My Comment Was Deleted

This page is here for our readers to record any comments deleted by other blogs.
Please tell us:
The name of the blog
The name of the post
The name of the editor (if more than one)
Your comment
The time it was left
The approximate time it was deleted
Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious)


Comments

My Comment Was Deleted — 311 Comments

  1. Blog: Challies.com
    Post: Should You Go to T4G? http://www.challies.com/interviews/should-you-go-to-t4g
    Date: 10/18/11
    Editor: David Kjos
    Comment: “They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, ‘Peace, peace,’ when there is no peace.” Jer. 6:14 and 8:11 
    Deleted: Same day
    Deleted because: The article referred to praised C J Mahaney as “exactly the kind of man we want to stand with”. These identical verses by Jeremiah expressed my opinion that CJ is NOT the kind of man we should stand with–that CJ has seriously wounded many, and caused much strife, which T4G brushed aside lightly. 
    More at http://thewartburgwatch.com/2011/11/04/tim-challies-deleting-both-scripture-and-hurting-people-a-request-from-sgm-refuge/

  2. This isn’t a Christian blogsite, but I wanted to make a stand for the many victimised by Sir Jimmy Savile OBE KCSG. He was interviewed by Louis Theroux and asked outright about his ‘predilections’ which he deftly shrugged off. The comment has moved to moderated to total disappearance.

    Blog: Louis Theroux
    Post: Jimmy Savile
    Link: http://louistheroux.com/blog/jimmy-savile/
    Comment:

    • time for an inquiry, on October 24th, 2012 at 10:48 pm

    “I am so sorry for those who had to suffer at the behest of Jimmy Savile, protected by the Establishment though he appeared anything but. I also think of all those who were no doubt complicit, in particular his loyal staff. Did they also share Jimmy’s “values” ?

    These blog words of Louis’ stood out:

    “Seeing Jimmy on the road moving between his various residences – penthouse in Leeds, seafront flat in Scarborough, picturesque cottage in Glencoe – I was struck by his network of friends and helpers he had in each place and their loyalty to him.

    I left Jimmy feeling that I was in a small way a part of his “London team”, as he called it.”

    Background:

    Exposure – The Other Side of Jimmy Savile 2012 (documentary now on YouTube – warning – graphic descriptions from victims)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nHDZfSl36g&feature=related

    True upfront confessions by Savile himself on HIGNFY (Have I Got News For You). There are many more. He was ‘hiding’ in ‘broad daylight’.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtUuOIXLawg
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AIjtAUEzD0&feature=relmfu

  3. Haitch

    That is a very distrubing story which parallels the support structure that some men in the SBC have given to churches which have covered up pedophilia.

  4. Blog: Challies.com
    Post: “Is My Wife’s Job Harder Than Mine”?

    My comment: “Why insult your readers like this, Tim?” at around 2:20pm on Wednesday, October 24, 2012.

    The comment was pulled sometime between 4 and 7:30pm on the same day.

    It was asking why Tim would insult his readers by so obviously acting like nothing major was going on with CJ Mahaney, who he was interacting positively with in the article. Although I did not mention Mahaney or the lawsuit in particular, I guess it was enough to be pulled.

  5. create a database so people…

    Yep. Great idea. I’ll assign that to the intern we just hired. :)

  6. Blog: Gospel Coalition
    Post: Tracing the Logic of Liberalism

    My comment – What I said seemed so un-inflammatory to me that I didn’t think to copy the exact statement. As I remember, I questioned if the author was not speaking against freedom of thought and of religion. I also said that it is my belief that worldview apologetics, which is what this post seemed to be rooted in, leads, if followed to its logical conclusion, to theocracy.

    The comment was published in the morning on October 29th and was taken down sometime between October 29th and October 30th.

  7. Caleb, Interesting. Over the years I have had tons of comments deleted when I asked about a “Christian World View” and for a specific definition. Seems we are to accept that concept. Like Post Modern. From my perspective Pontius Pilate was post modern. :o)

  8. I’ve never had a comment deleted, I don’t think, though I don’t suppose I’ve posted all that many.

    How about another category for people like me? Something snappy like, My Comment Didn’t Stir Up Any Controversy Because It Was So Long That Everyone Lost The Will To Live Halfway Through It? I could contribute to that one.

