From the post: “I have a suggestion. I think the SBC should reach out to all of those abused by Darrell Gilyard and offer to pay for their counseling instead of building Paige Patterson a Mcmansion for his retirement.”

Luke 3:8 & Matthew 3:8: “Therefore produce fruits in keeping with repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘ We have Abraham for our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham.”

Zaccheus: repaid 4x what he had unlawfully taken from his victims. Repentance.

None of Da Boys took Patterson seriously when he told that story before the CBMW years ago. I did not take the story seriously when I first read it ten or fifteen years ago. It’s not something that really happened. It’s just the kind of tall tale that Fundamentalist preachers tell to get some amens.

It appeals to the prejudices of the crowd. It tells them that their beliefs are valid despite all evidence to the contrary. They know it’s false but will cheer it because they want it to be true. They want to live in a world that conforms to their Children’s Church simplification of the Bible.

Paige Patterson did not tell a woman to stay and get a second black eye from her husband, and that husband did not get gloriously saved through her obedience and prayer. He made the story up for effect and the audience knew it was made up for effect.

R2 wrote:

He made the story up for effect and the audience knew it was made up for effect.

What effect? – “the prejudices of the crowd” … “their beliefs are valid” …

What is this? Take a black eye for the man, woman, and you are a Christian wife? Biblical Manhood and Womanhood?

Patterson’s 2018 statement references not recommending divorce because it’s not Biblical. We’ll come back to that one.

In the 2009 TWW article what I found interesting was the same rationale apparently offered as it related to the Gilyard allegations. From the 2009 article: “‘We were dealing with a man of special gifts and talents,’ Dr. Patterson said. ‘I was unwilling to call anyone guilty until I had demonstrable evidence that these allegations were true.’ Dr. Patterson said that according to Scriptures, action cannot be taken against a minister accused of adultery unless there are two or more witnesses. He also asked for any other proof, such as photographs, videotapes or laboratory tests!”

Thinking Biblically, I don’t believe the institutions which have been financing Patterson’s career during the times of the matters at hand are operating at a pre-Acts 6 organizational structure. Why is that significant? Because these institutions are by and large enmeshed with the state, from their 501(c)3 status to those gold-edged flags in the edifices — which it’s been contended puts them under admiralty law and thus under subjection to the state as the highest authority.

You don’t get to cozy up to the state when it’s convenient for nest-feathering, only to turn solely to Biblical authority — with the church leader(s) as said enforcer — in matters that involve churchgoers who are also subject to local, state, and federal laws and regulations. Where is the acknowledgement from these oft-capricious authoritarians of rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, or Romans 13 and Roman citizen Paul’s observing that the civil authorities not bearing the sword in vain?

We can now circle back to Patterson’s 2018 statement referencing not recommending divorce because it’s not Biblical. His spin appears to be a colossal strawman to anyone with common sense, as a woman seeking his advice and guidance not only reported physical abuse but showed credible evidence of it. Unless physical assault is not a crime where he was pastoring (I’m admittedly not up on NeoCal seminary discipline methods), not directing her to the authorities (and perchance acting as a witness to what he’d seen and heard doesn’t ring true as far as being subject to civil authorities and rendering sufficiently unto Caesar. That’s especially if the case if his reported 2009 quote is accurate: “Get ready because he may get a little more violent, you know, when he discovers this.”

Additionally, I don’t see where the “special gifts and talents” of Gilyard or anyone else is supposed to factor into the civil duties of someone acting in authority at an institution enmeshed with the state. (Being affiliated or not with the state via 501c3 etc isn’t the issue, but the high degree of involvement further undercuts the excuse that these actions are bolstered by a truly Biblical approach.) Plus, what’s with all of these lawyers and spokesmen the authoritarians being into the situation? If they’re going to go the two-three witness route and leave it at that before considering involving the state or anyone from the outside, then why not rather be wronged than let it go to that per a proof-texted reading of 1 Cor. 6?

The bottom line is the authoritarians need to be called out when they to have it both ways.

elastigirl wrote:

just how many stupidpills are these professional christians taking, anyway?

Just a couple, on a daily basis: like ego, for example.

“Leaders are often so concerned about their status or position in an organization, that they actually forget their real job. And the real job of a leader is not about being in charge, it’s about taking care of those in our charge.” – Simon Sinek

Jesus would say, begin with the least of the least, such as widows and orphans, for example. Not the bro’hood.

“I have also said that I have never recommended or prescribed divorce. How could I as a minister of the Gospel? The Bible makes clear the way in which God views divorce.”

When divorce is treated as the greatest sin then anything can and will be excused in a marriage…his history on this topic proves my point.

elastigirl wrote:

just how many stupidpills are these professional christians taking, anyway?

Handfulls and handfulls. Jesus, save us from your professional followers.

R2 wrote:

insiders are focused on the fantasy of the man getting gloriously saved by following just a few simple Bible steps.

Because only men really matter. Women??? Meh.

Are they saying that the congregation or the leaders knew that Patterson’s story was false? That in itself is a travesty and cause for rebuke. Knowingly telling a false story in order to continue a mythical tale of false conversion? There would be vulnerable women listening to that story and possibly put themselves at risk in order to fulfill some wistful but false outcome?
Tragic, Stupid. But Hey, I got a small whuppin as a teenager (17) because Bill Gothard taught the dominance of the father and god forbid that I would lose that umbrella of protection because I was a bit rebellious. Talk about abuse of young women! They hid the shennigans of his brother for years and then Bill himself wildly abused his authority as well-of course he admits no wrong and I believe he is still in ministry. I am getting mad just thinking about it. Thank you BILL, for destroying so many lives and bringing disgrace on the Lord and his Church. And BILL, just remember what consequences King David suffered for bringing disgrace on the Name of Jehovah.

R2 wrote:

He made the story up for effect and the audience knew it was made up for effect.

I understand your entire comment. I have no idea as to whether any event like that took place, but I do know that this sort of story telling used to be rampant among baptist fundamentalist evangelists. If I could only remember some of the gloriously saved tales I heard long ago. In fact, gloriously saved absurdities were stock in trade at a certain level for people who would come and hold the spring and autumn ‘revivals’.

That said, I personally know of a case in which a notorious drunk and wife abuser did actually get gloriously saved, changed his entire way of life, the whole band wagon. The point of telling this story is what people then said about the situation. There were those who praised the wife for staying even in the face of everything. There were those who did not. And at least one who said they were glad he got saved but it was by then too late for the children who had grown up in that over the years.

So, yes, some people approved of women (and men sometimes) who tolerated abuse ‘to keep the family together for the sake of the children’ so I believe that Patterson joined the crowd who would spew that mess from the pulpit. Other people just did not believe the ‘preacher stories’ but did adhere to the idea that discipleship comes with a price-even though not sure what that might be. And there were others who thought that telling these stories was inexcusable for whatever reason. Mostly in the crowd I ran with we only occasionally showed up at ‘revival’-just enough to be seen a time or two.

RE’s first husband’s father, a baptist preacher/missionary, mentioned to me admiration for a woman’s toleration of abuse if necessary as a means of evangelization. The idea was there but not everybody agreed. The use of preacher stories like this was common. Whether Patterson was just telling a story or whether he actually believed it or whether he was actually involved…could be either way.

It is the idea of tolerating abuse which is the issue for me-not the issue of Patterson and this story and its’ credibility or not. And before somebody denounces me for not believing every word out of some story telling preacher’s mouth, just ask yourself would story telling preachers lie? distort the truth? copy the other guy’s pulpit c**p for effect? exaggerate? play to the audience? You betcha. Would somebody who really did stand up for an accused abuser favorite fellow pulpiteer try to pull some of this *** from the pulpit? You betcha. Was Patterson wrong about saying this? You betcha; big time wrong. Is this a true story? Nah. This is too close to all the other stories. It is a recognizable genre of ole timey conservative baptist pulpiteering. Garbage no less whether true or not.

Reminds me of a quote from the Civil War era. The reason why they refuse to change is because “at the bottom of their souls is pride in being the master.”

You can hear the arrogance dripping from his words.

R2 wrote:

Almost everyone in a Fundamentalist church has a mind that operates at two levels. One is busy keeping up the act; the other tries to survive life as it really is.

I love the way you say this. That’s exactly what I was doing until some things broke loose in my life and I only had enough strength to operate on the survival level. It opened my eyes to how fake so much of my life was, which was a really hard pill to swallow.

That said, if you think lying to get someone to convert is ok, that is a classic ends justify the means argument, and I don’t think it has any place in the church. God doesn’t need our lies.

R2 wrote:

Almost everyone in a Fundamentalist church has a mind that operates at two levels. One is busy keeping up the act; the other tries to survive life as it really is.

Yes, that, and also this.

I see some good things about really taking discipleship seriously. When I contrast my exposure to baptist fundamentalism on the one hand and my time with a church which was basically almost the opposite, for me even fundamentalism is closer to reality. Example: Discipleship really does come with a price, as one will see when we list to Paul recount his personal physical abuses and disasters for the sake of the gospel. Surely we cannot read Paul and ‘admire’ Bonhoeffer and still think that there are no prices to be paid, no difficult roads to travel. It is when we try to manufacture stuff for ourselves that we get off base.

If we condone the toleration of domestic abuse, how is that not similar to the early christians who sought martyrdom to the extent that the church had to forbid them to do that. Every easter the media shows us people who get themselves literally nailed to a cross as a religious act and we disapprove; can we then turn right around and approve if people accept domestic violence as a religious act of endurance. I don’t know why people unnecessarily embrace suffering, but I do see how embracing suffering when it is unavoidable can be the best way to deal with it. I have a stage 4 cancer, and I see a lot of people in the same situation over at the cancer treatment center. It is not something religious, but accepting suffering and seeing that some good can come out of it is just plain common sense, and I see them over there at the center doing that.

The preacher stories are mostly factually hogwash, but the ideas behind the stories are a mixed bag. Sometimes people do get persecuted (Paul) and sometimes endurance is a divine command (Jesus’ comments to the churches in Revelation) and discipleship is not your best life now all the time. Your best choice now, but that is a different way to see it. I think that it is this mix of truth and error that allows error to flourish so easily.

Okrapod, sorry to hear about your cancer. Thoughts and prayers to you. I mean that sincerely not as Christian talk.

GSD [Getting Stuff Done] wrote:

Is it common for preachers to tell fictional stories as if they were factual? I’ve discovered that it’s normal to preach someone else’s sermon as if it were your own.

I have done neither.

R2 wrote:

Paige Patterson did not tell a woman to stay and get a second black eye from her husband, and that husband did not get gloriously saved through her obedience and prayer. He made the story up for effect and the audience knew it was made up for effect.

R2 – perhaps we know each other? Regardless, he told this story on many occasions, as I noted in my previous comment. I am well aware of his propensity towards hyperbole (to be charitable) but I can unequivocally state that in SEBTS chapel, the story was not shared ‘for effect’ but as a pattern for submission – I heard it with my own ears, while you read about it 10 years later.

