protecting the victims.

  6. Pingback: Feel the love-love-love department, ctd | Civil Commotion

  7. mitch wrote:

    Yes if your posts we’re not having impact, no one would care what you wrote about.

    mitch wrote:

    but as soon as you begin to get too close to the man at the top or your words start to impact money, all hell breaks lose.

    BINGO.

  8. PJ wrote:

    ah yes, I’ve gotten similar behavior from the Chris Rosebrough family and so have others

    Rosebrough does stuff like that?!?

  9. In my conference, unsigned letters go into the trash, unread.

    Suggest your friends prayerfully consider that policy as well.

    J.M.

  10. Typical response by spiritual abuse defenders – don’t respond to the facts, just attack and attempt to silence those who call attention to the problem. The reason they do this is because when it comes to the facts, they got nuthin’

  11. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    It is requesting that Dee be disciplined and thrown out of church, etc. It claims to have been written by a number of members from my denomination. The individual didn’t have the guts to sign his name.
    i.e. “Concerned Citizens(TM)”.
    With or without a bogus Organizational Title to look larger.
    And the FRAUDULENT “address from Regional Denom HQ”.
    Do the Deebs have a tort lawyer under consideration?
    Because I’m sure such a poison pen letter might be legally actionable.
    An Attorney? LawProf? Judge Tim?

    How about the guy that advertises on late night TV. That should be shooting fish in a barrel.

    J.M.

  12. “Thankfully, I have some great friends and contacts.” I am glad when I spoke up “very privately,” I thought the same thing and I was taken out, no fan fair all my contacts friends etc were gone. There was no mercy at all, and it was totally wrong on my part to expect such emotionalistic nonsense. So be very careful I can tell you from the cheap seats the beast is hungry when awaken. I am literally terrified on evangelical churches and organizations granted that makes me a coward but I do not have the strength to fight and I fear for my job, where I live etc. Yes, they do go after that. Not me but I have seen it and this just shows it more. I am very proud of you ladies sorry I cant be the “warrior” I use to be.

  13. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    Yeah. I agree. Get legal. Turning the other cheek on this rot was for the Roman occupiers. Jews were not to go around trying to ruin each other. Fake Christianity.

    I wish I had known. I would have responded very differently to something similar. This is a bold attempt to shame censor. Shut you down by ruining your reputation. Good thing church is voluntary. Livelihoods are not.

  14. Lydia wrote:

    @ ishy:
    Oh, they are not. Be assured. They are doing “Gods work”. That is what makes them so dangerous.

    True. [insert Lewis quote here]

    That or they are just…off. Mentally. Which is also dangerous.

  15. The response on chantry still blows my mind, though. You were reporting on public arrest reports, trial dates, etc. amazing that people think that should covered up.

    Tells you exactly how abuse cases with less public information get treated.

  16. I keep thinking about that word, disciplined, what exactly do they expect your church to do to you? I mean really, your not a child and certainly not their child. It seems what they mean is “bring them back in line”. Again as Lydia said earlier, thankfully church is a volunteer organization
    Let’s just suppose your church or pastor agrees and disciplines you and you leave, does that shut down your blog or just give you even more grist for the mill? Honestly if people like this want you to go away the first thing they should try is ignoing you. Then perhaps give some thought to their own actions that Garner so much negative attention.

  17. Printing the letter here may intensify the issue. The policy of throwing unsigned letters in the trash has merit.

    Prayers for a just resolution.

  18. I’m sorry that you are having to deal with this. I’m very thankful for the work that you do here.

  19. Dee,

    If the origin of the letter is in Texas or the party sending it resides or has a business here, please send me a copy. I can get a couple of good moderate Baptist attorneys to join me in filing a suit in federal court here.

  20. Dee,

    If you identify the sender and can be 95% or more sure of that identification, then publish the letter and the source, together with their contact information. They are apparently too chicken to identify themselves so you should do that for them to make up for their weakness. Give them a helping hand!

  21. @ drstevej:
    Never throw it away. Even if you ignore it. Ever. It might be needed in the future for a chain of evidence or a pattern if it escalates. This is nothing to play around with. I know. You cannot imagine how arrogantly evil these people in their protective bubbles can be….in the Name of Christ, of course, as they wring their hands over the sad rebellion of the bloggers. ‘We did not want to have to do this. We fear for her soul.’

  22. Im sorry to say Lydia is right. I use to be unable to imagine, now I am very sure about it. Just as much as I dont care what it takes but I am going to go back to fellowship and ask for help once I find the right faith community. Like one atheist online friend said, I make a lousy atheist.

  23. Lydia wrote:

    Never throw it away. Even if you ignore it. Ever. It might be needed in the future for a chain of evidence or a pattern if it escalates.

    Good point. I think on tv, people have a file for these things? I would read it just to see and pass along to law enforcement if concerning.

    Also, because of a story I heard once, I would not block the texts or emails of harassing persons. If they are getting increasingly agitated you want to know.

  24. Dee,

    I wish I could say this is unbelievable, but we all know it is quite believable; especially given the past few months of blog drama.

    The person who did this obviously has some real problems. It reveals more about them than it could ever reveal about you.

  25. @ brian:
    Can you tell I am passionate on the subject? 🙂

    People tend to underestimate this stuff. At least folks on this blog, don’t. But your average church goer who knows nothing of the blog or the actual blog posts think very differently when they see such things. They don’t believe that nice guy on stage is evil. Most people these days are followers of somebody. They tend to look to some guru for how to think. It can get nasty quick and impossible to defend against beloved gurus who use their position.

    Just think of the arrogance of concocting such a document and sending it to people like your pastor, denomination officials, etc. That is a character assassination shot across the bow.

  26. “The person who sent it even pretended it was sent from a regional denomination headquarters. ”

    This could be a real problem for the person if it wasn’t.

  27. The key is the letter to the Dee’s is unsigned.. if they are really that concerned, and have their facts straight, why not sign it?

  28. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Because I’m sure such a poison pen letter might be legally actionable.

    If the letter writer claimed to be acting on behalf of a person or organization and it was without their consent, those people or organizations can take legal action also and possibly on much firmer ground.

  29. This is sad. Pathetic.

    Watch how much you handle it physically. Not sure if it’s a threat or something.

    You may have a legal cause of action. And you may want to have physical proof.

  30. Dee,

    “No weapon that is formed against you shall prosper, and every tongue that shall rise against you in judgment you shall show to be in the wrong. This [peace, righteousness, security, triumph over opposition] is the heritage of the servants of the Lord; this is the righteousness or the vindication which they obtain from Me [this is that which I impart to them as their justification], says the Lord.” (Isaiah 54:17 AMP)

  31. @ Anonymous Oracle At Delphi:
    We are pretty sure we know who did this. I am getting in touch with denominational folks. I plan to post the letter and show the lies and misinformation in it. Also, I don’t think some people at a certain headquarters will be if they find out that the perp is suing their address as his return address. Oops- did I say him? Yep- I did.

  32. @ Jeffrey J . Chalmers:
    Because a lot of commenters here are anonymous and “attack” their beloved “gurus”. Precedent.

    Think about anonymous commenters commenting on Al Mohler and the other beloved gurus. How dare this be! Blasphemy!

    (We would all be tracked down. Trust me on this)

    You can’t approach this from a forthright, reasonable position and understand it. And it will drive you nuts, if you try too hard. :). It’s just weaselly. Planting poison.

  33. “Dr Iain Campbell, Tom Chantry, … Al Mohler … CJ Mahaney”

    Q: What do these men share in common
    A: Calvinism

    Reckon whoever is picking on Dee is also of that theological flavor and they are stirred up because TWW covers the dark side of their icons?

  34. Ephesians 6:12-15.

    “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces if this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the full armor of God that you may be able to resist on the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm. Stand firm therefore, Having girded your loins withTRUTH and having put on the breastplate of RIGHTEOUSNESS, and having shod your feet with with the preparation of the Gospel of peace”

    Dee and Deb, you are making enemies by putting light on the spiritual forces of wickedness. Keep it up ladies, you have many to help you in this fight.

  35. @ An Attorney:
    Thanks-The reason I am pretty sure know who it is is thru simple detective work. I plan to post the letter and go thru it for all of you. I have spent some time today, besides dealing with my elderly stepfather’s pneumonia, contacting some folks who are receiving letters.

    I am grateful to one person who contacted me stating this was bizarre. The person who wrote the letter is not terribly talented.

  36. Lydia wrote:

    Because a lot of commenters here are anonymous and “attack” their beloved “gurus”. Precedent.

    so stupid. We are sharing opinions. Ideas should be judged on their merits, not who we are. Rosy idealistic view though that may be. I guess people who put all their eggs in the ‘authority’ basket wouldn’t get it.