    Well… maybe “contribute” isn’t quite the right word.

  9. Nick, you cannot claim entrance into the wild west of the blogosphere until you have been deleted (or moderated) by the YRR!

  10. Oh, the irony. We have to be “deleted” by commenting on a celebrity blogger’s blog who deletes us so we won’t diminish the celebrityship, and by them deleting us as a non-celebrity, we become a celebrity.

    Meanwhile, I’ve not yet, to my knowledge, been YRR deleted, though I’m fairly sure I’ve been moderated without moderation.

    The internet … The Great Equalizer — or Squeakualizer!

  11. Anon1 – if you’re right, then I fear the Exalted Company of the Wild Frontier of the Blogosphere may forever elude me. I don’t contribute to YRR blogs to get deleterated.

  12. Hey, it worked (i.e. pressing alt-shift-2 to get a superscripted “TM”). Now I can refer to Godly™ pastors demonstrating Gospel™ repentance. And stuff.

  13. It’s OK, I’m off to bed now.

    (Hope you’re all as well as may be 5 hours to the west of us, btw. I believe the worst of the storm – if not the aftermath – has past?)

  14. Anon 1 and Nick,

    I don’t comment over at the Gospel Coalition too often, and they don’t delete everything, but this is probably the 3rd or 4th time I’ve been deleted over there. Challies, on the other hand, will delete you without a second thought. I find it helps not to mention specific names of their buddies – any time I’ve mentioned Driscoll or anyone else by name in a critical manner, it is often an automatic delete. So now I usually make my references more general. It makes them feel better.

    And the worldview stuff, I agree – this is so rarely explained and when it is I’m always troubled by it. I mentioned the conservative politics element of the so-called Christian worldview on another recent Gospel Coalition post and the author responded and essentially proved my point without knowing it – he couldn’t understand why any Christian would even consider not being on the right. I didn’t bother responding to that one..

  15. I may be going off on a slight tangent here, but the thread title “My Comment was Deleted” inexorably reminds me of the TV cartoon “My Goldfish is Evil”.

    Which is unfortunate because it’s bedtime once again and I can’t get the theme tune out of my head.

  16. Blog: http://www.dennyburke.com
    Name of the Post: Why Was Rachel Held Evans on the Roof?
    Editor: Denny Burke
    My comment: “Why endorse the views of someone who acts like such a jerk and inspires others to call for ‘ridicule at every opportunity’? The smug chauvinism of you and your friends is driving far more people away from the church than it is bringing in. It is repulsive.”

    Time of comment: 6pm on Oct. 31. It was deleted by 9am on Nov 1.

    Admittedly, I used slightly more inflammatory language than I usually do. However, given the condescending, arrogant, and dismissive tone of the post (and the Doug Wilson post to which it referred), I think that the tone was called for. And if Mr. Burke wants to dish it out, he should be able to take it. Note that another commentor ‘dittoed’ my comment before it vanished into the ether…

  17. Caleb, I’m amazed at what our spiritual ‘leaders’ (self appointed or otherwise) believe that they can dish out while at the same time, they are so thinned skinned themselves they can’t take anything. It has become laughable.

    I’m a firm believer that if a person feels they have the right to dish it out, they had better have the intestinal fortitude to take it. If they don’t then they had better stop with the dish it out free for all they engage in while they hide behind their moderated blogs.

    These men who think they are men, they really aren’t. They are boys pretending to be strong, confident, and right.

  18. Caleb, Just to brag about my wild west pioneer blogging badge, I was getting deleted at Challies back in 2006. He has always had a very thin skin.

    I cracked up when his first book topic was Discernment. Seriously?

    Nick, I am stealing, “Deleterated” Perfect.

  19. http://www.challies.com
    Post: How Many Children Should We Have?

    My Comment. I asked another commenter who was very concerned about other people giving selfish excuses for not having more children “Why do you care how many children other people have?”