@ Burwell:

I believe you. He said it. Now everybody believe me. Lots of similar stories were afloat back when. I heard them with my own ears. Usually though they involved alcohol.

Burwell wrote:

but as a pattern for submission

It’s really easy for a man, particularly a man in a position at the top of an authoritarian structure, to lecture others about submission. Also, from the big game hunting pictures, he clearly seems like a guy with a lot of extra cash. Hasn’t he worked in organizations funded by donations his whole life? How in the world can he relate to normal people from his lofty perch paid for by the hard-earned money of good hearted people

Many years ago I belonged to a local church that was known for excellent preaching and a quality, high church boarding on liturgical, worship style. One thing I learned from that experience was that there were people in the church because of the pastor and his preaching and there were people there despite their dislike for the pastor and his preaching. There were also people there due to the style and quality of music and those that were there despite their dislike for the worship style.

There are many good hearted and well meaning people including students, faculty, administration and staff at SWBTS. Some of these are there because of Paige Patterson and some of them are there despite their opinions of him. Please join me in praying for the individuals there and for the future of the institution. Change is imminent as Patterson prepares for retirement. We can pray for that change to be in a positive direction for all concerned.

My vision for the seminary would be that is restored to a strong fiscal position in terms of operational budget, establish strong academics that are reflective of the wider collection of Southern Baptists (including Arminians and Calvinists on faculty), build a diverse theological faculty including minorities and women, and remain on the path of building a strong infrastructure.

mot wrote:

drstevej wrote:

GSD [Getting Stuff Done] wrote:

Is it common for preachers to tell fictional stories as if they were factual? I’ve discovered that it’s normal to preach someone else’s sermon as if it were your own.

I have done neither.

I also have done neither.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to insult all preachers, pastors, etc. I have several pastor friends, and they would never do this sort of thing either. And they make subtle comments about other local preachers who download their sermon outlines. I’m sure they wouldn’t present a fictional story as if it was factual.

I guess my real question is: Is there something about this Fundamentalist subculture, this social group, that sees it as OK to present a fictional story as if it was fact?

GSD [Getting Stuff Done] wrote:

I guess my real question is: Is there something about this Fundamentalist subculture, this social group, that sees it as OK to present a fictional story as if it was fact?

Perhaps it’s lack of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.

Ricco wrote:

Also, from the big game hunting pictures, he clearly seems like a guy with a lot of extra cash. Hasn’t he worked in organizations funded by donations his whole life? How in the world can he relate to normal people from his lofty perch paid for by the hard-earned money of good hearted people

Here’s my opinion: He can’t relate to normal, good-hearted people, he doesn’t want to try and he doesn’t care.

Jonathan Merrit quoted Patterson as saying in 97, “When asked about women by @ajc in 1997, Paige Patterson of @Swbts quipped, “I think everyone should own at least one.”

THIS is what he really believes. All his fawning supporters should just admit they feel the same and we can all treat them like the trash they are.

okrapod wrote:

Some people do not believe the story itself, necessarily, but want such a thing to be true and believe in the message of the story, and will think that after all Jesus told stories which were not true in order to illustrate a point.

My response would be, there is no problem with fiction that doesn’t claim to have really happened. Fiction contains truth. Look at Jesus’ parables or Lord of the Rings or even Harry Potter. However, in my opinion, telling a story that didn’t happen as something that did to prove your point is dishonest.

Fiction is true if can be lived out successfully in the world. This is why, even if he framed it as a parable, this story is not “true.” I cannot imagine this ever working out like he said, and living this story out would only cause more abuse.

Dr. Patterson is in his mid 70s? He could easily retire and 60 year old alumnus Dr. Mac Brunson, could take his place.

@ Ricco:

Good points.

The good ole word redneck must come into play eventually.

GSD [Getting Stuff Done] wrote:

I guess my real question is: Is there something about this Fundamentalist subculture, this social group, that sees it as OK to present a fictional story as if it was fact?

Anything goes as long as Souls(TM) get Saved(TM).

okrapod wrote:

One result was that those of us who had been born in the church, grown up in the church and who had no enticing and tingling story of sex, drugs or crime to tell ended up as second class christians who maybe were not even saved seeing that we had to shocking story to tell. Meanwhile the ex-whatevers, the such were some of you with the stories to tell were the stars of the show.

How else can all those Respectable Church Ladies get their fix of vicarious JUICY JUICY JUICY SIN SIN SIN? Except by Spectacular (and JUICY) Testimonies?

Pornography for the Pious.

JDV wrote:

You don’t get to cozy up to the state when it’s convenient for nest-feathering, only to turn solely to Biblical authority — with the church leader(s) as said enforcer — in matters that involve churchgoers who are also subject to local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

“What’s yours is Mine, and What’s Mine is MINE!”

Here is the hardest part. there are no good guys in this situation including Jonathan Merritt who deceived a church full of people for a big salary. It’s pretty bad when the people outing each other are cut from the same lack of character cloth but looking to score a political win. I have noticed some of these people are totally hands off when it comes to Mohler and CJ.

This is why I don’t do movements or church institutions anymore.

I looked at Wade Burleson’s list of reasons for Paige Patterson to resign, and one of them hit on one of my other interests…fakes and forgeries.

7. It is possible that the Hebrew parchments purchased by the Pattersons for an unknown sum (e.g. in the millions of dollars) during a time of insitutional financial crisis, fragments that are now on display at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, may actually be fakes.

http://www.wadeburleson.org/2018/04/it-is-now-time-for-dr-paige-patterson.html?m=1

And a link to a very good story that has an excellent layman’s overview of the issue with these fragments: https://www.timesofisrael.com/dead-sea-scrolls-scam-dozens-of-recently-sold-fragments-are-fakes-experts-warn/

Also, some might be interested in perusing this list of unprovenanced (as in, they have no proven history) fragments that have been hit the market since 2002. I’d draw your attention to items 13, 16, 25, 26, 37, 44, 54, 55, and 73, all sold to SWBTS.

https://lyingpen.com/2016/08/11/a-list-of-70-unprovenanced-post-2002-dead-sea-scrolls-like-fragments/amp/

And then there is the reported cost of these tiny, tiny fragments. Again, I’d direct your attention to item 16, which a family apparently ponied up $500K to buy. (We don’t know the cost of the other 8 fragments, but if you look at the list, it is not inconceivable the amount spent could be in the millions.)

https://lyingpen.com/2017/08/17/the-post-2002-dss-like-fragments-a-price-list/

If you want to get an idea of the size and looks of some of these fragments, here’s a list:

https://lyingpen.com/2016/08/12/post-2002-dead-sea-scrolls-like-fragments-lines-and-measurements-preliminary-list/amp/

Number 15, the Dearing fragment that may have sold for $500K is described as “five lines” and is probably the size of a tiny sticky note.

Lastly, I’d draw your attention to item 44 on these lists: “Patterson Fragment DSS F.165 (Ps1)”. It’s tiny: 6 lines, 2.9 x 2.6 cm Is it perhaps named after Paige Patterson? I don’t know.

That’s all the research I am going to do on my cellphone but I think there are plenty of questions to ask about seminary money going for very possible forgeries.

drstevej wrote:

Craig A. Blaising

Blaising’s fingerprints are all over the Dr. Sherri Klouda incident as well as Dr. Karen Bullock not being granted tenure (for gender reasons only) before her.

http://www.wadeburleson.org/2008/03/woman-indulging-in-exposition-of.html
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2008/04/contaminated-pulpit-and-other-bizarre.html

okrapod wrote:

Some people believe that a particular story is true, so they think it is fine for it to be told. It encourages people who may be in the same sort of situation.

In other words, any story can contain elements of truth, whether or not the events actually happened. Jesus’ parables are a perfect example. There was a sower who spread seed over 4 different types of ground. To ask what his name was, where he lived and what sort of seed it was and whether he was a real person is to miss the point.

Maybe we’ve gotten too literal in our language, and not literary enough. We’re becoming more digital, where something is either completely true or completely false. Past generations just didn’t think this way.

I’ve developed the belief that most modern “preaching” had developed into a weird form of performance art. The audience just wants an emotional experience. That’s not always a bad thing, of course. But I find very little actual “teaching” in modern churches.

elastigirl wrote:

oh my goodness, what stupidity.

just how many stupidpills are these professional christians taking, anyway?

As many of us have found out, when we stop taking them the withdrawal will be painful. It is much better to just keep upping the dose.

Oh my gosh! When I first looked at this page and saw the photo at the top I thought he was an amazing courageous man to be there rubbing that animal without any fear. I had not read anything on the page; the photo first drew my attention. Then, I kind of skipped the first lines and went right into the article starting with “In June 2009…”. Later it hit me and I went back and looked closer again because it had stuck in my head.

This is what comes to my mind from the Bible as I reflect on this photo and the link to the page describing his hunting trips:

1 John 2 For everything in the world–the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life–comes not from the Father but from the world.

Jeremiah 9:24 But let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight, declares the Lord.”

2 Corinthians 11:30 If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness.

I don’t see any humility here; only boasting. Personally, I think the animals are the righteous ones for at least when they kill they are doing it to survive; not to show off and boast.

okrapod wrote:

It is the idea of tolerating abuse which is the issue for me-not the issue of Patterson and this story and its’ credibility or not.

I suspect the story is a lie, or at least a gross exaggeration or conflation. (did someone get counseled to go home and pray? Probably yes. Did someone show up with a black eye? Would not be surprised. Did some husband show up at church claiming he was all better now? Easy to believe. Were these all the same person and was this fairytale happy ending real? No. Not in a million years. It may have happened a time or two here and there but this time, no.)

The issue is what it says and what it says is a dangerous fantasy that women are required to sacrifice, to the point of violence, to the point possibly of death, for their husbands potential salvation. And submit while doing it. As if they are responsible.

True story, false story, this is the story Patterson wants to pretend is real. It is a lie, like his denials this week are a lie.

@ okrapod:
Well the Puritans believed that giving a woman anything to alleviate labor pains was witchcraft. And the Neo calvinist practically worshipped the Puritans so we might not be too far off.

@ R2:
Nothing I say here excuses the story.

But when it first came out my view was that it was a tall tale told to display a big Redemptive God and a very Holy Patterson who had insider understanding. It was also during the Heyday of CBMW of which Patterson was a big supporter along with Mohler, Piper, etc and before social media took off. The only thing Council on biblical manhood and Womanhood cared about in those days was divorce. So every single issue was centered around “no divorce”.

Frankly, I found it self-serving. And no one is accusing Patterson of being an abuser but as someone totally ignorant on the subject. So is Piper, Mohler, Moore, etc, etc.

I honestly see this as a political hit piece meant to recruit women to the other side. But they are exactly the same. I don’t see any good guys in the top-level leadership of the SBC.

