Paige Patterson – Will He Stay or Will He Go?

“Listen carefully Southern Baptists. Please, do not be tone deaf on this issue. If Dr. Paige Patterson is allowed to continue in leadership within the Southern Baptist Convention, Southern Baptists will lose any remaining credibility we possess as we share the Good News with the world at large.” 

Wade Burleson

https://twitter.com/_ppatterson_?lang=enPaige Patterson – Twitter

It’s been almost two decades since my family joined a Southern Baptist church. We had previously been attending a large church in a mainline denomination. My husband and I were raising two young daughters, and we were greatly concerned about their theological training. Our newly found Baptist church seemed to be the right place for them to be nurtured in the faith.

As it turned out, Paige and Dorothy Patterson were members of the church we joined. Dr. Patterson had a busy speaking schedule, so it was rare that he and his wife would be in attendance at their home church. I do recall him preaching one Mother’s Day at our church, and I went up to him at the end of the service, shook his hand, and explained that his friend and colleague Adrian Rogers had been a HUGE inspiration to me through his wonderful teaching.

A few years later we left that fellowship and got involved with a church plant from another Southern Baptist church in the area. The Pattersons also left North Carolina some years later when he became president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Looking back, I am terribly disappointed that Dr. Patterson made those callous remarks during the time that we were members of the same church. In an April 29 press release, he stated:

https://swbts.edu/news/releases/press-release-paige-patterson/As Dee emphasized in a previous post, we expressed our outrage at Paige Patterson’s remarks as soon as we became aware of them. That was nearly a decade ago and not long after the launching o this blog. Perhaps it’s divine providence that the world is becoming aware of his remarks during the #metoo / #churchtoo movement.

Yesterday Paige Patterson and the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SWBTS) published their Statement on Abuse (see screen shot below)


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


Dr. Patterson is slated to deliver an address next month at the Southern Baptist gathering in Texas. Now things appear to be in limbo. Will he remain SWBTS president for now?

Pressure is mounting for Paige Patterson to resign. Wade Burleson was among the first to request that he step down. In his April 30th post entitled It Is Now Time for Dr. Paige Patterson to Step Down, Burleson wrote the following:

Dr. Paige Patterson has created a firestorm in the media this past weekend over his public comments that an abused wife should stay in a physically abusive marriage. He said that a woman “who is undergoing genuine physical abuse from her husband, and her husband says she should submit” should do so. And he went on to say that the abused woman should:

“Pray at night beside her bed, quietly, for God to intervene.”

Don’t call the police. Don’t file for divorce. Don’t leave the abusive home. Pray. And if the abuse continues, “be happy” because God will hear her prayers and reach her husband through them and her quiet submission.

Twitter is ablaze with fury over what Dr. Patterson said.

Ironically, ten years ago I called out Dr. Patterson for these very remarks.

Nobody seemed to be paying attention then.

But in the days of #metoo and #churchtoo, people are much more keen to the issue of abuse. I’m not unfamiliar with the Southern Baptist Convention waiting ten years before correcting an error.

I like Dr. Paige Patterson. I have enjoyed dinner at his home. I have been the recipient of floral arrangements sent by Dr. and Mrs. Patterson (twice). I harbor no personal animosity toward Dr. Patterson or his family.

However, it’s time for Dr. Patterson to step down from his leadership positions in the Southern Baptist Convention. He is scheduled to give the Convention Sermon at the 2018 Southern Baptist Convention in Dallas, Texas. He serves as President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.

It’s time for Dr. Paige Patterson to step down from every leadership position he holds in the SBC.

Listen carefully Southern Baptists. Please, do not be tone deaf on this issue. If Dr. Paige Patterson is allowed to continue in leadership within the Southern Baptist Convention, Southern Baptists will lose any remaining credibility we possess as we share the Good News with the world at large. 

Dr. Patterson must step down. He must resign. If he does not, he must be removed.

Here are the top ten reasons Paige Patterson should resign immediately – or be removed by others – from his positions of leadership in the Southern Baptist Convention:

1. Paige Patterson has counseled physically abused wives to stay in their marriages.

2. Paige Patterson fired the finest Hebrew professor in the SBC because she was a woman.

3. Paige Patterson rescinded a seminary job offer to a popular SWBTS vocalist because Patterson discovered the vocalist was married to a divorced woman who had left an abusive marriage.

4. Paige Patterson is currently a party in a sexual abuse lawsuit, along with Judge Paul Pressler, a lawsuit that will soon be going to trial in Texas.

5. Paige Patterson protected a sexual predator by refusing to report him to authorities.

6. During a public sermon in 2016, Paige Patterson made suggestive comments about a 16-year-old girl being “built.”

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.

8.  Violating the school charter and admission policies, Paige Patterson admitted a practicing Muslim into Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, displaying the belief that he is above accountablity and oversight.

9.  Last year’s full-time equivalent (FTE) student enrollment at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary was 1249, nearly half of the 2381 FTE’s during the final year of Dr. Ken Hemphill tenure at SWBTS. Ironically, one of the stated reasons for Dr. Hemphill being forced out was “declining enrollment.”

10.  Contrary to Southern Baptist polity and policy, Dr. Patterson is having a retirement home built for him on the grounds of Southwestern Seminary where he will be able to attend weekly chapels where his image is engraved in the stain glassed windows.

Ed Stetzer, executive director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College and Billy Graham distinguished chair of church, mission, and evangelism, has also called for Patterson to go. Christianity Today featured his article entitled: Paige Patterson and Doing the Right Thing for the SBC, Again.

And Thom Ranier recently issued the following statement via Twitter.

https://twitter.com/ThomRainer/status/991161463665504256

No doubt Patterson and the SWBTS Trustees, among others, are burning the midnight oil as they discuss what to do. We will do our best to provide timely updates here and via Twitter.


Comments

Paige Patterson – Will He Stay or Will He Go? — 458 Comments

  1. Looks like another MALE LEADER believes that whatever he chooses to do is correct and must not be questioned. He subscribes to what is often preached in charismatic sermons ‘Touch not God’s annointed.’

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  2. GMFS… ION, Fitba’

    So, Liverpool win a thriller 7-6 on aggregate, and go on to face Geniune Madrid in the final – whom we beat 1-0 in the old European Cup final in 1981. IIRC, the scorer on that occasion was none other than Kenny Dalglish.

    Great credit must go to Roma, however, whose refusal to give up the tie ever, in either leg, made it such a close call.

    YNWA!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  3. When will these men no longer be allowed to retire or resign and experience practical consequences including legacy, lifestyle and money? No genuine repentance. If he can be this much of an evil fool in public, he must be really something behind closed doors. PP should have read some of BH’s leadership materials. Oh,right…

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  4. srs wrote:

    He probably won’t step down. It will be called “retirement” so it all looks good

    And the beating will be called consensual… An organic moment… All those years ago…

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  5. I look forward to Wade going after Mohler, next. After all, we are talking about Mahaney/pedophilia/children victims. And it’s even more recent. It will be hard to get WaPo and Merritt on board with that but it’s the right thing to do, next. It will show the SBC does put up with pedophile protectors. It’s not good enough to just hide Mahaney when it gets hot. Mohler purposely ignored victims. SBC doesn’t look the other way on any abuse.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  6. I wonder out loud why Southwestern issued this Statement on Abuse during the last few days? Seems quite suspicious to me.

    The SBC leaders are and have been a joke for decades now.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  7. What concerns me most is the hypocrisy of the leaders that TWW constantly exposes and the effect it will have on the kids/next generation. Unlike when I was a kid/student in fundy schools/churches, when the leaders could cover things up more effectively, we now live in a world where the “empty words” of these leaders is easily exposed. For example, the kids in Andy Savage’s youth group were not stupid, they knew somthing was up with him and Jules… yet Andy then “preached” on purity? Kids are NOT STUPID!

    It is obvious to me that the leaders of the SBC heavily covered up behaviors that the “conservatives” routinely bash. No matter what they do in their current situtation, they have NO credibility with me, and my “secular humanist” friends see it as well… so much for their “christian witness” that they POUND into the pew peons…

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  8. This video is too early (March 29) to mention PP, but…there’s so many things I could say about this video, but I don’t have time right now (or patience). OK, just one, then I got to go. If people just wait for something to be a public story before discussing it, how does it get out in to the public to discuss? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZkFaZVSUd4

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  9. @ Shannon H.:
    If only Todd Friel could make the rules! Lol.

    And what is up with calling it “discernment’? That has bothered me for a while now. I first saw that label applied by the guys at Pyro years ago that Freil tends to hang out with. Are they trying to equate the concept of discernment with position? I don’t think the word is a good fit for outing abusers and perverts.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  10. mot wrote:

    I wonder out loud why Southwestern issued this Statement on Abuse during the last few days? Seems quite suspicious to me.

    The SBC leaders are and have been a joke for decades now.

    Because Patterson’s giant mansion on the campus is probably being seriously questioned..

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  11. @ Lydia
    Going to the police is “reporting a crime” . Too much Christianese is flying around…. Oh, and when church leaders cover up and threaten people, that is called extortion and racketeering, and we have federal laws against that!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  12. I feel bad that the SWBTS students that are graduating this weekend have all of this controversy casting a pall over their event. Hopefully, PP will keep the focus on them and their future Kingdom service rather than on his issues.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  13. If the trustees intend to remove PP today, imagine all the issues to be negotiated: How long does he get to stay in Pecan Manor? Will they lock him out of his office like their predecessors did Dilday (that was wrong than and it would be wrong now)? Does he get to live in the new residence as previous announced? Does he speak at commencement? Is the timing immediate or a future date? Does Dorothy Patterson still have a job? Will they pay any outstanding taxidermy bills (inside joke for those following the accounting when he left SEBTS)? What staffing services will remain in effect (chefs, housekeeping, dog walkers, etc.) and for how long? How do they word things so as not further implicate the Seminary in pending court cases? Were there any agreements about the Seminary paying PP’s legal fees in the Pressler case that need to be revisited?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  14. @ FW Rez:

    The one thing these guys should hope and pray is that they are not treated like they treated others when they got power.

    I hope that one day Mohler will face this same sort of coordinated reckoning but I doubt it. But he’s been a lot more clever, stealthy and deceptive about his abuse of power and ruining people who dare cross him. No one demanded he resign over the mahaney saga which I thought would be the big one he couldn’t wrestle his way out of. Nope.

    Patterson always made the mistake of being a sideshow. Now he faces well-connected media master manipulators. When you get in that Stratosphere that’s how the power game is played.

    Finding Jesus in any of it is like trying to play where’s Waldo. There seems to be a big upside to being a nobody for Jesus. I am thinking of that passage in James.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  15. @ Lydia:
    Growing up in it, I was partially in the “bubble”. They make you think you are in/part of, the “inside” track to righteousness/heaven. Look at the comments coming out of Willow Creek followers, such as “Willow Creek is the most influential Church”, or some other non-sense. Or Al Mohler’s comment on You Tube… “but where else will they go” except our New-Cal churches, since we alone have the “correct way”….

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  16. Lydia wrote:

    If only Todd Friel could make the rules! Lol.

    Ironically, he broke one of his rules by making public what he assumes is not already public. So if it was not ok to talk about it before, it is ok now because he made it public. Unless he admits to only have about 100 followers.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  17. My question is this, and something that is making me sick to my stomach:

    Are SBC (past or present) women victims of domestic violence possibly being re-abused by all of this? By being made into an abstraction and temporary agenda/talking point to move political pieces around in the SBC?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  18. I think that the many (so-called) leaders in evangelicalism would do well if they read and seriously reflected on Galatians 2:1-10. Four times in that passage, Paul refers to the Big Three–James, Peter, and John–as those who seem to be [something], which carries with it a mildly pejorative tone. In v. 6, Paul says (following the NAB), “But from those who were reputed to be important (what they once were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality) — those of repute made me add nothing.” The men he refers to were apostles. As this site testifies over and over and over again, high-profile evangelical leaders are regarded as indispensable to God’s kingdom and therefore become too big to fail. They are showered with praise and prop each other up, even when they’re implicated in some seriously bad behavior. But if Paul could speak that way about three apostles (as he would about himself), maybe we need to re-evaluate the way Christians elevate (mostly) men to levels of fame and charismatic authority as if they were clearly God’s men of the hour. They’re not–and because God doesn’t respect rank or dignity or charisma the way His people do, we can be certain that what they are makes no difference to Him either.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  19. FW Rez wrote:

    What staffing services will remain in effect (chefs, housekeeping, dog walkers, etc.)

    Dee and I once knew their pastry chef. 😉 Not sure if he’s still working for them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  20. @ emily honey:
    My answer: Yes. Most definitely. Posturing. And yes Paige will step down/retire. He’s a big wheel but the machine is much bigger. And it’s much bigger than the Calvinist-Arminian divide. The machine will keep rolling along fueled by the naive.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  21. I have heard that this was supposed to be PP last year at SWBTS as it were due to his financial incompetence. He has run the seminary budget into the red and in essence ruined it for the time being with regard to finances.

    The one thing this guy cares about is his legacy and nothing else. His legacy will be that of someone who couldn’t run a seminary and someone who advocated abusing women.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  22. @ emily honey:
    Best question of the day. Throughout all of this, I keep thinking about the women that I have known both in person and in the blogosphere over the last 15 years who were totally sold out to CBMW teaching and followed every edict.

    I wonder if there are some of them saying, What? now Russ Moore says I can divorce for abuse?

    I am going to make a prediction. I think a lot of this is tied up in money equaling new recruits.

    You can’t look at the statistics out there and not see it as plain as day. I think they are going to try to take the SBC quasi egalitarian (in their way). What better way to kick that off and make an 18 year old example of Patterson as the old SBC? ( Don’t misunderstand me Patterson is an easy target who did it to himself who did it to himself)

    There are tons of young professional women who make good money to recruit not only for church but for Seminary where things are getting dire.

    Of course I would never trust their brand of mutuality.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  23. @ Geoff Smith:
    I smiled when I read this. We all wish this was true. It isn’t. If you think Paige and his kind care what you, I, or God himself thinks about anything on their agenda you have made the mistake they count on for survival. It is a nice thought though.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  24. Lydia wrote:

    I think they are going to try to take the SBC quasi egalitarian (in their way).

    Hard to believe that patriarchalist Russell Moore would go along with a move toward egalitarianism.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  25. Lydia wrote:

    Now he faces well-connected media master manipulators.

    One of his biggest detractors was well trained in denominational politics….. by PP himself.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  26. Deb wrote:

    Dee and I once knew their pastry chef. Not sure if he’s still working for them.

    My comment may have seemed unconcerned for those impacted by the changing of the guard, but they are in my prayers. A lot of people will be impacted by the transition.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  27. Steve wrote:

    If you think Paige and his kind care what you, I, or God himself thinks about anything on their agenda

    That was my first impression of PP when he spoke on Night Line in 1985.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  28. “Paige Patterson – Will He Stay or Will He Go?”

    If Dr. Patterson does not decline to speak at the SBC next month, that will be a sign that he has dug in his heels to stay the course. To “retire” before he planned to retire would not be the macho-man thing to do. As a big-game hunter, he likes the thrill of the hunt.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  29. Deb wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    I think they are going to try to take the SBC quasi egalitarian (in their way).
    //
    Hard to believe that patriarchalist Russell Moore would go along with a move toward egalitarianism.

    Yeah, I agree. These guys have placed everything on the line for patriarchy. I think they are doing their deceptive New Cal tactics–say one thing and then enforce another within.

    The teaching at the seminaries has not changed, as we saw with Owen Strachen the other day. As he teaches women are not made in the image of God at MWBTS and his father-in-law Bruce Ware teaches it at SBTS, they are still working over the future pastors of the SBC to patriarchy and considering women as servants to men.

    I still can’t help but wonder if they really want to head toward a Handmaid’s Tale sort of government takeover. Do I really think they could do that? Not really. Do I really think they might try? Yes.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  30. Max wrote:

    If Dr. Patterson does not decline to speak at the SBC next month, that will be a sign that he has dug in his heels to stay the course. To “retire” before he planned to retire would not be the macho-man thing to do. As a big-game hunter, he likes the thrill of the hunt.

    The trustees can remove him, though. And that is seeming more and more likely with this coordinated effort by SBC bigwigs to discredit him.

    I don’t think they really wanted to give him all these perks in the first place. Maybe he wrote stuff into his contracts a long time ago or has stuff on some of these guys.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  31. Jonathan Merritt has an article in the Atlantic recounting the events of the last several days. It is called:

    The Scandal Tearing Apart America’s Largest Protestant Denomination

    A denominational leader’s claim that abused women should remain in their broken marriages is forcing Southern Baptists to pick sides.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/05/sbc-patterson/559532/

    As for me, I think I’ll listen to The Clash’s “Should I Stay or Should I Go” as a palate-cleanser.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  32. @ Deb:

    Russ Moore has completely rebranded himself in the secular media since taking over ERLC. His new secular media readers would never dream he was patriarchal before he became an sjw. And he has been covered by the big cheeses. I have been paying close attention to it to try to figure out the end game. Todd Wilhelm has written on some of the shenanigans at ERLC. They are gearing up for big things.

    In the end, it’s all about growth, power and money to fuel it all.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  33. @ Lydia:
    I expect their brand of egalitarian would be “same old, same old” by redefining words that don’t sound like “men > women” to mean “men > women”.

    Kind of like the patriarchalists put women on pedestals, don’t you know, with their high view of women and Titus 2.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  34. Lydia wrote:

    Russ Moore has completely rebranded himself in the secular media since taking over ERLC. His new secular media readers would never dream he was patriarchal before he became an sjw. And he has been covered by the big cheeses. I have been paying close attention to it to try to figure out the end game. Todd Wilhelm has written on some of the shenanigans at ERLC. They are gearing up for big things.

    In the end, it’s all about growth, power and money to fuel it all.

    I’m a flaming SJW and I consider Russell Moore to be nothing more than an opportunist. He very carefully selects what part of SJW he will be in–race issues–but do you hear him doing much for women? Not really. I think this is all of a piece with his covert patriarchy. Moore hasn’t changed his mind; he still thinks women are subordinate. And yes, I give him the side eye whenever I see his name mentioned.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  35. @ refugee:
    Yes I agree with this. I think it will be very subtle in substance but bold enough to attract more professional single young women to other sjw “causes” and groom them to be leaders in certain areas.

    If you look at the statistics out there, they are missing out on a huge category of potential recruits. More women than men are entering the professions and graduating.

    I cannot tell you all the women I knew who left sbts in the 90s and up until the last few years– without finishing. From a purely numbers perspective I think the powers realize there is a market to be tapped they have been literally chasing away. I think it’s more about survival than ideology/doctrine. I don’t think they’ve changed their minds about anything. And I also think that if this happens many young women will end up disappointed.

    It’s early days yet but I think they are inching that way. If there is one thing I learned the hard way in the mega world is never underestimate their ability to reinvent themselves.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  36. @ Muslin fka Deana Holmes:

    I think it’s strange to think of people like Russ Moore as “doing anything” for women or any other “group”. It’s like looking to them as if they are our parents or something. Which is exactly what people have been doing with CBMW, etc. It’s the same stuff. Just a different tribe of Puritans.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  37. I really fear that women domestic violence victims are merely being used as supply and game pieces to mask another agenda with all this. By extension, male domestic violence victims will also experience re-abuse from it.

    Patterson’s resignation or being forced out, while necessary for multiple reasons outside his views on domestic abuse, does not equal that women are now somehow safe in the SBC. “Look, problem solved!”

    Are some women who are in abusive marriages right now hearing all this, getting hopeful, feeling seen, and will they be disappointed, re-traumatized and feel abandoned when this topic gets dropped or mishandled once Patterson is out?

    Once Patterson is gone, the real work should start, but will it? There is more to this than behavior modification and isolating a problem into one person. There is a larger system at work that has created and allowed these views to flourish and go unchecked for so long in the SBC.

    I’m glad if people who once held more stringent and legalistic views have changed them or are now open to being wrong, but it feels and looks suspect if there are no reparations or centering of women victims from the past who have been severely damaged by the previous views.

    Plus? So she leaves her husband. In the SBC, now she’s likely under a church contract and hyper-authoritarian male headship in her church. Her agency, the thing she needs to recover the most, may be compromised in other ways, even though she is now physically safe for the time being. Some theologies and beliefs in these churches may re-traumatize her and reinforce all the social psych abuse she endured, not just the violence.

    She also may find herself in a church that doesn’t believe in divorce allowance for abuse. Or maybe they believe she can get divorced but shouldn’t be allowed to marry again because it wasn’t adultery. There are all kinds of competing views and contingencies on divorce floating out there in the SBC.

    So many other things outside Patterson resigning or leaving needs to be looked at and discussed on this topic. From abstract things such as theologies and ideologies – to practical things such as exit strategies and how to actually help women leave their situations. And all the emotional, social, spiritual, financial nuances and abuses that go along with domestic violence and abusive marriages.

    Domestic violence victims past or present should be centered in all this, and lead the discussion moving forward, as well as those who are trained and well experienced in dealing with domestic violence – non-profits, social workers, lawyers, therapists, and so on.