  37. Lydia wrote:

    (We would all be tracked down. Trust me on this)

    I have to say, though, the idea of seeing my pastors reaction to some sort of rambling mysoginistic letter telling them to throw me out of church would be almost worth throwing out my real name lol.

  38. @ dee:
    I have found over the years that many “religious leaderz” have trouble dealing with truth when they are confronted with it

  39. No advice giving here.

    Just how sorry I am that this is happening & offer of my continuing prayers for you all.

  40. Lydia wrote:

    ‘We did not want to have to do this. We fear for her soul.’

    “SEE WHAT YOU MADE ME DO?????”
    — a lot of Abusers

  41. Jeffrey J Chalmers wrote:

    @ dee:
    I have found over the years that many “religious leaderz” have trouble dealing with truth when they are confronted with it.

    Remember what “religious leaders” did to that Rabbi from Nazareth who confronted them…

  42. Max wrote:

    “Dr Iain Campbell, Tom Chantry, … Al Mohler … CJ Mahaney”

    Q: What do these men share in common
    A: Calvinism

    Reckon whoever is picking on Dee is also of that theological flavor and they are stirred up because TWW covers the dark side of their icons?

    “Burn Servetus Burn!”?

  43. “TWW’s coverage of Dr Iain Campbell, Tom Chantry, and Al Mohler’s ill advised CJ Mahaney joke”: The commonality being: public figures with publicly known compromise (?).

    The sender: pretends to represent a religious organization
    pretends to be a group but is an individual
    nameless, unsigned
    uses proxy server

    The sender’s mandate: censor honest public discourse via religious & local community via deception.

    Unfortunately the Bible is not relevant to the sender: “You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.” – Jesus, John 8:32

    Truth + known = freedom. Alas, the sender is hidden, deceptive, staged – a poser, a coward. May God bless him/her with His deliverance, into the Light, obviously. “Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,” – Jesus, Matt. 5:44.

    And, of course, for TWW may God send you “input and advice”, wise counsel.

  44. mitch wrote:

    I keep thinking about that word, disciplined, what exactly do they expect your church to do to you? I mean really, your not a child and certainly not their child. It seems what they mean is “bring them back in line”.

    I’m thinking more like “Make An Example of Her”.

  45. Jeffrey J Chalmers wrote:

    I have found over the years that many “religious leaderz” have trouble dealing with truth when they are confronted with it

    Well, it sure looks like I am going to have the *opportunity*to explain this to some in my circle. I think I will go ahead and post the letter in the AM and explain some of the ridiculous stuff this person had to say.

  46. “A letter .. was sent to … The denomination’s President, etc.”

    Go to the top!

    “And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the High Priest, And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.” (Acts 9:1-2)

    This passage came to mind … relevant, I suppose. Fortunately, Saul (Paul) had a Damascus Road experience that turned him around.

  47. Jezebel sent letters to elders and nobles to ensnare Naboth. She didn’t sign her name – she used Ahab’s seal. These old spirits never die; they just manifest themselves in different places.

  48. An Attorney wrote:

    If you identify the sender and can be 95% or more sure of that identification, then publish the letter and the source, together with their contact information.

    So there could be a 5% probability that the assumed identity of the sender is incorrect. If the assumed identity is incorrect and this incorrect identity is published, couldn’t Dee then be sued for slander?

  49. This is all very mysterious.
    I can think of only two or three possible Arch Enemies of TWW / Dee / Deb, and I don’t think this action would fit maybe two of them.

    It’s as though Dee and Deb are Bat-Man and Robin and they have the Joker, Penguin, and the Riddler after them.

    To think I’ve been criticized around the internet on other sites or social media for not using my real name.

    I used to use my real name, but I encountered wack-a-doodles like Dee is now, which is why I stopped years ago.

    Hello, nom de plume, good bye online stalking (and real life stalking) and harassment.

    If your harasser is who I think it is (Dee has been dropping hints elsewhere as to who it is), why is he striking now? I don’t get it.

    He got into a Twitter fight with Dee a year or more ago, and I think he said back then he was quitting Twitter for good(?).

    If it’s him, what is prompting him to crawl out from under his rock to cause trouble now?

    I can think of only one other person who likes to make threats, or threatens to send threatening letters about people, but this doesn’t seem her style. I thought things had blown over with that person anyhow.

    Very weird stuff.

    I was just telling someone private about all this-

    I’ve noticed that a lot of these guys who claim they are Christ-followers who spend a lot of time on the blogs of their friends debating and discussing Christian theology all day do not remind me of Jesus of Nazareth at all.

    They act smug, condescending, and rude dill-holes, and do things like send stupid, harassing letters to people who run blogs discussing the abuse of children in churches.

  50. @ Ken G:
    Dee is pretty careful when it comes to things like slander. The law is clear. I have to believe what I say is true and to never, ever, ever deliberately lie about someone. That is one thing that we do not do on this blog-we never deliberately lie. Which means I can mention uncanny coincidences.

  51. Daisy wrote:

    This is all very mysterious.

    And a total pain in the butt. Wait until you see what he (I am pretty sure it is a he) used as examples of my sins. And talk about deliberately lying…

  52. Max wrote:

    Jezebel sent letters to elders and nobles to ensnare Naboth. She didn’t sign her name – she used Ahab’s seal. These old spirits never die; they just manifest themselves in different places.

    Ooooh,I am so excited. Can I accuse a man of being Jezebel? I may just go ahead and do so.

  53. As one of Robert Heinlein’s characters once said, “Never frighten a little man. He’ll kill you.”

    The author of those letters is a very frightened little man. Frightened that the truth will destroy the tiny theological world in which he imagines himself a mighty defender of the faith. Frightened that his theological heroes will fall or be embarrassed by their sins. Frightened that he has invested his life and energy in something that has a dark and decidedly un-Christlike cast to it.

    This terrified little man wants to assassinate your good name. His fear kept him from signing his name and owning his “sniper’s bulets.” He imagines himself a sort of avenger, but he has forgotten Who owns the right to vengeance… and Who will repay. We may not know his name, but the One who does knows who to repay.

    If I were this frightened little man, I’d come clean and beg the God he supposedly worships for forgiveness. God does not look kindly upon murderers, whether of people or reputations.

  54. @ Amy Smith:
    Another case of a cowardly letter writer, who loves the darkness rather than the light (“… the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.” – Jesus, John 3:19-21.

    The Elvis music vid at the end of the post is a nice touch, however: “Return to Sender…”

  55. You have made it to the big leagues, my friend! Congrats!

    Just like here in DC, where you haven’t arrived until you;be gotten the letter from OPM telling you that your records have been stolen, you need a letter like this to prove that you are legit.

    Frame it, dip it in bronze, keep it forever, 😉

  56. J.C. Mahaney wrote:

    Rosebrough does stuff like that?!?

    I am somewhat familiar with Rosebrough. I used to listen to his program quite a bit.

    One of several of Rosebrough’s flaws is that he will sit there on his apologetics program calling down criticism on any and all pastors except for those who have identical theology as his, or at least theology he respects.

    If Rosebrough disagrees with you – if you are a lady pastor, a charismatic type, etc, he will mock and ridicule you on his program.

    It always annoys me how CR (Chris Rosebrogh)will play audio of some preacher, pause the audio, and say in a solemn voice, (to that person), “You need to repent.”

    He’s mighty sure of himself, that all HIS theology is 100% right on the money. It’s all so smug.

    Anyway, back when Tullian T. was on his show or buddies with CR, Rosebrough defended Tullian to the hilt, and even sent out obnoxious memes in Tweets mocking Julie Anne and whomever else was calling Tullian out for the pastor-predator of women he was.

    Rosebrogh just knew that he knew that Julie Anne and other Tullian whistle blowers were not in the know and didn’t know Tullian as well as he did.

    Then he had to eat his hat later when Julie Anne uncovered more and more and more evidence against Tullian.

    CR eventually deleted Tullian’s materials off his site, he used to recommend them.

    “Tullian Resources Removed”
    http://www.piratechristian.com/fightingforthefaith/2016/12/tullian-resources-removed

    Mmm-hmm, took him long enough.

    Julie Anne and others had been sounding the warning bell on Tullian for the longest time before that point, but Rosebrough just did not want to call out his pastor-buddy with the supposedly correct, CR-approved doctrine until it became more than clear Tullian was not an upstanding dude.

    The double standard is just disgusting… C.R. is supposed to be a Christian apologist, but a true Christian apologist is not going to sacrifice truth if his friend is involved, or just because he thinks the doctrinal positions are peachy keen.

  57. If I were a betting woman, I’d put my money down on the identity of the anonymous letter writer as a Calvinist with Neo and misogynist leanings. He’s a coward behind a computer. Me thinks these kind of Christians would be delighted to have a theocracy if their denomination was the one in power.