    Time of comment – afternoon on November 7. It was deleted by the morning of November 8.

    Reason: I guess that is not a legitimate question? We should all be worrying about and talking about how many children other people are or are not having?

  20. Caleb W,

    I am no fan of Challies. Unfortunately, most of my family members are… I wish they would see that he’s a petty, thin-skinned excuse for a man. Any person who would rather delete comments that offer a different viewpoint than engage them is weak, in my opinion. I think that Dee and Deb are more manly than Tim Challies. :p

  21. Eagle,

    I was going to say “Dee and Deb have more balls than Tim Challies” but I held myself back because I didn’t want to offend anyone’s delicate sensibilities. You made me laugh out loud! I’m so glad you’re here. :D

  22. Eagle, I’m not going to ask how you conducted your ball research, but I’m sure it must have been interesting. :)

  23. Dee,

    You recommended two books, one was by Josh M. but I cannot find or recall the name of the other book….can you pls refresh my memory?

    Thanks

  24. “Post: How Many Children Should We Have?

    My Comment. I asked another commenter who was very concerned about other people giving selfish excuses for not having more children “Why do you care how many children other people have?”

    Time of comment – afternoon on November 7. It was deleted by the morning of November 8.

    Reason: I guess that is not a legitimate question? We should all be worrying about and talking about how many children other people are or are not having?”

    Oh, I just HATE it when Christians tell each other Christians how many kids they ought to have! And the accusations of selfishness… grrr…

  25. He doesn’t seem to understand that a blog is part of the public square and if you say outlandish things (or in this case, if your commenters do – it is a made up topic but Tim was being reasonable) you might be questioned. I don’t know what he is afraid of!

    Searching, a lot of folks in my former church circle were the same – they love them their Tim Challies. In my more charitable moods, I think he means well but is grossly underqualified to speak on about 80% of what he does. But you’re right – he can be very petty and dictatorial. The result – a lot of over-the-top stuff and some plain weird blog topics. I can’t help but feeling sorry for the person who felt the need to ask Tim Challies to address how to decide how many children to have! Who cares what a web designer with minimal formal training has to say about that?

  26. Sophie,

    I know! I honestly think (and this is not a slam against stay-at-home-moms/homeschoolers with big families) that the only reason anyone is talking about this is because there are certain stay-at-home-moms whose favorite things in life are: having children, raising children, talking about raising their children, and homeschooling their children who tend to populate churches and who are insecure about their decisions and feel the need to make everyone else justify why they don’t have large families. There is nothing wrong with being a stay at home mom with lots of kids – but that is your decision! The rest of us aren’t selfish for having 1, 2, or 3 children. In fact, there is a kind of emotional/familial selfishness that can also motivate a ‘quiverfull’ lifestyle that those with fewer kids ought to bring up the next time they are accused of being selfish or materialistic for having smaller families.

    There are so many things wrong with the whole discussion and the way it is framed – very frustrating!

  27. ‘Insecure about their decisions’ – yep, I think you may be on to something. I also hate the implication that women who aren’t crazy about the idea of repeated motherhood have some kind of deficiency in their femininity. Recently when a rabbi blasted Sarah Silverman for her decision not to have kids I was so annoyed on her behalf because this rabbi referred to ‘the basic desire of the feminine soul’. What makes religious men think they know more about ‘the feminine soul’ than, you know, actual women? I’ve heard plenty of this ‘here’s what women are all like, deep down’ stuff from Christian men and it ticks me off!

  28. http://www.challies.com
    Post: How Many Children Should We Have?

    My Comment. Okay, this is getting serious. One woman wrote the following tragically misguided comment: “Here’s our situation: After 6 years of intense study, we have made the decision that we will not use birth control of any kind anymore. We have every reason to limit our family size – we have very limited means, and I get intensely sick (hyperemesis) during pregnancy. However, we have decided that (1) God can safely be trusted to determine our family size, and (2) the Bible says that children are a blessing, a heritage, a reward – and we have decided to believe that in deed as well as in word.