    But I fear it isn’t really about any of that at all. And this was really all just about Patterson.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  38. @ Lydia:
    Aargh. I was a young professional woman making good money once upon a time. The CBMW crowd convinced me it was best to stay home. For decades.

    It’s difficult to start over, and I think how much more we might have in the way of retirement and college savings if I had worked even part time.

    Think of all the tithe $$$$ they missed! Did they really think this through? Or are they so afraid of women (henpecked at home, perhaps?) that domination mattered more than the tithes that working women might have poured into the coffers of their churches?

    Or are women in the workforce better able to think critically and logically than those sequestered at home and in their little isolated evangelical bubble?

    I hope the young professionals out there have more discernment than I did.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  39. refugee wrote:

    @ Lydia:

    Or are women in the workforce better able to think critically and logically than those sequestered at home and in their little isolated evangelical bubble?

    Sorry to quote myself. ^^^ meaning “the ones kept at home are easier to control” in their minds.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  40. emily honey wrote:

    Once Patterson is gone, the real work should start, but will it? There is more to this than behavior modification and isolating a problem into one person. There is a larger system at work that has created and allowed these views to flourish and go unchecked for so long in the SBC.

    SBC Corporate Culture and Groupthink of The Inner Ring.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  41. Lydia wrote:

    It’s early days yet but I think they are inching that way. If there is one thing I learned the hard way in the mega world is never underestimate their ability to reinvent themselves.

    “REJOICE! THE CHOCOLATE RATION OF TEN GRAMS HAS BEEN INCREASED TO TWENTY!”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  42. Lydia wrote:

    It’s early days yet but I think they are inching that way. If there is one thing I learned the hard way in the mega world is never underestimate their ability to reinvent themselves.

    Correction:

    “REJOICE! THE CHOCOLATE RATION OF TWENTY GRAMS HAS BEEN INCREASED TO TEN!”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  43. FW Rez wrote:

    Apparently went out to faculty, staff, and students. Wonder if it is mandatory? If you want your degree on Friday you had better be at the meeting on Thursday? If you want your teaching contract renewed….

    “The Commissar has told us that We Have Volunteered.”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  44. Max wrote:

    “Paige Patterson – Will He Stay or Will He Go?”
    If Dr. Patterson does not decline to speak at the SBC next month, that will be a sign that he has dug in his heels to stay the course. To “retire” before he planned to retire would not be the macho-man thing to do. As a big-game hunter, he likes the thrill of the hunt.

    He is NOT a Big Game Hunter.
    He’s a WANNA-BE.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  45. @ refugee:
    Never underestimate the power of being in a tribe. One of the saddest things I witnessed as far as comp Doctrine– was a professional CPA partner in a top firm jumping through hoops about comp Doctrine and her lofty professional position while a wife and mother. I thought it was the saddest thing in the world. She should have been proud of her accomplishments without the need to jump through all the Hoops to make it comp approved. But she was a product of her tribe. As we all have been so don’t beat yourself up too much! 🙂

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  46. emily honey wrote:

    Domestic violence victims past or present should be centered in all this, and lead the discussion moving forward, as well as those who are trained and well experienced in dealing with domestic violence – non-profits, social workers, lawyers, therapists, and so on.

    Very wise. Thanks for sharing this. To some degree, these folks are now skipping the hierarchy and now sharing, online. Maybe that is where the real church now takes place, at least initially.

    What are the Pattersons, Wilsons and Pipers, etc., going to do when they are ignored?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  47. I still have the Strachan article on my RSS feed, so reposting it here:

    “Owen Strachan Argues How the Church Enfranchises Only Men to Lead
    RELEVANT Magazine by RELEVANT
    It has been widely reported that on any given Sunday, more women than men will attend church in America. Some have concluded that the Church has been “feminized” and needs to become more masculine.

    In the newest episode of the RELEVANT Podcast Network’s The Faith Angle, hosts Kirsten and Jonathan explore the myths and pitfalls of “muscular Christianity.” The duo interviews Owen Strachan, an author and leading voice among Christians who believe men have been ordained by God to lead in the home and church.

    This version of the conversation has been condensed. To listen to the full conversation, subscribe to the show.

    Jonathan: There is this, now, infamous quote by John Piper that said: “God has given Christianity a masculine feel.” I’m wondering if that’s something you’d agree with, and if so, how do you define masculinity from a Biblical perspective?

    Owen: (…) I believe that manhood can be defined biblically and it should be. We’re starting off deeper into the Piper quote because it drew a lot of fire, but you go to Scripture and you recognize that God the Father represents Himself in those terms that I just said.

    He is the Father, not the mother, not gender androgynous. He is God the Father. And then you recognize that Jesus Christ was a man, you recognize that Jesus gathered around him 12 male apostles. You’ll see that Paul called for men to be the pastors and shepherds and elders of the local church. You’ll see that men are called to be the head of their wife and are meant to lead their family in a self-sacrificial Christlike way, and you realize that there’s a lot being stacked up here.

    Not in any sense that marginalizes women or puts them on the shelf, but that does enfranchise men to take leadership in the home or in the Church and to some degree in society. So that’s what Piper meant when he was talking about Christianity having a masculine feel. There’s lots of ways you could take that statement admittedly, but that’s what he was after. And again, if you just wanna affirm the Bible and what it teaches positively, which is kind of the heart of Christianity, I think that’s where you get those ideas from.

    Jonathan: Let me just push back on that a bit, because on the one hand I don’t disagree that the Bible presents God the Father as the Father, I don’t think many people would disagree with that. But I want to provide some examples of what might be called a minority report.

    The writer of Deuteronomy describes God as “a mother eagle hovering over her offspring.” The book of Job speaks of God as “having a womb and giving birth to the frost of Heaven.” … Even Jesus describes Himself as a “mother hen who wishes to gather her children under the safety of her wings.”

    When Christians say that they are born again, they mean that, to borrow from Jesus’ words, they are born of the Spirit. Men don’t give birth. Only women do. To say you’re “born again” from God is to use feminine language to speak of God.

    Isn’t it fair to say, yes you’re correct, the Bible speaks of God often in masculine terms, but there is also a whole history of feminine language for God that you’re just not mentioning. And even much of that language derives from the Bible itself.

    Owen: Well first of all it’s interesting to hear you affirm that only women can give birth, so that’s worth talking about later, cause I firmly and completely agree with that, though many would disagree with us if we state that today. Secondly, you are pointing out a number of really wonderful metaphors for God and also for Christ and I commend you for compiling those because those are really important metaphors and images of God in the Bible.

    But I would just say, and this is something you’re obviously going to know. When you’re looking at biblical language, you have to distinguish between metaphors and direct statements of identity. So many theologians all across the spectrum would affirm that. Not just a hard-edged, cisgender theological conservative like me. So I would say that when we’re talking about God picturing Himself as a mother hen for example, God’s not formally stating that He is a mother hen, that would be quite the revelation unearthed on this podcast. God is comparing Himself to that by using a metaphor and speaking of His love as God the Father.

    Kirsten: But it’s a feminine metaphor. I just want to add something in here: God says that He made us in His image, and I’m a woman and I was made in God’s image. So that means God has feminine characteristics. And I think you would agree, God’s not actually a person, so it’s kind of hard to say … we’re putting Him in these human terms but He’s not of this world. He’s a spiritual entity. So I don’t understand how, if God is both male and female, if you disagree with that …

    Owen: I totally disagree.

    Kirsten: So I wasn’t made in God’s image?

    Owen: No, you have to work from God back to our humanity. Let me go back to mother hen for a minute—

    Kirsten: I think we understood that it was a metaphor.

    Owen: No, this is really important. Because God is not saying He’s a woman in exactly the same way He’s not saying He’s an animal.

    Kirsten: Just to be clear, I didn’t say God was a woman. I don’t think God is a man, I don’t think God is human. I think God has feminine characteristics. He has both feminine and masculine characteristics because we were all made in His image.

    Owen: Uh, so I would actually start from God himself, because God doesn’t say that He has feminist characteristics in scripture. So you’ve gotta start from God proper, right? And that’s how you understand the image. Carl Bart understood that the image was related to gender complementarity and he has some different things to say about relationships and how the image is perfectly realized when married couples come together, that sort of thing. So he’s one theologian who’s gone in that direction, but many would not define the image of God as meaning that God himself has maleness and femaleness because God himself doesn’t say that.

    Kirsten: We’re made in His image. I’m a woman, how could He not have any feminine characteristics if we were made in His image?

    Owen: What I’m trying to say is, you may not agree with me but this is what I’m trying to say: The image does not relate directly to maleness and femaleness. Males and females, men and women bear the image. But as I define image, which is very much standard in the evangelical world, the image does not directly relate to maleness and femaleness, it relates to being a spiritual being meant to represent God on Earth.

    Both men and women do that, interestingly, if you really wanna talk about the image, Christ is the true image. So Christ as the true, unblemished image is male. He is a male. In other words Kirsten, if you want to look at an image in it’s perfect form … it’s Christ.

    Kirsten: What do you think would have happened if God would have sent someone to Earth and it was a woman trying to do what Jesus did in that time? What do you think would have happened?

    Owen: That’s an interesting thought starter. I’m not really sure what to say.

    Kirsten: They would have been completely rejected because women had no influence or power and couldn’t even testify in court as a witness, and it would have gone nowhere, so there’s an argument to be made that it really had to be a man because there was no other way. But what’s interesting about Jesus is he’s not typically masculine. He says things that a lot of times, a woman would say.

    Richard Rohr, the Franciscan priest, has this theory, he says that it was so countercultural for Jesus to say these things that if God had sent a woman, people would say, “Of course you think I should turn the other cheek and be gentle and put others before me.” And so to have a man saying it was so radical and countercultural, you can see his followers having a hard time. So he wasn’t actually, like, macho. Right? He had feminine qualities.

    Owen: I don’t know what macho means, the Bible never says that Jesus is macho. But Jesus has to be a man in Biblical terms. Those comment by Rohr are very interesting and speculative, but in biblical terms, if you’re working within a system of biblical thought, you recognize that Jesus is the second Adam, the last Adam, the new Adam … so God appoints Adam to be the head of the human race and He appoints Jesus to be the new head of the human race, those who are all gathered in to Jesus Christ through faith and His death and resurrection born again into Christ.

    So in biblical theological terms, Jesus has to be a man. He’s the image of the invisible God, Colossians 1:15. So when you’re looking at Jesus, you’re looking at the true human. 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.

    It’s very beautiful that you see in New Testament Christianity is fully fleshed out, that the Church’s plan, God’s ordered love, is so much better than anything we could ever imagine. You’re right, Kirsten, to point out how punitive how many cultures have been toward women.

    In the Church of Jesus Christ, women have a status that Greco Roman secular culture Pagans of that day never accorded women. Women had no rights. A woman was killed by her husband because he suspected her of adultery whether or not that was proven, and of course it won’t have been proven in a 21st-century courtroom ruling as we would have it. He could murder his wife. He can kill his wife.

    Jesus Christ comes, and He comes with a very specific ordered sexual ethic, but He enfranchises women to an impossible degree, it’s really a beautiful picture of manhood and womanhood that He offers and that the apostle Paul fleshes out.”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  48. ishy wrote:

    The Owen Strachen article has been removed from Relevant.

    Can you summarize it? (If not too much trouble.) Or is there a Wayback link? I missed that one.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  49. FW Rez wrote:

    @ emily honey:

    I wish you had known the SBC before the CR. It was a kinder, gentler denomination with a cooperative spirit for missions.

    Do you remember Bold Mission Thrust?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  50. FW Rez wrote:

    @ emily honey:

    I wish you had known the SBC before the CR. It was a kinder, gentler denomination with a cooperative spirit for missions.

    Though still wacky enough, or at least with the potential for it, my dim memories tell me, four or five decades ago that my aunt got the side eye from the rest of her relatives for her devotion to her Baptist church in Houston. (First Baptist? Second Baptist? I don’t remember anymore.)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  51. ishy wrote:

    The trustees can remove him, though. And that is seeming more and more likely with this coordinated effort by SBC bigwigs to discredit him.

    Or the trustees may look at this as a coordinated attack by the New Calvinists to capture one of the last bastions of training for pastors in traditional SBC non-Calvinist belief and practice. In which case, they might come along Dr. Patterson to the bitter end. But usually with these things, when the potato becomes too hot to handle even supporters are forced to drop it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  52. refugee wrote:

    FW Rez wrote:

    @ emily honey:

    I wish you had known the SBC before the CR. It was a kinder, gentler denomination with a cooperative spirit for missions.

    Though still wacky enough, or at least with the potential for it, my dim memories tell me, four or five decades ago that my aunt got the side eye from the rest of her relatives for her devotion to her Baptist church in Houston. (First Baptist? Second Baptist? I don’t remember anymore.)

    MEGAs were their own thing, but few and far between compared to today.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  53. Now I am confused. I’ve always read that he told an abused woman to return to her abuser. If this is correct, that he was “neither harsh nor physical” but she felt abused that he did not want her attending church, it is a horse of a different color.

    First question has to be, was she abused or not. I’m well aware of emotional and psychological abuse, having a child who endured it. But simply not wanting her to attend church and fussing with her about one issue does not rise to the level of abuse.

    If you read the comment streams at Wade Burleson and SBCToday you will also find it was not Patterson saying the young woman was built, but rather some teens saying it and his reply to their mom. Now, I totally disagree with his handling of the matter, but it does matter if he said it or was asked to comment on rude teen’s behavior.

    Can someone verify which is the case in both of these?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  54. mot wrote:

    FW Rez wrote:

    @ emily honey:

    I wish you had known the SBC before the CR. It was a kinder, gentler denomination with a cooperative spirit for missions.

    Do you remember Bold Mission Thrust?

    Yes. I thought it was a worthy effort.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  55. emily honey wrote:

    real work should start, but will it? There is more to this than behavior modification and isolating a problem into one person. There is a larger system at work that has created and allowed these views to flourish and go unchecked for so long in the SBC.

    Nothing is going to happen that we would consider “real work”. Even in my tiny, rural corner of the world, too many “Christian” men see themselves as the prophets, priests, and kings over women.
    I even have my doubts about Patterson resigning, or being fired. He still has a lot of support in the good ole boys network. Note how few SBC leaders are even bothering to mention Gilyard …… as well as a few other things.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  56. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    The Commissar has told us that We Have Volunteered.

    Read on Twitter where a PhD student at SWBTS lost his campus job for tweeting a link to Stetzer’s article. If an academic institution does not allow some freedom of thought then it is indoctrinating rather than educating.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  57. @ FW Rez:
    The structure was more bottom up than top down. I’m sure there were individual local churches that were Authoritarian but no one considered it at denomination so what they did was none of our business. Everything was geared toward cooperating in missions. Not micromanaging individuals in local churches from the top.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  58. Another quote from PP which might throw some light on his views

    “To spark the interests of these men, the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary President Paige Patterson shared his insight on African big game hunting. Patterson displayed photos of his African trophies but noted that he actually had come to tell the hunters about “America’s number one problem and what they can do about it.” That problem, a war against boys and the establishment of laws to prevent men from hunting and owning guns, has produced a generation of fathers disconnected from their sons, he said.

    “Today there is a war against boys … you’ve got to make little girls out of your little boys,” Patterson said.”

    https://www.christianpost.com/news/sportsman-146-s-safari-brings-men-to-christ-19800/

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  59. You know what’s going to happen?
    “Nuthin”

    They are just going to keep digging until the SBC becomes just another “has-been” denomination that is made up of grey-hairs and little kids.

    And perhaps that’s a good thing.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  60. And it is a theme he likes
    “God has not called young people to be wimps but rather courageous men and women who trust in his sovereign plan and purpose for their lives. Young boys are especially vulnerable to the trend toward feminism in America. My conclusion after many years of experience in academia is that every boy needs these three things in preparation for life”, states Patterson.

    But why a dog, a gun and a daddy? This may seem to be overly simplistic to some, especially coming from the past two term president of the Southern Baptist Convention and academic scholar with seven earned degrees. However, Dr. Patterson is emphatic about this three point remedy centered on the character qualities of responsibility, respect and nurture.

    “Every boy needs a dog to care for, feed, groom and take to the veterinarian. He does not need a little yapper but rather a big dog as his companion in discovering outdoors adventure and the responsibility that comes from dependence on his companion.

    “He also needs a gun, not a toy gun but a real firearm that allows him to appreciate our Second Amendment rights afforded by our constitution to own and bear arms. Without question, our Second Amendment rights are closely aligned with our First Amendment rights protecting free speech in proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

    http://csfmagazine.com/new-page-2

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  61. Somebody brought up the issue of missions-back when.

    Not to be forgotten is the fact that foreign/international missions had a different twist to it in colonial days than today. The summer I spent in africa was during a transition period from british colonialism in that nation to full independence. The issue of what now was at the top of the list. They were looking at lots of changes, and I heard a lot of pro and con and and lot about alleged disagreement with policies between the people in Richmond and the people in Africa.

    Even today, last week in fact, GK#1 had to present a position statement about relatively recent colonialism in one of her classes; as in what about today is residual from that era.

    The sending agencies had a lot of radical changes to make, and that while stuff at home was also changing quickly. Is it any wonder that some level of chaos ensued, and any wonder that there were power struggles taking advantage of the turmoil?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  62. @ Nancy2 (aka Kevlar):

    I am speaking strictly strategically.
    I don’t think they’ll give up until he’s gone. Note that they are making it a secular media ultimatum on how the SBC treats women. They are creating a narrative and making Patterson the poster boy even though most of them are quite guilty themselves for either supporting pats or teaching it.

    I’m not seeing a lot of good old boys lining up outside of a few on a Trad blog. But if you see more, I would appreciate you linking to them here. The huge good old boy network is on Mohler’s end of the NeoCal new SJW Puritan chain.

    In some ways Patterson is low-hanging fruit. Try taking out a Mohler in the same way. Lol. The Patterson wing doesn’t have the resources or the connections.

    I laughed out loud when I saw Thom Rainer’s tweet. Now there is a guy who has milked his position even setting up an “answers” online business to make money off what should be free resources for pastors while a big cheese at Lifeway. Another charlatan fraud.

    There are no good guys in this scenario and that is what makes it so hard. My view is that the days of looking for decent Godly leaders needs to end for grown-ups. We don’t need any mediators between us and Jesus. I am wondering just how responsible we will be for propping them up unless we are deceived out of ignorance.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  63. Lea wrote:

    I think the writing is on the wall, or all his detractors would be keeping quiet, like they did for the last decade or two.

    The sharks sense something wounded in the water and are gathering for the kill.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  64. @ Lowlandseer:
    There are SO MANY things wrong with this article btw.

    I’m reading the thing about men not coming to church because they are ‘hunting’ which is like 4 weekends out of year so pull the other one on that. (and I see this was in Arkansas joy)

    This is particularly gross to me: “Patterson also said that every boy needs a father, for without a father there “is no image in the house they can relate to.”

    Men and boys, apparently, cannot ‘relate’ to women. Ever.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  65. I’ve read thru some very well-considered business development strategies in this thread. You may want to consider deleting them, on the off chance that those working at these orgs are not as smart as you. You know they read this. 😉

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  66. @ Lowlandseer:
    In 2003 CBMW was big on the same theme. Did you ever read their print journal? Denny Burke used to be the editor and worked for Patterson at Criswell before he went to sbts.

    A big question that made the rounds in blogdom back in the wild west days was if Patterson was able to have his big safaris paid for as mission trips.

    My view is that both sides of the equation have gone to extremes when it comes to boys.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  67. D wrote:

    I’ve read thru some very well-considered business development strategies in this thread. You may want to consider deleting them, on the off chance that those working at these orgs are not as smart as you. You know they read this.

    They think we are ignorant.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  68. @Lydia You may know this for a fact somehow, but if you don’t, it’s a dangerous assumption in my book. Just a thought for consideration, not meaning to be combative at all. 🙂

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  69. Lea wrote:

    Lowlandseer wrote:

    “Today there is a war against boys … you’ve got to make little girls out of your little boys,” Patterson said.”

    What?

    I know it’s scandal after scandal out there, but I hope we can address Beth Moore’s recent article because it is fantastic. This year full of nonsense has made me a Beth Moore fan.

    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html

    In East Texas, it is okay for your daughter to be involved in Lil Britches Rodeo, she play catcher on the softball team…..but your boy show interest in art, or music or “Heaven Forbid” books, well, he’s not much of a “man.”
    BTW- My son has a degree in music( a Master’s of Music now) and people wonder about him? Never mind he is married. ( His wife is Chinese, yes from the PRC, but that’s another story East Texas can’t handle.)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  70. Lea wrote:

    like they did for the last decade or two.

    Bending with the winds of the world, not the Holy Spirit (however, TWW posted when no one seemed to care but them).

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  71. I know I don’t know anyone here so I probably essentially seem to be poking around. I’m uncomfortable using my own name. I worked in marketing and PR at Mars Hill, and one of the absolutely critical keys to me finding a healthy path out of there, was that I decided you all were NOT ignorant… while I was STILL on the job.