  58. Lea wrote:

    so stupid. We are sharing opinions. Ideas should be judged on their merits, not who we are. Rosy idealistic view though that may be. I guess people who put all their eggs in the ‘authority’ basket wouldn’t get it.

    Can’t have the wohmen and church peons getting ideas now can we? What would that do to the industrial complex that is the modern Evangelical church (I know I’m generalizing here). Can’t have the facade of authority questioned. We might start booting these fellas out. Then what would they do?

  59. one of the little people wrote:

    Can’t have the wohmen and church peons getting ideas now can we? What would that do to the industrial complex that is the modern Evangelical church (I know I’m generalizing here). Can’t have the facade of authority questioned. We might start booting these fellas out. Then what would they do?

    1517 — Luther nailed Ninety-Five Theses to Castle Church door in Wittenberg, October 31.

    500 years later, 10.31.2017, who should nail 95 theses (what should be written?), and to what door? – perhaps a digital online door? for global reach?

  60. dee wrote:

    We are pretty sure we know who did this. I am getting in touch with denominational folks. I plan to post the letter and show the lies and misinformation in it. Also, I don’t think some people at a certain headquarters will be if they find out that the perp is suing their address as his return address. Oops- did I say him? Yep- I did.

    A “him”??? Oh, my…….. such a brave manly man to go to such lengths to hide his identity!

  61. The only person with an M.O. like this that I know of is Tim Bayly. If you said something he didn’t like in a Baylyblog comment thread, he’d be demanding your pastor’s name and contact info, plus your husband’s name if you were a woman. However, I don’t know if he really pays attention to the goings-on of TGC guys. Usually it’s PCA or other NAPARC stuff.

    Anyway, congrats ladies, on obviously having an impact. Too bad we can’t know everything going on behind the scenes.

  62. Dee, I’m sorry you are having to deal with this distraction, but I hope that once this issue is “disinfected” with some “sunlight,” some good will come out of the situation.

  63. Lea wrote:

    Ideas should be judged on their merits, not who we are.

    See, there you go being all adult about things. Small minded groupies will mistake affiliation to an idea with allegiance to a leader; the longer they follow that leader, the more ‘untouchable’ that leader becomes. The problem begins when you start tipping sacred cows…it’s no longer fun and games at that point and, soon enough, there will be blood.

  64. “But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” I Pet. 3:14

    “How blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, because the kingdom from heaven belongs to them!” Mtt. 5:10

    Congrats (sorta)!

  65. dee wrote:

    Ooooh,I am so excited. Can I accuse a man of being Jezebel? I may just go ahead and do so.

    A little off-topic here, but hey.

    When the whole Jezebel spirit fad flared up a few years ago, it did reach Blighty. But it was different over here. There are undoubtedly multiple reasons for this; but the Jezebellion never became the rank, all-out gynophobic crusade it seems to’ve been over on the geographical left. I came across a certain amount of teaching on the Jezebel_Spirit, but the emphasis was never gender-specific. Indeed, people teaching on it over here generally emphasised that both men and women could behave like the old testament Jezebel.

    So, yes, you can call a man “Jezebel” if his behaviour – trying to punch above his weight by usurping authority he has no right to – warrants it. But you’d probably be exaggerating. The person you describe might, perhaps, aspire to foment a Jezebellion, but probably lacks the toxic intelligence to pull it off.

  66. So, here’s a little hypothesis. In the strict scientific sense: I aim specifically to test it against better evidence than I now have, and refine it if need be.

    At such time as Deebs publish this “letter”, I’m expecting that the quality of written english will be less than Tolkien-esque.

  67. bonnie knox wrote:

    I hope that once this issue is “disinfected” with some “sunlight,” some good will come out of the situation

    “Light is capable of ‘showing up’ everything for what it really is.” (Ephesians 5:13 Phillips)

  68. Daisy wrote:

    They act smug, condescending, and rude

    This is the thing that shocked me over at that SBC site. All these men who claimed to be pastors were rude, condescending…and they had no problem signing their real names and doing this in front of the world and instead of being called out for it, they were praised. Those people need to seriously check themselves.

    I’m out of the loop. I have no idea who it could be. I just hope he isn’t dangerous.

  69. Lydia wrote:

    What is creepy is the amount of research the guy had to do

    This is concerning. Dragging it into the light is probably the best defense. Stay careful gang.

  70. dee wrote:

    Ooooh,I am so excited. Can I accuse a man of being Jezebel? I may just go ahead and do so.

    Hi. I’m Jack. I am a Jezebel.

  71. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I’m expecting that the quality of written english will be less than Tolkien-esque.

    All them inkling’s was rubbish! Excerpt maybe Lewis, who had the good sense to defective to Cambridge. Up Yours.

  72. None of this surprises me. We knew if you all kept it up, this would be how the powers that be would handle this. Remember the reasons Christians were burned at the stake. There is a pastor at a large Baptist Church in Raleigh area who told some members (through his hit man) that if they didn’t stop asking questions, he would ruin their reputations. I have learned to stay in the Word, keep my eyes on Jesus, and pray and pray. Nothing new under the sun. Praying for you brave women.

  73. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    At such time as Deebs publish this “letter”, I’m expecting that the quality of written english will be less than Tolkien-esque.

    You mean to say that this letter will fall short of the Christopher Hitchens’ level of writing, say for example, his book on Mother Teresa “The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice”?

    Say it isn’t so!

    BTW, he once said that his original title for the above referenced book was “Sacred Cow” but even his publisher thought that went a bit too far.

  74. Daisy wrote:

    Rosebrogh just knew that he knew that Julie Anne and other Tullian whistle blowers were not in the know and didn’t know Tullian as well as he did.

    A lot of people use ‘my friend Bob was falsely accused of XYZ’ as the reason they know so many accusations are made that are lies. I know that reading all these stories, I am so much more suspicious of these assertions. People don’t seem to know their friends nearly as well as they think they do.

  75. dee wrote:

    This persoon is not only cowardly but is also a liar.

    I think “persoon” might be just the word to use for those who do these things. As in, “We’d like this persoon to know that our denomination is fully supporting us.”

  76. dee wrote:

    This persoon is not only cowardly but is also a liar.

    That seems to be the modus if that person happens to be from the YRR/Neo-Cal camp. Our former YRR pastor pastor ripped us to shreds because we exposed the darkness of his deeds. When his deception was exposed, he had nowhere to hide, so he resorted to finger-pointing and condemnation. If the allegations leveled against y’all are true, then why the need for anonymity? A cowardly, ugly act, indeed.
    “…God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.” -I John 1:5

    Here’s another good verse of encouragement–feel free to dwell on it:
    Proverbs 28:1 “The wicked flee though no one pursues, but the righteous are as bold as a lion.” I clung to that verse when our former pastor was condemning our church and its members when he said how evil and wicked we were because we didn’t follow his “authority”! Amazing how that now he’s gone, the church once more has unity, clarity and harmony.

  77. Deebs: Sorry you are going thru this trial. Leave it to some pusillanimous twit to launch an attack on the one slice of the church that “gets it”. Haters gotta’ hate.

    Dear pusillanimous twit (PT): Thanks for providing a living example of the decadence that typifies your theology , thus making “the point” even clearer. Your “system” is morally and theologically bankrupt, as are your leaders and your founding fathers. The apple truly does not fall far from the tree.

    Praying. Grace.

  78. Darlene wrote:

    I’d put my money down on the identity of the anonymous letter writer as a Calvinist with Neo and misogynist leanings.

    You shall know them by their fruits.

  79. Finegold wrote:

    There is a pastor at a large Baptist Church in Raleigh area who told some members (through his hit man) that if they didn’t stop asking questions, he would ruin their reputations.

    This frightening statement gives us a glimpse into how the Neo-Cals are using sinister means to take over traditional Baptist churches. Shame on them!

    There's absolutely NO WAY that these strong-arm tactics are pleasing to Almighty God. May the truth be revealed and soon!

  80. Finegold wrote:

    There is a pastor at a large Baptist Church in Raleigh area who told some members (through his hit man) that if they didn’t stop asking questions, he would ruin their reputations.

    Outrageous!

  81. Max wrote:

    Yep, accuser of the sistern at work.

    I think of that every time I sit there listening to the man-o-gawd tell me how much I suck at being a Christian and how much he doesn’t. It seems to me that the “system” is built to create artificial need in the sheep (a.k.a. customer) that only the guru man-o-gawd can solve. The “need” is reinforced by the weekly bashing of the sheep ceremony. Eventually the man-o-gawd is no longer satisfied with the of beating his own sheep and has to expand his customer base to other sheep and other churches, blogs, and other’s not so enlightened. Puke. I can see the slithering tongue from where I sit.

    No wonder I’d rather be kayaking. No snakes.