    If God truly is sovereign in the conception of each and every child, and children are not an accident, then I can also trust God with our family size. Do we honestly think that God would give us a child whom he did not want conceived or whom he did not want in our family? “Oops! Sorry! I didn’t realize that I shouldn’t have given you that child! My mistake!” I truly trust in God’s total sovereignty and knowledge and wisdom, and I can trust him to add to our family exactly as he wants children. If he wants to close my womb, HE can do so. I don’t need to do it for him. When I use birth control, I am telling God, “I don’t trust your plan for my family, and I don’t want your blessings.”

    If I had had my own way, two of our three children would not be here right now (“unplanned”). After seeing how great of a blessing they are to our family, we decided that we can let go and trust God to plan the rest of our fertile years rather than dictating to him.

    I know this is controversial, and I would be happy to (calmly!) discuss it. I don’t expect a ton of agreement, and, as I said, it took six years for us to come to this difficult conclusion. Six years ago, I was on birth-control pills and would have considered living without it to be something along the lines of insanity.

    Cheers!”

    I responded to this commenter with the following: “God also gave you a brain, and he wants you to use it. To refuse to do so, to reject your capacity for wisdom and reason, seems like a reckless rejection of his good gifts.
    We would all do well to read Psalm 127 (a poem, not a reverse command) in its entirety and then ask ourselves about the validity of the reasoning that goes “If children are a blessing from the Lord, then to plan my family size is a sinful/selfish rejection of his blessing.”

    I left the comment just after 3pm on Saturday November 10. It was deleted almost immediately.

    The reason? Insanity. That is the only justification I can imagine. To let this woman believe this, given her situation, without challenging her, is irresponsible.

  29. I just knew Challies would quote Psalm 127:

    “Children Are a Blessing. The Bible is clear that we are to regard children as a blessing and not as a burden. Psalm 127 tells us that “children are a heritage from the LORD, The fruit of the womb is a reward.” Where our culture may see children as a financial, emotional or psychological burden, the Bible tells us that they are a blessing and a reward. Further, Many Children Is a Great Blessing. God gave no conditions to his command that we be fruitful and multiply. He did not say “multiply up to and including eight children at which point you must stop.” At the same time he did not say “be fruitful and multiply until you have exceeded two children.” We are given no rules about how many children are appropriate in God’s eyes. We do hear hints, though, that God approves of large families and that many children represent a special blessing. Psalm 127 continues, “Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, So are the children of one’s youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them.” Many children represent many blessings.”

    If Psalm 127 is an indication that God favours large families, then what do we do with Psalm 139?

    “Happy is the one who takes your babies and smashes them against the rocks!’.”

  30. Denny Burk lauded Mary Kassian for her review of Rachel Held
    Evan’s book A Year of Biblical Womanhood on his blog. Here is her review:

    http://www.girlsgonewise.com/review-of-a-year-of-biblical-womanhood/

    Of course she leave no room to comment on her blog, so I left the following comment for Mr. Burk but it was deleted:

    “Poor Mary! As I read her review, what kept coming to mind was Alexander Haig in the White House on the day Reagan was shot as he kept proclaiming “I’m in charge!” She needs to stop reminding everyone of her role in complementarianism a generation ago and recognize that the more she tries to address the present day confusion, the sillier and more hypocritical she looks!

    “Either Mary is being disingenuous or she has no communication with her complementarian colleagues who now embrace the term “patriarchy;” it is also apparent she has not done her research into the influence both Debi Pearl and Stacy McDonald have had on women in conservative circles. Had she done so she would have discovered that solid Bible teaching churches in a variety of denominations have handed out the Pearl marriage books by the case! She also would have discovered that McDonald’s book was not only endorsed by Nancy Leigh DeMoss but McDonald and her co-author, Jenny Chancey (who also does not believe in woman’s suffrage), were guests on DeMoss’s radio program . What Mary considers straw men are teachings that have been made central to the Gospel and are even behind the creation of new and questionable doctrines. Until she stops dismissing the truth of this, she has no credibility!”