    When I read solid marketing strategy on here (it happens pretty often), submitted under the pretense of theorizing, as a professional these snippets hit me as valuable recommendations and I find myself hoping against hope that decision-makers at the very orgs you are discussing are not reading these threads. But I know they are.

    When you lay out potential strategies, in public, that involve demographics that you are trying to defend, you may not be doing them any favors.

    Sorry if I come across poorly, I just wanted to submit this thought to the group for consideration.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  72. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lowlandseer:
    In 2003 CBMW was big on the same theme. Did you ever read their print journal? Denny Burke used to be the editor and worked for Patterson at Criswell before he went to sbts.

    A big question that made the rounds in blogdom back in the wild west days was if Patterson was able to have his big safaris paid for as mission trips.

    My view is that both sides of the equation have gone to extremes when it comes to boys.

    Actually, it sounds like the big boys never grew up. They seem to be trying to perpetuate unending adolescence while giving it the deceptive title “manliness” or “manhood”.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  73. @ D:
    p.s. The manipulators and elitists being discussed here would be fools if they were not already considering such things among themselves.

    I am a Done, and most of my kids were formed into atheists by being raised in churchianity, so their schemes don’t affect me directly. (ed.)

    Sadly, when I try to speak a warning to those in a church, they patronize me as “triggered” by past abuse and therefore perhaps an unreliable witness? Therefore, I get compassion from them, but otherwise blank stares.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  74. refugee wrote:

    @ D:
    p.s. The manipulators and elitists being discussed here would be fools if they were not already considering such things among themselves.

    I am a Done, and most of my kids were formed into atheists by being raised in churchianity, so their schemes don’t affect me deliberately.

    Sadly, when I try to speak a warning to those in a church, they patronize me as “triggered” by past abuse and therefore perhaps an unreliable witness? Therefore, I get compassion from them, but otherwise blank stares.

    D- Welcome, I am an alumni of SWBTS and I am a done( Only attending church when either forced or some sort of Anglican/Lutheran based denomination, and even there, they have problems.
    D- They know already, if not, well, they know. These things are talked about, even if they seem they are not. I have been in church staff meetings in which things were discussed I never dreamed of while in seminary.
    Trust me, us, they know….

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  75. Lowlandseer wrote:

    “Today there is a war against boys … you’ve got to make little girls out of your little boys,” Patterson said.”

    There have been some credible ideas in the larger culture that in education there is a trend toward methodologies which may be more comfortable for girls than boys. I am being careful here with my words. I doubt that is probably not what Patterson exactly means, but I for one do think that when culture talks about toxic masculinity and then seems to run to extremes as to what that means then the people who preach what P seems to be preaching will find an audience.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  76. @refugee man I can relate to that re: church convos. Thankfully we are in a church family now that doesn’t value comfort a whole lot so real talk can actually happen pretty often.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  77. Lydia wrote:

    I’m not seeing a lot of good old boys lining up outside of a few on a Trad blog. But if you see more, I would appreciate you linking to them here. The huge good old boy network is on Mohler’s end of the NeoCal new SJW Puritan chain.

    In some ways Patterson is low-hanging fruit. Try taking out a Mohler in the same way. Lol. The Patterson wing doesn’t have the resources or the connections.

    I think part of the grand bargain struck ahead of the 2009 annual meeting in Louisville has expired. Patterson is no longer needed or owed anything for his support. Greear and the younger generation are still to be rewarded for the part he played. Patterson’s misdeeds were held in the back pocket of the SBC power players for a day like today. Honestly, does anyone think that this would’ve gotten any traction in the SBC ten years ago? Patterson was just too strong then and had the loyalty of a lot of the delgates, many of whom have retired or died in the past decade.

    There are probably other angles to the story but that’s an obvious one.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  78. @ D:
    I used to do a lot of contract consulting for megas so I know exactly what you are talking about although the game has changed with social media when it comes to timing, size of audience, issue being promoted or deflected and the ever popular coordinated ambush.

    But ask yourself this– how many times did the powers-that-be still make really stupid decisions that you could not believe people fell for? One reason why I think it still worked quite a bit is because they spoke boldly convincing people it was truth often deflecting from what was over on the other side of the room. It’s amazing how much that works on people. People have an emotional attachment (one way or another) and reaction to the issue being presented. They don’t always look at the background on players, the timing, Associated events leading up to it and many other dots that should be connected to what is really going on. None of that means the issue is right or wrong. It just means you’re being manipulated about how to look at the issue from a tribal perspective. And that was about 90% of what came out of the mega’s communication departments.

    I came to really understand that in times of universal deceit, telling the “full” truth is truly a revolutionary Act.

    I spent 10 years repenting. 🙁

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  79. Lydia wrote:

    @ R2:
    I agree with your points. Was 2009 the year they did the GCR lockbox? Do you mind saying what the grand bargain was?

    I think the grand bargain was that Patterson would hold his fire and let Mohler takeover the SBC. Patterson had been weakened by fighting with Wade Burleson over the private prayer language thing. However, if he were personally attacked he would’ve fought back. The YRR stayed off his back and he stayed quiet.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  80. __

    “Page Paterson Getting A Bad Rap, Perhaps??”

    hmmm…

    “In this day and age, people don’t stand and applaud men who treat women as second-class citizens unless you wish to die a swift and sudden organizational death.”-Wade Burlison

    Bump.

    – [ ] Herein is presented a list of Page Paterson personal detrimental offenses and injuries upon the SBC (and its people) in general, and academia specifically described with point-by-point advanced clarity combined with sensitivity and brevity, requesting a specific outcome, and the reasons why.
    – [ ] Q. “Paige Patterson – Stay or Go?”
    – [ ] All that is required is a sincere conscience and contentious vote.

    ♪♩♪♩ hum, hum, hum .. “ if he goes there will be Trouble, …if he stays there will be DOUBLE… (1)

    ATB

    Advancing the Narrative?

    huh?

    Twitter confirmed to CBS News that over 1.7 million tweets included the hashtag “#MeToo,” with 85 countries that had at least 1,000 #MeToo tweets…
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/metoo-reaches-85-countries-with-1-7-

    What?!?

    Women in my neck of the woods are both capable and not culpable (non- deserving of blame or censure; as ‘Victim Mentality’ ™ is not a part of their every-day schtick. (2)

    SKreeeeeetch!

    #Metoo movement waning on the side of the ridiculous?
    —> KIND FOLKS, I DON’T THINK SO… (3)

    L’Chaim !

    Sòpy

    (1) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HNMXDNVKPqw

    (2) Bonus: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qlywcuw-1TU

    (3) Push-Back Commentary:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X_Y9XByQg1Y

    ___

    Note:
    —> Possible women intentionally injured in an criminal #Metoo multiple backlash incident(s)? TBD

    could b.

    (sadface)

    🙁

    – –

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  81. @lydia thank you for this, very edifying. Powers that were made so many preposterous and predatory decisions right in front of my face that it still flabbergasts me to this day. Tribalism and group think are understatements when it comes to what happened there.

    My reason for speaking up here is actually because these days I’m driven by a whole lot of missed opportunities to speak up back then. Very similar to your heart it seems.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  82. Crap PLEASE do not read that I felt compelled to speak a word of rebuke *against you*. Rather it was a word of support for the downtrodden. Any time I get an inkling that something could be used against them by the PTB I say something now. 🙂

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  83. @ R2:
    Thanks. That makes sense. I am not real familiar with Patterson’s doctrinal stands except for the comp issue. Someone told me a while back that he tended to try to find agreement with the Neo cals doctrinally in some talks. He never took them on really– fully head on. Always thought he was looking to get along with Mohler so what you are saying makes matches that.

    I got the impression he was just trying to increase the perks of his position and stay under the SBC radar — so to speak. But he is way too flamboyant to pull that off. He has a history of staying a few steps ahead of the firing ax and landing on his feet. Those days are over?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  84. Actually to the larger subject, all of the issues being discussed are CRUCIAL to nuancing and understanding what’s happened here. But if you really want to know, put a lot of that stuff aside and just follow the $$$. You can either get a basic picture, or a very detailed picture, of what’s really going on depending on how much work you know how to do.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  85. emily honey wrote:

    My question is this, and something that is making me sick to my stomach:

    Are SBC (past or present) women victims of domestic violence possibly being re-abused by all of this? By being made into an abstraction and temporary agenda/talking point to move political pieces around in the SBC?

    Catching up on this thread. I think this is a good question. This clip, I believe, is being used against Patterson, not out of any care or love for victims, but for politics.

    That said, the rocks are crying out. I can only hope that people’s ears are opened, their hearts soften, and they are really convicted in a way that leads to real and lasting change.

    Will it happen? Eh. I’m a cynic. But it could. Or it could bring things to light and women and men may question what they’re seeing and leave. That’s what I did.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  86. Ack! My old habits of telling people what to talk about are rearing their ugly head! Apologies to all for that. I’m really out this time. 🙂

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  87. Lydia wrote:

    @ Muslin fka Deana Holmes:
    I think it’s strange to think of people like Russ Moore as “doing anything” for women or any other “group”. It’s like looking to them as if they are our parents or something.

    I think in most of theses scenarios, what is actually meant is for men like Moore to stop actively preventing women from doing things in their denomination, one.

    And two, to stop teaching men to treat women like a lower species, and other such errant teachings.

    So it’s really less ‘do this thing for women’ and more ‘stop doing this thing *to* women’. This is an important distinction!!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  88. @ Lydia:
    Paige is most definitely not Calvinistic. He’s Armininian. Deep apologies to Jacob Arminius. The SBC feud between these two sides was very short-lived. It’s much more to do with MONEY than theology. Mohler and Patterson have tighter grips on their wallets than their theology. They’ve both flourished within their respective camps.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  89. refugee wrote:

    Sadly, when I try to speak a warning to those in a church, they patronize me as “triggered” by past abuse and therefore perhaps an unreliable witness? Therefore, I get compassion from them, but otherwise blank stares.

    I don’t want to go off on a tangent, but since someone brought up the ‘women are more ’emotional’ nonsense on another blog I will.

    Many people try to categorize things as ‘rational’ or ’emotional’. This is inaccurate. Emotions are rational and someone with experience (which is often painful) should not be dismissed because THEY KNOW MORE ABOUT THIS THAN YOU DO.

    Listening to the voice of experience? *That* is rational. Dismissing them because they might have an emotional response at times is deeply irrational.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  90. FW Rez wrote:

    Prayer meeting scheduled on campus in support of PP:

    http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article210334709.html

    Apparently went out to faculty, staff, and students. Wonder if it is mandatory? If you want your degree on Friday you had better be at the meeting on Thursday? If you want your teaching contract renewed….

    From chief-of-staff Colter’s letter: ‘It is simply an opportunity for those desiring to pray FOR the Pattersons to gather together and pray WITH them.’ (my CAPS)
    Today is the National Day of Prayer — so that’s what I’ve been thinking of regarding Patterson. Of course, in the letter it is also notable that Colter asserts without any supporting details that the accusations are false. Following a very common tactic, he also makes all support and encouragement and prayer about both Dr AND Mrs Patterson.
    But on to my main point about prayer. Colter indicates that for prayer FOR the Pattersons to mean anything, it must also be WITH them. He’s following Dr Patterson’s lead here from the infamous sermon illustration. Here is the current version: ‘I suggested to her that she kneel by the bed at night and pray for him. Because he might hear her prayer, I warned her that he could become angry over this and seek to retaliate.’ and the original: ‘I said, “All right, what I want you to do is, every evening I want you to get down by your bed just as he goes to sleep, get down by the bed, and when you think he’s just about asleep, you just pray and ask God to intervene, not out loud, quietly,” but I said, “You just pray there.”’
    I conclude that Patterson does not believe in effectual prayer, unless one is there with the object of the prayers, and that person is aware one is praying. Otherwise, why wouldn’t he have her kneel some other time and place– thereby avoiding the retaliation? God wouldn’t hear her then?
    To go just a little farther afield, and confessing that I do think the story is largely if not wholly fabricated– what is with the repetition of the guy just falling asleep? Right when one falls asleep is an odd time — Patterson wants to be sure the guy is not fully awake or asleep when he notices her kneeling there. Originally she was supposed to be praying quietly– but in the new improved version, Patterson knew he might hear her.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  91. Dave A A wrote:

    Otherwise, why wouldn’t he have her kneel some other time and place– thereby avoiding the retaliation? God wouldn’t hear her then?

    Clearly he didn’t want God to hear. He wanted the *husband* to hear. And then becoming angry, and get ‘more violent’ (as he said in the original version).

    And then…maybe feel bad about it I guess? Ugh. This is terrible terrible story.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  92. Steve wrote:

    It’s much more to do with MONEY than theology

    I continue to beat the dead horse of Patterson’s recent “open letter” saying souls “trooped” into hell because somebody stole money from the SBC. So I don’t believe he’s Arminian any more than Calvinist. He believes in salvation via MONEY enabling religious professionals to bring the gospel to those who otherwise have no opportunity to hear it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  93. Dave A A wrote:

    thereby avoiding the retaliation

    And if I thought Patterson knew enough/cared about the circle of violence, you could say he wanted a bad violent outburst as that would generally be followed by a apologetic and/or cooling off period. because that’s how the cycle works. Maybe then he could pretend ‘all better’ and move on.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  94. Dave A A wrote:

    Clearly he didn’t want God to hear. He wanted the *husband* to hear. And then becoming angry, and get ‘more violent’ (as he said in the original version).

    And then…maybe feel bad about it I guess? Ugh. This is terrible terrible story.

    Exactly– God is irrelevant. Manipulation — if he beats her for praying for him, he’ll feel guilty– is everything.
    Hypothetically speaking– because I’m pretty sure the couple is fictional. If they’re real, and lived happily ever after, and the woman has been testifying in public about it, why not name names and ask her to speak for herself? Instead we get a bunch of weasel words “about the desire of her husband to prevent her attendance in church. He was neither harsh nor physical with her, but she felt abused.” Come to think of it, he should have simply counseled her to submit to the old goat and stop going to church.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  95. BTW, this is how the Christian Post reported on this story:

    “Last week, a blog posted an audio interview of Patterson in 2000 with the Council on Biblical Womanhood and Manhood in which some suggested that he appeared to support women staying with their abusive husbands rather than divorcing them. ”

    Got enough qualifiers in there, CP? Sheesh.
    https://www.christianpost.com/news/rachael-denhollander-claims-evangelical-church-perpetually-stuck-when-addressing-sexual-abuse-223586/

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  96. @ Lea:
    Especially funny they need qualifers, since two seconds later they say this:

    “He also said that, in his ministry, he has “never counseled that anybody seek a divorce, and I do think that’s always wrong counsel.” ”

    I mean. This is pretty clear, no? Why are we pretending otherwise?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  97. All that said, all the uproar now by those who couldn’t care less 10+ years ago must be a power play by Mohlerites, and I feel rather bad about joining in.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  98. Lydia wrote:

    @ Shannon H.:
    If only Todd Friel could make the rules! Lol.

    And what is up with calling it “discernment’? That has bothered me for a while now. I first saw that label applied by the guys at Pyro years ago that Freil tends to hang out with. Are they trying to equate the concept of discernment with position? I don’t think the word is a good fit for outing abusers and perverts.

    I was friends with Friel up in the Twin Cities of Minnesota back when he first was seduced by the neocalvinist strain almost two decades ago. Was there in Northwestern bookstore on Snelling Avenue in Roseville (St. Paul) when he made his first public rollout of his newfound neocal faith. Seemed like an OK guy. But he has changed, it appears. But two decades running with the neocalvinists will do that to you. I spent two years with them and still have the occasional PTSD tremor.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  99. Steve wrote:

    @ Lydia:
    Paige is most definitely not Calvinistic. He’s Armininian. Deep apologies to Jacob Arminius. The SBC feud between these two sides was very short-lived. It’s much more to do with MONEY than theology. Mohler and Patterson have tighter grips on their wallets than their theology. They’ve both flourished within their respective camps.

    It’s true he is not Calvinist. Patterson at least had for a long time traditional free will Baptist beliefs. However, they are not really Arminian, either, as “once saved, always saved” Baptists do not embrace traditional Arminian theology. There are more than two views of soteriology.

    However, they have patriarchy in common. Remember Dorothy Patterson was one of the five original founders of CBMW with John Piper. And CBMW had a huge hand in the conservative resurgence.

    I think Patterson believed that he would run the SBC and have all the power after the CS, but he wasn’t aware of what Mohler and friends had planned. In other words, they used him.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  100. I watched Paige Patterson yesterday for the first time, the infamous video. Came away with the impression the guy is literally mentally off; there’s something terribly amiss, IMO. Have always felt the same way about Piper, and I saw him multiple times in person. These gurus almost invariably seem to be the worst, least funny, least insightful and least mentally sound types.

    Am absolutely mystified about their appeal to even the small subsection of Christianity in which they’re held in esteem. The only thing I can think is a group of people with unsound minds have gathered to themselves leaders with similar qualities. They flat seem unchristian to me: full of self, ruthless, arrogant, smug and always seeking the center stage and glory for themselves. I wouldn’t give them three seconds of consideration—that anyone does is astonishing.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  101. Lydia wrote:

    Was 2009 the year they did the GCR lockbox?

    Lydia is referring to the mysterious 15-year sealing of records from task force meetings of SBC elites in 2009/2010 … to not be viewed publicly until 2025. When questioned about that unusual practice at the 2010 annual meeting with a call from the convention floor to make public immediately those minutes and recordings, Al Mohler (task force member) said “unsealing the record now would cause the committee to break its promise of confidentiality to participants in the deliberation process.”

    Sure sounds like some sort of theo-political compromise was made by the SBC who’s-who. Keeping millions of SBC members in the dark on such proceedings just doesn’t seem like the Christian thing to do. In the ensuing years, the New Calvinists under Mohler’s lead have taken over the denomination … makes you wonder if there’s something in those records about that. One thing is for sure, once very vocal anti-Calvinists Page Patterson and Frank Page became strangely silent about the New Calvinist takeover as they neared retirement.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  102. Law Prof wrote:

    Am absolutely mystified about their appeal to even the small subsection of Christianity in which they’re held in esteem. The only thing I can think is a group of people with unsound minds have gathered to themselves leaders with similar qualities. They flat seem unchristian to me: full of self, ruthless, arrogant, smug and always seeking the center stage and glory for themselves. I wouldn’t give them three seconds of consideration—that anyone does is astonishing.

    I submit that if this were and always had been the common assumption among believers of Jesus and many Jewish sects over the ages and today with regard to ANY religious leader who sought personal gain through talking about Jesus… can you imagine the world?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  103. Law Prof wrote:

    Patterson … Piper … Am absolutely mystified about their appeal to even the small subsection of Christianity in which they’re held in esteem. The only thing I can think is a group of people with unsound minds have gathered to themselves leaders with similar qualities.

    “For the time is coming when men will not tolerate wholesome teaching. They will want something to tickle their own fancies, and they will collect teachers who will pander to their own desires.” (2 Timothy 4:3)

    I guess there is a category of church folks out there who desire verbal abuse for a season, who need to be smacked for a night to bring them back to their senses.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  104. Steve wrote:

    Paige is most definitely not Calvinistic. He’s Armininian.

    While Dr. Patterson has been an outspoken opponent to certain Calvinistic beliefs and practices over the years, he has at times sent a mixed-message in this regard. For example, when he was President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, he signed, and required all faculty to sign, the Abstract of Principles (a reformed confession of faith). In my 60+ years as a Southern Baptist, I saw many SBC preachers/leaders walk the theological fence to make sure they were on the “right” side as movements came and went. I don’t trust folks like that who waiver in what they profess to believe. Just tell me who you are! You will always know who I am!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  105. @ Max:

    I’m right with you Max on your assessment. I took a class on the Anabaptists from Patterson years ago. He railed against Calvin. He’s more of a bully than a theologian. My roots are in the SBC. I grew up in a small SBC church more than 50 years ago. The SBC of today is far different. It’s painful to cut those. But necessary.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  106. Steve wrote:

    My roots are in the SBC. I grew up in a small SBC church more than 50 years ago. The SBC of today is far different. It’s painful to cut those. But necessary.

    Steve, another gospel is being preached in many corners of the SBC these days … which is not the Gospel at all. Why would true believers want to be associated with that. As you note, it is painful to separate from the familiar – while it may be agonizing, it is the healthy thing to do. I come from a long-line of Southern Baptists, I gave my life to Jesus in an SBC church, I have been a long-time Bible teacher in SBC ranks and a lay-preacher, I have family who have been SBC foreign missionaries, my son-in-law has a seminary degree from SWBTS and has served as a bi-vocational preacher in rural SBC churches, my daughter has been a singer/musician in SBC churches, my wife has agonized and prayed for a genuine revival in SBC … we have been faithful to serve for years, but the message and messengers are changing … time to enter the “Done” ranks (done with SBC, but not done with Jesus).