  82. I’m thinking this squirrelish fellow (nothing against squirrels mind you) might be a long time commenter on several blogs who has gone by a few different monikers.

  83. Finegold wrote:

    There is a pastor at a large Baptist Church in Raleigh area who told some members (through his hit man) that if they didn’t stop asking questions, he would ruin their reputations.

    I am from Raleigh and still live just outside of it. I can think of at least five different churches that meet that description. Very, very, very sad.

  84. @ Bridget:

    Well, they’re not someone of any substance or importance.

    I’m not sure I agree with the idea that they’re even pretending to be speaking for God. If Deebs do indeed have a clear idea who this is, they may have information to the contrary; but it looks to me just like a troll making mischief for personal amusement.

  85. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    but it looks to me just like a troll making mischief for personal amusement

    More than that I think– revenge for being “mistreated” by comments being unapproved or deleted. But we’ll soon get more of the story.

  86. My prayers for y’all. This past Sunday our sermon was on 1 Peter 3. Verses 13 and on say “Who then will harm you if you are devoted to what is good? But even if you should suffer for righteousness, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear or be intimidated, but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, ready at any time to give a defense to any one who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.” Christ Himself is our hope.

    God has used your honest reporting on YRR’s, neo-cal’s to encourage and strengthen me through years of intimidation and abuse, and during the time after when God gave the blessing of peace to to me and my family and other church members who stood with us. Praying for courage, strength and wisdom in all you do.

  87. Finegold wrote:

    There is a pastor at a large Baptist Church in Raleigh area who told some members (through his hit man) that if they didn’t stop asking questions, he would ruin their reputations.

    “You better walk the line, boy. I can make you look real good, or I can make you look real bad.”

    Sounds so pastoral doesn’t it?

  88. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Jezebellion

    Despite the awful things happening to prompt this post, on the plus side this word gives me a deep sense of warmth & satisfaction.

  89. Max wrote:

    Finegold wrote:
    There is a pastor at a large Baptist Church in Raleigh area who told some members (through his hit man) that if they didn’t stop asking questions, he would ruin their reputations.
    “You better walk the line, boy. I can make you look real good, or I can make you look real bad.”
    Sounds so pastoral doesn’t it?

    Yikes….this pastor = thug.

  90. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    At such time as Deebs publish this “letter”, I’m expecting that the quality of written english will be less than Tolkien-esque.

    More like Beavis & Butthead or Our Gang?

  91. Hard to blame people for not wanting to be part of churchianity when this is what living in it is like.

  92. Bridget wrote:

    I’m thinking this squirrelish fellow (nothing against squirrels mind you) might be a long time commenter on several blogs who has gone by a few different monikers.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if you are right. I’m thinking along the same lines.

  93. Darlene wrote:

    Me thinks these kind of Christians would be delighted to have a theocracy if their denomination was the one in power.

    John Adams said the same thing in a letter to Jefferson in 1817.
    He wrote:

    “Oh! Lord! Do you think that a Protestant Popedom is annihilated in America? Do you recollect, or have you ever attended to the ecclesiastical Strifes in Maryland Pensilvania, New York, and every part of New England? What a mercy it is that these People cannot whip and crop, and pillory and roast, as yet in the U.S.! If they could they would.”

  94. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Bridget:

    Well, they’re not someone of any substance or importance.

    I’m not sure I agree with the idea that they’re even pretending to be speaking for God. If Deebs do indeed have a clear idea who this is, they may have information to the contrary; but it looks to me just like a troll making mischief for personal amusement.

    If only he had signed his name. Just think of all those who would come out supporting him. He missed his opportunity for a devoted fan club. 🙂

  95. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    At such time as Deebs publish this “letter”, I’m expecting that the quality of written english will be less than Tolkien-esque.

    I’ll wager the same.

  96. Bridget wrote:

    I’m thinking this squirrelish fellow (nothing against squirrels mind you) might be a long time commenter on several blogs who has gone by a few different monikers.

    I’m bettin’ it’s Jimmy.

  97. @ hoodaticus:

    Given all the noise about reformed™ doctrine, tradition, teaching, etc currently cluttering the airwaves, one could almost be convinced that the Reformation happened over doctrine and teaching. Undoubtedly, none of it happened in a vacuum, and there were a great many things waiting to happen at the same time as Luther was nailing theses to the door and living on a Diet of Worms. But in fact it began over the issues of greed, corruption and the politicising of a church in bed with secular power.

    It had ceased to be a question over whether the man-made institution of “The Church” was, or was not, “perfect” in some way. Past a point, the question becomes: is God really imprisoned in these structures? Not even the Acts church could make such a claim. The Holy Spirit fell on uncircumcised gentiles and the church had to change to accommodate Him. Many of us, likewise, have pondered what the first apostles had to say about splitting the church into separate fragments, and then pondered the (contradictory) modern-day doctrine that the church IS split into fragments and you must pick one.

  98. Pingback: Linkathon! – PhoenixPreacher UNITED STATES

  99. Ken G wrote:

    An Attorney wrote:
    If you identify the sender and can be 95% or more sure of that identification, then publish the letter and the source, together with their contact information.

    So there could be a 5% probability that the assumed identity of the sender is incorrect. If the assumed identity is incorrect and this incorrect identity is published, couldn’t Dee then be sued for slander?

    95% certainty might be some sort of legal threshold in such matters.

  100. Injun Joe wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    I’m thinking this squirrelish fellow (nothing against squirrels mind you) might be a long time commenter on several blogs who has gone by a few different monikers.
    I’m bettin’ it’s Jimmy.

    Ha ha! A guy obsessed with the Deebs to the point of having a blog whose sole purpose is to attack TWW. A person with many aliases and a blog with almost zero traffic. Sounds like the perfect candidate to try and pull off something like this. We’ll have to wait and see.

  101. For the most part I am a read-only watcher, but as the years have gone by I have become more and more aware of these types of malicious people within the body of Christ who defend corruption and oppose bringing evil behavior to light. I hope you broadcast this far and wide.

  102. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Ken G wrote:

    An Attorney wrote:
    If you identify the sender and can be 95% or more sure of that identification, then publish the letter and the source, together with their contact information.

    So there could be a 5% probability that the assumed identity of the sender is incorrect. If the assumed identity is incorrect and this incorrect identity is published, couldn’t Dee then be sued for slander?

    95% certainty might be some sort of legal threshold in such matters.

    I just wonder how you calculate ‘95% certainty’ in something like this. Seems like false precision to me. In fact, it seems like an absurdity to assign a numerical probability. It’s more like “pretty sure”, or “I’ve got circumstantial evidence that leads me to believe…”.

  103. Injun Joe wrote:

    I’m bettin’ it’s Jimmy.

    That was my first thought, but I don’t think so, because he’s very actively blogging, and I can’t see anything since April about Campbell or Chantry. And his most recent on Mahaney was about him being yesterday’s news, with which I tend to agree. Right now he’s focusing on Miss Daisy Flower and poor Noble and RCJr.
    BTW really love the Adams quote posted by that old heretic Muff. Those founding fathers were smart cookies, as is that Muff fellow.

  104. NJ wrote:

    The only person with an M.O. like this that I know of is Tim Bayly.

    At this point in time, I take it that the likely suspect has the initials of F. T.. unless I am reading Dee’s hints incorrectly.

    There was a post about this guy on this very blog:
    “Frank Turk Retires His Blog and Demonstrates That He Hardly Knew Us”

  105. @ Lea:

    Someone in the comments on another blog very succinctly and accurately summed up the deal with Chris Rosebrough:

    “He [Rosebrough] has a habit of not publicly condemning friends if they are more popular than the friend being attacked. #notfriendship”

    -Paula Coyle, on the “Just and Sinner” blog, post title:
    “Why I have Decided to Leave Pirate Christian Radio”

  106. Beakerj wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    Jezebellion
    Despite the awful things happening to prompt this post, on the plus side this word gives me a deep sense of warmth & satisfaction.

    Yes, that and the “pusillanimous twit” in one of the other comments.

  107. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Many of us, likewise, have pondered what the first apostles had to say about splitting the church into separate fragments, and then pondered the (contradictory) modern-day doctrine that the church IS split into fragments and you must pick one.

    Very insightful.
    I choose “none of the above”.
    Grace.

  108. hoodaticus wrote:

    Hard to blame people for not wanting to be part of churchianity when this is what living in it is like.

    Definitely.
    I get confused, sometimes, by apparently conflicting reports. The SBC is losing members. The YRR are planting new churches at a record rate?

    In any event, considering reports of the increasing numbers of “dones” I wonder if there is panic stirring as people see their lucrative careers and perceived power over the lives of others and money-making schemes beginning to go (in the words of one of my favorite musicians) slip-slidin’ away.