  31. thatmom,

    Thanks for attempting to speak out on Denny Burk’s blog.  He, Mary Kassian, and their ilk live in a bubble that will soon burst.  I saw that Kassian’s post was featured over at TGC but have not yet taken time to read it.  I will take a look tonight or tomorrow. 

    It’s rather humorous hat there’s not that much difference between what Evans and Kassian are doing.  They are both authors, bloggers, etc.  Rachel Evans has definitely struck a nerve!

  32. “why do you care how many children other people have?” Great response. I would also say, “it’s none of your business.” So many people in “church” major in pettiness. Somehow these people think what you cook for dinner is their business.

  33. I commented this on http://www.girlsgonewise.com/sex-in-the-shadowlands/ at the time when it was new (I still had the comment in the word file from which I copied and pasted in on her blog):

    —————–

    Mary, where does the Bible say the ultimate goal of sex is to tell the truth about God? We should be careful about claiming to speak for God, when He was silent. It seems to me (correct me if I am wrong) that the “men leaving parents, cleaving to wife, become one flesh” verses, has a “therefore” in it – and the “therefore”(the reason for them to become one) is not “so the message of unity between us and God can be pictured.”
    And I explained the gospel to many 6- and 7- year olds in my life who have no idea of marriage and sex, so I can honestly tell you: People who don’t understand sex and marriage do not have a tough time to understand the gospel. Statistically, very few people come to God after marriage, and unmarried people like me can understand the gospel, so sex and marriage is not needed to understand the gospel.
    And to whom should sex tell the story of God? To the Christian husband and wife who already understand the gospel, or to the world?
    If to the world, should we get the message to them by:
    a) Telling them what to do in their intimate lives while they are unbelievers, so they can understand the Christian message from it, or
    b) by making DVDs of Christian couples in the bedroom, so it can tell the story to them?
    If marriage and sex is the greatest way to remember these things, why did he not make an equally powerful picture for those who stay single (something God finds good!) and children?
    If sex stands for the intimacy between us and Jesus and, by the diagram, us and church elders, the correct symbol for that would not be sleeping with only one person. Because Jesus and church elders are not the same. The correct symbol would be sleeping with A who represents Jesus and B who represents the church elders, but B should also sleep with A.
    ——————
    (Kassian later deleted all comments on that blog entry, but mine was never even approved, even in a time when she did take comments on the post.)

  34. I posted the link a second time and they deleted it again. Then I got an e-mail saying “The link you keep posting is not germane to the discussion at SBC Voices.”

  35. Blog Name: Gospel Coalition
    The name of the post: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/11/19/leaders-tell-the-truth/
    The name of the editor: Excerpt from Al Mohler’s new book

    My comment:

    I really appreciate the subject of this book in light of the many abuse cases in churches. What astonishes me the most is that Mohler has been very aware of the moral decisions his good buddy CJ Mahaney has made with regard to the mishandling of abuse cases in Sovereign Grace churches. Al Mohler was the first to speak out in DEFENSE of his friend, CJ, after CJ’s leave of absence and now more than a month ago we all found out about the lawsuit filed against SGM, CJ and several pastors brought on by 3 victims/families for failure to report to authorities, failure to protect children from sexual predation, etc.

    Here is part of the lawsuit: “The Church provided sexual predators with free legal advice and counsel on how to evade accountability, and repeatedly worked with sexual predators to mislead law enforcement. The Church was willing to, and did, make false statements to law enforcement officials and in courts of law in its efforts to protect sexual predators.”

    CJ has been reading this book (as noted by his Twitter tweets), but it makes one wonder if Mohler read his own words from his book:

    But laws and commandments are not enough. Leadership requires the possession and cultivation of certain moral virtues that allow leadership to happen. If the leader does not demonstrate these essential virtues, disaster is certain.

    Leaders are subject to the same laws, moral principles, and expectations as the rest of humanity, but the moral risks are far higher for them. For that reason, there are certain moral virtues that are especially crucial in the leader’s character and life.

    Who is going to act morally regarding the SGM case? Mohler and Gospel Coalition friends need to quit playing buddy/buddy with CJ, and look at the real moral issues they are trying to cover up or avoid. It still is a moral choice to “avoid” dealing with moral issues. God sees and will judge this apathy.