Anyone who makes multiple trips to Africa to kill wild animals (“big game”)clearly has a lot of time and money on their hands. They also clearly have issues about their manhood.

This clown is a pastor? The church is a joke.

Lydia wrote:

@ Lea:
“The issue is what it says and what it says is a dangerous fantasy that women are required to sacrifice, to the point of violence, to the point possibly of death, for their husbands potential salvation. And submit while doing it. As if they are responsible.”
Bullies, thugs and cowards love this doctrine.

FEATURE, NOT BUG.

Mr Paterson’s infamous story, even if true, needed to be set in a much more cautious context. If he were talking about unexpected ways in which the Holy Spirit can work wonders that bring good out of evil, that would be one thing. But it would need significant other examples – for instance, of persecuted believers praying for and doing good to their persecutors, to similar effect.

Plus, a great weakness in the story is the fact that the person emerging with the credit is Paterson himself. It was, we are to believe, his steadfastly preaching the doctrine of patriarchy and female enslavement/subordination, in the face of being slightly unpopular with one person whom he didn’t respect anyway, that paved the way for a glorious move of God. Had it been the wife herself giving the testimony, in which she herself found strength, courage and dignity in the secret place of prayer, emerged from it daily filled with the Holy Spirit and with wisdom, and won a victory she’d always known was hers, it would be more significant.

But she probably wouldn’t be using it as proof that women in general should accept abusive marriages as their God-appointed lot in life.

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

Plus, a great weakness in the story is the fact that the person emerging with the credit is Paterson himself. It was, we are to believe, his steadfastly preaching the doctrine of patriarchy and female enslavement/subordination, in the face of being slightly unpopular with one person whom he didn’t respect anyway, that paved the way for a glorious move of God.

“DEUS VULT!”
— New Internet Meme (look it up)

Of course the story is phony but the sentiments it expresses are vile and should be called out. He presents the story as true; call it out as though it’s true.

When I used to work in a church office, the mail constantly included advertisements for books of stories for preachers to use in case they weren’t creative enough to make up their own. These phony stories do not appeal to me at all. If we’re not speaking truth, what is the point? I admit, church just never made much sense to me. Do the phony stories mean we don’t *really* believe any of it? We’re just playing make-believe?

Jack Hyles was infamous for stories. Google “Jack Hyles’ Favorite Soul Winning Experiences” and you will see a ridiculous list of fantasies he claimed to have lived.

ishy wrote:

Well, this is an interesting turn of events, particularly from a New Cal:
https://relevantmagazine.com/god/russell-moore-yes-abuse-warrants-divorce/

I was just reading twitter responses to this. I don’t like Moore, but good for him.

Although I will never cease to be astounded at the stuff I read from supposed ‘christians’ or ‘pastors’ about how they expect women (and occasionally men) to react in the face of adultery/abuse.

Look at this person: “The difficulty with “abuse” is that, almost certainly, there are other issues in the marriage, some the fault of the wife, but the abuse brings an urgency that prevents other discussion”

NOPE.

@ ishy:
It will work, too. Never mind what he taught for years.

Lydia wrote:

@ ishy:
It will work, too. Never mind what he taught for years.

Well, it’s probably like ESS. Say one thing in public to “look good” and still teach the baby pastors to enforce absolute submission in churches via covenants.

I don’t buy it.

Lea wrote:

these former views

ABOUT women, I meant to say. His former views on women.

@ ishy:
A clue is they say nothing about what they taught before. The CBMW site was positively Mormon before they scrubbed and rebranded. Nor does he do a media hit on Piper for teaching the same. Hmm. Why? Piper was practically a dean at SBTS. It was a cash cow doctrine for 20 years.

This was a coordinated media hit. Moore and another guy involved have the contacts. Why does WaPo care about Patterson? Slow day?

None of that makes Patterson innocent. I refuse sides because I think both of them are charlatans. And this just shows me how vicious they can be for control and power.

Never forget that Mohler had the power to get his pro Mahaney comments to the Courier scrubbed 2 years later.

@ ishy:
Other people do it for him. It’s already out there. But note these people have never called for Mohler to step down over Mahaney. Hmm. Both sides have made some serious enemies and the top layers of all of it need to be drained.

Lydia wrote:

@ ishy:
A clue is they say nothing about what they taught before. The CBMW site was positively Mormon before they scrubbed and rebranded. Nor does he do a media hit on Piper for teaching the same. Hmm. Why? Piper was practically a dean at SBTS. It was a cash cow doctrine for 20 years.

ESS is still taught at SBTS even though Mohler has said it was discredited and he didn’t believe it. And churches are still being taking over by deceptive means taught to SBTS students training to be pastors.

I haven’t quite figured out Moore’s end game, but Akin has retweeted some of these things, so they are all in it together. And I do believe there is an end game that involves deceiving people until they sign a covenant at a New Calvinist church. Maybe it goes even farther into The Handmaid’s Tale territory, which is why they are positioning themselves in politics. I just know that they currently do not teach in seminaries what they say they believe in social media.

ishy wrote:

so they are all in it together

phones be a ringin’

SWBTS just posted this Statement from Patterson and the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees:

https://swbts.edu/news/releases/statement-abuse/

roebuck wrote:

Anyone who makes multiple trips to Africa to kill wild animals (“big game”)clearly has a lot of time and money on their hands. They also clearly have issues about their manhood.

If poetic justice really had her way, there might be a hunter from space who’d make a trophy out of Patterson in two shakes of a lamb’s tail.

FW Rez wrote:

SWBTS just posted this Statement from Patterson and the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees:

https://swbts.edu/news/releases/statement-abuse/

That statement is next to useless. Not only because it cites CBMW, whose whole purpose is to push patriarchy on the world, but because it does not address the elephant I the room, which is ending abusive marriages through divorce.

These guys need to spend some seminary money and bring in a board-certified attorney in family law for a day to explain to them, in clear and concise language, why separation is not always an option. I’d also suggest a competent family psychologist to complement the attorney, to explain to these dunderheads that when it gets to abuse, the absolute best thing for the abused parties (and I include children in this) is to GET OUTabd sever the connection.

I can’t tell you how angry I was with a woman on Twitter who tried to pass off the story of Hagar as instructive in how to handle suffering. First, Hagar was property. Her unborn child was property. And it’s the rare woman who has an angel come to her and tell her to go back to an untenable situation. Finally, I resent the idea that women should stay in marriages like this and suffer for God’s glory. I don’t think God is honored by a wife continually being mentally, emotionally or physically abused.

Just My Personal Opinion.

@ ishy:
They are anything but moderate. If one doesn’t agree with their methods one is harshly and unfairly labeled. I totally agree about the ERLC. It should be eliminated immediately. Todd has written some excellent posts on the ERLC on thouarttheman blog..

@ Little King:

Somewhere in his statement he said, “I will never be a party to any position other than that of the defense of any weaker party when subjected to the threat of a stronger party.” Somehow the picture of him killing a beautiful cat doesn’t fit.

Muslin, fka Deana Holmes wrote:

And it’s the rare woman who has an angel come to her

That’s a great point. The extraordinary, rare events of the Bible shouldn’t always be turned into normative scripts for life that everyone must follow

@ ishy:
And participate with these folks at one’s own risk.

Just that horrific shot of him with a glorious wild animal he has killed for no reason, except vanity, is really all I need to know about him & his attitude to the world. Thoughtless ‘dominion’ over all, without care for the welfare of the other.

Lydia wrote:

@ ishy:
I think it’s to get Patterson out and install an African American as President. I have been calling (as a nobody) for Moore to step down and lobby for an African American to fill his position. That would be a real leadership moment if Moore is serious about what he writes and speaks. Model the opposite of what you are accusing others of doing. But he’s all talk. He should put his money where his mouth is.

As with everything, it matters who in particular, or it’s not progress. If it’s the guy who going into T4G reportedly accused everyone of a certain race of complicity in MLK’s death (looking to be the opposite of true witness), pass. The push for diversity in recent NeoCal frontiers looks suspiciously to me to expanding the branding of books, church structure, paying people model, etc. with a ready-made populace.

Inclusion for true Kingdom purposes, absolutely. A rebranding with the same authoritarian business model, no thanks.

Beakerj wrote:

Just that horrific shot of him with a glorious wild animal he has killed for no reason, except vanity, is really all I need to know about him & his attitude to the world. Thoughtless ‘dominion’ over all, without care for the welfare of the other.

My sentiments exactly.

drstevej wrote:

Beakerj wrote:

Just that horrific shot of him with a glorious wild animal he has killed for no reason, except vanity

I crushed a roach in the garage today. Was that vanity? And don’t say roaches aren’t glorious, that would be creature-prejudice and a snub to the Creator.

Leopards eat bunnies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD2iXp5peWg

Yes, leopards eat bunnies – humans eat just about everything. You gotta eat. But killing big cats for ‘sport’ is just vanity, and indicative of a man with a very small, um, sense of self-esteem. Or something.

But I guess you were probably just kidding around.

drstevej wrote:

roebuck wrote:

killing big cats for ‘sport’ is just vanity

I’ve killed roaches for sport. I even fish and deceive fish into thinking they are in for a treat and they get a hook.

Do you eat the fish?

@ Muslin, fka Deana Holmes:
AS a woman who left an abusive “Christian” husband after 3 decades, I think people in these discussions fail to consider how painful, often dangerous, and difficult it is to divorce an abuser. That same man is likely to lie and deceive about finances, smear the woman’s name, alienate the children of any age.

When the church decides to offer support for the abuser, the survivor often wonders how she will survive-spiritually, physically, emotionally, financially, etc. My “favorite” was when a fellow believer (female) chastised me for taking the “easy out” of divorce.

Life is almost unbearable at times while in the marriage. Getting out of it safely can be its own personal hell at a time she is depleted in every way and worried sick about the unknown consequences of a decision she never dreamed she would be making. Then the re-building begins. If you learn to identify abusers as skilled liars you will be more discerning as situations unfold.

agreed

I’ve been a baptist my whole life. I was raised in baptist churches – SBC baptist.
My father verbally, emotionally, and physically abused my mother for 26 years.
The smartest thing my mom ever did was file for divorce.
The best thing my mom ever did for my dad was file for divorce.

My dad changed his behavior when he learned that : 1) My mom can survive just fine without him, and 2) neither me nor my brother will take any cr@p from him.

Further evidence that the SBC hierarchy is an ole boys club of silence and protection.

The darn windows at the SWBTS chapel need to come down! It’s becoming a hall of shame, rather than a hall of fame.

@ okrapod:
I eventually realized that the birth story everyone wants to have is a normal,healthy delivery without drama or trauma. We were wrong to glorify the “big sinners” as a more spectacular path to new life.

Max wrote:

JYJames wrote:

Take a black eye for the man, woman, and you are a Christian wife?