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  107. @ linda:
    I watched the 2 minute video. I encourage you to do so if you have not. Not good at links. You can watch him practically lick his lips just remembering how she looked. I think he said she was “niiicce”. Look at it w/o audio. Then he supports the teen’s “built” comment while rebuking the mother and explaining her son is just being “biblical.” Much worse to watch than what I expected.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  108. Reading these posts and comments does not make one want to rush out an join a church.

    Seriously, there is something severely whacked about this whole enterprise!

    Most of the Baptists I know are nice people. They don’t seem to endorse patriarchy and authoritarian to extent the leadership does.

    There has got to be a massive disconnect between the congregations and the leadership.

    Or the face being portrayed to outsiders masks a deep rot behind close doors.

    Can’t say I regret my decision to de-christianize myself.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  109. Deborah wrote:

    Then he supports the teen’s “built” comment while rebuking the mother and explaining her son is just being “biblical.” Much worse to watch than what I expected.

    Honestly, watching the video was worse for me because you had a mother trying to teach her son to respect this girl and a male preacher saying ‘nope/boys will be boys’. SO gross.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  110. Sòpwith wrote:

    “In this day and age, people don’t stand and applaud men who treat women as second-class citizens unless you wish to die a swift and sudden organizational death.”-Wade Burlison

    Was that recent? It seems especially untrue considering Hybels and Savage.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  111. Jack wrote:

    Most of the Baptists I know are nice people. They don’t seem to endorse patriarchy and authoritarian to extent the leadership does.

    There has got to be a massive disconnect between the congregations and the leadership.

    Agreed. The people of God deserve a new batch of leaders. You will find more faithfulness to Christ in the pew than among SBC leadership. It’s a shame what has happened to this once-great denomination by a handful of self-centered leaders with ungodly agendas. While local church autonomy is hindering the drift in traditional belief and practice in much of SBC life, a generational shift is taking place with pastors who do not preach the old, old story of Jesus and His love.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  112. @ Lea:
    As the mother of 2 sons now married adults, that ticked me off to the extreme. But this #churchtoo doesn’t have to do much to help me “get in touch with my anger” these days. All the more reason to have godly men in charge instead of emotional, irrational females. Ugh! Beth Moore is stepping right on the toes of Life Way and SBC. That is what truth telling looks like. It costs the truth teller. Unlike the way the deceivers and liars always maintain the income stream in their “convictions.”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  113. Jack wrote:

    Reading these posts and comments does not make one want to rush out an join a church.

    Seriously, there is something severely whacked about this whole enterprise!

    Well said. The ones who get it should have called out the fakes a long time ago, if indeed, there are those who get it. TWW went on record nine years ago taking a stand against the improprieties.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  114. Lea wrote:

    Lowlandseer wrote:

    “Today there is a war against boys … you’ve got to make little girls out of your little boys,” Patterson said.”

    What?

    I know it’s scandal after scandal out there, but I hope we can address Beth Moore’s recent article because it is fantastic. This year full of nonsense has made me a Beth Moore fan.

    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html

    Fantastic letter by Beth Moore. She told the truth!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  115. FW Rez wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    The Commissar has told us that We Have Volunteered.

    Read on Twitter where a PhD student at SWBTS lost his campus job for tweeting a link to Stetzer’s article. If an academic institution does not allow some freedom of thought then it is indoctrinating rather than educating.

    I am afraid these students have been indoctrinated for years. They have been taught to follow the party line and if not there are some serious consequences. It would be great to find out who this PHD student is and help them financially.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  116. K.D. wrote:

    You know what’s going to happen?
    “Nuthin”

    They are just going to keep digging until the SBC becomes just another “has-been” denomination that is made up of grey-hairs and little kids.

    And perhaps that’s a good thing.

    If the remaining people in the SBC would quit giving these leaders would have to find a real job.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  117. mot wrote:

    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html

    Fantastic letter by Beth Moore. She told the truth!

    Whew! This may be a costly stand for Sister Moore. Her messages are simulcast across SBC. She is one of only a few females blessed by New Calvinist leaders to teach ‘their’ women. LifeWay promotes her big time; they make money off of her. Making this stand is the right thing to do – things are getting tougher in SBC life for the women she loves and teaches. She has set a good example for them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  118. Deborah wrote:

    @ linda:
    I watched the 2 minute video. I encourage you to do so if you have not. Not good at links. You can watch him practically lick his lips just remembering how she looked. I think he said she was “niiicce”. Look at it w/o audio. Then he supports the teen’s “built” comment while rebuking the mother and explaining her son is just being “biblical.” Much worse to watch than what I expected.

    Same here with me, and it wasn’t even the leering, filthy old man qualities (which are bad enough, goodness knows); the guy does not seem mentally right, he acted like someone who’d been borrowed for the evening from a facility with his counselors close by to ensure he did nothing dangerous and told to effect a good ol’ boy SoBap preacher impersonation. He is a very strange man. Worse than Piper IMO.

    Am still thunderstruck that anyone would listen to anything this fellow says except in the manner that we’re often strangely fascinated by a car accident.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  119. linda wrote:

    Now I am confused. I’ve always read that he told an abused woman to return to her abuser. If this is correct, that he was “neither harsh nor physical” but she felt abused that he did not want her attending church, it is a horse of a different color.
    First question has to be, was she abused or not.

    Patterson made the following statement, as you will see in the screen shot I included in the post:

    “Subsequently, on a Sunday morning, she arrived at church with some evidence of physical abuse.”

    Why didn’t he write what he said in his talk back in 2000 – that she came to church with “both eyes black”?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  120. Law Prof wrote:

    Deborah wrote:

    the guy does not seem mentally right, he acted like someone who’d been borrowed for the evening from a facility with his counselors close by to ensure he did nothing dangerous and told to effect a good ol’ boy SoBap preacher impersonation. He is a very strange man. Worse than Piper IMO.

    Am still thunderstruck that anyone would listen to anything this fellow says except in the manner that we’re often strangely fascinated by a car accident.

    There’s a story that is no longer on the Baptist Press site about Paige P “taking the hill” in which he rode into SWBTS chapel on some sort of military vehicle firing blanks from a .50 caliber machine gun to announce a new drive to evangelize the neighborhood around the Seminary

    He has also been known to wear sidearms to formal banquets and receptions

    The CR was brutal and they needed someone a little unhinged to swing the axe and get rid of “moderates”, aka good men who weren’t hardline enough

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  121. @ Law Prof:
    I know your comment was serious and true. I cannot lie (like a Baptist preacher boy), I laughed out loud. As a mental health professional, I was alarmed. Likely more evil than merely unstable. I am even more alarmed that the audiences in these different settings don’t get up and walk out. Evil brings deception.

    Besides, I need to laugh when I can cuz this church world exposure is no barrel of laughs. Especially knowing that what we have seen so far is a tiny fraction of the truth. Just looked up the meaning of “hound dog.” Yep, it meant what I thought it did: A mean or despicable person.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  122. Lea wrote:

    Beth

    Lea wrote:

    Lowlandseer wrote:

    “Today there is a war against boys … you’ve got to make little girls out of your little boys,” Patterson said.”

    What?

    I know it’s scandal after scandal out there, but I hope we can address Beth Moore’s recent article because it is fantastic. This year full of nonsense has made me a Beth Moore fan.

    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html

    I went and looked at Beth Moore’s twitter. Some of the preachers responding to her by praising her would not have done so a week ago-IMO they are such hypocrites.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  123. linda wrote:

    Now I am confused. I’ve always read that he told an abused woman to return to her abuser. If this is correct, that he was “neither harsh nor physical” but she felt abused that he did not want her attending church, it is a horse of a different color.

    I think what you’re missing, linda, is that he changed the story this time to try to make it sound better.

    Previously, he told her the husband might get ‘more violent’ and it was in response to a question specifically about domestic violence. So.

    The story is probably a lie, but what he was saying is still true, which was ‘go home, get beat up more’.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  124. Deborah wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    I know your comment was serious and true. I cannot lie (like a Baptist preacher boy), I laughed out loud. As a mental health professional, I was alarmed. Likely more evil than merely unstable. I am even more alarmed that the audiences in these different settings don’t get up and walk out. Evil brings deception.

    Besides, I need to laugh when I can cuz this church world exposure is no barrel of laughs. Especially knowing that what we have seen so far is a tiny fraction of the truth. Just looked up the meaning of “hound dog.” Yep, it meant what I thought it did: A mean or despicable person.

    Hey, I heard a prosperity gospel preacher once say from the pulpit poor people are not God’s children because King David said in the Psalms: “I have never seen the righteous forsaken or their children begging bread.” It still amazes me I didn’t walk out. Or overturn the pulpit. Or grab the mic from the preacher. Or knock said preacher over the head with the mic.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  125. mot wrote:

    K.D. wrote:

    If the remaining people in the SBC would quit giving these leaders would have to find a real job.

    Yep. But you have to remember that the overwhelming majority of people are completely ignorant of the issues discussed here at TWW. Furthermore, they have no interest in discussing them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  126. Steve wrote:

    the overwhelming majority of people are completely ignorant of the issues discussed here at TWW. Furthermore, they have no interest in discussing them.

    This is true. The average Southern Baptist does not really give a big whoop about the misbehavings of national SBC leaders – it makes little difference to their church, they think. Likewise, the theological drift occurring in the denomination is no big deal to them. But if you mess with their potluck dinners, you will have a war on your hands!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  127. Law Prof wrote:

    I heard a prosperity gospel preacher once say from the pulpit poor people are not God’s children because King David said in the Psalms: “I have never seen the righteous forsaken or their children begging bread.”

    I heard one say that Jesus was obviously wealthy since he had a treasurer (Judas).

    Twisted exegesis is not restricted to the prosperity boys. The New Calvinists are equally bad at torturing Scripture to support their theology.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  128. This will probably get me in trouble, but here it goes:

    I think the story of the abused woman that was instrumental in her husband’s salvation was “based on a true story”, but most likely embellished.

    The one about the 16-year old girl….. probably exaggerated as well. What I do not get is his total lack of discernment at even hinting about an underage girl being built. The bottom line as that our sin nature is distorting something that God created to be beautiful, and thus we struggle with lust and sexual sin. It was not necessary for him to come across as a dirty old man to make that point. He was trying to be edgy and he crossed the line.

    I am glad that abusers and lawbreakers are being exposed. What I am thinking comes out of all this is that SOME people that reach the age of 70 or so, if you talk to them long enough…. they say innapropriate things about race, women, immigrants, etc. In the case of people that have been speaking for a living for many decades…. well, we can have a field day.

    I say this about myself….. while I have never abused anyone or broken the law, I have learned over the years that some things I may have said in the past are offensive, even if I am joking. It is just part of maturing and I do want to be a good influence on those around me. I guess Patterson did not have anyone helping him with this (or he really believes this stuff)

    I am not excusing him. He may be a dirty old man that thinks women exist to serve men. On the other hand…. he may just be an old man that lacks discernment, exaggerates in his sermons, and lives high off the hog with other peoples’ money. Shame on him either way, and shame on the people that have covered for him.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  129. @ Lea:
    From that link, not satire:

    “But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  130. @ Deb:
    Birds of a feather flock… they self-identify as they rank this PP stooge as “the greatest”.

    Note to everyone: run from these pastors and their establishments or dynasties.

    Let’s see… HB is “the greatest”, PP is “the greatest” …

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  131. jyjames wrote:

    “… if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.” (SBC Today)

    Whew! Patterson is amazing! Give him a stained glass window (oh wait a minute …).

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  132. On the previous thread, Seneca suggested Patterson will retire and be replaced by Mac Brunson. I didn’t know how likely this might be until now. What I’d not heard previously (with all the other news) was that Brunson is already stepping down at FBC Jax and this Sunday will be his last. From Leonardo Blair: “Seven months after revealing that he hoped to remain in his position for at least five more years, Mac Brunson, senior pastor of the 10,000-member First Baptist Church of Jacksonville in Florida, abruptly resigned on Sunday as church officials assured members his premature exit wasn’t prompted by any scandal.” https://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-mac-brunson-resigns-from-jacksonville-megachurch-no-scandal-involved-officials-say-223529/
    According to Brunson himself: “Deb and I have sensed for the last six or seven months that the Lord was bringing our ministry to a close here in Jacksonville. We are now seeking the Lord’s will for our next place of ministry and excitedly waiting for the Lord to show us His perfect will for our lives,”
    In the absence of an inappropriate relationship, no megapastor ever ever senses this unless he has lost a power struggle or already has another gig lined up (or some combination).

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  133. jyjames wrote:

    Well said. The ones who get it should have called out the fakes a long time ago, if indeed, there are those who get it. TWW went on record nine years ago taking a stand against the improprieties.

    And that’s what it comes down to. Right & wrong. I don’t give 2 beans what the bible says. Men & women are equal. In every single way.

    Reading the sbc today article really makes me feel my day to day existence is in an alternate universe.

    With all the issues facing humanity, it’s that important the wife stays in the kitchen & makes you breakfast?

    Kind of glad that Southwest captain didn’t stay in the kitchen when the engine of her plane blew apart.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  134. Jack wrote:

    Kind of glad that Southwest captain didn’t stay in the kitchen when the engine of her plane blew apart.

    Same here. BTW, IMHO, theirs is the alternative reailty.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  135. Max wrote:

    Did you see the piece over at SBC Today: “Patterson Sides with God and Bible Over Backslidden Bloggers”? The lines are being drawn.

    Why don’t the commentors on Voices or Today mention Darrell Gilyard???? Might a comment about him be deleted??? Hmmmmm….

    Concerning PP’s original story about the abused wife: Yeah, what I hear is, “Go home. Submit. Pray. Who cares if dear hubby seriously injures you or even beats you to death, as long as he gets saved!”
    That might sound a bit extreme to some people, but I grew up seeing my mom with a bloody nose and black eyes repeatedly ….. broken windows, broken dishes, broken furniture, multiple threats, and then some. My dad even tried to run over my mom with the truck one day when we were loading tobacco scaffolds — all over something trivial.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  136. @ Jeffrey Chalmers:

    “What concerns me most is the hypocrisy of the leaders that TWW constantly exposes and the effect it will have on the kids/next generation.”
    +++++++++++++++

    my kids quickly became disillusioned with organized church. they don’t want to go.

    (they see it as fake, judgemental, smilingly hateful, imposing a pedantic burden of tightly-wired behavior standards [although they wouldn’t word it that way] which seem totally unreasonable & illogical to them.)

    …but they are finding God. in kind of a pure way.

    in the same way one finds their way through a big city (some innate sense of direction, some signs pointing the way, some hunches, dead ends, wrong turns, a few laps around the block to get in the right lane, getting closer,…

    I don’t think there is necessarily cause to worry or be concerned where kids are concerned. they see the hypocrisy in a matter of fact way. and I think they are not without the ability to see God for who God is, apart from religious nincompoops.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  137. Jack wrote:

    Kind of glad that Southwest captain didn’t stay in the kitchen when the engine of her plane blew apart.

    Yep. I’m sure every man on that plane was glad she was in the cockpit. Piper might not have been, though, seeing as she had to instruct “everyone” while she was saving their lives.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  138. Bridget wrote:

    Piper might not have been, though, seeing as she had to instruct “everyone”

    He hopes he doesn’t age quicker than the Mrs., in which case, he’ll be taking orders from her.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  139. Lowlandseer wrote:

    And it is a theme he likes…
    “Every boy needs a dog to care for, feed, groom and take to the veterinarian. He does not need a little yapper but rather a big dog as his companion in discovering outdoors adventure and the responsibility that comes from dependence on his companion.
    “He also needs a gun, not a toy gun but a real firearm that allows him to appreciate our Second Amendment rights afforded by our constitution to own and bear arms. Without question, our Second Amendment rights are closely aligned with our First Amendment rights protecting free speech in proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
    http://csfmagazine.com/new-page-2

    ‘Without question’? Not even in the disputable matters category? Is the North American Mission Board going to start a “Arm your kids, I mean boys, with big guns and big guns” campaign? Could this be a new ‘Wolverines’-based method of church-planting, say by siege?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  140. Max wrote:

    mot wrote:
    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html
    Fantastic letter by Beth Moore. She told the truth!
    Whew! This may be a costly stand for Sister Moore. Her messages are simulcast across SBC. She is one of only a few females blessed by New Calvinist leaders to teach ‘their’ women. LifeWay promotes her big time; they make money off of her. Making this stand is the right thing to do – things are getting tougher in SBC life for the women she loves and teaches. She has set a good example for them.

    She’s marketed the eastern-tinged mystical/new Agish prayer approach way beyond the sbc, so I doubt she’s worried about speaking out regarding a retirement-age guy who is almost certainly out the door with the primary q being the color of the parachute.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  141. jyjames wrote:

    @ Lea:
    From that link, not satire:
    “But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.”

    “Greatest living Southern Baptist” — has this guy personally judged the inward thoughts? And there’s the whole epistle of James and the matter of being a respecter of persons, last being first, leaders needing to be servants, and so forth…

    And the next sentence is astounding, as if the entire denom would’ve given up on Biblical inerrancy save for this guy who I doubt most sbc church attenders have heard about.

    At least this is allowing some of the SBC Voices to feature their u Kaye insight with their outside voices…
    That’s right, because

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  142. Max wrote:

    I heard one say that Jesus was obviously wealthy since he had a treasurer (Judas).

    Some televangelist, I don’t remember whom, once said that when Jesus said He had “no place to lay my head”, it was not an expression of the lack of funds or any sort of temporary financial distress, but that He was heading to a religious conference (where He was presumably the keynote speaker) and the hotel rooms were sold out due to the popularity of the conference. I swear I read words very much to that effect spoken by some evangelist luminary. They just make up an imaginary Jesus in their own image.

    Can you imagine worshiping a wealthy, smugly comfortable Jesus who strode up to the stage in fashionable clothing and a gleaming white smile, surrounded by His posse who keep the little people at bay, giving His canned message, then raking in the big honoraria? Can you imagine?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  143. Max wrote:

    I heard one say that Jesus was obviously wealthy since he had a treasurer (Judas).

    Some televangelist, I don’t remember whom, once said that when Jesus said He had “no place to lay my head”, it was not an expression of the lack of funds or any sort of temporary financial distress, but that He was heading to a religious conference (where He was presumably the keynote speaker) and the hotel rooms were sold out due to the popularity of the conference. I swear I read words very much to that effect spoken by some evangelist luminary. They just make up an imaginary Jesus in their own image.

    Can you imagine worshiping a wealthy, smugly comfortable Jesus who strode up to the stage in fashionable clothing and a gleaming white smile, surrounded by His posse who keep the little people at bay, giving His canned message, then raking in the big honoraria? Can you imagine?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  144. JDV wrote:

    save for this guy

    Doesn’t really matter if this guy stays or goes and another stooge sits in his place.

    Jesus is the only way. He’s the real deal, the real guy, the real leader. Without Him, moot question.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  145. Jack wrote:

    And that’s what it comes down to. Right & wrong. I don’t give 2 beans what the bible says. Men & women are equal. In every single way.

    I do give two beans what the Bible says. And I don’t think it can be fairly read in context to state that are better than women, or greater than women, or anything of the sort.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  146. Law Prof wrote:

    I do give two beans what the Bible says. And I don’t think it can be fairly read in context to state that are better than women, or greater than women, or anything of the sort.

    I agree. And I think those passages are most often used to browbeat patriarchy were intentionally translated to sound that way.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  147. 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.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  148. Nuttshell wrote:

    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.

    Paige Patterson is everywhere. His tentacles reach far and wide. He is not the only one that needs to be removed from their positions in the SBC. Good luck removing them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  149. JDV wrote:

    @ Lea:
    From that link, not satire:
    “But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.”

    Sadly Paige is in every since worshiped by many in the SBC and some of those at SBC Voices. He can do no wrong.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  150. JDV wrote:

    Max wrote:

    mot wrote:
    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html
    Fantastic letter by Beth Moore. She told the truth!
    Whew! This may be a costly stand for Sister Moore. Her messages are simulcast across SBC. She is one of only a few females blessed by New Calvinist leaders to teach ‘their’ women. LifeWay promotes her big time; they make money off of her. Making this stand is the right thing to do – things are getting tougher in SBC life for the women she loves and teaches. She has set a good example for them.

    She’s marketed the eastern-tinged mystical/new Agish prayer approach way beyond the sbc, so I doubt she’s worried about speaking out regarding a retirement-age guy who is almost certainly out the door with the primary q being the color of the parachute.

    My point was at least she spoke out which did surprise me.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  151. __

    “No, we simply can not be silent an the issue of the abuse of women…”

    hmmm…

    Deborah,

    Hello,

    Herein lies your answer:

    “There are no women on the Executive Committee of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. … In this day and age, people don’t stand and applaud men who treat women as second-class citizens unless you wish to die a swift and sudden organizational death.” – Wade Burlison
    wadeburleson.org/2018/05/

    *

    “Men are right now dealing with the very important question of what to do with a man who is seemingly indifferent to the physical abuse of women. It is a very critical and important time of decision…” – Wade Burlison
    http://www.wadeburleson.org/2018/05/

    (Hope this helps.)