    The time it was left: 11:28 AM
    The approximate time it was deleted: It was gone when I checked 20 min. later
    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious): Because I’m a blogger and a woman and I told the truth.

  36. Julie Anne

    Great comment. Truth has become a squishy word in these circles. It means that “certain leaders were born to tell you the truth about what is wrong with you and you were born to take it.”

  37. Deb, if you look at the twitter hash tag for the book (#conviction2lead) on Twitter, CJ has been tweeting about the book for days. He’s probably tweeted the most. Hmmm. Wonder why?

  38. @ Caleb, Sophie & Stormy (per the lots of kids thing):

    Here’s my take on the children are a blessing thing (I can’t remember if I thought of this myself, or if I read it on an anti-Quiverfull blog).

    It’s clear from Psalm 127 that children can be a blessing from God. What are some other things that can be blessings from God?
    – Wine/alcohol.
    – Wealth (see David, Solomon, Abraham).
    – Food (see manna).

    So how does God tell us to use these blessings?
    – Drinking too much wine is called drunkenness and is a sin.
    – It is clear from the rich young ruler and various other parts of the Bible that single-mindedly accumulating wealth is NOT pleasing to God.
    – The Israelites were forbidden to take more manna than they needed and gluttony (eating too much food) is repeatedly called a sin.

    It should be clear from the above that just because something is a gift/blessing from God, this does NOT mean we should automatically try to get as much of it as we possibly can. This activity is, almost without fail, condemned in the Bible. So why should we treat children any differently – esp. when a large number of children forces the family into poverty or threatens the mother’s health (see 1 Timothy 5:8 and Ephesians 5:28)?

    So in my view, the idea that Christians are obligated to have as many children as possible because they are a blessing from God is “child gluttony.”

    As for “be fruitful and multiply”:
    1. You can multiply by 1. Off sarcasm. ; )
    2. It only takes 4 children per couple to double the population every generation, but it’s almost a sin in Quiverfull circles to “only” have 4 kids.
    3. Let’s assume both that the average Quiverfull couple has 7 kids, and that their dream of this being the norm for every couple was realized. If this happened, in a single generation the population would be (at a minimum) FOURTEEN TIMES larger than it had been the previous generation (and this only counts “breeding” couples, not everyone else). And Quiverfull folks want this to be repeated in the next generation and every generation after that! How is the food supply supposed to keep up with this level of population growth? Widespread adoption of Quiverfull ideology would of necessity lead to famine and severe societal upheaval.

    Oh, that’s right…God will provide. Never mind.

  39. Gosh, it’s morning – my math in the last post. I think it’s actually ten times larger. Though it doesn’t matter for my actual argument per famine.

  40. Hester, My take on the whole quiverfull position is that bearing children is one of those immutable laws at creation that was corrupted in the fall. Be fruitful and multiply was replaced with “go and make disciples” in the New Covenant.

    How are we to look at this concept when drug addicts can continue having children they leave in trash bins but but a believing woman who desperately wants children is left barren? God designed us so that sperm and egg meeting might make babies. The fall corrupted that so it does not always work. The quiverfull movement (and others who believe in the determinist god) thinks b is being barren is some sort of punishment from God. It is cruel.

    Carolyn Custis James has some interesting things to say about this subject in her book, “When Life and Beliefs Collide”. She was also barren and ended up adopting.

  41. “if you look at the twitter hash tag for the book (#conviction2lead) on Twitter, CJ has been tweeting about the book for days. He’s probably tweeted the most. Hmmm. Wonder why?”

    Desperation? Promoting his protector? He is now in Louisville under Mohler’s protection just as he was at CHBC under Dever’s protection before. But more and more SBC folk are questioning Mohler’s BFF status with someone like Mahaney for more reasons than we think.

  42. The Gospel Coalition may not like me. Here’s another one that got removed.
    Posted: November 25, 2012 at 9:01 pm
    Removed: I checked it a couple hours after posting and it was gone

    I think it was removed because it references CJ Mahaney, their beloved (even though I did not spell out his name). I have a post ready to publish on this topic and now get to add this little tidbit. Oh joy, this is so much fun.