  109. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    But in fact it began over the issues of greed, corruption and the politicising of a church in bed with secular power.

    This fact has struck me with increasing frequency of late. Thanks for pointing it out so clearly.

  110. @ roebuck:
    As a practicing scientist, we see this allot, and it is called “physics envy”. The social science disciplines like to try to be qualitative like we are…. I agree, it is false precision.

  111. Bystander wrote:

    the years have gone by I have become more and more aware of these types of malicious people within the body of Christ

    One of the fantastic things about the internet is that people will show you who they really are much more quickly than they would in read life.

  112. Jeffrey J . Chalmers wrote:

    @ roebuck:
    As a practicing scientist, we see this allot, and it is called “physics envy”. The social science disciplines like to try to be qualitative like we are…. I agree, it is false precision.

    I wonder, on the topic of certainty vs guessing, if perhaps the letter got put through one of those writing comparison programs, along with samples of various people’s writings – you know, the kind of program that gives a percentage of certainty that the same person wrote both things?

    I don’t know how accurate those things are, or how widely used they may be. I’ve read about them somewhere, that’s all.

  113. Dave A A wrote:

    To get a little background on this read the comments on the April 26 post beginning 3:28PM.

    Am I missing something? I went to that thread and started at 3.28 (post by Gram 3).

  114. Our former pastor ask the judge to drop child rape charges there is no length they won’t go to further abuse. He brought my childs rapist to the church one week after the assault to face my child which was further intimidation. Yes they all are like this who abuse others. Don’t be suprised anymore it can get worse praise God for the laws of our land and His people like Dee and Deb who defend the abused and shame abusers. Lea wrote:

    The response on chantry still blows my mind, though. You were reporting on public arrest reports, trial dates, etc. amazing that people think that should covered up.

    Tells you exactly how abuse cases with less public information get treated.

  115. hoodaticus wrote:

    Hard to blame people for not wanting to be part of churchianity when this is what living in it is like.

    Exactly.

    I hope whoever is behind the harassment of Dee realizes, he’s only turning people off to Christianity even more than they are already, including people like me who are in a faith crisis. I don’t know if the faith is true or not, if it’s worth my time, etc.

    The irony is the person behind the letters probably fancies himself a devout, loving Christian who is only (as someone put it above) “doing the Lord’s work.”

    He likely thinks he’s a stellar example of the Christian faith – but not from where I sit. He’s a reason for me to continue to stay away from churches.

    If he’s lurking on this thread, I hope he re-reads this post of mine several times over and takes it to heart. He’s helping to drive people like me further away from the faith, not to it.

  116. Daisy wrote:

    NJ wrote:
    The only person with an M.O. like this that I know of is Tim Bayly.
    At this point in time, I take it that the likely suspect has the initials of F. T.. unless I am reading Dee’s hints incorrectly.
    There was a post about this guy on this very blog:
    “Frank Turk Retires His Blog and Demonstrates That He Hardly Knew Us”

    Hmmm…I can see why F.T. might be suspected because of the Chantry info that the Deebs posted. And he’s savvy enough to use a Proxy server to hide his identity. But he’s been staying away from blogging and not involved in what the bloggers are doing (as far as I can tell) so I don’t think it’s him. I would see his goal to be to get the DEEBS to stop blogging (get the spot light off of Chantry), and this kind of letter writing campaign to get Dee disciplined/kicked out of her church wouldn’t achieve that goal.

  117. Bridget wrote:

    I’m thinking this squirrelish fellow (nothing against squirrels mind you) might be a long time commenter on several blogs who has gone by a few different monikers.

    I was wondering that as well. Initials S.G.?

    But I don’t know. Whoever is sending out a bunch of letters against Dee – they seem more hostile. It doesn’t quite seem SG’s style. He seems content to sit on his blog and complain.

    SG seemed more amused by my recent blog posts critiquing his views than angry about it, but I think it takes some anger to get off your rear and snail mail a bunch of gripey letters. I don’t know.

  118. @ Lea:

    There are two other 3.28’s on Apr 26, one by ishy, one by the Mod guy chastising someone named “Bruce”

  119. Wow and Oh Dear. I know what it’s like to get a Federal Express letter from a lawyer for the cult of greed and power. And back then it was so quaint. I was mocking New Era Dianetics for Operating Thetans (NOTS) by running it through a filter and making the text sound like the Swedish Chef. The cult was not amused. Nowadays they have to put up with Leah Remini on A&E talking about all sorts of bad stuff (tonight). I hope, I wish and I pray that David Miscavige thinks about those days in the 90s and wishes they would come back.

    But yeah, it is a chilling moment when you get something like that. However, you know you’re having an effect!

  120. Daisy wrote:

    one by the Mod guy chastising someone named “Bruce”

    Pretty sure that’s the one that was being discussed. There were some follow up comments as well.

    I think the mention of Chantry is key, so I would focus on people who had interest in that case…

  121. refugee wrote:

    I get confused, sometimes, by apparently conflicting reports. The SBC is losing members. The YRR are planting new churches at a record rate?

    doublethink, comrade, doublethink.

    To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself—that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word—doublethink—involved the use of doublethink.
    — Eric Blair (George Orwell), Nineteen Eighty-Four

  122. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    refugee wrote:
    I get confused, sometimes, by apparently conflicting reports. The SBC is losing members. The YRR are planting new churches at a record rate?

    doublethink, comrade, doublethink.

    SBC loses 10k members.
    YRR plants 3 churches with 20 members each.
    Profit.

    I think that’s the long and the short of it.

  123. Maybe I’m off about this, but, I wonder if Deb and Dee were “Doug and Dave” if this letter-mailer would’ve gone this route.

    A lot of these complementarian guys view women as big children, and as property of their husbands.

    So instead of speaking to the woman one on one as an equal and fellow adult, they will report the woman to her church or husband.

    One example the comes to mind readily was something I read about Mark Driscoll a few years ago:
    He got angry at some woman in his church over something (I think she disagreed with him), and instead of just arguing with her, Driscoll, the article said, turned to his husband and said something like, “Get your woman under control.”

  124. correction:
    ” Driscoll, the article said, turned to his husband and said something like,”

    Should read:
    turned to HER husband…

  125. @ Daisy:
    Daisy, I found your blog post on the difference in the way men and women are treated to be fascinating.

    (The part about the men experiencing the pain of “labor” and “high heels” was not at all surprising.)

    For some reason I cannot comment on your blog without giving an email address that ties me to my RL WordPress account, and I am unable to do that for personal reasons. Anyhow, I have found good food for thought at your blog. Thanks for the time you’ve invested.

  126. Daisy wrote:

    I hope whoever is behind the harassment of Dee realizes, he’s only turning people off to Christianity even more than they are already, including people like me who are in a faith crisis.

    I am coming to think that people like “him” don’t care if they are turning people away from the faith, or causing the little ones to stumble.

    They may even feel that they are doing a good work in god’s kingdom, separating the “goats” from the “sheep” in a sort of pre-selection process, as if somehow they are doing a service to god so that god won’t have to do it when the “great white throne” judgment comes.

    It’ll already be done. How convenient! I’m sure they are anticipating a rich reward and a “Well done, My good and faithful servant.”

  127. Lea wrote:

    Daisy wrote:
    one by the Mod guy chastising someone named “Bruce”
    Pretty sure that’s the one that was being discussed. There were some follow up comments as well.
    I think the mention of Chantry is key, so I would focus on people who had interest in that case…

    Bruce either inspired or transmorgrified into a Nobody, of whom you quoted a poem beginning “Nobody loves me, nobody cares”. Dee recently mentioned nobody in a tweet, indicating maybe nobody wrote the letters in question.

  128. Lea wrote:

    SBC loses 10k members.
    YRR plants 3 churches with 20 members each.
    Profit.
    I think that’s the long and the short of it.

    Lea:
    True, but according to the super-duper spiritual people in those church plants, they are far more religious, “biblical” and “gospel-ly” oriented than the 10,000 “reprobates” lost. So they look at that like a gain, I’m sure. The YRR planters are nothing more than sheep shufflers and they are not out soul-winning new believers. Sadly, the SBC won’t know what hit them until it’s too late.

  129. Ken G wrote:

    So there could be a 5% probability that the assumed identity of the sender is incorrect. If the assumed identity is incorrect and this incorrect identity is published, couldn’t Dee then be sued for slander?

    Not if Dee does her usually good job with caveats! “We believe the writer of this was blankety blank.” Let him prove otherwise.

  130. An Attorney wrote:

    “We believe the writer of this was blankety blank.”

    I’m picturing now something like ancient aliens…

    ‘Could it be that..’
    ‘And is it possible that …’
    ‘Ancient Astronaut theorists suggest…’

  131. @ Lea:

    And the Mohler factions are refusing to share hard data on those church plants. I think it was something like 60 million dollars spent. Why anyone would send the SBC money, I will never understand. It’s like giving whiskey and car keys to teenagers.