“If it’s not requiring her to sin but simply hurting her, then I think she endures verbal abuse for a season, and she endures perhaps being smacked one night, and then she seeks help from the church.” (John Piper)

Don’t call the church, CALL 911!

Max: Who are the Biblical leaders that support a woman enduring being smacked for one night? They are monsters IMO.

mot wrote:

Who are the Biblical leaders that support a woman enduring being smacked for one night?

They are not “Biblical” leaders at all, in my humble but accurate opinion.

ishy wrote:

Wow. Just…. wow….
https://relevantmagazine.com/current/owen-strachan-argues-church-enfranchises-men-lead/

Uhmmmmmmm ………
Dear Owen, et al:
If you bring your children to church, see to them yourself, or hire daycare people. If you plan to have fellowship meals, learn to cook and rinse soap bubbles, or hire a catering service. This subhuman derivative (female) is through playing “roles”.

@ Max:
As was stated several months ago here on TWW… those windows take the word “stained” to a whole new level ( a very, very low one)……

K.D. wrote:

And the average SBC pew sitter knows none of this, they throw their 10% into the plate that they’ve been browbeaten to give not realizing part of their money goes to support this circus.
I wonder if they knew they’d do anything about it?

The average SBC pew sitter is either uninformed, misinformed, or willingly ignorant. That latter category of SBC membership is the most unsettling – they keep bringing their tithes and offerings to underwrite bad actors in ivory towers!

Beakerj wrote:

Just that horrific shot of him with a glorious wild animal he has killed for no reason, except vanity, is really all I need to know about him & his attitude to the world. Thoughtless ‘dominion’ over all, without care for the welfare of the other.

It angers me to no end.
In their world, aggression, violence, and domination are virtues.

@ Muff Potter:

They are like the Huns.
Very much so.

@ Law Prof:

I’ll take the Whorehouse to Patterson’s chapel any day.
The girls probably make way more sense than he does too.

Lydia wrote:

Well the Puritans believed that giving a woman anything to alleviate labor pains was witchcraft. And the Neo calvinist practically worshipped the Puritans so we might not be too far off.

I’m glad that their religion is being outed for what it is.
Sick and twisted

According to my former pastor, the elders would ‘allow’ a woman to leave her abusive husband if the abuse was, and I quote, ‘frequent and severe enough’. This was stated during a fellowship meal, at a table with at least two women who had suffered abusive situations, as his pastor full well knew. Apparently I ‘raised my voice’ as I expressed my disagreement – which I wanted the women at the far end of the table to clearly hear over the din of noisy children.

By that time, I already knew I was gone, but this was just one more nail in the coffin. Who do these men think they are, playing with people’s lives as if it is all about keeping their ‘no divorce’ scorecard clean? When I challenged his comment, he defensively scoffed, ‘Well, if it’s that bad, why don’t they just call the police?’ As if this church and this pastor did not repeatedly urge people to come to the elders rather than look to ‘the state’ for help in times of trouble.

And, just for the record, I suppose everyone here realizes how terribly mistranslated many of the scriptures concerning ‘divorce’ are? What is mistranslated, it seems to me deliberately, is the distinction between ‘putting away’ and divorce. If translated consistently, the English would read that Jesus said ‘God hates (unlawful) putting away’ not divorce, which he acknowledged was permissible, but required the appropriate official papers. The Pharisees had apparently abused the practice of ‘putting away’ which was a sort of ‘mercy’ granted to wives who were discovered to have had premarital sex, and, by law, should have been stoned (as Joseph was planning to ‘put away’ Mary, rather than seek her death). The wife could be ‘put away’, acknowledging her shame and not allowing for lawful remarriage. It was not supposed to be the equivalent to modern no-fault divorce, allowing the men to toss off their wives for a new one on a whim. Jesus was saying that these unlawful ‘putting aways’ were unlawful, and that the parties involved were committing adultery by remarrying without officially terminating their first marriage covenant. The law of Moses – written by God – allowed for divorce when the marriage covenant was broken by one or more party, (not adultery, which called for stoning) but required that the woman be given official papers of divorcement, proving that she was not an adulteress and had the legal right to remarry. The Patriarchal church has been lying about divorce from the get go. As much as God hates broken relationships, he – due to the hardness of sinful hearts – does not demand that people remain entombed forever in miserable, dead marriages, and certainly not in abusive ones.

Quoting Patterson:

“who is undergoing genuine physical abuse from her husband, and her husband says she should submit”

“Genuine” abuse? What is “genuine” abuse? And why limit a woman to physical abuse only? Abuse comes in other forms, which are just as harmful, including consistent verbal or psychological abuse.

GSD [Getting Stuff Done] wrote:

I guess my real question is: Is there something about this Fundamentalist subculture, this social group, that sees it as OK to present a fictional story as if it was fact?

Plague of US preachers falsely claim to be Navy SEALs
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/11/us_preachers_claim_to_be_navy_seals/

Preacher’s Wife wrote:

We went to a workshop on preaching about evangelism a couple months ago thinking there would be advice and ideas and collaboration. Basically we were told how to mimic someone else’s sermon, complete with stage directions.

Another thing that just crossed my mind about this. A couple of years ago, I was either listening to a Chris Rosebrough podcast or this was on one of his sites –
But he has an example or two of one preacher totally copying off another guy’s sermon, complete with using the same props.

The example that sticks in my memory is one where a preacher was illustrating his sermon points by pouring M & M candy (or rocks? or something) into a jar, but the candy or rocks or whatever overflowed and fell out of the jar.

There was another preacher who copied off that one’s sermon, even down to using the jar and candy prop, pouring the stuff into the jar, etc, to make the same point.

So lame.

Beakerj wrote:

Just that horrific shot of him with a glorious wild animal he has killed for no reason, except vanity, is really all I need to know about him & his attitude to the world. Thoughtless ‘dominion’ over all, without care for the welfare of the other.

I don’t like big game hunters. I actually enjoy these types of stories:

“‘Poetic justice’: Suspected lion hunter mauled to death by pride of lions”
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/africa/101421559/poetic-justice-suspected-lion-hunter-mauled-to-death-by-pride-of-lions

In the last few years, there was a story of a big game hunter who was trying to kill an elephant when another one in the herd got in a panic and stomped him to death.

There was another hunter who was trying to shoot some animal in Africa, but he slipped, and fell into a watering area known to contain crocodiles.

Hopefully, something of that nature will happen to Paige Patterson if he goes on another big game hunting trip. Yes, I mean that. I don’t feel sorry for these types of people. At all.

Daisy wrote:

Don’t leopards eat bunnies in nature to eat,

I meant, they eat them -to survive- in the wild.

I am unaware of any leopards in nature who can drive a car to a HEB Pantry store to buy bread, milk, eggs, etc.

@ drstevej:

My reply to you on that is sitting in queue. You’ll have to scroll up later to see it, I guess.

I find your roach / leopard analogy lacking and weak, for a few reasons I explain in my currently queued post…

@ Deborah:

I’m sorry for what you went through.

I’ve lately been re-reading a book about domestic abusers, and it discusses how many abusive husbands become even more abusive and dangerous when/if they discover their partner is going to leave. Some will even stalk their partner after she’s left.

Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

The smartest thing my mom ever did was file for divorce.
The best thing my mom ever did for my dad was file for divorce.
My dad changed his behavior when he learned that : 1) My mom can survive just fine without him, and 2) neither me nor my brother will take any cr@p from him.

One of the things I don’t see from Southern Baptist (or general complementarian) teachings about all these interwoven topics is the husband being held truly accountable for any abuse he is dishing out.

All these churches ever do is tell the wife in question to stay (they tell her divorce is “unbiblical”), and to pray and submit more. Some might allow separation for a time.

But there is nothing there to penalize an abusive husband, no consequences for his behavior. And the abusers know it – their victim is trapped if she follows these teachings.

mot wrote:

I wish every woman in churches where they are subjugated would strike until the men repent of treating them like 2nd class citizens.

The Resignation of Eve
“What if Adam’s Rib is No Longer Willing to Be The Church’s Backbone”
http://resignationofeve.com/

Daisy wrote:

This is contrary to some of the advice I’ve seen by experts on domestic abuse – they say the first time the guy is violent with you (in the advice they give in the dating stages of a relationship), to LEAVE.

I mean, the books advise women to leave pronto, immediately, don’t wait for the abuse to escalate until the guy is getting MORE severe, even more violent, and/or it’s happening more often.

The experts say the longer you wait to get out, the worse it is, and it will be more difficult to leave.

truthseeker00 wrote:

The Patriarchal church has been lying about divorce from the get go. As much as God hates broken relationships, he – due to the hardness of sinful hearts – does not demand that people remain entombed forever in miserable, dead marriages, and certainly not in abusive ones.

Something else I wanted to add about this.

You realize all these Christian men saying divorce is “always” wrong no matter what would revoke that if it were THEM in some kind of marital trouble?

Years ago, pastor Charles Stanley said he believed and pastor who gets divorced should step down from the pulpit.

But when his wife asked him for a divorce (they did get one), he changed his tune. He fought to stay in his pastor role at the big Baptist church he worked at (and they televise their services weekly).

See, once the doctrine they preach hits them personally, these guys change their tune.

These anti- Divorce guys magically turn into, “I was wrong about divorce, divorce is not so wrong or un-biblical after all!” devotees when divorce happens to them.

@ Daisy:
Ok. That’s what I said about Merritt, too. 🙂

JYJames wrote:

Titus 2: Older women teaching younger women,

Older women = Elders.

The whole female subjugation thing is almost pathological. Like it’s the most important aspect of Christianity.

Some tool went and drove a truck into a crowd of people in Toronto and identfied himself as “incel”. A loose gathering of fellow tools who spew mysogeny because they can’t get a date.

I’d say that a lot the same attitudes espoused by guys like Patterson, Piper and the like are rife with psycho sexual overtones.

It’s the power that’s the turn on that drives it all. Slice & dice the bible for the requisite verses and boom…divine justification for what’s essentially a tax free kink club.

No wonder abuse is rampant.

Sick stuff but until the Christians in these organizations stop it, it will continue.

@ Preacher’s Wife:
While I understand the use of “dramatic license” I can tell you how many time, as a practicing scientist/engineer/medical reseracher, I just cringe at what hear going out of the pulpit. The lack of basic scietific understanding is very depressing… And then pew peons jusy go on to repeat it, thinking they are pious…
Sigh… clearly as pointed out here on TWW, many pasters have very little moder understanding of dealing with abuse…. I have found it is extended to most forms of scientific knowledge..

Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:

The lack of basic scietific understanding is very depressing… And then pew peons jusy go on to repeat it, thinking they are pious…

In some religious circles it seems that rebellion against science is a cardinal virtue, a way to separate sheep and goats. As if faith and science are polar opposites.