    ATB

    Sòpy

    https://youtu.be/XTvTGBHld6I

    :~)

    – –

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  152. @ mot:
    Nope. They despise him. The whole bigger problem with this situation are sides. I will be awaiting the time Wade goes after Al Mohler in the same way. I mean if the purpose is really to get rid of bad people…..

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  153. Lydia wrote:

    @ mot:
    Nope. They despise him. The whole bigger problem with this situation are sides. I will be awaiting the time Wade goes after Al Mohler in the same way. I mean if the purpose is really to get rid of bad people…..

    Just so I am clear about what you wrote–who is it that they despise?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  154. @ mot:
    In fact, it’s just the opposite over the last 15 years or so his influence has waned. I wouldn’t put Fundy small Bible colleges on par with RTS, WTS, T4G, TGC and on and on. He is low-hanging old fruit easy to go after. And he brought it all on himself.

    Mohler, Moore and the others are much better protected and I would love to see them get the same treatment but it won’t happen. I predict that Moore and others will use Patterson as an example of the old SBC they got rid of and now it is great because of them. That is what this is all about because we can’t say the other side is more moral– if we are honest.

    It’s all a big manipulation game. My hope is more and more people will be disgusted with all of it and just leave– making sure the money dries up. Especially the money that goes to headquarters and the entities.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  155. @ mot:
    Sbcvoices historically depises Patterson. They are big Mohler/Moore wing since they started the blog.

    They are being uncharacteristically quiet on the patterson pusch. Hmmm.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  156. Lydia wrote:

    @ mot:
    Sbcvoices historically depises Patterson. They are big Mohler/Moore wing since they started the blog.

    They are being uncharacteristically quiet on the patterson pusch. Hmmm.

    Thanks for the correction. The blog that is supporting Patterson is the SBC Today blog–correct?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  157. @ mot:
    Yes. The good thing about sbctoday is they don’t moderate people who disagree. Voices is horrible about eviscerating people with labeling accusations then publicly banning them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  158. Lydia wrote:

    @ mot:
    Yes. The good thing about sbctoday is they don’t moderate people who disagree. Voices is horrible about eviscerating people with labeling accusations then publicly banning them.

    Yep–I am banned from Voices.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  159. Lydia wrote:

    @ mot:
    I spoketoo soon! Check this out
    http://sbcvoices.com/harboring-conflicting-emotions-regarding-paige-pattersons-counsel-on-spousal-abuse-and-the-resulting-implications/

    “Dr. Patterson, on a snowy day in February, three-four years ago, when school was closed because of the weather, Dr. Patterson entertained (in his house) the only Black professor in the world (I’m told) with a PhD from the University of Manchester whose study focused on The Dead Sea Scrolls. He later provided a guide to tour Dr. Hopkins through the exhibit on display at the time. I found their technical conversation about the Dead Sea Scrolls fascinating, although I understood very little of what was being said.”

    Wonder if these were a focus of this gesture being portrayed as relevant:

    “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

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  160. @ mot:
    I was, too, for several years. Then I one day, out of the blue, decided to try to comment on a #me-too article and it went through. My guess is because I had a new ISP from previous years?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  161. Max wrote:

    Whew! This may be a costly stand for Sister Moore. Her messages are simulcast across SBC. She is one of only a few females blessed by New Calvinist leaders to teach ‘their’ women. LifeWay promotes her big time; they make money off of her. Making this stand is the right thing to do – things are getting tougher in SBC life for the women she loves and teaches. She has set a good example for them.

    Yes, well, every coin has two sides. Beth Moore is so far at the other end of some spectrum from me that I have to keep a tight reign on myself with this comment, but it needs said.

    I just don’t get it why SBC people took up with BM. She dabbles in some stuff which some have called eastern-ish mysticism and some stuff which some have called new age-ish but she does not go ahead and embrace the ideas within the longer traditions of those sorts of practices. She dabbles in charismatic-ish stuff but she does not go ahead and embrace the nitty gritty as it were of pentecostal/charismatic theology. She teaches ‘bible’ but it sounds like mostly from a personalized angle without the more disciplined approach of somebody who went to school and seriously listened to what has been said over the centuries by various other people.

    That does not sound like something the SBC of my youth would have taken up with. I get it that she is pretty and dynamic and comes across as ‘warm’, but SBC of my youth was more, well, stable than that. And I say that even while I disagree with some of the concepts of SBC of my youth. I come away from Beth thinking have women actually come to the place where this is their best level of understanding, or is that that forces at SBC merely hope to steer women in that direction?

    Has something gone wrong with baptist women? Back when I said “we’ concerning baptist women the WMU was formidable, women were teachers and serious musicians and organizers in the church, ‘mom’ ran a rather tight ship at home and ‘dad’ enjoyed the benefits of that, and kids grew up from the conveyor belt of how youth were trained and enabled at church as able to defend the faith at some level. Something has gone wrong.

    So, is Beth’s problem that she is female in what has become the man’s world of SBC, and have they been disrespectful to her because of changing ideas about the value of female persons, or is it partly that lots of stuff has happened and female ‘ain’t what it used to be’ in baptistville, or is it perhaps also that what she has been marketing does not hold its own against the more substantive and may I say difficult and more demanding expectations of baptist-ville-of-yore.

    Sorry folks, but as a no-longer-baptist I grieve at what has been lost from the faith community of my youth, but I am encouraged that there could be better things ahead.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  162. “My point is: What if my speaking engagements (at least nine scheduled as of today) or the several awards that I have recently received (including a Distinguished Alumni award that I will be receiving at Ouachita Baptist University in September) were revoked because of wrong advice that I gave 40 years ago?”

    Ah, we have the time-limit concept made of such rrelevance in the Andy Savage matter. Of course, even if we play along with that, Patterson’s comments came in less than half that time when he was in a position of power directly related to where he is now, so apples and oranges.

    And if this guy had suggested something at any time when of in a position of spiritual authority that showcased fundamentally-flawed thinking — especially when essentially repping it as Biblical action while ignoring legal rights of an individual and civil reporting responsibilities of someone running a civilly-enmeshed entity, then yes, it remains relevant and actionable. That’s especially the case if it’s another apparent situation of crisis management and managing personal risk over doing the right thing.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  163. “I just don’t get it why SBC people took up with BM. She dabbles in some stuff which some have called eastern-ish mysticism and some stuff which some have called new age-ish but she does not go ahead and embrace the ideas within the longer traditions of those sorts of practices.”

    I’ll keep it short to not derail the topic, but there’s ample evidence that she does go further down the line, if not necessary at first blush of the sbc-friendly studies, I’d say more like the “here’s a taste” foot in the door like the JWs, Mormons, and SDA (like those LDS commercials offer a free Bible).

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  164. @ Steve:
    Bingo. She traveled with a security detail for her speaking engagements. She was so popular people literally scalped tickets. LifeWay could not crank out her Bible studies quick enough for the demand. I used to know a guy who was on her security detail who ended up on the staff of a mega security department. She was a bonafide Rockstar until advent of social media started to take her down.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  165. @ okrapod:

    I have forgotten more than I remember but it started in a church in Houston with a well-connected pastor. I don’t want to conjecture cuz I cannot remember if it was First Baptist or Second Baptist?

    So we start with being well-connected and then timing. It was the mid-90s during comp hey day and she had a huge following in Houston with a weekly womens Bible study. LifeWay picked her up helped her start a women’s ministry in conjunction with LifeWay. Women’s Ministries were huge back then. She was the opposite of Kay Arthur in style and presentation. She was a cash cow appealing to the lowest common denominator in that venue, imo. It was feel good pablum by a cutsy funny non threatening woman.

    One of the discussion questions in a study of, I think it was Abraham, was this:

    If you were invited to Sarah’s baby shower what kind of a gift would you buy for her?

    That sort of said it all to me.

    But think of the gate on one of her speaking engagements back in the day. 55.00 a pop in a mega that seats 10,000. And tickets were being scalped!

    Commercial Christianity- for women–at its best.

    And I can relate to your comment about formidable WMU women. I grew up around them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  166. Jack wrote:

    And that’s what it comes down to. Right & wrong. I don’t give 2 beans what the bible says. Men & women are equal. In every single way.

    Beth Moore called it. She said

    I accepted the peculiarities accompanying female leadership in a conservative Christian world because I chose to believe that, whether or not some of the actions and attitudes seemed godly to me, they were rooted in deep convictions based on passages from 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14.
    [snip]
    I came face to face with one of the most demoralizing realizations of my adult life: Scripture was not the reason for the colossal disregard and disrespect of women among many of these men. It was only the excuse. Sin was the reason. Ungodliness.

    I think this is where people have been, trying to argue the scriptures. The truth is, these men don’t care about that. Not really. If they cared about women they would be looking at the bible and reading things in a way that was most charitable to them, that was most loving. They aren’t. That’s because they are deeply misogynistic. I have no interest in hearing their take on the scriptures, because it is filtered through bad men.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  167. JDV wrote:

    She’s marketed the eastern-tinged mystical/new Agish prayer approach way beyond the sbc

    Have you read her studies or did you hear this from someone?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  168. JDV wrote:

    “Greatest living Southern Baptist”

    With all due respect to Rick Patrick, I feel sure that the greatest living Southern Baptist is someone in the pew quietly going about the Lord’s business, known but to God.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  169. Max wrote:

    @ Deb:
    Did you see the piece over at SBC Today: “Patterson Sides with God and Bible Over Backslidden Bloggers”? The lines are being drawn.

    http://sbctoday.wpengine.com/biblical-inerrantist-believes-bible/

    These bozos are just amazing. So the premise implied is that the message isn’t trustworthy because of who brought it? That is…. well I won’t say. He said it! It doesn’t change anything by who brought the information to light. If he survives this and/or speaks at the convention, will any women ever attend a Southern Baptist Church again? Not if she is in her right mind she won’t.
    What is so hard to understand that this is misogynistic? If he survives this it means that all the accusations are true about Southern Baptist leadership and their view about women as second class citizens. They own it and they don’t care who knows it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  170. Quote from dude at SBC Voices wrote:

    “My point is: What if my speaking engagements (at least nine scheduled as of today) or the several awards that I have recently received (including a Distinguished Alumni award that I will be receiving at Ouachita Baptist University in September) were revoked because of wrong advice that I gave 40 years ago?”

    So. Dude men need to listen up on this.

    If you said something 40 years ago that you now realize is dead wrong, by all means say so. Say why. Apologize to people who have been hurt by your counsel! It’s not that hard.

    You are not in trouble for having been wrong in your youth (although if you did something criminal you may still have to pay for it, witness GoldenStateK, who is going to go to jail at 72). But did you learn? Did you admit? Did you change?

    For people like Patterson, the answer is no. He’s still the same guy. Teaching the same stuff. And he should be called out for it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  171. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lea:
    Do you have a link because I’d like to see the year she said that.

    This is in the link I posted above. From yesterday maybe?

    https://blog.lproof.org/2018/05/a-letter-to-my-brothers.html

    I’m not getting into Beth Moore studies. I don’t read them, can’t comment. But I thought her comments here were dead on.

    Also, if you want to read a pulpit and pen person talk about how much he hates and despises beth moore and prove her points entirely? Here is another link:
    http://pulpitandpen.org/2018/05/03/a-letter-back-to-beth-moore-from-seth-dunn/

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  172. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lea:
    Do you have a link because I’d like to see the year she said that.

    I responded but my response is in timeout (maybe because I linked pulpit and pen too). Just look for my comment in this thread and there is a link.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  173. @ Lea:
    The same for Mohler, Moore and all the rest of them. Moore is now claiming divorce ok for DV but that wasnt his position at SBTS all those years. But now it’s PC. But he never explained why he changed his position. He doesn’t have to they scrubbed CBMW site.

    The really great thing about all this is what frauds they all are –is there for anyone with a little history to see loud and clear.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  174. @ Lea:
    Yikes –things are bad when you can use pulpit and pen to make a point! 🙂

    I just can’t rehab any of those guys even when they agree with me! Hee hee. I think JD Hall is a thug! And I never bought into his instant repentance shtick after bullying Braxton Caner on Twitter.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  175. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lea:
    Yikes –things are bad when you can use pulpit and pen to make a point!

    HAHA. The point was that the pulpit and pen dude is a crazy misogynist so…

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  176. ishy wrote:

    I think Patterson believed that he would run the SBC and have all the power after the CS, but he wasn’t aware of what Mohler and friends had planned. In other words, they used him.

    I believe this is the key to understanding what is going on.

    In The Organization, the Organization is all that matters. Those who sell their souls to join frequently do not read the small print, which reads:

    “The Organization retains the right to at any time and for any reason disassociate, cut off, condemn or offer up as scapegoat any individual as deemed necessary to the health and safety of The Organization.”

    These people can go on for decades, some their entire lives, and reap only the benefits – the fame, power, wealth and accolades. However, every single individual, even to the very summit of power, is disposable. They are all, in effect, being used.”

    I find here a metaphor. This is what selling your soul to the devil is like. He sells you on all the benefits, and gets your signature before you have a chance to read the fine print. Then, when he comes to call, to ask you to perform a particularly gruesome or even self-sacrificial task, you have no choice. You have already enjoyed all of the reward – now you pay.

    No one is safe. No one is indispensable. You can be Billy Graham, Billy O’Reilly or Billy Hybels. If you are caught out, or getting old, or just the most useful to sacrifice, you will be thrown under the bus without a moment’s hesitation, except perhaps for a few weeping admirers who got their own rewards on the scapegoat’s coattails.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  177. And it can get ugly when the sharks start circling, and each man is fighting for his own survival.

    You see, God really doesn’t need to punish the ‘wicked’ very often – they tend to destroy one another.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  178. truthseeker00 wrote:

    This is what selling your soul to the devil is like. He sells you on all the benefits, and gets your signature before you have a chance to read the fine print. Then, when he comes to call, to ask you to perform a particularly gruesome or even self-sacrificial task, you have no choice. You have already enjoyed all of the reward – now you pay.

    Judas.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  179. JDV wrote:

    @ Lea:
    From that link, not satire:
    “But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.”

    This is essentially the propaganda plank that has kept well-meaning men and women in the program, in spite of all of its shortcomings. The men were induced with a little ‘You get to be the boss, boys’ and the women were assured that, with a small personal sacrifice, they were ‘saving the culture’.

    Read articles going back since Reagan, who had the privilege of leading the charge. Read the articles and listen to the sermons of all those who got on board the Conservative Revolution. They were sold a bill of goods, and now, as always, the Truth is coming out.

    You know who I pity? The innocent. The sheep. The men who were turned into ‘bullies’ and the women who gave up their personal identities. The children who saw all the hypocrisy and evil, and decided The Church was not the place for them.

    The Church, The Organization, must go. For the sake of the body which is within her, the honest, God-loving, unthinking men and women who trusted the ‘authorities’ to tell them how to live. Trust me, I know. I was there. I was taken. I am Done.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  180. truthseeker00 wrote:

    No one is safe. No one is indispensable. You can be Billy Graham, Billy O’Reilly or Billy Hybels. If you are caught out, or getting old, or just the most useful to sacrifice, you will be thrown under the bus without a moment’s hesitation, except perhaps for a few weeping admirers who got their own rewards on the scapegoat’s coattails.

    PP certainly didn’t hesitate to throw a few people under the bus.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  181. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    truthseeker00 wrote:

    No one is safe. No one is indispensable. You can be Billy Graham, Billy O’Reilly or Billy Hybels. If you are caught out, or getting old, or just the most useful to sacrifice, you will be thrown under the bus without a moment’s hesitation, except perhaps for a few weeping admirers who got their own rewards on the scapegoat’s coattails.

    PP certainly didn’t hesitate to throw a few people under the bus.

    Can not prove it but he probably helped with 100″s of people being thrown under the bus.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  182. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    Well, blow me away. I would have never expected that from Dwight.

    Racism bad!
    Misogyny ???? Meh.

    Whiplash. Which is what I think all of this is based on considering my reading and watching history with all the players since 2006. I will be awaiting the coordinated secular and social media take down of Mohler and Moore. I don’t think this is a measuring contest of who is worse because I think they are all in the same category. 🙂

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  183. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    in 2013 Patterson said not to go to the secular authorities about abuse

    And his reason is— said secular authorities will go to hell and it’ll be YOUR damn fault.
    “and one more Christian home bites the dust in front of a civil judge, and one more judge walks out into eternity lost without Christ.”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  184. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    Well, blow me away. I would have never expected that from Dwight.

    Racism bad!
    Misogyny ???? Meh.

    I’m reading through this article.

    “Again, that’s not to excuse, or agree with, what Dr. Patterson unwisely spoke (in my judgment); it’s to say, “The punishment is much greater than the crime.”

    The punishment for Patterson? He might not get to make a speech I guess? Or live in a free mansion?

    The punishment for the women he ‘counseled’? Getting beaten up and locked into a marriage with a man who hates them for the sake of the ‘gospel’.

    Who is really suffering here? These men need to get their heads out of their…well.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  185. What also happens is that when something really big is threatening The Organization, they create a false flag to distract attention away from the real deal.

    My guess is that the real issue is how The Church has lied about submission, divorce and every other issue concerning male and female relations to keep the men in charge and women as sex slaves. Is that overstating it? Perhaps, but you get the drift.

    It was easy to be a big-mouthed misogynist when they were in their heyday, protected by – you guessed it – The Organization. But when The Organization feels the heat, they turn on those who merely did as they were employed to do. And even the Big Boys go down in flames. Anyone hear the devil laughing?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  186. Dave A A wrote:

    “and one more Christian home bites the dust in front of a civil judge

    How Christian is an abusive home, really?

    There was a guy on twitter responding to somebody (moore maybe?) trying to figure out how much beating his wife was ok. How many slaps, how many backhands…

    What on EARTH is wrong with these people? This wing of church is deeply, intensely broken.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  187. Lea wrote:

    For people like Patterson, the answer is no. He’s still the same guy. Teaching the same stuff. And he should be called out for it.

    What is particularly worrisome with Patterson is that he is in the position to control what is taught in the counseling curriculum at SWBTS, even to the extent of replacing a respected professional preparation program with his brand of “Biblical Counseling”.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  188. Lydia wrote:

    I just can’t rehab any of those guys even when they agree with me!

    Here is some stuff this guy said:

    “Also, to be forthright, you are a good-looking woman. Did it ever cross your mind that the Christian ministers who didn’t talk to you at conferences didn’t want to jeopardize their career by being thought to flirt with you? … Just maybe they were trying to protect themselves from making the wrong decision around a beautiful, effusive woman. ”

    BWAH. Like Beth Moore would give them the time of day. They should climb up a mountain and get over themselves.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  189. Ken A wrote:

    If he survives this and/or speaks at the convention, will any women ever attend a Southern Baptist Church again? Not if she is in her right mind she won’t.

    The oppression of women in the SBC is coming from two fronts: authoritarian “traditional” Southern Baptists like Patterson and the young restless and reformed with their “Biblical” manhood/womanhood mumbo-jumbo. Unless SBC men get in their right spiritual mind about this, SBC women are not in a good place to mature spiritually. There are, of course, exceptions to this in local churches … it just depends on individual church leadership. But right now, the SBC has a leadership crisis in its national hierarchy.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  190. truthseeker00 wrote:

    The Church has lied about submission, divorce and every other issue concerning male and female relations to keep the men in charge and women as sex slaves.

    The sad part is that though God created Man and Woman to collaborate (think, mature human beings), it’s completely lost with their manmade hierarchy. No relationship, just orders handed down – like to a farm animal.

    The projection then extends to their churches, which are also run with a hierarchy, rather than collaboration and [mature] relationships. Good grief, parents with grown adult children know that the hierarchy of parenting is only temporary and fades away to be replaced by collaborative relationships when kids become adults.

    The top of the hierarchy must have negligible social/relationship skills, which is why they come off as such doofuses on their elevated podiums. Just watch their videos, read their work. Ridiculous antics and strange teaching.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  191. jyjames wrote:

    The sad part is that though God created Man and Woman to collaborate (think, mature human beings), it’s completely lost with their manmade hierarchy. No relationship, just orders handed down – like to a farm animal.

    Farm animal WITH BENEFITS (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean…)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  192. I usually avoid the SBC oriented sites but have been reading some articles and following the comments on some of the PP pieces this week. What is alarming to me is the extent to which these folks have partaken (partook?) of the kool-aid, to the point that their blood streams are saturated with it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  193. okrapod wrote:

    I just don’t get it why SBC people took up with BM.

    Beth teaches a “grace, grace, grace” message which is compatible with the young reformers taking over SBC. They don’t feel threatened to send “their girls” off to her conferences, sit in on her simulcasts, and buy her books/videos. As another commenter noted, SBC’s publishing house LifeWay promotes her material because it sells. Her current stand may affect that deal for both of them.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  194. Lea wrote:

    The punishment for the women he ‘counseled’? Getting beaten up and locked into a marriage with a man who hates them for the sake of the ‘gospel’.

    This is it. It is not just a few women who sadly, unforgivably, suffered physical abuse. It is the thousands upon thousands of women who were told they had no options but to remain in their marriages. Period. Anything but the big D.