  132. @ Root 66:
    And so desperate they are resorting to the seeker methods they once used as examples of bad church that did not have the “true Gospel”

  133. @ refugee:

    I hope you can eventually find a way to post there. 🙂
    If you use whatever your preferred e-mail is, I would be able to see it as an admin, but I would not publicize it.

    The only time I bother to dink around with checking that stuff is if I have a troll or trouble maker on there.

    Some people have said they post to my blog via their Facebook account. Could you try creating a secondary, throw away type Yahoo or G-Mail account?That’s how I sign up for most forums and blogs.

    (I don’t give out my one e-mail address that’s under my actual name)

    I did get impatient and cranky with Ed on there last night and blocked him. I don’t like blocking people, but he was pushing it.

  134. Don’t worry Dee. God sees this. Pharisees and false prophets will always come after the true church of Jesus’s love and mercy.

    By their fruits of love, or lack of fruit, you will know them.

    To anyone defending Dr Iain Campbell:

    If you have solid evidence to show that Campbell is innocent, then show it. If you don’t and you know Campbell is guilty, then do you know what you are doing?

    This is a man who “said” he followed Jesus. Yet behind his wife he cheated against her with (at least) 7 other women. This actually means that he was actively sleeping with 7 other women near the time of his suicide. So he probably slept with MANY MORE women during his years of ministry.

    All of the above has been proven by Campbell’s very church. This was the church that at first defended him, but had to admit to his sins due to overwhelming evidence.

    Hence we know that Campbell was a liar when he claimedto be a Christian, because he clearly didn't  love his wife. And if he didn't even fulfill his marriage vow, there is no way he truly loved any of his other brothers. It was all an act, a pretending, a lie. It was all for himself. Money, fame, power etc. He didn’t love his members. He used his members for his own gain.

    1 John 4:19-21

    19 We love, because He first loved us. 20 If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

    You, who defends Campbell, would really call Campbell a Christian? Do you not understand that he would SLEEP WITH YOUR VERY WIFE if he had the chance? Yes he would! 6 of the 7 women he was sleeping with were married. That’s the kind of snake he is. I really don’t understand why anyone, including you who call yourself a Christian, would defend him. What is in it for you? Campbell is from Satan. Do you not understand? Why would you follow a man who is from Satan?

    Throw every single book he has ever written away. Burnt them all in a fire. You can learn theology from anyone but Satan’s snakes. Why would you want to learn from a false teacher? I really don’t understand you.

    If you defend Campbell, you are encouraging other evil snakes to behave just like Campbell did. And so every single future pastoral sexual abuse will also be your fault. Because you didn’t reject evil, but you DELIGHT in evil. Yes you do. You are giving your approval to the evil sins of this snake of Satan. Hence you delight in evil. And God will find you guilty on judgement day.

    By their fruits you will know them. If you want to follow Jesus, then be love to the world. If you want to follow Satan, then be all hatred and selfish. Yes have no fear for God at all. Sleep with 7 other women other than your wife, for example. Then after living a life of lies and sins, following Satan the whole way through, go proudly to God and demands that God let you into heaven. See what happens. I hope you smell the burning sulfur by now.

    Repent now, before it is too late. Turn toward the light. Get away from evil. Be careful of false prophets, who knows the TRUTH of Jesus YET delight and rejoice in EVIL. Night and day they ignore God and look forward to doing evil. Do not even eat with such a person.

  135. Out of all the stories covered at TWW, I am having some difficulty discerning the problem someone would have with these three stories in particular. Writing about the Mohler joke about Mahaney is a big problem? I can understand that someone might be very upset that the Campbell and Chantry stories were written and discussed, but they were public stories, and people have *opinions* about public stories.

    Everyone now reserves the right to veto everyone else’s opinion about everything, it seems. Everything is DEFCON 1.

  136. Gram3 wrote:

    Out of all the stories covered at TWW, I am having some difficulty discerning the problem someone would have with these three stories in particular.

    Yes. All of it was more or less public information. Especially Chantry! All of these ‘wait for the real story’ stuff doesn’t even apply. We were discussing the news.

    But this isn’t about information or truth, really, this is about telling a story that might knock down men who are idolized. Because we cant’ have that. Even if it’s true.

  137. Lea wrote:

    But this isn’t about information or truth, really, this is about telling a story that might knock down men who are idolized.

    Because you are uttering Blasphemy against Their Gods, and they have called Jihad.

  138. Root 66 wrote:

    True, but according to the super-duper spiritual people in those church plants, they are far more religious, “biblical” and “gospel-ly” oriented than the 10,000 “reprobates” lost.

    Just like the Taliban & ISIS are more Islamic than the lukewarm Muslims they lord it over.

  139. refugee wrote:

    They may even feel that they are doing a good work in god’s kingdom, separating the “goats” from the “sheep” in a sort of pre-selection process, as if somehow they are doing a service to god so that god won’t have to do it when the “great white throne” judgment comes.

    Like the Witchfinders of the Thirty Years War or the Spanish Inquisitors or the Religious Police of Talibanistan and the Global Caliphate of ISIS.

    What would God ever do without them?

  140. Will be praying for you and your husband, Dee. I hope this person is found out and exposed as soon as possible. In the meantime, keep your heads up! You’re doing God’s work (and it’s THEIR problem if THEY *start Jack Nicholson impersonation here* can’t handle the TRUTH!)

  141. An Attorney wrote:

    Not if Dee does her usually good job with caveats! “We believe the writer of this was blankety blank.” Let him prove otherwise.

    Dee may do a good job with caveats. She needs evidence and facts to support making an accusation of an individual. An accusation based on past experiences absent evidence and facts pertinent to the present situation is a recipe for disaster. Dee has to make the case based on evidence and facts. If she doesn’t, the accused individual can simply claim she is being vindictive due to past experiences. Slander?

  142. Seriously, it’s hard to imagine the guy Dee seems to suspect would do this personally. He commented here on a Chantry post under his own name and would be risking a lot to resort to subterfuge. Maybe he’s inspired a fan? I know Pastor P inspired a church bodyguard to harass Dr Duncan while maintaining plausible deniability. Or maybe the guy went off the rails after going off tweeter.

  143. Gram3 wrote:

    Out of all the stories covered at TWW, I am having some difficulty discerning the problem someone would have with these three stories in particular. Writing about the Mohler joke about Mahaney is a big problem? I can understand that someone might be very upset that the Campbell and Chantry stories were written and discussed, but they were public stories, and people have *opinions* about public stories.

    That was my first thought as well. It’s almost like they want to be publicly proven wrong.

    I actually instantly thought of 5 or 6 people who I believe would have do something like this. A few have been hinted at here, but I’ve thought of some others, too. The Deebs seem to know who it is, though, and with the giant paper trail they’ve left, it probably will be pretty easy to figure out.

    I only pray that TWW ends soon because church corruption has ended, but only until then.

  144. Ken G wrote:

    Dee may do a good job with caveats. She needs evidence and facts to support making an accusation of an individual. An accusation based on past experiences absent evidence and facts pertinent to the present situation is a recipe for disaster.

    I don't know about libel, but… you almost have to do this sort of thing in moderating a blog or forum.

    For instance, my gut told me from day one that the person posting to my Daisy blog as "Megs" was actually Seneca Griggs – or someone who is friends with him – posting to my blog. And I turned out to be correct about that.

  145. Daisy wrote:

    For instance, my gut told me from day one that the person posting to my Daisy blog as “Megs” was actually Seneca Griggs -or someone friends with him – posting to my blog. And I turned out to be correct about that.

    I did text roleplay for many years. Even in groups with 100+ people, I usually figured out people’s alternate identities right away by their writing style. And particularly aggressive players or banned players were very easy to identify because they usually have a very misguided notion of how talented and intelligent they are. The same has been true of some of the trolls here. Then you add in a (virtual) paper trail and troll identity confirmed quite easily.

  146. Injun Joe wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    I’m thinking this squirrelish fellow (nothing against squirrels mind you) might be a long time commenter on several blogs who has gone by a few different monikers.
    I’m bettin’ it’s Jimmy.

    Squirrelish by all means!

  147. Lydia wrote:

    the Mohler factions are refusing to share hard data on those church plants. I think it was something like 60 million dollars spent

    Actually, that was the amount spent a few years ago. Kevin Ezell, President, SBC’s North American Mission Board, has stepped his game up a bit to Calvinize the SBC via New Calvinist church plants. Of course, he wouldn’t admit that his agenda, but most – if not all – SBC church plants in my area are staffed with YRR leaders. (P.S. Kevin Ezell was Al Mohler’s pastor before he was tapped to lead NAMB … I wonder how he got that appointment?!)