@ Jeffrey Chalmers:
You can add basics in psychology to the list they know nothing about.

I agree with those who say the story is a fraud. It is screaming of embellishment if not outright lie.
These are the same people (those responsible for CBMW) when Willow Creek and Bill Hybels became so big scoffed that God didn’t need help to save the lost or something like that. What Patterson did with that story is the same thing. Playing with people’s emotions to get a response.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Anything goes as long as Souls(TM) get Saved(TM).

Prioritizing the Great Commission over the Great Commandment. Sigh.

@ Ken A:
Tell me about it. I live at Ground Zero. Moore was the poster boy for female subjugation as Dean at SBTS.

Daisy wrote:

One of the things I find very strange about a lot of conservative Christians is that they make things – life, marriage, what have you – more difficult under the New Testament than things were under the Old.

And that makes no sense. Jesus corrected the Pharisees on their legalistic behavior, where they upheld the letter of the law but negated the spirit of the law, that sort of thing.

Jesus said his yoke and burden was easy, but that the Pharisees kept wanting to add MORE burdens and rules on to people’s shoulders – and that sounds just like the Christians today who tell wives in abusive marriages that divorce is supposedly not “biblically” permissible for them.

When you’re making divorce and marriage even more difficult today than it was in the Old Testament, as Southern Baptists and other Christians are doing, something is not adding up.

Yessssssss!!!!!!

Beth74 wrote:

You’re looking at God’s fully realized plans for humanity, it’s not some gender androgynous human being, it’s Jesus Christ, He’s the second Adam, He’s the very embodiment of what humanity is to be. -Strachan

Hmm…where does that leave women?

Did we fall short of “what humanity is to be” just by our plumbing?

And what about Mary, mother of Christ?

Did she, too, fall short of God’s “fully realized plans for humanity”?

And what about in Heaven? When everything is all sorted out, do we all turn into men?

Unreal. Does it never occur to them that if Christ spent a good deal [all] of his ministry time emphasizing that all people are valuable to God, they might want to follow his lead a bit here?

My gosh.

Jesus is the stumbling block. He was to those who make up rules and doctrines not in the Bible or fairly representative of the Bible 2,000 years ago—and He still is today to their theological progeny.

@ drstevej:
Hey, I give you an “A” for taking it! The missuse of thermodyanimcs by YEC makes me pull my hair out

@ Jeffrey Chalmers:

Oh, goodness, Oak Ridge. I spent two weeks there for a specific continuing ed course when I was pursuing the stamp on the forehead so we could open a little nuclear med lab at a hospital where there was none. It was kind of awesome just being there, and sad that at the time they had to resort to little courses like I was taking where once history had been made.

Okay, enough with the sentimentality.

But yes to your earlier comment. Some of the ridiculous comments from some folks in churchianity about ‘science’ are pathetic. I want to say that those of us who may know just a little something are painfully aware of how little we know; so how is it that those who know basically nothing cannot figure out how little they know.

Churchianity is a chronic degenerative disease which cannot be cured and which, unlike some physical chronic degenerative diseases, apparently cannot even be controlled or even ameliorated.

Law Prof wrote:

Jesus is the stumbling block.

Jesus still cannot be controlled. There are several ways to manipulate scripture and make head roads in controlling the message. Those in Jesus’ day who tried to either control or manipulate or discredit him are now merely bad examples for other people.

@ Jeffrey Chalmers:

One of my biggest issues with sermon borrowing is that the preacher is not allowing himself to be affected by the text at all. Reading and studying a new text in depth each week should make a profound impact on the speaker. But if they just borrow ideas and outlines, they are short-changing themselves and eventually their lack of character will catch up with them.

@ okrapod:
Churchianity is a business… which readily embrasses many of the current “best practices” of American capitalism/business…. I have seen the exact same thing at the Big U over the last 30 years…..

If it weren’t for church problems we would not have most of the NT epistles. The flesh is an enemy then and now (Gal. 5:7).

Daisy wrote:

Quoting Patterson:
“who is undergoing genuine physical abuse from her husband, and her husband says she should submit”
“Genuine” abuse? What is “genuine” abuse? And why limit a woman to physical abuse only?

The goal is to minimize, and define abuse down to the tiniest sliver of physical abuse that resulted in major damage or hospitalization so they can ignore the rest and pretend like it’s ‘she accused me of abuse because I left my socks on the floor’, which is a thing I saw on twitter yesterday.

If they get to define abuse, they get to make all the decisions. Which is something like abuse, come to think of it.

Daisy wrote:

But there is nothing there to penalize an abusive husband, no consequences for his behavior.

Which make it ineffective. And stupid.

Unless you are an abuser. Increasingly, I can’t help but wonder how many of these men who complain the loudest are just that.

Lea wrote:

Why on earth would he need to be ‘elevated’, btw???

So he doesn’t become an “Incel”.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-futrelle-incels-toronto-terrorism_us_5ae8d130e4b06748dc8d2b95

(or aggrieved about his unfulfilled need for entitlement).

@ Lea:
Or maybe that last one is Twain 🙂

Preacher’s Wife wrote:

Basically we were told how to mimic someone else’s sermon, complete with stage directions.

Wow, I know this sort of thing is going on, especially with the ARC-type guys. I just didn’t know it was being encouraged [and taught!] at conferences.

In the secular world, it’s called plagiarism, and it can get you fired from a job or kicked out of school. It’s similar to making up stories and presenting them as fact to illustrate your point and make people follow your advice.

Some of these guys have developed their own code of ethics. The same guys who would preach loudly against situational ethics and moral relativism. And really, these offenses are so minor, compared with other things that Patterson is accused of.

drstevej wrote:

If it weren’t for church problems we would not have most of the NT epistles. The flesh is an enemy then and now (Gal. 5:7).

Certainly! The church is full of flesh-babies. I get tired of church folks (even preachers!) saying they are struggling with their flesh, never getting victory over it.

“I say then, walk by the Spirit and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.” (Gal. 5:16)

There’s not enough preaching/teaching today about the ministry of the Holy Spirit and being Spirit-led, rather than letting the flesh rule when it comes to temptation.

Jack wrote:

The whole female subjugation thing is almost pathological.

It is pathological.

Max wrote:

ole boys club

Max:

If Patterson were given the opportunity to same his successor, who do you think it would be?

If Mohler were given the opportunity to name Patterson’s successor, who do you think it would be?

I assume that SWBTS trustees’ (and nominees for that position) phones are ringing off the hook with recommendations from the SBC good ole boys club.

abigail wrote:

I just can’t take it anymore.

The end of the Evangelical Era? (Just as Europe had the end of the State Church Era?)

abigail wrote:

big name Christian teachers who have been called out the past few years for either tolerating abuse or themselves abusing others. Lets see…quite a list. Mahaney, Piper, Savage, Patterson, Hybels, Gothard, that guy from Vision Forum….the list goes on and on by the day

“The entire manosphere ― from the faux-respectable Men’s Rights Activists to the anonymous Twitter trolls who threaten and harass any woman who dares express an opinion they don’t like ― is irredeemably toxic, … Misogyny kills.” – i.e., Matthew Phelps, etc.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-futrelle-incels-toronto-terrorism_us_5ae8d130e4b06748dc8d2b95

Lea wrote:

Max wrote:

SBC hierarchy is an ole boys club of silence and protection.

There was an article I read yesterday in Christianity today (maybe) basically saying there is a whole ‘don’t talk bad about people even when they are terrible’ deal going on in SBC, although Patterson is allowed to talk about people. It was ridiculous.

I certainly can not prove it, but I have wondered how many men’s careers in the SBC have been harmed when they dared to criticize Patterson.

@ Lydia:

“This was a coordinated media hit. Moore and another guy involved have the contacts. Why does WaPo care about Patterson? Slow day?”
++++++++++++++

so, you suspect Russell Moore (in a concerted effort with others) leaked the old recording and story to WaPo for the purpose of getting him out?

so underhandedly vicious.

is this driven by the social rules in the SBC that you can’t say bad things about leaders? so the only alternative is to scheme with a sweet smile?

There wasn’t a more mature, diplomatic way to go about this?

i’m truly amazed.

SBC leaders are worse than junior high girls. fake smiles and backstabbing to get your way.

a very sick culture, made all the more so by invoking God as their raison d’etre and for revenue.

Lea wrote:

There was an article I read yesterday in Christianity today (maybe) basically saying there is a whole ‘don’t talk bad about people even when they are terrible’ deal going on in SBC

I just read the CT article. While I’m not a fan of Ed Stetzer because of his link to SBC’s New Calvinist movement, he nails it on the head when he says of folks like Patterson: “In the aftermath of the Conservative Resurgence, the SBC made a mistake. We spent more time taking victory laps than really leading. We let our history become mythology. We turned men into heroes, and then we turned our heroes into gods.”

And then we immortalized those icons on stain-glass windows! But we are now finding out they aren’t gods at all – they were human and they sinned (some sinned really bad!). The hall of fame is becoming a hall of shame.

Yep, I agree with Stetzer that Dr. Patterson is done, but just hasn’t quit yet. I join him as he says: “Thank you, Dr. Patterson, for your service … Thank you for thinking first of the SBC as you step into a well-earned retirement.”

As a side-note, TWW’s frequent readers will love this line from the article regarding Patterson’s upcoming appearance at the SBC annual meeting: “If Patterson preaches at the SBC, he will, because of his past work, get a STANDING OVATION.”

Good Lord! Southern Baptists have lost their spiritual minds!!

elastigirl wrote:

so, you suspect Russell Moore (in a concerted effort with others) leaked the old recording and story to WaPo for the purpose of getting him out?
so underhandedly vicious.

I suspect they are like sharks, they smelled blood in the water with Patterson, and weakness, and see the opportunity to bite.

abigail wrote:

big name Christian teachers who have been called out the past few years for either tolerating abuse or themselves abusing others

From leader to beggar, literally: https://www.thedailybeast.com/richard-spencer-was-supposed-to-lead-the-alt-right-to-victory-now-hes-begging-for-money?ref=home

How many of these clowns teaching it’s OK or good for a wife (who may have young children in the house) to endure domestic violence could be sued for causing PTSD in those families?

Max wrote:

I join him as he says: “Thank you, Dr. Patterson, for your service …

I do not thank him for his service. Although I am now reminded of Evita…

https://youtu.be/4sa9oMej5B8

@ Max:

“And then we immortalized those icons on stain-glass windows! But we are now finding out they aren’t gods at all – they were human and they sinned (some sinned really bad!).”
++++++++++++++

sinned is too lightweight a word. it’s what people say when they apologize for having a mean tone of voice.

sinned is a manipulative word. it’s what people say then they apologize for “not loving well” to deflect from actual crimes they committed.

i prefer words like criminal, scum of the earth, foolish ignoramus, unprincipled moron…

elastigirl wrote:

i prefer words like criminal, scum of the earth, foolish ignoramus, unprincipled moron…

Not your typical descriptors for men of the cloth, but they fit for some of these characters!