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2012/11/25/the-church-the-gospel-and-violence-against-women/?comments#comments#comment-104537

    Thank you so much for addressing this very important topic. One very big concern I have: only 3 of the above articles mentions notifying civil authorities when violence occurs (I did not check the CCEF articles which cost $$). A member of TGC and his church and several pastors are currently being sued because of failure to report abuse cases, etc. This issue must be addressed from the highest level of leadership on down. Additionally, what is the responsibility of leaders when one of their peers has failed to protect wives/children by failing to report to civil authorities? This silence must also be broken. 


    This criticism is given in love – love to protect the victims who not only are victims of spousal/child/sex abuse, but also become victims of spiritual abuse when their church leaders fail them by dealing appropriately with the abuse. The church must wake up to this very dangerous problem. Romans 13:1 is the correct biblical response to crime. Physical violence is a crime which must be reported. God uses civil authority to produce godly sorrow and restitution.

  43. Oh . . . wait . it is still there. I’m not sure what happened. Well, let’s see what happens. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is removed.

  44. James Altucher deleted my post

    www jamesaltucher com/

    (i will not give him a hyperlink)

    11/26/2012

  45. Hester, Another thought is what about those who can’t have kids or for various reasons are only able to have one child. I’ve heard Mac Arthur in a sermon take issue with those who only want one child. Like it is really his business anyway… What I find is that people want to take a hard line with something that is supposively scriptural but then what is their reasoning when for instance if a woman is unable to conceave. You can’t say that this scripture is only talking to the people who can conceave(to have several children).But this is basically what they are doing. Another for instance, say that someone is not able to attend church due to illness. What we hear is that you are out of God’s will if you are not at church fellowshipping,serving and hearing from God. Again, there is a clear contradiction in their so-called beliefs.

  46. So I’m wondering if Nicholas’ comment was removed because it contains a TWW link or because it lists a BFF Russell Moore (or both)? It was posted for a few minutes, I saw it :)

  47. Julie Anne, thank you for your reply to Sue's comment on Justin Taylor's post above. I appreciate you taking time to affirm her experience.

  48. Blog: Owen Strachan/Thoughtlife

    Link: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thoughtlife/2012/11/why-abusive-men-repudiate-true-manhood-letter-to-an-abusive-husband/

    My comment (still in moderation – looks like it might just stay there):

    All I can say is that if I were to be abused in my home, I hope that Owen Stachan is not all there is to stand between me and my abuser.

    This letter is all about Owen’s manliness and theology. A victim of abuse needs people who know what to do and law enforcement. I’m sure Owen is a nice man, but I hope he takes a pass on handling abuse and gets victims to someone who can actually help.

  49. Nicholas

    I read that comment thread. Julie Anne’s comment prevailed because she did not name CJ Mahaney, merely alluded to him. It is a mortal sin to name anyone  who is a Calvinista and in trouble. That is why they could call out Dinesh D’Souza and Billy Graham by name recently for their apparent sins but will never, ever mention Mahaney or Mohler . They show their weakness in this strategy.

  50. Julie Anne

    You sly person! Your comment regarding Mahaney prevailed because you did not name him. Everyone knows to whom you refer. 

  51. Dana

    Strachan’s lettter is just that, a letter. he said that “next time” he could come with the menfolk to rescue the wife and kids. Next time? The time for action is now. They should report the incident to the police (even if the wife drops the charges), help find the woman shelter and kick that man’s sorry butt outside of the church. They can recommend that he attend church but it should be another so the wife does not have to see her abuser in the church. 

    What do you want to bet that groups like SGM, in the past, has made the woman forgive her abuser?

    I believe this “we are against men beating their wives” stuff is due to the fact that spotlight is now on these “comp” churches and some of the odd doctrines that have been developed. So, they want to show that “we, too, don’t like this.” 