    So when you try to imagine the list of victims, don’t forget the many, many women – and men as well – who were locked into miserable, hopeless, loveless marriages. Even if no certifiable abuse took place, it was abuse.

    I do not believe God is a fan of divorce. Neither am I. But I believe God is even less of a fan of oppression, abuse and tyranny – whether it is by a state, a so-called church or a husband. Whether they knew they were ‘abusive’ or just filling their roles as proscribed by The Organization.

    God love us, people. I mean, really loves us. The reason – and I apologize for bruised toes – there is no such thing as Once saved, always saved is that there is no such thing as unconditional love. Love, and the relationships engendered by love, are always conditional. The moment the love is no longer desired, returned or properly exhibited, the covenant/contract is negated. God’s love never fails. But he will not keep individuals to a contract they no longer want. That’s why God is a divorcee. That is why, whatever the true form of ‘punishment’, God allows people to decide their own fate, to reject him and walk away.

    But for centuries the church has been denying that truth and that right. People were burned at the stake for daring to walk away from The Church. Today people are burned at the metaphorical stake for disagreeing with their pastor or officially ending a broken covenant in the manner prescribed by God – with papers of divorcement.

    The Organization always survives. It reinvents itself. It adopts new names, and puts on new garments. But it never changes. It hates God and it hates people. Any way that harm can be wreaked upon God’s beautiful, much-loved creation, it will be done.

    In the end, The Organization will not be allowed to slither away, shed its skin and continue its destructive ways. Because God is going to expose it for what it is, and what it has done, and there will be no rock under which it can hide.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  195. Lea wrote:

    There was a guy on twitter responding to somebody (moore maybe?) trying to figure out how much beating his wife was ok. How many slaps, how many backhands…

    Sounds like “How much can I get away with and still stay Righteous?”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  196. Max wrote:

    Unless SBC men get in their right spiritual mind about this, SBC women are not in a good place to mature spiritually.

    Actually, no one matures in the hierarchy paradigm; even the goofy leaders don’t mature. Think, Piper, Wilson, Savage, Hybels, etc.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  197. truthseeker00 wrote:

    It hates God and it hates people. Any way that harm can be wreaked upon God’s beautiful, much-loved creation, it will be done.

    Analogous to “It’s All Gonna Burn — SCRIPTURE! SCRIPTURE! SCRIPTURE!” vs Creation Care?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  198. jyjames wrote:

    Actually, no one matures in the hierarchy paradigm; even the goofy leaders don’t mature. Think, Piper, Wilson, Savage, Hybels, etc.

    Cartmans from South Park — boymaster/momservant dynamic where everything revolves around Cartman’s convenience.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  199. Max wrote:

    They don’t feel threatened to send “their girls” off to her conferences, sit in on her simulcasts, and buy her books/videos.

    She’s a bit goofy. The boys who take themselves way too seriously like goofy girls.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  200. Law Prof wrote:

    Can you imagine worshiping a wealthy, smugly comfortable Jesus who strode up to the stage in fashionable clothing and a gleaming white smile, surrounded by His posse who keep the little people at bay, giving His canned message, then raking in the big honoraria? Can you imagine?

    I can.
    I was the Omega Male of my high school.
    And that Jesus is the God of the jocks and cheerleaders and ONLY the jocks and cheerleaders.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  201. truthseeker00 wrote:

    But he will not keep individuals to a contract they no longer want. That’s why God is a divorcee. That is why, whatever the true form of ‘punishment’, God allows people to decide their own fate, to reject him and walk away.

    Yes.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  202. mot wrote:

    Sadly Paige is in every since worshiped by many in the SBC and some of those at SBC Voices. He can do no wrong.

    “Caesar sits above the gods,
    Barbara the maid…”
    — G.K.Chesterton, “Ballad of Saint Barbara”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  203. BM, just like every other tool of The Organization, knows how long her leash is. Or thinks they do, until they get yanked to heel. You go out and do your job, and everybody loves and admires you – until they crucify you for saying the same thing you have always said. It is a terrible, terrible game these people have been drawn into. And it looks nothing like the personal, genuine, gracious, loving relationship God desires to have with his people.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  204. FW Rez wrote:

    What is alarming to me is the extent to which these folks have partaken (partook?) of the kool-aid, to the point that their blood streams are saturated with it.

    I think everytime I read SBC Voices comments, I constantly think to myself ‘these men are PASTORS’?????!!!!

    No wonder the conservative church is a total mess. These are terrible people.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  205. Lea wrote:

    I think everytime I read SBC Voices comments, I constantly think to myself ‘these men are PASTORS’?????!!!!

    Yep, the new breed of SBC pastors … they are coming to a church near you!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  206. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    There was a guy on twitter responding to somebody (moore maybe?) trying to figure out how much beating his wife was ok. How many slaps, how many backhands…

    Sounds like “How much can I get away with and still stay Righteous?”

    It was honestly fascinating and I think the patheos article (might have been linked above) included the screenshot.

    It appears to me that there are a LOT of men out there who are afraid that if given half a chance, wives will leave immediately. They are constantly worrying that their wives are going to be given a hall pass, so if they get ‘angry’ and hit them they will be ‘allowed’ to leave.

    First of all, they are already allowed, thank god seriously for laws that make it so at this point. I have changed my mind utterly on this divorce issue over the years, because it is increasingly clear that people have REALLY good reasons for leaving in most of these cases. Adultery, abuse, general neglect.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  207. truthseeker00 wrote:

    This is what selling your soul to the devil is like. He sells you on all the benefits, and gets your signature before you have a chance to read the fine print. Then, when he comes to call, to ask you to perform a particularly gruesome or even self-sacrificial task, you have no choice. You have already enjoyed all of the reward – now you pay.

    “Playtime’s Over — Time to Pay the Piper!”

    One FRP gamer contact of mine in Glendale told me of the time he called the bluff of some Angsty-Mopeygoth gamers who were interested in DARK Fantasy games — NO, DARKER!

    He agreed to set up a DARK Fantasy campaign for them. At the first session, he unveiled the ruleset he was using: Rapture: The Second Coming (probably the first edition by Quintessal Mercy Games — which pulls NO punches about its Tribulation setting).

    “You want to be Creatures and Servants of The Dark (No, DARKER)? Here’s your chance — Playtime’s over — Time to Pay the Piper!”

    These wannabe Creatures of the Dark couldn’t get away from him fast enough.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  208. Lea wrote:

    It appears to me that there are a LOT of men out there who are afraid that if given half a chance, wives will leave immediately. They are constantly worrying that their wives are going to be given a hall pass, so if they get ‘angry’ and hit them they will be ‘allowed’ to leave.

    Like all those Pastors SCREAMING from the Pulpit about how much God Hates Divorce?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  209. Lea wrote:

    No wonder the conservative church is a total mess. These are terrible people.

    I wonder.

    At least, they probably did not start out as ‘terrible people’. They started out as decent people who loved God, their wives, their kids and set out to build his Kingdom on earth. And they fell into the well-laid trap, baited with whatever flavor of desire they found most irresistible. Power? Wealth? Fame? Sex? Name your price. They sold their souls, and I can’t help but hope that there is forgiveness and restoration even for them.

    When I think of how far down the road I was before God opened my eyes – and like Saul, I wasn’t really looking for it – I am reminded that many of us earnestly desire to do God’s work, and think that we are doing it even while we are terrorizing his people. I never wanted to hurt anyone, and certainly didn’t believe in murdering heretics, but how many did I stand silently by as they were ‘disciplined’ out of The Church? How difficult did I make it for my own children, with years of serving them the Koolaid so generously provided? And will my own battered and bedraggled marriage survive the decades-long onslaught of lies and deception?

    I prefer to think that most of us were naive victims, and that God views us with pity and mercy. We need to call out the system, The Organization, while attempting to redeem as many of its victims as possible. That seems, in my humble view, to be God’s way.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  210. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Like all those Pastors SCREAMING from the Pulpit about how much God Hates Divorce?

    Seriously. What is Patterson really talking about when he say “non-injurious physical abuse which happens in so many marriages”. Really????? Oxymoron much. [apparently this quote was also later fixed up to take out the ‘physical’ word]

    This is his statement ‘clearing it all up’ with the publicity people!!! This is the statement that made people believe everybody is lying about him?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  211. jyjames wrote:

    @ Lea:
    From that link, not satire:
    “But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.”

    Note that he hits EVERY major Christianese Culture War Snarl Word:
    ABORTION.
    HOMOSEXUALITY.
    EVOLUTION.
    HILLARY. (recent arrival)

    Any one of these sufficient to disable every neuron above the Christianese reptile brain and wave the Bright Red Murder Flag in front of what’s left.

    Two Minutes Hate.
    Stimulus –> Response. Stimulus –> Response.
    Pavlov would be proud.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  212. At the emergence of the CR, I belonged to two different SBC churches that allowed for women deacons (clearly liberal by CR’s standards). I had frequent occasions to visit other SBC churches of various degrees of conservatism (guest musician following the paychecks). The preaching in the two “liberal” churches was much more Biblical than much of the “I think what the Lord is saying here…” type sermons I heard in the most conservative churches. I couldn’t believe how much liberty was being taken with the scripture by pastors toting the “Inerrantist” line. Most of the posturing around “inerrancy” was, to use an officially sanctioned TWW term, codswallop.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  213. FW Rez wrote:

    Most of the posturing around “inerrancy” was, to use an officially sanctioned TWW term, codswallop.

    +1

    Also, I heard more yammering sermons than I could stand about golf games, and kids and other such things before I went ‘liberal’. Now they are mostly about bible passages. Imagine that.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  214. Dave A A wrote:

    Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:
    in 2013 Patterson said not to go to the secular authorities about abuse
    And his reason is— said secular authorities will go to hell and it’ll be YOUR damn fault.
    “and one more Christian home bites the dust in front of a civil judge, and one more judge walks out into eternity lost without Christ.”

    Uhm hum……… Paul Pressler???

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  215. @ Lea:
    Abuse is not always physical. And women are not always innocent. Anyone who has been married to or has worked closely with an NPD and other disorders can tell you it’s like living in a Black Op.

    I have always found it hard to believe that our Savior would prefer we stay in such a dark deceptive world and expose children to it than get out. You can pray all you want but if they don’t want to change nothing is going to happen.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  216. truthseeker00 wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    No wonder the conservative church is a total mess. These are terrible people.
    I wonder.
    At least, they probably did not start out as ‘terrible people’. They started out as decent people who loved God, their wives, their kids and set out to build his Kingdom on earth. And they fell into the well-laid trap, baited with whatever flavor of desire they found most irresistible. Power? Wealth? Fame? Sex? Name your price. They sold their souls, and I can’t help but hope that there is forgiveness and restoration even for them.
    When I think of how far down the road I was before God opened my eyes – and like Saul, I wasn’t really looking for it – I am reminded that many of us earnestly desire to do God’s work, and think that we are doing it even while we are terrorizing his people. I never wanted to hurt anyone, and certainly didn’t believe in murdering heretics, but how many did I stand silently by as they were ‘disciplined’ out of The Church? How difficult did I make it for my own children, with years of serving them the Koolaid so generously provided? And will my own battered and bedraggled marriage survive the decades-long onslaught of lies and deception?
    I prefer to think that most of us were naive victims, and that God views us with pity and mercy. We need to call out the system, The Organization, while attempting to redeem as many of its victims as possible. That seems, in my humble view, to be God’s way.

    It’s the truth, we just don’t know and can’t know where people stand before God, are they just fakes drawn to Christianity because it provides an excellent opportunity to abuse others and work out their sadistic natures or are they people who truly have the Holy Spirit, but got off track and lost their ability to discern up from down?

    Surely there are people from both camps featured here among the abusive leaders. At some point, though, it doesn’t really matter, as far as we’re concerned, because whether you have a genuine believer in Jesus who’s gotten horribly off track and does evil things or a genuinely evil person quite on track they intend and doing evil things, they still must be called out, exposed and themselves disciplined (and exposure on social media is a form of discipline in the modern church).

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  217. Lydia wrote:

    Anyone who has been married to or has worked closely with an NPD and other disorders can tell you it’s like living in a Black Op.

    And what is the modern (evangelical) Institutional Church but one, huge petrie dish culture for growing NPD men? That was what such a culture was designed to grow, and it succeeded. Take one NPD man, give him a naive, trusting flock to ‘rule over’ and you have the modern recipe for disaster called ‘Church’.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  218. Then, that NPD pastor can recreate, growing endless copies of himself in his flock. Voila! Patriarchy, the savior of the modern church rides in on its white horse, determined to elevate men and subjugate women; all supposedly, in the name of scripture.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  219. Max wrote:

    Ken A wrote:
    If he survives this and/or speaks at the convention, will any women ever attend a Southern Baptist Church again? Not if she is in her right mind she won’t.
    The oppression of women in the SBC is coming from two fronts: authoritarian “traditional” Southern Baptists like Patterson and the young restless and reformed with their “Biblical” manhood/womanhood mumbo-jumbo. Unless SBC men get in their right spiritual mind about this, SBC women are not in a good place to mature spiritually. There are, of course, exceptions to this in local churches … it just depends on individual church leadership. But right now, the SBC has a leadership crisis in its national hierarchy.

    And yet the bold PP seems to think it’s alright for his wife to teach, according to her own testimony.
    “I loved Northwest Arkansas. But when we went there, I was very young, and I was just out of seminary. I had a master’s, the Th.M., and I had probably had more preparation than a lot of pastors have. I had a heavy language background. I had five years of Greek and three years of Hebrew. So, I really was well grounded in my tools. But when I went to that church, there was a master Bible teacher who had been teaching women the Bible for a number of years. And I felt a lot of resentment, whether—and I’d have to say, it was pretty actual and not too much in my imagination. So, I did things in the church there. In fact, I taught college students a little later, and you know, I did a lot of hospitality. But I never taught women the Bible in that church. I wasn’t asked to lead in silent prayer in the WMU of that church. And I felt that resentment toward me. So, the only teaching—I laughingly say the only teaching I did of women really, while we were in Fayetteville, Arkansas, was at the public library. And I offered a seminar in womanhood just for the general public. I did it as kind of an outreach and just because I—I love teaching women. I didn’t think it was worth the battle. I didn’t think it was worth the risk of what harm it might do to our world ministry to come toe-to-toe. I did in Dallas, then. I ran into that again at one point. I started off—I did teach in Dallas, a class in the singles division. It was a class in which I felt very uncomfortable. I mean, it wasn’t what I would’ve chosen to teach, but they came to me. So, I taught a group of divorcees for a long time there. I was asked to do [general] Bible study one time for the women [of the church]. Only one time. Then again I ran into a situation where it just—it just wasn’t worth the risk to Paige’s ministry for me to be at a position where there would be resentment. So, I just backed away. And so then, I started—and so again, in Dallas I never did teach by my choice. I was asked several times, but I did not teach a large women’s Bible class or anything like that. I just did my ministry in local churches to women and I would occasionally—and, of course, I taught in the college—women there. But I did not do it in the church. So, in that sense, I did run into this resentment, and I did have to come, then, head-to-head with the issue. Well, you know, if you’re going to be resented because you have this theological education, you know, why do you think God would have you with that education and you can’t even use it?”
    http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/utils/getdownloaditem/collection/buioh/id/3373/filename/3374.pdf/mapsto/pdf

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  220. FWIW I cannot express how encouraged I am to see reasonable God-fearing people referring to the church as The Organization and doing the work to trace The Organization’s activity back through human history. Jesus’ interactions with The Organization are particularly interesting in this context. In my mind, this is a branch of critical thinking that is a few millenia overdue. I hope this thread makes history and I think it might.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  221. In my view, The Organization’s mission has and always will be to reap gains from God’s kingdom that were not intended (or only intended as possible blessings). The way they do that is by interpreting Scripture in a way that props them up and stabilizes their authority. Then they simply “make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God” A1519. Most of the difficulties, or course, do benefit The Organization.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  222. Sorry if this has already been mentioned. I think Rainer’s statement sums up a root of the problem with CBMW. He wants “us” to respect women and girls based on their relationship to men (mothers, wives, sisters, daughters). NO! Women and girls should be respected because they are humans. This is a human rights issue, not a women’s issue. Women are made in the image of God, just like men – Something that never seems to sink in with Owen Strachan. Patriarchy doesn’t end until men stop defining women in relation to themselves.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  223. Lea wrote:

    JDV wrote:
    She’s marketed the eastern-tinged mystical/new Agish prayer approach way beyond the sbc
    Have you read her studies or did you hear this from someone?

    I took this from the direct source of her own words in the be still DVD promoting contemplation, in which participants specify the differences between that and other prayer as well as articulating the eastern and mystical/new age roots of it. For Moore’s part, she cited the need to not lose the art of mediation as well as the concept of practicing God’s presence. The latter is not just from the DVD but in her 2002 book, a concept which she associated from Brother Lawrence (who is also listed in the DVD as part of the historical cloud of witnesses as it were of those from which this practice emanated (which is a verifiable who’s who of mystical/New Agish thought: Madame Guyon, Teresa of Avila, Julian of Norwich, Evelyn Underhill).

    The merits of these clouds of witnesses (sic) are also spoken of admiringly by DVD co-participants with Moore, Dallas Willard and Richard Foster, others who display quite an affinity for things mystical and New Agish there and in their own work. I haven’t taken one of her studies, but have seen them promoted in an sbc church and know of people taking them. As I suspect the new agish/mystical associations are probably downplayed if mentioned at all in said studies but are present elsewhere such as the book and DVD mentioned, that’s why I made the observations and comparisons I did upthread.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  224. From the SWBTS Statement on Abuse:

    “Because of the clarity of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s Statement on Abuse, we affirm that statement in its entirety and draw particular attention to the affirmation that “the local church and Christian ministries have a responsibility to establish safe environments; to execute policies and practices that protect against any form of abuse; to confront abusers and to protect the abused, which includes the responsibility to report abuse to the civil authorities.””

    I wonder how well that jibes with Patterson’s stated views of reporting church matters to “unbelievers”…

    https://tictocministries.wordpress.com/2018/05/02/lost-audio-paige-patterson-to-victims-dont-take-it-to-court-or-to-the-press-settle-it-in-the-church/

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  225. JDV wrote:

    which is a verifiable who’s who of mystical/New Agish thought: Madame Guyon, Teresa of Avila, Julian of Norwich, Evelyn Underhill

    Teresa of Avila is mystical/new age??
    JDV wrote:

    I haven’t taken one of her studies

    Thank you.

    I ask, because she mentions specifically a lot of people spreading ideas about her work who haven’t read any of it, which I thought was interesting because I have also heard these vague worries without specifics regarding her studies. This is different, of course, from people who have read her stuff and criticized it for various reasons which is obviously fine.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  226. JDV wrote:

    For Moore’s part, she cited the need to not lose the art of mediation as well as the concept of practicing God’s presence.

    I wouldn’t call myself a mystic but I don’t really have any problems with this. Although I’m not sure what ‘practicing gods presence’ is, I may have to investigate.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  227. Steve wrote:

    @ Lea:
    “‘practicing gods presence’ is, I may have to investigate”
    How would you go about this investigation?

    I suppose I would have to go back to whatever Beth Moore thing supposedly teaches this? Since we’re getting it second or third hand here…

    However, the thing it made me think of is the ‘real presence’ as relating to communion.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  228. @ Lowlandseer:

    I know nothing about her, but this makes me very sad for her. Imagine having that much education, training, and passion, and being rejected and resented because of genitalia? She wasn’t even asking to teach men, just women. What was PP’s reaction to the church’s rejection of his smart wife? I am half way through my MDiv and my husband is my biggest promoter. If this was happening in our church, he would quit.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  229. @ Steve:
    BTW, I tried to look up this thing about gods presence, and all I found was a bunch of people ranting about Catholicism as related to a monk hundreds of years ago…the complaints sound a lot like the things JDV mentioned. Interesting.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  230. @ Lea:
    Not to go down this trail too far but I think this illustrates how these people can say nonsensical things without being challenged. Is it possible for God to not be REALLY present anywhere and at any time whether I “practice” his presence or not. And Beth would have to be the one to teach me how to “practice” this because there’s nothing in the Bible about it. It’s gibberish at best and outright deceit at worst. But it sells.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  231. Lea wrote:

    JDV wrote:
    which is a verifiable who’s who of mystical/New Agish thought: Madame Guyon, Teresa of Avila, Julian of Norwich, Evelyn Underhill
    Teresa of Avila is mystical/new age??

    Per Harper’s Encyclopedia of Mystical & Paranormal Experience:

    “During her illness and convalescence, she took to daily mental prayers, which in turn led to her experiences with mystical prayer. She attributed her recovery to St. Joseph. In 1555 she experienced visions and revelations. In 1557, after a two year gap, she experienced her first ecstasy, when she felt carried out of herself. After that she had many extraordinary mystical experiences, including visions of Christ and a sense of his presence at her side…

    She spent long periods in intense meditation, which she called the “prayer of quiet” and the “prayer of union.” During these prayers she often fell into a trance, and at times entered upon mystical flights in which she felt as though her soul were lifted out of her body. She likened ecstasy to a “delectable death,” saying that the soul becomes awake to God as never before when the faculties and senses are “dead””.