@ Lea:
They are all alike. It’s just that Patterson doesn’t have the power and influence he used to have and is a real easy Mark for the more well-connected charlatans with the secular media.

I was just thinking of dr. Klouda this morning. But I was also thinking of SGM victims and what Mohler and Mark Dever have put them through by embracing and protecting Mahaney.

The entire SBC is totally corrupt and sick at the top.

@ Max:

A standing ovation this summer would doom the already doomed SBC.

@ Lydia:
Hm.

Steve wrote:

@ Max:
A standing ovation this summer would doom the already doomed SBC.

Which is why there’s probably going to be one.

“THIS CAN’T RUIN ME! NOTHING CAN RUIN ME!”
— Congressman Wilbur Mills (with assistance from Jack Daniels) just before he went down in a scandal

Max wrote:

As a side-note, TWW’s frequent readers will love this line from the article regarding Patterson’s upcoming appearance at the SBC annual meeting: “If Patterson preaches at the SBC, he will, because of his past work, get a STANDING OVATION.”

Again, who’s standing next to who atop Lenin’s Tomb?

abigail wrote:

The shot with that magnificent leopard makes me sick. I know some places in Africa actually fence in the animals so the big boys can snare a trophey. If that is how he got that creature its a pity

It’s called a “canned hunt” or “canned safari”, and violates a major tradition of REAL big-game hunting: The quarry must have a reasonable chance of escape, and the hunter must be in actual danger from the quarry.

I know a couple hunters.
Patterson is NOT Great White Hunter — he’s a WANNA-BE.
And REAL hunters would hold such a Wanna-Be in absolute contempt.

And never mind Leopards — of the five Big Game animals of Africa, the absolute most dangerous is the Cape Buffalo. When Great White Hunter faces down a Cape Buffalo on foot with no “canned hunt” protections, THEN I’ll believe he’s a hunter.

@ mot:
Not sure who Cole works for now. Started with one of the old singing Senators. My guess is DC. It’s all about timing and patterns. Cole has been going after Patterson since old blogosphere days. Baptist blogger. If it’s not pass protected. He goes through phases. Used to have hilarious stuff about Patterson including pics of his deceased dog’s fancy human sized tombstone buried on seminary property. He was the one who dubbed Dorothy, Hyacinth Bucket.

Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:

and I see no hint of quantum mechanics, general relativity, particle physics, etc…. yet it has impacted all of our lives directly, or indirectly…. in ways we do not even realize….. yet my bet most clergy have very little understanding of any of this…

Perhaps if a serious effort were made to make this stuff accessible to lay-people, the clergy might sing a different tune.
And no, I am not suggesting dumbed-down versions.
I believe there’s a big difference between accessible and dumbed-down.

@ Lydia:

i do remember Benjamin Cole at that time, thinking there was potential there for great consequence (of some kind). but that it was for a time in the future while he went ‘incognito’ (so to speak) for a while (working from the outside).

….that was about the time i first encountered the word ‘male headship’, proffered to me as a wonderful thing by pastor of 2nd Church of Dysfunction (along with loaning me the enormous ‘Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’ for my light reading enjoyment).

“What in the world….”, i thought to myself. so i started digging around trying to find out “what is this weirdness? what parallel universe have i just beamed into?”

I soon found Wade Burleson’s blog, where I learned of the shenanigans perpetrated by the entity known as SBC. Then found TWW not long after.

turns out this parallel universe has been steadily replacing my former reality as this gender role weirdness grows like mold. (did i mix metaphors, there?)

but i’m thankful for those sober enough to push back. unlike so many naive church leaders of all backgrounds so easily taken in.

it really is like a science fiction movie:

1 parallel universe expanding into its counterpart and replacing it with itself, but the true heroes having muscled their way into the hairs-breadth line between the 2, and are pushing with all their might, one hand on each side projecting the force of bulging biceps and triceps like hercules, separating the 2 realities to stop the advance of the invading universe.

@ elastigirl:

perhaps i’m giving Mr. Cole too much credit, here. i really know nothing, just an observer from the far outside.

Preacher’s Wife wrote:

The way people treat animals and nature, things that are objectively weaker and lesser than humans, will tell you a lot about how they will treat people they perceive as lesser than themselves.

Or, as Sirius Black put it:

If you want to know what a man’s like, take a good look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.

I realise Sirius Black isn’t real; but the sentiment behind the quote goes back a long way. It’s a question of whether [generic] you respect someone whom you have nothing to gain by respecting. One might even say… Whoever can be trusted in a small thing, can also be trusted with much… And by the way, mind and give to people who can’t repay you. (I paraphrase.)

Lydia wrote:

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
They are too smart for that. Master deceivers. Think Neo Cal stealth.

Jus like my youngest brother.
Then curse God that you weren’t born a Master Deceiver and Sociopath like them, BECAUSE THEIR KIND ALWAYS WINS! ALWAYS!

Maybe this is already posted somewhere.. http://stopbaptistpredators.org/article/darrell_gilyard2.html

And this guy is in the highest position with the SBC? I have little confidence in SBC men of influence. Power, control, fame, followings, it all gives them an illusion that they are “serving God.” Self-deceived.

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

I realise Sirius Black isn’t real; but the sentiment behind the quote goes back a long way.

the modern version is generally to watch how they treat the waiter…

senecagriggs wrote:

and 60 year old alumnus Dr. Mac Brunson, could take his place.

Wait, is that the guy that talks a lot of patriarchal nonsense on twitter?

Awesome.

ishy wrote:

Wow. Just…. wow….
https://relevantmagazine.com/current/owen-strachan-argues-church-enfranchises-men-lead/

Uhmmmmmmm ………
Dear Owen, et al:
If you bring your children to church, see to them yourself, or hire daycare people. If you plan to have fellowship meals, learn to cook and rinse soap bubbles, or hire a catering service. This subhuman derivative (female) is through playing “roles”.

I wish every woman in churches where they are subjugated would strike until the men repent of treating them like 2nd class citizens.

How are we supposed to take these men seriously any more? Talk about a person we would never have heard of it is wasn’t for his father-in-law. This guy was supposed to be so smart. He came highly recommended by none other than Mark Dever. He didn’t even see the heresy of ESS. He was supposedly brilliant? These guys get paid to think! I guess he still holds on to the nonsense of ESS. In the interview he pushes back against men and women both being made in the image of God. From the ESV (the super duper translation?)
Gen 1:27 “So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.”
Like I say, he appears to be very shallow in his thinking. Or maybe deceptive. I know that isn’t out of the question.
So much of what is taught coming for SBTS is really very shallow and the guys there prove themselves very shallow. None of them could see what a huckster CJ Mahaney really was. Now the whole world sees it and they can’t bring themselves to say what everyone sees.
Moore says submission of women is “a gospel issue”. That is just nonsense. What does it have to do with a man or women being saved? All of them appear to be very shallow in their thinking and not all that bright. They keep up the charade in hopes no one will notice.
The emperor has no close.

drstevej wrote:

I crushed a roach in the garage today. Was that vanity?

Did you do it for no reason but to pose with it to show how very virile & amazingly manly you are? If so, yes 🙂 If you travelled abroad & spent a load of money to do this, double yes. Pat yourself on the Y chromosome.

ishy wrote:

Daisy wrote:

Here’s one quote of Strachan from the page you linked:

“He is the Father, not the mother, not gender androgynous. He is God the Father.”

But God the Father and Jesus sometimes described themselves in feminine terms, such as comparing themselves to Mother Birds.

Despite all their big talk about being scholars, the CBMW people never use the original languages. And as we saw from the ESV 2016, they had no problem intentionally mistranslating (considering Strachan’s father-in-law Bruce Ware was one of the people behind that mistranslation).

And Ware says women are not made in the image of God…

Ware said we are a “derivitive”.

drstevej wrote:

Some, others I throw back wounded. I even use live minnows as bait, encouraging pescatoral cannibalism.

I also have a friend who keeps a tiger in a cage. The tiger’s name is Mike VII. https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-9.09.52-AM-718×490.jpg

Well, colour me completely unimpressed. Deliberate cruelty for the sake of feeling superior is just pitiful. There’s enough cruelty & oppression in the world without wilfully adding to it. How does that correspond with the fruit of the Spirit, by the way?

Lydia wrote:

@ elastigirl:Lol.
My view is that they already own it all and the eating of each other has begun.

WHAT DO PREDATORS EAT AFTER THEY’VE KILLED OFF ALL THE PREY?

Lydia wrote:

@ roebuck:
Are there fish police now?

Game and Fish doesn’t play where I live…

Beakerj wrote:

Well, colour me completely unimpressed.

Jesus went fishing.

Lydia wrote:

Remember Setzer could not even do a funeral of a church member where he pastored. He didn’t do Hospital visits. He was too important and had to spend his precious time working on his sermon. Because as you know their sermon is the most important event of the week.

Modus operandi for New Calvinists. But they’ve got plenty of time to tweet their lives away in coffee shops.

I have so many, many things to say, but I don’t even know where to begin – though I think a lot of it speaks for itself, and suffice to say I agree with all the good and profound insight as always that is offered here.

P.S. For those who don’t know as I am a sporadic commenter here and don’t usually give my background when I post: I recently, within the past few years, left the SBC and particularly seminary at SEBTS. I was on an academia track and…well, nope. Had to leave. Couldn’t reconcile and live and operate in their academic and church world anymore.

A lot of my leaving the SBC had to do with my bad personal experiences as a woman in those circles, and the social psych and larger theological and philosophical structures for women that I found and experienced as extremely troubling amd contradictory.

But, I also left for a lot of other theological and ideological personal reasons.

I could write a book about all of it. I’m using pretty much my real name here – except I literally “cutt” off the last part of it. 🙂

@ okrapod:
I prayed for you just now, okrapod.

Lydia wrote:

It’s pretty bad when the people outing each other are cut from the same lack of character cloth but looking to score a political win.

Not a spiritual bone in any of them … at least not Holy Spirit.

emily honey wrote:

I don’t like Ed Stetzer’s Christianity Today article.

The whole thing, the whole culture of it, grosses me out. This is their idea of Christianity? It’s nothing more than a club, and a deeply dysfunctional one at that, where they will not call each other out, publicly or privately, on what ought to be serious matters of conscience.

This is Christianity? I think not.

@ Beakerj:
This is cruelty when law enforcement looks the other way to be PC. Human girls. PC is deadly.

Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal

Max wrote:

Yes, it will be live-streamed.

Would love to see it combined with UFC. Watching Rhonda Rousey give Paige Patterson a round-house kick would be awesome!

@ emily honey:
Good for you! Big life changing decision.