    Recent operating budgets for church plants:

    FY 2016 … $67 million
    FY 2017 … $76 million
    FY 2018 … $78 million

    The window is open for the New Calvinists to get a huge foothold in SBC life via church plants and “replants.” The Southern Baptist pew (predominantly non-Calvinists) don’t have a clue that they are financing a generational shift in belief and practice from the non-Calvinist theology which has prevailed for the past 150 years in a once-great denomination.

    http://www.sbc.net/cp/ministryreports/2017/namb.asp

  148. @ Ken G:

    As in, “I can’t tell you, officer, who might do this to me because that Would be an accusation”? I am trying to understand where you are coming from.

  149. Max wrote:

    The window is open for the New Calvinists to get a huge foothold in SBC life via church plants and “replants.”

    I do think they are counting the replants and the takeovers, and re-reporting those numbers. They just don’t add up otherwise.

  150. ishy wrote:

    I do think they are counting the replants and the takeovers, and re-reporting those numbers. They just don’t add up otherwise.

    Plus, that follows perfectly with New Cal theology that one must be “in submission and covenant to the authority of a church” (in a mix of quotes of Mohler and Carter) to be “elected”.

  151. @ Max:
    Thanks Max. That is outrageous. And they won’t share data on the plants. Who know how many folded. (I noticed Setzer, the church plant expert, got out of LifeWay.. He’s a wily one) Lord only knows how much went to non SBC Discollesque Acts 29 plants. I would not be surprised to learn CJ received planting money for his hotel church. What a brain gaming scam they put on. Now they target established traditional debt free older churches.

  152. @ Lydia:
    Check out the “Financial Management” tab on the link in my previous comment. The church planting budget represents 60+% of overall NAMB expenditures! Budgets for evangelism and missions are much smaller numbers. For the first time in my life, I’m saddened to see the Annie Armstrong offering envelopes in church pews.

  153. Lydia wrote:

    @ Ken G:
    As in, “I can’t tell you, officer, who might do this to me because that Would be an accusation”? I am trying to understand where you are coming from.

    Good luck!

  154. Lord have mercy. Praying for the Deebs. I’m no lawyer, but I would bet dollars to doughnuts that the creeps have no legal leg to stand on. That’s why they threaten: to frighten and intimidate. So we won’t notice that they have no leg to stand on. Do they really think we are that stupid? Why, yes, yes they do.

  155. I think the suspect is someone not mentioned in the following post, but if you want a very interesting sidenote on how the three scandals mentioned are tied together, here is former SGM pastor Brent Detweiler’s account of his run-in with Tom Chantry not long before Chantry was arrested accusing Detwiler of covering up abuse in SGM. Detweiler confronted the cult-like atmosphere of PDI/SGM many years ago, is writing a book on the SGM abuse scandal, and has written hundreds of posts exposing the SGM leadership.

    http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/phil-johnson-tom-chantry-charge-me-with-a-hit-run-for-not-an.html

    The three choices of scandals mentioned in the OP were definitely chosen for a reason, even though they are very poor choices to make if you want to stay anonymous.

  156. ishy wrote:

    I think the suspect is someone not mentioned in the following post, but if you want a very interesting sidenote on how the three scandals mentioned are tied together, here is former SGM pastor Brent Detweiler’s account of his run-in with Tom Chantry not long before Chantry was arrested accusing Detwiler of covering up abuse in SGM. Detweiler confronted the cult-like atmosphere of PDI/SGM many years ago, is writing a book on the SGM abuse scandal, and has written hundreds of posts exposing the SGM leadership.
    http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/phil-johnson-tom-chantry-charge-me-with-a-hit-run-for-not-an.html
    The three choices of scandals mentioned in the OP were definitely chosen for a reason, even though they are very poor choices to make if you want to stay anonymous.

    So… are you saying this is someone who is invested in covering up sexual abuse scandals?

    (‘Cause that’s the kind of dots that seem to be begging to be connected, all considered.)

    I am with Sergeant Klink, in that “I know nuzzink!”

    However, I (and I’m sure plenty of others) am watching with interest. I would imagine the Deebs are lawyered up (at least, getting legal advice), because they strike me as the prudent sort.

  157. Lydia wrote:

    As in, “I can’t tell you, officer, who might do this to me because that Would be an accusation”? I am trying to understand where you are coming from.

    There is a difference between telling an officer of the law background information so the officer can conduct an investigation and determine whether the background information is a rabbit hole or has some merit vs posting an accusation on the internet for the Christian community to read knowing that it could be wrong because it is based on speculation without any evidence relevant to the current situation. By the way, the officer has access to far greater resources to conduct an investigation than we have available to us. Hope that clarifies were I’m coming from.

  158. ishy wrote:

    here is former SGM pastor Brent Detweiler’s account of his run-in with Tom Chantry not long before Chantry was arrested

    I’m not a fan of Brents blogging style, but this does seem to tie the CJ/Chantry together. Why Campbell, though?

    Also, I can’t stand Phil or Chantry’s obnoxious style.

  159. refugee wrote:

    So… are you saying this is someone who is invested in covering up sexual abuse scandals?
    (‘Cause that’s the kind of dots that seem to be begging to be connected, all considered.)
    I am with Sergeant Klink, in that “I know nuzzink!”

    I was not, but that is a possibility. I was just making a point about the correlation of the three scandals mentioned in the letter. Only a few people would tie those particular three things together as being the worst things ever on TWW. As in less than 5. And all of those have made very public attacks on others over those issues.

    In rereading Detwiler’s post, though, I’ve come to the conclusion it could be one of two people and the one that makes the most sense is not the person who I first considered. But if I’m right, it wouldn’t even be a surprise, just very, very bad for him in a legal sense.

  160. Lea wrote:

    I’m not a fan of Brents blogging style, but this does seem to tie the CJ/Chantry together. Why Campbell, though?

    Ah, I was referring to Mohler's comment as the third and the connection with T4G. As for Campbell, I do think Dave is right that the troll on the Campbell post was caught for being someone known to troll TWW.

  161. Ken G wrote:

    posting an accusation on the internet for the Christian community to read knowing that it could be wrong

    I think Dee is fairly careful, so I wouldn’t worry. And I don’t think anyone in this blog is dangerous to the person who would be outed.

    There is a danger in accusing people and being wrong. There was someone who misidentified one of the recent ‘protestors’ online and it was lucky that the real media got on it and fixed the accusation because he was completely innocent and uninvolved. But that is not a thing I worry about so much with this blog.

    If they are fairly certain, they can say what they think, if they think it wise.

  162. Lea wrote:

    @ ishy:
    hmm.
    I guess we will see.

    Yeah, well, this attack sounds so poorly planned that it’s likely we will very soon.

  163. @ ishy:

    With “Megs” on my blog, it wasn’t so much his writing style that gave him away to me, but that the female identity he was writing as kept linking to Griggs’ blog and asking me for my opinion about Griggs’ blog and for my opinion about Deb and Dee.

    Also, this person liked to leave mildly worded challenges to my anti- complementarian or “pro woman” posts (like one I did with links about women as cops, etc), and I know that Griggs’ has a huge chip on his shoulder against anyone who criticizes complementarianism, or who writes posts in support of women.

  164. Daisy wrote:

    @ ishy:
    With “Megs” on my blog, it wasn’t so much his writing style that gave him away to me, but that the female identity he was writing as kept linking to Griggs’ blog and asking me for my opinion about Griggs’ blog and for my opinion about Deb and Dee.

    Hahaha! Way to hide your identity, dude!

  165. Lea wrote:

    I think Dee is fairly careful, so I wouldn’t worry. And I don’t think anyone in this blog is dangerous to the person who would be outed.

    What about the other way round?

  166. ishy wrote:

    Hahaha! Way to hide your identity, dude!

    I don’t know if you’re interested in the rest of the details, but – Griggs posted to my blog first as “Buzz English”, then later as “Megs48.”

    Buzz English set off my radar, too.

    After Megs showed up, and I was really suspicious, I went to the blog’s admin tool box to look at IP numbers.

    Not only were some of the IP numbers (of Buzz English and Megs) the same, but Griggs used the identical e-mail address to sign up as both names.

    There were so many red flags.

    I think all the years I spent co-modding a very busy Christian board with multiple forums and many visitors paid off. You really learn how to spot trolls and stuff after so many years.

    You get a Spidey Sense that tells you, “something is off with this poster.”

  167. Lydia wrote:

    Now they target established traditional debt free older churches.

    When will those good and solid folks stand up to those mountebanks and tell them NO!…??

  168. Ken G wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    Good luck!
    Please read my above reply to Lydia.

    I did read it.

    I think Dee should find out who has done this to her and prosecute them for defamation.