    From Encyclopedia Americana:

    “In the midst of these cares she continued to mature spiritually and, in 1572, according to her own account, she was raised to ‘spiritual marriage,’ the highest stage of the spiritual life, through which the soul remains absorbed in God.”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  232. Lea wrote:

    JDV wrote:
    I haven’t taken one of her studies
    Thank you.
    I ask, because she mentions specifically a lot of people spreading ideas about her work who haven’t read any of it, which I thought was interesting because I have also heard these vague worries without specifics regarding her studies. This is different, of course, from people who have read her stuff and criticized it for various reasons which is obviously fine.

    Which was why my original comment regarding her — “She’s marketed the eastern-tinged mystical/new Agish prayer approach way beyond the sbc” — didn’t reference a study but was referring to a specific approach showcased in what I was familiar with, which was the dvd I’d had direct experience with.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  233. Steve wrote:

    My point is that it’s just his method.

    I agree. I think Jesus’ words “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” are evidence of His presence with us. I think we are to live consistent with that fact.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  234. Steve wrote:

    And Beth would have to be the one to teach me how to “practice” this because there’s nothing in the Bible about it. It’s gibberish at best and outright deceit at worst. But it sells.

    I’m not sure she even said it…so much as maybe referenced some monk hundreds of years ago. Maybe.

    It seems like tenuous connections mostly.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  235. Steve wrote:

    How would you go about this investigation?

    Well, first familiarize yourself with some of the ideas, practices and vocabulary of various strains of christian tradition. Then, when somebody says something like ‘contemplation’ or ‘contemplative prayer’ you ask yourself is they are using a specific term from a different strain of christian tradition or if they are saying something entirely different.

    For example, Catholicism uses some words in ways which I never heard as a Baptist. For example: ‘intention’. That specific word has nothing to do with the present conversation but I am using it as an example of how words have different meanings depending on which brand of christian dialect one is speaking. ‘Contemplation’ does not mean Einstein concentrating on some idea trying to make sense of it, for another example. Someone brought up ‘real presence’ and someone brought up ‘practice of..’. The list goes on.

    At the same time the Pentecostal/Charismatic segment of christianity has its own customs and vocabulary. I am less familiar with them, but I can rather frequently spot in a conversation someone who is using a style of thinking which I think is P/C; like how Jesus talks to them as understood in actual words. Example: if someone says they prayed about something until they ‘had peace about it’ they might be a fundamentalist style Baptist or even just a plain ole Baptist of long ago, but if somebody announced that Jesus spoke to them this morning and they understood it to be or else to be understandable in actual words they can quote, that person might be a Pentecostal/Charismatic. Then there are those who would only quote some scripture fragment and they are yet using a different style.

    Vocabulary. Style. And frankly I do not think it is nonsensical at all, merely different and sometimes quite historical actually. Now IMO historical does not necessarily mean true or practical, merely old.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  236. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lea:
    Lol. I don’t feel sorry for Beth, though. She milked that system. Millions.

    It’s not that I feel sorry for Beth now, although I absolutely can feel sorrow for a younger Beth going to seminary and finding she wasn’t wanted.

    But her comments about sexism? Dead on. And that P&P guy is just proving her point – which was my point 😉

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  237. Preacher’s Wife wrote:

    Patriarchy doesn’t end until men stop defining women in relation to themselves.

    Amen. Jesus defined women in relationship to Himself: “In Christ’s family there can be no division into Jew and non-Jew, slave and free, male and female. Among us you are all equal. That is, we are all in a common relationship with Jesus Christ.” (Galatians 3:28)

    Only where that is occurring will you find the true Body of Christ. Everything else is just doing church without God.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  238. okrapod wrote:

    Vocabulary. Style.

    Yes. This is what I am seeing at first glance.

    And as I said, tenuous links that are derided as eastern meditation, but mostly seem to end up with the catholics. Interesting.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  239. Lydia wrote:

    Lol. I don’t feel sorry for Beth, though. She milked that system. Millions.

    Quite. And now she seems to be saying that how come she as a huge rain maker is not getting the same respect as some who have done far less $$$ and crowds than she has done. She is certainly correct that this is gender based, and for some it may be based on the idea that teaching women is not as important as teaching men never mind the crowds and the $$$, and she has been honest about her lack of official education, but none the less she has experienced bias. It is good that she is saying this now either way.

    I respect her for speaking out about this.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  240. okrapod wrote:

    At the same time the Pentecostal/Charismatic segment of christianity has its own customs and vocabulary.

    I think the church I grew up in was SBC but a bit ‘bapticostal’, so these things don’t seem so odd to me when I see them.

    But I love how that one guy was angrily accusing Beth of flirting with both Charismatic and Egalitarian principles. Quelle Horreur!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  241. okrapod wrote:

    for some it may be based on the idea that teaching women is not as important as teaching men

    Absolutely it is. The order of importance in these quarters is:

    Men
    Women
    Children

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  242. Lea wrote:

    And as I said, tenuous links that are derided as eastern meditation, but mostly seem to end up with the catholics. Interesting.

    Contemplative prayer is a form of mysticism and can be investigated from the Catholic viewpoint. There is nothing tenuous about the links between the two. Contemplative prayer has been much cussed and discussed in protestant circles rather lately. Opinions as to the permissibility of mysticism within christian practice and particularly protestantism are varied.

    In my opinion it is one thing to venture into mysticism within a system with a long history of it and with an experienced spiritual advisor but quite another to take it up as a venture unaided and unguided. Rather like lifting weights at the gym without a trainer-people can get hurt like that.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  243. okrapod wrote:

    There is nothing tenuous about the links between the two.

    Let me clarify, I meant the links with Beth Moore are tenuous, not between mysticism and Catholicism. (although I would ask if this type of Catholicism would be counted as ‘eastern mysticism’) It is interesting because here we are believing, ostensibly, in God and miracles and burning bushes. Where does prayer cross over into contemplative or meditative. Where does ‘wherever two or more are gathered there I am’ turn into weirdness at someone saying God was present? It is interesting.

    But what I would ask is at what point do we start drawing lines and saying ‘not our kind dear’. Those lines seem to be drawn much closer for some than for others.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  244. @ Lea:

    That P&P article was terrifying! I’ve never been a fan of Moore, but the anger this man feels is disturbing and sets off all sorts of red flags. Gross.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  245. Lea wrote:

    I think the church I grew up in was SBC but a bit ‘bapticostal’, so these things don’t seem so odd to me when I see them.

    If I recall Max has characterized himself that way also. The way I grew up Baptist partly at church but mostly at home was not remotely any kind of ‘costal’ which was rather a pity. Too many fixed boundaries and too little understandings.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  246. okrapod wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    And as I said, tenuous links that are derided as eastern meditation, but mostly seem to end up with the catholics. Interesting.
    Contemplative prayer is a form of mysticism and can be investigated from the Catholic viewpoint. There is nothing tenuous about the links between the two. Contemplative prayer has been much cussed and discussed in protestant circles rather lately. Opinions as to the permissibility of mysticism within christian practice and particularly protestantism are varied.
    In my opinion it is one thing to venture into mysticism within a system with a long history of it and with an experienced spiritual advisor but quite another to take it up as a venture unaided and unguided. Rather like lifting weights at the gym without a trainer-people can get hurt like that.

    And that’s a primary issue for me, which is being up front about what is being promoted/encouraged. So much of the contemplative prayer push that I’ve encountered starts with a packaging of this as being a “new” approach to living out one’s faith walk. A couple of seminars and DVDs past it being “new”, there’s discussion about it actually being not new but part of Christian history (some orthodox — small ‘o’, some not; the be still DVD speaks of the ‘desert fathers’, some of who would live on platforms to be more spiritual and less material).

    As some of the paths offered beyond that go off on the gnostic realms, discernment is needed when “new” or “traditional” approaches are packaged, whether it’s secret knowledge regarding prayer or marks of church discipline and earthly spiritual authoritarianism.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  247. Lea wrote:

    primary

    Her references in her books to Brennan Manning as someone whose contributions to this generation of believers may be an unparalleled gift connect to someone with more than a tenuous connection to the Eastern centering practices, especially through his appreciation of Thomas Merton. People can go back and forth about the worth, but as I’ve said, it’s always worth examining what is being packaged and presented in case it may involve a measure of repackaging of an established trail.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  248. Steve wrote:

    “‘practicing gods presence’ is, I may have to investigate”
    How would you go about this investigation?

    This is a a very good question. And a very old one. It turns out that Christianity has a rich and ancient tradition of “contemplative prayer” and experiencing the presence of God. Both Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox share this very old tradition. Since I have not seen Orthodoxy mentioned yet, here is one example: https://www.orthodoxroad.com/an-unholy-identity-crisis/#more-938. Whether or not this practice is right is another questions. But it is certainly not new to Christianity. For myself, right now I am more interested in learning about the ancient practices rather than for new discoveries.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  249. @ Lea:
    Because there can be no middle ground between refusing to acknowledge a woman and flirting with her. That is truly pathetic and one more indicator of how skewed this all is. Plain women of the world rejoice! These men are eager to visit with you!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  250. Deborah wrote:

    Plain women of the world rejoice! These men are eager to visit with you!

    HA! They’re not though. You’re either interesting because of looks so they can’t talk to you, or they don’t find your looks interesting so they don’t talk to you.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  251. @ Steve:
    I was thinking today that the church culture I was raised in, with many fine traits and people, was the most spiritually and emotionally dangerous environment I have experienced-aside from my long “Christian” marriage. And I was “scared of the WORLD!…”

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  252. @ Lea:
    Always a reason that is completely viewed through the lens of what is best for them, isn’t there? I was being completely facetious. Hard days these are for my tongue. It is firmly locked in my cheek or bitten almost to a stub.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  253. Ken F (aka Tweed) wrote:

    For myself, right now I am more interested in learning about the ancient practices rather than for new discoveries.

    Yes. But I have no intention of trying them all out, like self flagellation for instance or any other type of self inflicted and optional pain. Glad folks gave up castration along the way. Severe fasting. Public humiliation. Inadequate clothing and shelter. Isolation. Quite a history back in the day there. But interesting to read about.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  254. Oh my. The mail just came and suddenly I have hope for the world. Trader Joe wants to sell me organic persian cucumbers along with the mini lecture that it really is a fruit don’t you know.

    Sorry for the distraction. I will hush.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  255. Bridget wrote:

    Dumbed down.

    As I said, I haven’t read her stuff, aside from the recent blog/twitter stuff.

    Dumbed down is quite different from dangerous heretic, though. I haven’t seen anything that is actually hurtful in the way that ‘go back and get beaten again’ is hurtful. Some light comp I disagree with maybe.

    Russell Moore has written a very pro Beth twitter thing too (in addition to the ‘yes you can divorce for abuse’). It’s really interesting to watch the lines being drawn. [And disturbing to read the pro abuse stuff in his twitter timeline]

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  256. Lea wrote:

    [And disturbing to read the pro abuse stuff in his twitter timeline]

    I meant the comments to his stance on divorce, just to clarify. Not from him.

    I haven’t forgotten the patriarchy thing. But it’s still interesting.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  257. drstevej wrote:

    I like fried okra.

    Okra if left on the stem past the best time to pick gets too tough to fry. But if you like friend okra then you may have better success with too-old-to-fry okras than some folks do.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  258. okrapod wrote:

    But I have no intention of trying them all out, like self flagellation for instance or any other type of self inflicted and optional pain.

    This the trouble with church – it’s always been a mixed bag. The point is the “Eastern” approach to Christianity is actually quite old and traditional. Just because something does not appeal to Protestant senses does not mean it is unchristian in the historical sense. I think you understand this, but few Protestants I have met do.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  259. @ okrapod:
    It seems i always learn from you comments. Thanks
    It is very important to understand what a person means by what they say. We can go on and on in conversation with someone and never understand each other, yet think we do.
    Are you sure you are not a professor in some higher institution of learning? You think on a different level than most people.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  260. BM sounds an awful lot like a thought leader desperately trying to keep her position:

    “Oh, all those years I went along, made millions, shared the podium with those guys – I really was mistreated and I feel all our pain. Oh, and thanks to all those really fine Misogynists who were my personal leaders, who of course were not guilty of any of the bad stuff. And yeah, I really wanted to speak up for all women everywhere all those times I felt myself being mistreated, but not at the risk of my money, fame etc. But now that it’s an issue, I’m going to vent. Cause I am just one of you. Only prettier.”

    Sorry, I don’t buy it. When people live the lie for years and years, then jump on the bandwagon once it can no longer be stopped – I’m sorta doubting their sincerity.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  261. I’m just wondering when we are ever going to stop believing words and start judging people according to how they actually live. Haven’t we learned – after all of this – that a person can SAY anything?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  262. @ truthseeker00:
    I think your reading of Beth is completely off. This is not just now an issue, just because she is now speaking about it. And I don’t think she is doing it for personal gain, that is uncharitable.

    She says she gave people the benefit of the doubt for a while. I have done that too. And then something happens and you see the truth. You claim to be ‘seeking’ truth, should she have stayed silent? No.

    Of course, if she had mentioned it years ago she might have been drummed out. That doesn’t negate the truth of what she says, if anything it confirms it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  263. Ken A wrote:

    Are you sure you are not a professor in some higher institution of learning? You think on a different level than most people.

    No, but I am homeschooling one of my grandchildren who is a sixth grader. I am doing the math, science and social studies while her mom oversees the language arts. No doubt at all in my mind that this experience influences how I think and talk. And may I say for the worse. I used to be a lot easier person to deal with.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  264. Ken A wrote:

    Are you sure you are not a professor in some higher institution of learning? You think on a different level than most people.

    I concur with your kind words to Okrapod, but for goodness sakes, pick a higher intellectual class of people than professors.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  265. Ken F (aka Tweed) wrote:

    The point is the “Eastern” approach to Christianity is actually quite old and traditional. Just because something does not appeal to Protestant senses does not mean it is unchristian in the historical sense. I think you understand this, but few Protestants I have met do.

    If I weren’t such a semi-Voltaireian free-thinker and all round’ free spirit, I’d have probably tried the EO thing by now.

    I’m told that there are many former fundagelicals who’ve gone EO.
    Last I heard, Papa Chuck (founder of Calvary Chapel) has a son who went EO.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  266. Law Prof wrote:

    pick a higher intellectual class of people than professors.

    There is no higher calling than for those who know to share what they know, which is what you do and even get paid for it. You are fortunate and so are your students. I never had anybody even listen to me before TWW, that is outside of my profession. If I made some pronouncement as to whether something fell on which side of some line as either a normal variant or early pathology some people believed me way beyond what they should. But if I said that Jesus was a Jew, for example, they just wrote me off as some nut case. You people at TWW have been God’s gift to me as I deal with this other situation in my life. I have in fact told Him that I really noted how clever He really is with that sort of thing-what you need when you need it. Probably something about I am with you always, the expanded version.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  267. @ Lea:

    I agree. I thought it was pretty bold of her to state that the men were just using 2 Timothy to try to excuse their own sin. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard a prominent evangelical say that. BM is not a change agent or a revolutionary; from the letter I get the impression she had a mission as a young woman and just kept her head down and focused. Her experience sounds really familiar.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  268. Lydia wrote:

    Lol. I don’t feel sorry for Beth, though. She milked that system. Millions.

    “In the Seance, the Shaman leads; a sensuous panic…”
    — From Oliver Stone’s film The Doors

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  269. @ Lea:

    “It is interesting because here we are believing, ostensibly, in God and miracles and burning bushes. Where does prayer cross over into contemplative or meditative. Where does ‘wherever two or more are gathered there I am’ turn into weirdness at someone saying God was present?”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    to believe the bible in all its inerrancy and infallibility as it describes the God of the Universe in all God’s awesomeness and power and miracles and presence that people see and hear and tremble and fall back and glow because of it….

    but then expect to feel nothing? a generic nothing feeling is the only acceptable standard? equating the spiritual only with the cerebral?

    houston, i think we have a logic problem.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  270. @ okrapod:
    I don’t view her as a victim or a role model. I might have been impressed if she would’ve said it in the hey day of speaking tours and bible studies being published faster than mega book stores could stock them. 🙂

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  271. okrapod wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    pick a higher intellectual class of people than professors.
    There is no higher calling than for those who know to share what they know, which is what you do and even get paid for it. You are fortunate and so are your students. I never had anybody even listen to me before TWW, that is outside of my profession. If I made some pronouncement as to whether something fell on which side of some line as either a normal variant or early pathology some people believed me way beyond what they should. But if I said that Jesus was a Jew, for example, they just wrote me off as some nut case. You people at TWW have been God’s gift to me as I deal with this other situation in my life. I have in fact told Him that I really noted how clever He really is with that sort of thing-what you need when you need it. Probably something about I am with you always, the expanded version.

    God bless you. You always speak wisdom even if I don’t agree.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  272. @ truthseeker00:
    That is where I am. I guess you could say it bothers me a lot because most of the people I have dealt with in these situations are not well heeled financially and it is huge a strain financially, socially, and emotionally on their lives to even think about speaking up. From sexual harassment to right out right abuse . Then here comes these well-heeled professional women who’ve had a platform for years, benefited from that system and never said a word NOW jumping on a popular bandwagon. You could say it rubs me the wrong way based on what I have seen for 30 years.

    I just look at it differently. I am an underdog person. Always have been.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  273. @ Ken F (aka Tweed):
    I think the brouhaha on BM comes from the “Be Still” dvd she did with quite a few other people. It was quite the talk of Christian blogosphere around 2006 or so. I think she was a well known face to Baptist and other Protestants and it was not her normal fare so did not go over well. Between that and the situation with her adoption, things started to go downhill. Another casualty of living a public Christian ministry life. .

    The problem I see with this sort of thing is it isn’t really transferable. I am open minded about it (think Quaker, too) but resistant to someone teaching it to me. Sort of like the Holy Spirit. We can talk about the HS but it’s not transferable like talking about scripture interpretation.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  274. @ okrapod:
    I don’t buy produce at Trader Joe’s because have not had good experiences. But they have excellent selections in their frozen organic vegetarian category for the family herbivore. (No one here is eating lettuce because of hepatitis outbreak.)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  275. @ Lydia:

    Since I am not a frozen organic vegetarian herbivore the Trader and I have not found much in common. I still think that pork chops and gravy are as good as it gets on the planet. That would be plain ole hogs and pan milk gravy. It might shorten one’s life but nothing’s perfect.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  276. okrapod wrote:

    Ken A wrote:
    Are you sure you are not a professor in some higher institution of learning? You think on a different level than most people.
    No, but I am homeschooling one of my grandchildren who is a sixth grader. I am doing the math, science and social studies while her mom oversees the language arts. No doubt at all in my mind that this experience influences how I think and talk. And may I say for the worse. I used to be a lot easier person to deal with.

    I have the deepest respect for all home schoolers. Kids who have homeschooling parents and grandparents may never understand just what a gift they have received. And yet most home school parents and grandparents never consider that. They just do it. Out of love.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  277. Steve wrote:

    I’m wondering why anyone would “go to church” this Sunday. Especially any woman

    To be fair, this seems to be a stream of Christianity that preaches this level of misogyny. My wife’s a devout Christian and I was one as well.
    I never heard a sermon on male headship in any church I attended so for all the struggle I’ve had with faith, blatant misogyny wasn’t part of it.
    It is important to get the word out. Those trapped in abusive situations often feel alone. In that regard the internet can be a wonderful tool.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  278. Law Prof wrote:

    I do give two beans what the Bible says. And I don’t think it can be fairly read in context to state that are better than women, or greater than women, or anything of the sort.

    And there’s the magic word “context”. The bible represents the time in which it was written.
    It seems guys like Patterson focus on the old testament, not the gospels. Because the old testament tells them what they want to hear.
    Jesus doesn’t.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  279. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t buy produce at Trader Joe’s because have not had good experiences.

    I tried their organic ‘carrots of many colors’ and got one of the worst cases of the $#it$ I’ve ever had, even though they were in the steamer for a good long time.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  280. Muslin fka Deana Holmes wrote:

    And yeah, he fired a caterer who is a student because the student tweeted Ed Stetzer’s article.

    I’m reminded how Driscoll fired/encouraged to resign 8 of the 9 elders who stood up to him in August of ’14, just before he let the door hit him in the… er just before god told him a twap was set and inspired him to move to AZ.
    And those guys had to fend for themselves. I think a couple planted a new church– but the guys who stayed loyal to the bitter end got buildings and start-up money.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  281. Lowlandseer wrote:

    “Today there is a war against boys … you’ve got to make little girls out of your little boys,” Patterson said.”

    Hmm. I bet, like many conservative critics of feminism, he’s the sort of guy who also says feminism is wrong because all feminists portray all women as being victims, and yet:

    You Say You’re Against Victimhood Culture Yet You Depict All Men As Victims
    https://missdaisyflower.wordpress.com/2018/02/09/%E2%80%A2-you-say-youre-against-victimhood-culture-yet-you-depict-all-men-as-victims/

    Often, I see critics of feminism who decry its arguments, about how women are treated unfairly in some settings, mock it as being “victim-hood” culture, turn around and also claim that boys and men are the “real” victims in culture.