Nothing to worry about here folks, let’s just forget Grudem’s assurances…”This created order is also best for us, because it comes from an allwise Creator. This created order truly honors men and women. It does not lead to abuse but guards against it, because both men and women are equal in value before God.” (Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood)

Augustine wrote:

Nothing to worry about here folks…It does not lead to abuse but guards against it

LOl.

Well, if he says so, let’s just ignore all evidence to the contrary. Good plan!/s

IF: Numbers 23:19 KJV – God is not a man …; neither the son of man,

AND IF: John 4:24-26 KJV – God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth

AND IF: the doctrine of the Trinity went to great ends to be sure that the Second Person of the Trinity was declared to be both human and also divine, not some hybrid of the two; pre-existent as not human but rather the Word

How then is God the Father male as a human male is male seeing that God the Father is not human. And if the idea of male is not a sexual/gender definition then what is it?

It is correct that God is not a female; also not a male or a chicken. Only in the humanity of Jesus does one see material being (as opposed to spirit) with the attributes of man; and the counsels have been quite clear that God is not man and man is not God and Jesus was not a hybrid but rather both.

S and W are making it up to suit themselves. One wonders if the object is to make too much of human maleness as compared to divinity or if the object is to not have to deal with the concept of spirit.

That Person who was both God and man (do not miss ‘both’ or ‘and’) said that what is born of the flesh is flesh and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. It is cringe worthy to hear people bypass spirit in a rush to validate flesh.

Humans are in the image of God in spirit, needing to be born of Spirit to renew the original plan and redeem the disaster of separation between God and man. What a pity to overlook that with excessive preoccupation with the human body and its genitals; makes one wonder, frankly, about those who get fixated on this. I want to say to them ‘get your hand out of your pants; you will not find the image of God in your underwear’.

Catherine Martin wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Anything goes as long as Souls(TM) get Saved(TM).
Prioritizing the Great Commission over the Great Commandment. Sigh.

And to Save(TM) Souls(TM) takes your hard-earned dough. “As soon as a coin in the coffer rings / the soul from purgatory springs.”
On March 28, 2018, Patterson wrote:
“August of 1928, a sad month for Southern Baptists, was the date when it was discovered that Clinton S. Carnes, trusted treasurer of the Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, had quietly pilfered $909,161 from the treasury of the Home Mission Board. Southern Baptists were humiliated; the Home Mission Board was virtually bankrupt; missionaries were left without pay; church funds were cut off; and, doubtless, lost people who could not get the message of Christ certainly trooped into hell.”
People (maybe your grandmother) are in hell right now suffering eternal (a very long time) conscious torment– not because a Calvinist god predestined it, nor due to any sin or unbelief of their own, but because a scoundrel absconded with a boatload of cash from the Southern Baptist Convention. Let that thought sink into our minds when we think about what Patterson is teaching future pastors.

@ okrapod:

Great comment! lol on that last bit.

@ Lydia:
@ Ken A:

I was with SEBTS – Raleigh-Durham area. Not sure if that changes anything. If you mean maybe we have crossed paths in real life before?

@ Ken F (aka Tweed):
That is how the mega world operated.

@ Bridget:
Fundamentalist and evangelicals have a obsession with gender and sex……. and it really does predate the sexual “revolution” of the 1960’s…. it is interesting to go back and look at Dantes “Inferno, and the nine rings of hell…. the most inner rings are not sexual, in fact I would argue some of the stuff that TWW reports on would fall into these inner rings…
Now, we can all debate the validity of Dante’s work; however it does show that the focus on specific “sins” can vary over the centuries..

@ emily honey:

And just to prove that – my thought and immediate feeling after posting that is “Oh. Shoot. If certain people read here and see I wrote that I might get an email about it that they’re upset I would say such a thing.” Even though I’m not in their world anymore, that immediate social conditioned thought is still there.

Because it is also not socially advantageous in other/non-Patterson SBC circles to be that directly disagreeable with Ed Stetzer.

See the irony and layers? 🙂

Must read from Wade Burleson:

http://www.wadeburleson.org/2018/05/will-dr-paige-patterson-retire-or-will.html

Lydia wrote:

That is how the mega world operated.

The flag by my name is very appropriate for this discussion. More than a decade ago we lived for more than two years very close to the commune described here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casalesi_clan. I did not now about the New Calvinists, the SBC intrigues, and the Conservative Resurgence back then. But we were very familiar with the ways of the Camorra – not a fun place to live. When I started to read about New Calvinism a few years ago and saw all the connections it reminded me more of the mob than anything else I could think of. In the area were we lived integrity was not valued. What was valued was keeping quiet. Sound familiar?

@ emily honey:
Not even a former president? Lol. That is who I was thinking of. Very nice guy. BM. Before Mohler.

Daisy wrote:

But God the Father and Jesus sometimes described themselves in feminine terms, such as comparing themselves to Mother Birds.

Strachan worships an idol. God is God and far above our conceptions about sex, gender, etc. Again, just my personal opinion.

Steve wrote:

@ emily honey:

There’s not much to like coming out of the SBC these days. If you’re a thinking person you have no home in the SBC. The worst is yet to come.

Yes those chickens are coming home to roost. It is way past time IMO.

Lydia wrote:

“I want to say to them ‘get your hand out of your pants; you will not find the image of God in your underwear’.”

Are you sure they are limiting their to their own underwear?

You make the assumption that Paige didn’t completely make up the story about the abused woman whose husband came to Christ. Frankly I think the whole thing is suspicious, and I would not trust Paige to tell the truth.

emily honey wrote:

Because it is also not socially advantageous in other/non-Patterson SBC circles to be that directly disagreeable with Ed Stetzer.

I quoted Patterson in a 4:03PM comment currently in time out. I forgot the link https://swbts.edu/news/releases/open-letter-southern-baptists/
The open letter was ostensibly about Frank Page (not Paige–I suppose this Page was a Southern Baptist leader of the 19th century, since other SBC leaders have utterly forgotten he ever existed). But Patterson also says:
“In more recent time, when the Ashley Madison list of those willing to compromise their marriages went public in 2016, one “prophet” predicted that hundreds of Baptist churches would be pastorless in only a few days.”
Now, the only suspect I saw predict hundreds (at least 400, to be precise) of leaders would resign the following Sunday was Ed Stetzer. (I’ve still not seen Stetzer walk back his prediction.) So I assume the mystery “prophet” Patterson is lambasting is Stetzer, and there’s some animosity between them.

Paige is probably more concerned about the upcoming Pressler trial than anything else right now. I’m sure lots of lawyering taking place right now. Gotta save those two stained glass windows.

@ Lea:
Most of it appeared on CBMW which was the repository for all things patriarchal. But the site was scrubbed and rehabbed. It’s even hard to find his Henry Institute paper that is quite a doozy trashing comp as not patriarchal enough and chiding men who ask their wives if they can attend Promise keepers. Don’t ask. Tell her.

These guys are diabolically deceptive but not stupid.

My rule for changing what you taught for years is to publicly state what you taught wrong and why. The reason is because they approached it dogmatically. It was the Gospel. It was “biblical”. Disagreement was unbiblical or heresy along with all their slippery slope declarations.

They don’t deserve to be taken seriously.

Lydia wrote:

Now, Russ Moore is claiming the same? Seriously? Maybe we can wait another 5 years to see what else they change in what they teach that people shouldn’t listen to now.

No, a NEW “what we have ALWAYS taught”.

oceania has always been at peace with eurasia, comrades.

emily honey wrote:

And just to prove that – my thought and immediate feeling after posting that is “Oh. Shoot. If certain people read here and see I wrote that I might get an email about it that they’re upset I would say such a thing.” Even though I’m not in their world anymore, that immediate social conditioned thought is still there.

It’s not only chickens who peck the Defective to death in the barnyard.

Steve wrote:

Paige is probably more concerned about the upcoming Pressler trial than anything else right now. I’m sure lots of lawyering taking place right now. Gotta save those two stained glass windows.

Oh yes. Puts Mahaney on backburner. It’s going to be interesting how Mohler, Moore and others reposition themselves as barely part of the CR contingency after milking it for fame and position. Patterson has plenty of lawyer help. He sure used them against other people enough!

drstevej wrote:

Jesus went fishing.

I’m not sure Jesus was a trophy fisherman tbh, or that those fish went uneaten.

@ emily honey:
Stay out of that circle. Run from morons who actually believe they are superior to you and won’t treat you as an equal. There’s nothing Christian about all of this junk we see and hear today. Leave the SBC and don’t look back.

emily honey wrote:

I recently, within the past few years, left the SBC and particularly seminary at SEBTS.

Wisdom. I have a feeling that an SBC seminary degree, particularly one from SBTS or SEBTS, will soon become a liability not an asset.

Steve wrote:

Keep doing the two things that that the SBC forbids: think and speak for yourself. The truth is slowly leaking out. The SBC is only one court case or major news story away from irreversible damage and embarrassment.

Right.

emily honey wrote:

As a non inner circle woman I generally felt like an object or abstraction to them.

Are there inner circle women? Oxymoron?
Drank-the-kool-aid-women, perhaps?

@ Deb:

Likewise! 🙂

emily honey wrote:

The small number of women in the inner circle tend to have different experiences and priveleges than most of us who operate and live outside it.

“Let them eat cake” … attributed to inner circle Marie-Antoinette, the queen of France during the French Revolution.

* tells abused women to suck it up and submit more
* protects sexual predators
* kills exotic animals for no reason other than to exude macho man image
* major player in takeover through secrecy and scheming
* spends tons of money for stained glass false idols and securing himself a nice retirement home …….

Hmmmmm, were these the qualities Jesus looked for in his apostles?

Max wrote:

emily honey wrote:

I recently, within the past few years, left the SBC and particularly seminary at SEBTS.

Wisdom. I have a feeling that an SBC seminary degree, particularly one from SBTS or SEBTS, will soon become a liability not an asset.

I have a couple friends, husband and wife, who announce their graduate education as “Master of Divinity from SBTS…before the crazies took over.”

@ Beakerj:

I was thinking more in terms of priorities on what is “disgusting and cruel”. Had the human traffic barbarians been trophy fishing actual young girls would have been spared from being human trafficking victims over many years while law enforcement and social services looked the other way to be PC and not “profile” There should be a huge reckoning on what has been allowed to take place for so long to so many girls with heads rolling. But there won’t be because….PC. My position is humans first. Especially children.

emily honey wrote:

The small number of women in the inner circle tend to have different experiences and priveleges than most of us who operate and live outside it.

And they get to lecture the Handmaids with wagging fingers.

@ Lydia:
I’m going to be honest Lydia, I’m happy with my priorities. I’ve spent 25 years helping vulnerable & challenging children & young people, & helping animals at the same time. I used to be a Hunt Sab (look it up) & am in my 19th year as a vegetarian. A lot of people in the caring professions for people care for animals too.