  169. @ Ken G:

    Slander is not a problem if she states as her OPINION that the writer was SoandSo based on information that she presents, and offers him space to reply, if he is civil in his reply.

  170. Ken G wrote:

    knowing that it could be wrong because it is based on speculation without any evidence relevant to the current situation

    That is not the situation that the Deebs are in. They have evidence sufficient to narrow the field of suspects down to one or two, with one being highly probable. In a criminal case, sufficient to get an arrest warrant, I believe.

  171. @ Muff Potter:
    Because they believe they are decent people. By the time they figure it out, too late.

    It’s all deception. People like this are never upfront about their real agenda. They use all sorts of manipulative tactics to suck people in. Quiet Revolution even outlined them. That is now so ingrained that most YRR have never heard of it. It’s their MO because the “intentions” are good and pew sitters are ignorant and need to be led to the proper position carefully. And besides, its “gossip, hate and/or bitterness” to dissent these days.

  172. Deb wrote:

    Sadly, not many are willing to stand up to these bullies in the pulpit.

    Pulpit bullies operate by control, manipulation, and intimidation (not on the spiritual fruit list). They create an atmosphere where they present themselves above correction and rebuke … when in fact, God holds any who teach and preach the most accountable before Him and the Body of Christ they are supposed to serve not rule.

    A message to the pew: it is OK – in fact, your responsibility – to call out rogue church leaders. If you can’t turn them, turn your legs and wallets in another direction. And, for Heaven’s sake, NEVER sign a church membership agreement which fences you in from exercising your Biblical mandate to name and expose those who aren’t leading you in Jesus’ name and character.

  173. Spiritual warfare is never fun…EVER. Those who lead know this more than most. I am praying for you.

  174. Max wrote:

    If you can’t turn them, turn your legs and wallets in another direction.

    Good advice, and with not getting caught up in the “assimilate or eliminate” strategy, too.

    As I watched a number of churches online this weekend, I was thinking how even on Sunday morning from the pulpit, the sequence of 1-way top down church or hierarchy can be at work:
    1 – select
    2 – seduce
    3 – shape, via rewards and negatives
    4 – isolate, us vs. them
    5 – control, a contract, a covenant
    Which, I believe, is contrasted in Scripture with:
    1 – meet
    2 – share
    3 – learn from each other
    4 – bond, form connections but not in isolation
    5 – commit to common goals where appropriate, but with the openness of leaving without repercussion, at any time, and keeping one’s own counsel with the Lord, always

  175. JYJames wrote:

    Max wrote:
    If you can’t turn them, turn your legs and wallets in another direction.

    Good advice, and with not getting caught up in the “assimilate or eliminate” strategy, too.

    From Citizen Robespierre on, “Republiques of Perfect Virtue” and other Perfect Righteous Societies always seem to require more and more mass graves.

  176. Sam wrote:

    Will be praying for you and your husband, Dee. I hope this person is found out and exposed as soon as possible. In the meantime, keep your heads up!

    And a lawyer on speed-dial and that Concealed Carry Permit active.

    Because Mister Poison Pen sounds like he’s putting a stalker’s worth of effort into this.

    All the more reason he needs to be exposed and taken down.

  177. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Sam wrote:
    Will be praying for you and your husband, Dee. I hope this person is found out and exposed as soon as possible. In the meantime, keep your heads up!
    And a lawyer on speed-dial and that Concealed Carry Permit active.
    Because Mister Poison Pen sounds like he’s putting a stalker’s worth of effort into this.
    All the more reason he needs to be exposed and taken down.

    Sending letters about her to a magnitude of people is creepy. Stalkers do this.
    It’s necessary to treat this person as a threat, rather then an Mr. Illiterate Buffoon.

  178. dee wrote:

    This persoon is not only cowardly but is also a liar.

    If so, as you well know, that sounds like it’s actionable. If I were licensed in your jurisdiction would have been glad to look into it, but as it stands, there are surely some fine attorneys in NC who take defamation cases. Of course, one also has to consider the source and the likelihood that they’re judgment proof (lawyerese for no money), as loonie anonymous letter writers of the sort who wrote the letter about you are also often sans assets.

  179. Mae wrote:

    Sending letters about her to a magnitude of people is creepy. Stalkers do this.
    It’s necessary to treat this person as a threat, rather then an Mr. Illiterate Buffoon.

    Especially if he’s so insistent on publicly destroying Dee, her family and this blog.

  180. Law Prof wrote:

    If so, as you well know, that sounds like it’s actionable. If I were licensed in your jurisdiction would have been glad to look into it, but as it stands, there are surely some fine attorneys in NC who take defamation cases.

    Wish Velour hadn’t taken her ball and gone home – in previous cases, she was a one-woman legal referral service.

  181. @ ishy:
    Arrrghhh. I read through that quickly and had nightmare flasbacks. Johnson and those guys communicate like middle school boys with a new thesaurus. There is a bible verse for not answering quickly!!! So glad to be out of that world!!!

    After reading Detwilers perfectly organized doc dump way back when, I can testify he is one detailed guy. I think he missed his calling as an archive analyst or something. 🙂

    . It is creepy to read Chantry bullying him on coverups knowing what we now know but the real clincher is how mortified all those guys must be (including Pruitt) over Chantry. Lump in serious Calvin Guru, Campbell, and the Mohler wing and there is a recipe for revenge.

    The Reformed world has been wracked with big and small scandals for the last 5 years. It probably would not have hurt them so much as a big group had they not presented themselves to the world as they did. And then how they responded to the worst of the worst by circling wagons.

    These seem to be guys with too much time and money on their hands as pastors. I had no idea how little full time pastors of many churches actually worked until I started doing mega projects. It’s embarrassing.

    Anyway, these guys are just plain cruel, deceptive and yes, evil. Somebody is out for revenge. As I have said, trying to find “reason” in these things is a waste of time. Some folks think marginalizing others they disagree with makes them superior. They can’t just disagree and move on. They have to take it a step further and further. And some play the long game which is what I think this guy did —who I suspect is from that team….. (I thought he was going away.)

  182. Lydia wrote:

    After reading Detwilers perfectly organized doc dump way back when, I can testify he is one detailed guy. I think he missed his calling as an archive analyst or something.
    . It is creepy to read Chantry bullying him on coverups knowing what we now know but the real clincher is how mortified all those guys must be (including Pruitt) over Chantry. Lump in serious Calvin Guru, Campbell, and the Mohler wing and there is a recipe for revenge.
    The Reformed world has been wracked with big and small scandals for the last 5 years. It probably would not have hurt them so much as a big group had they not presented themselves to the world as they did. And then how they responded to the worst of the worst by circling wagons.

    All of the information they were pushing for was already on Detwiler’s blog, too. I think they just wanted to discredit him on Twitter and get the YRR riled up against him. And I read Detwiler’s e-doc on the cult abuse in PDI/SGM way back in college, and you’re right, he’s very precise and detailed. But the information they wanted was already publicly available, so the way they went about questioning him, then immediately blocking him when he carefully made his case, tells me that truth was the farthest thing from their minds.

    Some of that group are still defending Chantry, Johnson being one. The ARBCA has been notoriously silent on the issue for some time, though.

  183. @ JYJames:
    Good perspective, JY. The contrasts you list are striking. The 21st century church does not resemble the 1st century church much at all.

  184. Lydia wrote:

    I had no idea how little full time pastors of many churches actually worked until I started doing mega projects.

    They tweet their lives away in coffee shops. Too busy on Twitter following Piper Points, Mohler Moments, Mahaney Malarkey, and Dever Drivel to visit the sick in hospitals, pray with folks in nursing homes, or just get to know their church members.

  185. I know a few attorneys in Raleigh, could get a referral to a litigation attorney for defamation, etc., if that would be of help.

  186. Lydia wrote:

    . It is creepy to read Chantry bullying him on coverups knowing what we now know but the real clincher is how mortified all those guys must be (including Pruitt) over Chantry.

    Right?

    If you have any sense and you are one of these guys, you might need to reevaluate your ability to recognize lying. To recognize virtue or lack thereof. If they are wise, they learn from this and began to realize maybe they don’t know as much as they think they do. If they have any sense, they were rocked by this and learned from it.

    IF.

  187. @ Max:
    And then they rally the RJF (Real Job Folks) to volunteer over and above making a living, maintaining a family, keeping up a home, and community engagement.

  188. Lea wrote:

    One of the fantastic things about the internet is that people will show you who they really are much more quickly than they would in read life.

    It’s called Net Drunk Syndrome — anonymous behind their broadband and safely out of fist range.

  189. JYJames wrote:

    @ Max:
    And then they rally the RJF (Real Job Folks) to volunteer over and above making a living, maintaining a family, keeping up a home, and community engagement.

    While the Big Dog takes his leisure in the Plantation’s Big House.