    So, these types of conservatives like victim-hood status when it suits their world views or arguments.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  282. okrpod wrote:

    but I for one do think that when culture talks about toxic masculinity and then seems to run to extremes

    I’m a conservative. Most conservatives do not understand what the phrase “toxic masculinity” really means.

    Many conservatives who attack that concept end up writing long blog posts attacking a straw man.

    (It does not mean that masculinity is toxic. That is misconception Number One most conservatives hold.)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  283. Lea wrote:

    Honestly, watching the video was worse for me because you had a mother trying to teach her son to respect this girl and a male preacher saying ‘nope/boys will be boys’. SO gross.

    I just finished re-reading “Why Does He Do That,” a book about domestic violence by DV expert Lundy Bancroft, and Patterson is doing the VERY THING that Bancroft advises theologians and others NOT TO DO.

    Rather than teaching boys to be respectful of girls and to view them as full human beings (not as sex objects), which Bancroft says culture and cultural leaders should be doing, Patterson was encouraging the very opposite – which, as Bancroft explains, contributes to our culture domestic violence problem.

    Bancroft lays it all out in his book, in the chapter on ‘Where and how abusive men learn to be abusive to women,’ and that chapter addresses media (movies, video games, etc.), role modeling boys see in their families, as well as the sort of thing preachers say.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  284. Deborah wrote:

    Sòpwith wrote:
    “In this day and age, people don’t stand and applaud men who treat women as second-class citizens unless you wish to die a swift and sudden organizational death.”-Wade Burlison

    (Deborah said),
    Was that recent? It seems especially untrue considering Hybels and Savage.

    I would take it Wade likely means everyone but for evangelical, Neo Calvinist, or Southern Baptists who are all still living in their little respective bubbles.

    For anyone else, these guys look like tone-deaf sexists.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  285. Max wrote:

    Did you see the piece over at SBC Today: “Patterson Sides with God and Bible Over Backslidden Bloggers”? The lines are being drawn.

    Even the most conservative biblical inerrantist doesn’t always agree with other equally conservative biblical inerrantists on all biblical passages and verses.

    What good is believing in, or having, an inerrant biblical translation, if your fellow inerrantists don’t agree with you on each and every point?

    And then what is the point in dismissing anyone as being “liberal” who doesn’t share your particular interpretation of that same Bible, since other conservative inerrantists disagree with you on that same topic or on others as well?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  286. Lea wrote:

    Is this a satirical piece?

    I glanced it over quickly. The author appears to be serious. If you disagree with Paige Patterson on any of this, he will feel you are a liberal who doesn’t take the Bible seriously or as being inerrant. Hence my comment above to Max about this.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  287. jyjames wrote:

    From that link, not satire:
    “But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.”

    As a conservative person (politically and otherwise), I’m way more concerned with how Christians such as Patterson and churches cover up domestic violence or justify it, and how they create an environment ripe for it vis a vis their terrible complementarian teachings, than I am with…

    A pastor being pro- Hillary or believers in evolution.

    I’d rather have a pro-evolution yet anti- Domestic Violence pastor in the pulpit than vice versa, I think.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  288. Lea wrote:

    I think this is where people have been, trying to argue the scriptures. The truth is, these men don’t care about that. Not really. If they cared about women they would be looking at the bible and reading things in a way that was most charitable to them, that was most loving. They aren’t. That’s because they are deeply misogynistic. I have no interest in hearing their take on the scriptures, because it is filtered through bad men.

    This is pretty much my view as well.

    There are plenty of conservative Christians who have written books and blog posts showing that there are equally plausible, conservative ways of understanding the same clobber verses that complementarians love to use to limit women, which demonstrate that the Bible is not saying women cannot or should not lead and teach.

    And yet, complementarians keep wanting to choose the least- charitable interpretation(s) that keep the men in charge.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  289. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    Racism bad!
    Misogyny ???? Meh.

    Another very big pet peeve of mine with complementarians.

    Most of them will condemn racism (which they should do, of course), but they either defend sexism tooth and nail, try to paint complementarianism as being beneficial to women (no, it’s not, it’s sexism), or, some of them just shrug their shoulders at sexism.

    It’s frustrating to see how they are willing to see how wrong racism is, but its equivalent (sexism), they see nothing wrong with it, or it’s not worthy of condemning.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  290. Lea wrote:

    Have you read her studies or did you hear this from someone?

    I participated in one Beth Moore Bible study at a local church a few years ago (it lasted for a few weeks), but I don’t remember there being anything New Age or Far Eastern about it.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  291. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    PP certainly didn’t hesitate to throw a few people under the bus.

    Mark Driscoll is among Kings of those who throw former partners under the bus.

    I think one of the Mars Hills survivor blogs used to call itself “Thrown Under The Bus,” or they had a bus as their logo or what not??

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  292. Lea wrote:

    There was a guy on twitter responding to somebody (moore maybe?) trying to figure out how much beating his wife was ok. How many slaps, how many backhands…

    The Bancroft books gets into that. He explains that in some states or cities that one poke, one slap, or one shove can land a guy in legal trouble for DV, and a lot of abusive men are shocked when the cops haul him away for a poke, slap, or shove. All of that stuff is physical assault.

    That’s all legally. From a personal stand point, Bancroft explains that if something becomes a pattern with a guy.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  293. @ truthseeker00:
    Is there some verse in the Bible that says if a Christian divorces, God revokes his or her salvation and sends him or her to hell?

    I don’t think there is, so I don’t know why so many people trapped in abusive marriages keep caving into the severe anti-divorce messages people like Patterson spout off. Ignore the Pattersons and do what YOU think is right for YOU.

    Is there some Bible verse that says that Divorce is the one and only UNFORGIVABLE sin? No, I don’t think so. So, if you’re unhappy in your marriage – if it’s loveless or abusive, and you’d like to divorce, then divorce.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  294. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Cartmans from South Park — boymaster/momservant dynamic where everything revolves around Cartman’s convenience.

    This summarizes a big chunk of the book by Bancroft on domestic abuse. A lot of men are abusive because of all the goodies it nabs them. They are loathe to give up their abusive ways, because they have this wife they control who is at their beck and call. The wife meets all the abusive husband’s needs, but he doesn’t meet any of hers. The wife is a slave or servant in this sort of marriage. That is one large factor of why so many men abuse their wives (according to Bancroft).

    And, I was startled as I was re-reading his book (entitled,”Why Does He Do That?”) at how similar the teachings of Christian gender complementarianism are (that attempt to justify or rationalize one-way servitude of females to males) with how abusive men think, act, and justify their abuse of their wives.

    Many of the same tactics, thinking patterns, and entitled attitudes are present between complementarians and abusive husbands.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  295. Lea wrote:

    Seriously. What is Patterson really talking about when he say “non-injurious physical abuse which happens in so many marriages”. Really????? Oxymoron much. [apparently this quote was also later fixed up to take out the ‘physical’ word]

    To me it reads as a guy like Patterson might (MIGHT!) recognize that physical abuse is “real” abuse, but he would quibble and say that consistent verbal or emotional abuse is not “real” abuse (but it is).

    The ‘Cry for Justice’ blog had a review months ago about a book by some guy (who also posted a You Tube video) about how his wife divorced him after 20 years of marriage, because of his recurrent emotional and verbal abuse.

    She had had enough of the constant put downs, barbs, and whatever other verbal abuse tactics he had been using, and she left him.

    I’ve said this before on this blog, but.

    You can teach this “no divorce at all, no not ever” crud as much as you want to, but at the end of the day, even the most naive, overly sensitive Christian woman (who wants to please God, and who trusts a male pastor’s biblical interpretation more than her own), WILL get sick and tired after X years of abuse and say to herself,

    “You know what, I don’t care if divorce is “anti biblical,” or if God never permits divorce, I’m divorcing this clown who’s been abusing me. I can’t take any more.”

    This sure applies to other areas, too. I remember for years having Christians tell me face to face, or in books, that it was wrong and un-biblical for me to use anti-depressant meds or to see psychiartists. (I was supposed to ‘rely only on the Lord’ to cope with the depression.)

    But when my anxiety and depression got really bad (and prayer and faith was not working to treat it), I no longer cared about what was “godly” or “biblical.”

    I was suffering and needed relief. And if an atheist had offered me some kind of cure – I would’ve taken it.

    I don’t know how to articulate it, but when you are suffering, in pain, or your misery is unbearable, you WILL willingly chuck all your “biblical” ideals out the window for healing or relief.
    I think this point is greatly under-appreciated by the clowns who teach “no divorce,” or others who teach “all worldly treatments are bad” type views.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  296. FW Rez wrote:

    The preaching in the two “liberal” churches was much more Biblical than much of the “I think what the Lord is saying here…” type sermons I heard in the most conservative churches. I couldn’t believe how much liberty was being taken with the scripture by pastors toting the “Inerrantist” line.

    I see this a lot in complementarian writing. Most comps claim to be inerrantists, say that non-comps have been influenced by secular / feminist culture, but some of them make up view points willy nilly and claim they are “biblical.”

    John Piper seems pretty bad about this. He’s all the time saying God would not approve of women doing X, Y, or Z, but he does not offer any Scriptural support for any of that. He just takes his personal preferences and tries to pass them off as being compatible with the Bible. And he also wants us to believe he takes the Bible seriously / literally.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  297. Lydia wrote:

    And women are not always innocent.

    According to sources I see, while men can be victims of DV at the hands of a female partners, the male to female numbers are higher.

    Complementarianism benefits male abusers far more. It provides them with ready-made justifications for why they can control / abuse their wives. They also get the backing of their male pastors and male elders.

    I don’t see abusive wives being able to leverage complementarian teachings to abuse their husbands, as husbands do with wives.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  298. Lea wrote:

    But her comments about sexism? Dead on. And that P&P guy is just proving her point – which was my point

    I agree. Regardless of how one feels about Moore’s beliefs or the content of her teaching, she’s been the object of sexism by male Christians for years. Which is not cool.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  299. Preacher’s Wife wrote:

    Patriarchy doesn’t end until men stop defining women in relation to themselves.

    Also what abusive men do to their wives, as described by Bancroft in his book “Why Does He Do That.” Abusers don’t view their wives as their own persons, equal partners, but as their possessions.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  300. Daisy wrote:

    John Piper seems pretty bad about this. He’s all the time saying God would not approve of women doing X, Y, or Z, but he does not offer any Scriptural support for any of that. He just takes his personal preferences and tries to pass them off as being compatible with the Bible. And he also wants us to believe he takes the Bible seriously / literally.

    He does this all the time – and his tribe seems to thrive on it. He is horribly inconsistent in his teaching, but his followers think he is deep.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  301. Lydia wrote:

    I have heard from a few folks that Wade is moderating. He wouldn’t even do that during the velour debacle.

    Velour…now there’s a name I haven’t seen in quite awhile!

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  302. This is going to sound a bit insensitive, but would it really be such a bad thing if the SBC just fell to pieces over this entire Patterson debacle and ended up disbanding? Whatever it was in the past – and I hear some folks talking about the good ole days before the CS – it no longer is even a shadow of its former self. It has morphed into something entirely different.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  303. @ Daisy:
    I mentioned that it wasn’t usually “physical” abuse by females and agree the male to female numbers are higher. I don’t agree that females are more virtuous simply by being female.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  304. @ Muff Potter:
    Yikes. Scary stuff because the problems here are linked to healthier fare. Romaine lettuce out of AZ, as one example. Here the hepatitis outbreak has even been linked with some restaurant employees like Panera.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  305. okrapod wrote:

    You people at TWW have been God’s gift to me as I deal with this other situation in my life.

    Bless you, okrapod. I have really enjoyed your perspective on all these things.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  306. Lydia wrote:

    @ truthseeker00:
    That is where I am. I guess you could say it bothers me a lot because most of the people I have dealt with in these situations are not well heeled financially and it is huge a strain financially, socially, and emotionally on their lives to even think about speaking up. From sexual harassment to right out right abuse . Then here comes these well-heeled professional women who’ve had a platform for years, benefited from that system and never said a word NOW jumping on a popular bandwagon. You could say it rubs me the wrong way based on what I have seen for 30 years.

    I just look at it differently. I am an underdog person. Always have been.

    But here is the thing Lydia…yes Beth Moore is speaking from a privileged position. She has her status and her fans and money.

    But sometimes those are the people who desperately need to use their voices on behalf of people who still cant! People who might lose jobs and livelihoods forever.

    She also has enough of a presence for people to listen. Maybe she can reach women in church who have seen it and been going along. That is what I respect.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  307. Steve wrote:

    https://flyingfreenow.com/message-baptist-church-preached-death-women/

    I’m wondering why anyone would “go to church” this Sunday. Especially any woman.

    I am done with churches that don’t treat women as equal. There are some that do.

    These stats in this article (and I don’t know where she got then) are instructive, when people crow about divorce:

    ‘Did you know that the top three reasons these women give for initiating divorce are 1. Spousal adultery 2. Spousal addiction 3. Spousal abuse?

    Did you know that of the men who initiate divorce in “Christian” marriages, the number ONE reason is infidelity? Their own?’

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  308. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t agree that females are more virtuous simply by being female.

    Not more virtuous, but generally speaking far less violent. Society wide not just in relationships.

    I do think that we could get into nature/nurture…power dynamics matter and we can breed men into more selfish and less virtuous creatures by teaching them that they matter more Than women. That’s what’s comp stuff does and it isn’t healthy.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  309. Jack wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:

    I do give two beans what the Bible says. And I don’t think it can be fairly read in context to state that are better than women, or greater than women, or anything of the sort.

    And there’s the magic word “context”. The bible represents the time in which it was written.
    It seems guys like Patterson focus on the old testament, not the gospels. Because the old testament tells them what they want to hear.
    Jesus doesn’t.

    Exactly. They don’t acknowledge that the Lord was speaking to people in a particular place and time, was (for whatever reason) working within the paradigm of the cultures as they existed and telling people their true kingdom was in Him, not in changing the world so much. In that way, (again, for whatever reasons that are far, far above my pay grade) the Lord is definitely not a cultural warrior out to set the world right. He allowed things to exist among the ancients that I’d have not allowed (though who am I to say what’s right and wrong?), He seems to be more interested in our hearts being right with Him and us changing the immediate world around us than reforming the institutions and systems of the world. So, fascinatingly, He tells His people in the New Testament to submit to the Roman Empire and other authorities over them that were anything but just.

    But you’re right, to find a world they like, the smug, misogynistic braggarts have to go back a few millenia to a world where women were possessions and men ruled by sheer force. That the Lord didn’t overturn all those institutions back then is His business, but one can certainly assume based on the way He treated women as He walked among us that He didn’t think that nonsense was right—but nevermind, if Mr. Patterson wants to stuff his face like the days of Roman decadence, hunt big game like Papa Hemmingway, leer at underage hotties who are “stacked” and generally act like a deranged hun in the name of Jesus, let him go at it. One day he’ll be speaking with that Jesus face-to-face.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  310. Daisy wrote:

    It’s frustrating to see how they are willing to see how wrong racism is, but its equivalent (sexism), they see nothing wrong with it, or it’s not worthy of condemning.

    Because they’re not Personally Benefiting from Racism and they ARE Personally Benefiting from Sexism.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  311. Law Prof wrote:

    if Mr. Patterson wants to stuff his face like the days of Roman decadence, hunt big game like Papa Hemingway, leer at underage hotties who are “stacked” and generally act like a deranged hun in the name of Jesus, let him go at it.

    If he REALLY wants to be like Papa Hemingway, he should be living in a beach cabin in the Caribbean with about a dozen six-toed cats, spending his mornings at a typewriter bombed on cheap Scotch and his evenings shooting sharks in the surf with a submachine gun.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  312. Ken F (aka Tweed) wrote:

    Daisy wrote:

    John Piper seems pretty bad about this. He’s all the time saying God would not approve of women doing X, Y, or Z, but he does not offer any Scriptural support for any of that. He just takes his personal preferences and tries to pass them off as being compatible with the Bible. And he also wants us to believe he takes the Bible seriously / literally.

    He does this all the time – and his tribe seems to thrive on it. He is horribly inconsistent in his teaching, but his followers think he is deep.

    As deep as the Deep Thoughts guy on Saturday Night Live.

    “No matter where you go, There You Are.”
    — Buckaroo Banzai

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  313. Daisy wrote:

    Often, I see critics of feminism who decry its arguments, about how women are treated unfairly in some settings, mock it as being “victim-hood” culture, turn around and also claim that boys and men are the “real” victims in culture.

    Just like the Manifesto of the Santa Barbara Shooter.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  314. Muff Potter wrote:

    I’m told that there are many former fundagelicals who’ve gone EO.
    Last I heard, Papa Chuck (founder of Calvary Chapel) has a son who went EO.

    I wonder how much of that is a “Go as Far as Possible in the Other Direction” reaction.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  315. Lea wrote:

    okrapod wrote:

    for some it may be based on the idea that teaching women is not as important as teaching men

    Absolutely it is. The order of importance in these quarters is:

    Men
    Women
    Children

    No, the order of importance is:

    MEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
    Inferior Men
    Women
    Children
    (Don’t know where “Pets” fits on that spectrum, except definitely NOT on top.)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  316. Muff Potter wrote:

    I’m told that there are many former fundagelicals who’ve gone EO.

    Hank Hanegraaff is one of the most recent high profile evangelicals to convert to EO. I have been tempted myself. But I find a combination of irresistible forces both drawing me and repelling me, so I hover about it like an election around a proton, not able to do much but be a blur. It seems like some of the worst EOs (in the sense of out-spiritualizing others) are protestant converts, so much so that I heard a joke that we all should be fine at the final judgment as long as God is not a protestant convert to Orthodoxy. What my investigation into Orthodoxy has done for me is to show me a different way to look at Christianity. Theologically it makes a lot of sense and it has helped me recover from my exposure to some toxic forms of Christianity (as if there is such a thing as toxin-free Christianity)

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  317. Ken F (aka Tweed) wrote:

    Hank Hanegraaff is one of the most recent high profile evangelicals to convert to EO.

    Wasn’t there some huge blow-back over Hanegraaf’s conversion to EO?
    Some of the more rabid fundagelicals declaring him apostate and concerned over his ‘eternal destiny’?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  318. @ Steve:

    Good question. Because there are good churches out there with good people.

    The existence of bad pastors and unhealthy churches doesn’t eliminate the existence of good pastors and healthy churches.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  319. Jack wrote:

    the old testament tells them what they want to hear

    … and then they torture certain New Testament passages to provide a false alibi for their aberrations.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  320. @ Ken F (aka Tweed):

    Well, what can I say Ken?
    They don’t call it Chrislam for nothin’.
    And what’s more, their religion is not sustainable.
    Catholicism and EO will survive and thrive long after rabid fundagelicalism drys up and blows away like so many Walmart bags snarled in chain-link fences.
    It happened to the movements of Edwards and Whitefield, and it will happen to theirs too.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  321. Jack wrote:

    Because the old testament tells them what they want to hear.
    Jesus doesn’t.

    Isn’t the difference between a true and false prophet that the false prophet tells the king what he wants to hear and the true prophet tells him what he NEEDS to hear?

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  322. Muff Potter wrote:

    Wasn’t there some huge blow-back over Hanegraaf’s conversion to EO?
    Some of the more rabid fundagelicals declaring him apostate and concerned over his ‘eternal destiny’?

    “Concerned over his eternal destiny” as in “Gleefully casting him into Eternal Hell”?

    And the RCC and EO have demonstrated Staying Power.
    Twenty centuries worth of Staying Power.
    Fundagelicals haven’t.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  323. Ken F (aka Tweed) wrote:

    Muff Potter wrote:

    Wasn’t there some huge blow-back over Hanegraaf’s conversion to EO?

    And of course Pulpit and Pen always weighs in with charitable words (not): http://pulpitandpen.org/2017/04/21/an-apology-to-the-eastern-orthodoxy-community/

    I wonder if they’re crowing over Hanegraaf’s out-of-the-blue cancer diagnosis?

    Or is that for the Pagan Temple Screamers and their Imprecatory Prayer(TM) like that which killed Mother Teresa (at least in their own minds)?

    I remember long ago some preacher-man was convicted of shady financial shenanigans (embezzlement?), his defendant’s statement before sentencing was a loud public Imprecatory Prayer calling upon God (as his familiar spirit) to Curse with Terminal Cancer the Judge, Jury, Prosecutor, and prosecution witnesses. Like some Hexerai or Conjure-Man putting a Death Hex on his enemies.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

  324. Ken F (aka Tweed) wrote:

    It seems like some of the worst EOs (in the sense of out-spiritualizing others) are protestant converts, so much so that I heard a joke that we all should be fine at the final judgment as long as God is not a protestant convert to Orthodoxy.

    “Cage Phase” Syndrome applies to more than just Calvinist converts.

    Like Communism begetting Objectivism, they bring their old attitudes to their new belief system.

      (Quote)