The Political Correctness that got in the way in Rotherham is no longer in power there. I also feel that although the term ‘PC’was properly used in that case, it is chucked out in all sorts of ridiculous circumstances, for eg my dislike of trophy hunting is not PC, it is basic human decency. It is used, like lots of Christianese, to shut down discussion & shame people into accepting things that are actually unacceptable.

I also think the implication that unless the right thing is done in one place, children in Rotherham, it somehow means we should hold off doing the right thing in another place where cruelty occurs is ludicrous. I know the Rotherham case has been used in the US to bolster all kinds of erroneous conclusions about culture in the UK, so it’s probably helpful for you to be speaking to someone who deals with the equivalent young people in a different area of the UK, who is mindful of lessons learned. Sadly I have no power to bring charges in the Rotherham area, or I would…the best I can do is ensure no professional around me does the same thing.

@ Beakerj:
I wonder if interviews with somebof the trafficked girls, counts as credible?

@ Beakerj:
I thought you were picking a fight over something that many decent people consider an acceptable sport. We can agree to disagree and go in peace.

Lydia wrote:

My rule for changing what you taught for years is to publicly state what you taught wrong and why.

Yep.

I used to think X. I have changed my mind and here is why.

Anything less than that is subterfuge.

emily honey wrote:

As a non inner circle woman I generally felt like an object or abstraction to them. Something to either ignore or project onto. Not an equal. Or as someone to get to know or discover as a unique individual, made in the image of God just as much as them. Not all the men were like that. But that was my norm experience.

This is so sad. This is why, although abuse can certainly exist in egalitarian spaces or by men who profess to be so, I will not accept that comp thought is not a part of the problem. Because it reduces women, categorizes them, as ‘other’. And that is never good, historically.
emily honey wrote:

This feeds into emotional and intellectual timidity, self-doubt and suppression for women when you are interacting in that world. Moderate to severe impostor syndrome is likely as well.

This is a very interesting point!

emily honey wrote:

And the people to lead the discussion and be at the center are the women who have been victims of this horrible counsel and advice over the years in the SBC.

Yes. 100%

But it wont’ happen in an org where women are not valued. Which is the problem to began with! A circle. SBC needs reform and they need to change their ideas about women and unless/until that happens this will never be fixed.

okrapod wrote:

If we condone the toleration of domestic abuse, how is that not similar to the early christians who sought martyrdom to the extent that the church had to forbid them to do that. Every easter the media shows us people who get themselves literally nailed to a cross as a religious act and we disapprove; can we then turn right around and approve if people accept domestic violence as a religious act of endurance. I don’t know why people unnecessarily embrace suffering, but I do see how embracing suffering when it is unavoidable can be the best way to deal with it. I have a stage 4 cancer, and I see a lot of people in the same situation over at the cancer treatment center. It is not something religious, but accepting suffering and seeing that some good can come out of it is just plain common sense, and I see them over there at the center doing that.

I know we have had our differences, but it saddened me to read that you have stage 4 cancer.

Lea wrote:

It is crazy making to hear the defenders of Patterson try to pretend that this is ‘taken out of context’ or being misstated/lying about the man. NO. He said it, it’s on tape. You tell them its on tape, and they run away. They can’t deal with the reality of it honestly.

“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.

“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies—all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”
— George Orwell, “The Principles of Newspeak”, appendix to Nineteen Eighty-Four

okrapod wrote:

I don’t know why people unnecessarily embrace suffering, but I do see how embracing suffering when it is unavoidable can be the best way to deal with it. I have a stage 4 cancer, and I see a lot of people in the same situation over at the cancer treatment center. It is not something religious, but accepting suffering and seeing that some good can come out of it is just plain common sense, and I see them over there at the center doing that.

(Went to the wrong link, above.): Okrapod, Thanks for sharing your wisdom. God bless you. Praying.

Estelle wrote:

That was the leopard! What a privilege to hear it. They are elusive creatures and on the vulnerable species list.

I understand they’re off the list in some places; they’ve bounced back to the point they’re actually becoming a “nuisance species” in a couple areas.

And leopards are not only the worst-tempered of the big cats, they’re one of the most likely to go man-eater (and if they do, they become one of the most dangerous man-eaters).

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

And leopards are not only the worst-tempered of the big cats, they’re one of the most likely to go man-eater (and if they do, they become one of the most dangerous man-eaters).

I always heard that Tigers were most likely to be a man-eater. But it’s been a while since I looked at stats..

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Max wrote:

drstevej wrote:
Will they stream the SBC Convention?

Yes, it will be live-streamed.

Standing Ovation and all?

Yes, every jot and tittle of the annual SBC Convention will be broadcast live … except the closed door, smoked-filled meetings of the elite who make all the decisions for the denomination, while the thousands of SBC messengers coming from across America think they are.

@ Muff Potter:
We’ll have to agree to disagree and you are more than welcome to think I am immoral. I went deep sea fishing once and was indisposed the whole time. 🙂 But I am not going to put deep sea trophy fishing on par with a pedophile.

Estelle wrote:

I woke up and heard what sounded like someone sawing wood – in the middle of the night, in the bush, not too far from my tent. That was the leopard!

Crikey, that’s impressive. If they had opposable thumbs, leopards would probably have The Bomb by now.

@ Lydia:

We’re talking two different things Lyds.
When I was a kid I fished Lake Michigan for perch, and off the Calif. coast for rock-cod, both are fantastic eating, deep-fried or charcoal grilled!

The pic of Patterson making a trophy of that magnificent cat is immoral and sinful.
I stand on my comment and conviction.
And no, I do not think you’re immoral, quite the contrary, I consider you one of the most moral people I’ve ever encountered online.

Paige Patterson sits on the Board of Trustees at Cedarville University where PP mentee Thomas White is President. PP should be dismissed as a trustee but that most likely will not happen. Many of the Bible faculty at Cedarville hail from SWBS as well. Buyer beware.

@ Muff Potter:
@ Muff Potter:
Like the odds for the uborn?. It’s legal, too.

“25 reports of sexual abuse”.

Wasn’t 25 “reports” coming forward the critical mass for Pill Cosby?

Lea wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
And leopards are not only the worst-tempered of the big cats, they’re one of the most likely to go man-eater (and if they do, they become one of the most dangerous man-eaters).
I always heard that Tigers were most likely to be a man-eater. But it’s been a while since I looked at stats..

Tigers may be more likely, but leopards are the most clever and dangerous ones.

My source for this is Jim Corbett’s Man-Eaters of Kumaon, circa 1930s. Corbett was a professional hunter in India from the Twenties to the Forties specializing in man-eater removal.

JYJames wrote:

abigail wrote:
I just can’t take it anymore.
The end of the Evangelical Era? (Just as Europe had the end of the State Church Era?)

Remember Internet Monk and “The Coming Evangelical Collapse”?

Well, this is it.

Lydia wrote:

Like the odds for the uborn?. It’s legal, too.

I am staunchly anti-abortion.
When I read a factual account of a late term abortion, I shook and cried.
I got a little taste of what a Jewish Sonderkommando saw when he* shoveled his own grandkids into a crematorium incinerator at Auschwitz.

*From Leon Uris’s novel Exodus

Lydia wrote:

@ Bridget:
The disgust lecture was specifically to Steve about trophy fishing. A bridge too far.

Going back in the thread it seems he’s the one that egged it on. He shared his pursuits. Beakerj shared her opinion about it. It didn’t seem like a lecture to me. It appeared you were the one that brought up trophy fishing, unless I missed some comments, which is possible . . .

There are more reasons to send some animals on to the next world than merely food reasons. Overpopulation. Epidemic diseases. Destruction of the environment beyond what will sustain the species, individuals turned man killers like we keep seeing from India, predation on domestic species which cannot be otherwise controlled, and there is always David and the bear and the lion. Some of the real biologists who comment here can add to or modify the list.

Predation itself is an integral part of nature as it is, and as difficult as that is for humans to watch none the less there it is. Either God included predation in the original design or else evolutionary change is true, but either way predation is a fact of life. It is not by any means the whole issue, but it is one variable. And yes, I audited a course in population genetics at NCState back in the day and this is where I am coming from. I am not pretending to be any authority, but I did not totally forget everything from that course-that is all.

Man is one of the predators. Sometimes man acts wisely, sometimes he almost exterminates the bison unwisely.

I am not advocating cruelty at all. But there is a time to be born and a time to die-always and everyone and everything.

okrapod wrote:

There are more reasons to send some animals on to the next world than merely food reasons. Overpopulation. Epidemic diseases. Destruction of the environment beyond what will sustain the species, individuals turned man killers like we keep seeing from India, predation on domestic species which cannot be otherwise controlled, and there is always David and the bear and the lion. Some of the real biologists who comment here can add to or modify the list.

I would consider all of that necessity. I just cannot get my head around people finding pleasure in harming or killing animals for other reasons outside of necessity. Same reason I find testing make-up on animals appalling, but just about can see why some medical testing might need to be done.

@ Beakerj:

I think that we are basically on the same page on this.

Nice work me.

Beakerj wrote:

Some, others I throw back wounded. I even use live minnows as bait, encouraging pescatoral cannibalism.

I also have a friend who keeps a tiger in a cage. The tiger’s name is Mike VII. https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Screen-Shot-2017-08-21-at-9.09.52-AM-718×490.jpg

Well, colour me completely unimpressed. Deliberate cruelty for the sake of feeling superior is just pitiful. There’s enough cruelty & oppression in the world without wilfully adding to it. How does that correspond with the fruit of the Spirit, by the way?

Lydia – I didn’t use the word disgusting. These were the strongest words I used after DrSteve decided to bait me with unnecessary instances of practices he & his friends engage in that inherently involve animal suffering, from wounding, to being eaten alive, to living in captivity. And I’m the one who’s ‘OTT’? It’s very strange to me that I seem expected to choose to oppose EITHER animal or human suffering, when actually you can oppose all forms of pointless cruelty, & as Christians I think we should. I find it utterly obscene that Paige Patterson & his ilk spend vast sums of money to go to Africa & kill beautiful creatures for the sake of his ego. And that’s because it is obscene. How many kids could that money have helped?

What if someone here used the words I used after a graphic yet jocular description of casual cruelty to babies or the unborn? Okay then?

Max wrote:

Yes, every jot and tittle of the annual SBC Convention will be broadcast live … except the closed door, smoked-filled meetings of the elite who make all the decisions for the denomination

i.e. the Inner Ring of Party Commissars.

@ Forrest:
I agreee, and that is what I will do if he speaks at the annual meeting. My current pastor is defending him, so I may have to leave anyway. Sigh…..so sick of pompous, Bible donkey leaders.

@ Lea:
Thanks Lea, being a Brit it meant absolutely nothing whatsoever to me. Consider those comments struck from the record. I applaud the University for their stance & hope he/she lives a fantastic life. I love those films where you see a rescued big cat take their first steps on grass, or their first swim.

Anthony,

He lies in all ways, which is not good ministerially speaking.