  52. I also believe that the comps have discovered that the “we are against men beating their wives” is an excellent piece of rhetoric to show the gospelly goodness of their Most Biblical Masculine Manhood. There is nothing in the world that doesn’t show the that kind of gospelly goodness. Except the evils of feminism.

  53. I take it back. My comment is now out of moderation and on the blog for all to see.

    24 hours or so after posting it.

  54. Dana: THANK YOU for your comment. It really hit the nail on the head, even if they DID let it out of moderation. 
         Too bad Owen hasn’t responded to any of the comments, including the first, which began, “I have to confess this is truly awful! Awful!”
         I must say it did not start out awful, when Owen said, “if I could talk with a man who was abusing…” Good–he’d talk to an abuser given the chance!  Then things go south quickly when Owen continues  ”abusing… his headship of his home.”  What!? Not abusing a person? A fellow heir of grace? The woman he promised to love and to cherish? Nope! Abusing “HIS headship of HIS home! “ 

  55. Dave AA – that is exactly right. He certainly gives the impression that a wife being abused is not nearly important and his gospelly good manhood being undermined.

  56. …not nearly as important as his gospelly good manhood being undermined.

    I hate making typos, but I do like having another chance to type “gospelly good manhood.”

  57. “gospelly good BIBLICAL manhood riding in on white horse to rescue the sinner’s headship and home” (if this happens again)

  58. “I believe this “we are against men beating their wives” stuff is due to the fact that spotlight is now on these “comp” churches and some of the odd doctrines that have been developed. So, they want to show that “we, too, don’t like this.” ”

    I think they are also concerned because there is now a precedent for institutions to be held responsible for what they choose to ignore.

  59. Apostle DaveAA

    You continue to make me laugh. “gospelly good BIBLICAL manhood riding in on white horse to rescue the sinner’s headship and home”

  60. Nicholas

    Well, I will give him props for keeping the comment up. That was a hrad hitting post and Moore is featured in it. Has he seen it actually read it?

  61. HTML Test, please ignore
    This is Red

    This is a Title
    This is italic
    This is bold
    This is larger text
    This is smaller text
    This is centered

    This is right justified

    These
    are
    bulleted

    These
    are
    numbered

    This is indented text
    So is this

    ll
    This is Segoe UI
    This is Segoe Script

  62. test

    HTML Test, please ignore
    This is Red

    This is a Title
    This is italic
    This is bold
    This is larger text
    This is smaller text
    This is centered

    This is right justified

    These
    are
    bulleted

    These
    are
    numbered

    This is indented text
    So is this

    ll
    This is Segoe UI
    This is Segoe Script

  63. Fendrel,
    Are you seeking to prove the existence of HTML, or provide evidence to the contrary? :) :;

  64. Dave….funny lol

    I choose to believe in HTML despite the evidence to the contrary…am I irrational?

  65. Dan Phillips @ Pyromaniacs

    Just deleted this comment – Twice – in 15 minutes. ;-)

    http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2012/11/forum-on-female-commentators.html

    When going to post it a third time (Hoping for some feed back)

    Found they closed the comments box. ;-)

    “New comments have been disabled for this post by a blog administrator.”

    ———————

    DJP

    I agree when you start this post about – a female pastor…
    “Scripture is clear: there is no such thing as a female pastor under Christ’s Lordship.”

    Was wondering…
    Can you show – clearly – from the scriptures…
    Such a thing as “a Male pastor?” As we see them today?

    And – Can you show – clearly – from the scriptures…
    How many of His Disciples?
    Were “Called” – “Pastor/Leader/Reverend?”
    “Called” themself – “Pastor/Leader/Reverend?”
    Had the “Title” – “Pastor/Leader/Reverend?”
    Were “Hired – Or Fired” as a – “Pastor/Leader/Reverend?”

    The only one I can find with the “Title” Shepherd – is Jesus.

    And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
    them also I must bring, and they shall **hear My voice;**
    and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
    John 10:16

    One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice – One Leader

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}

    ——————-

    Well – These questions didn’t seem to be to tough. ;-)

    So much for – the “inerrancy” of the Bible…
    And -The Bible says…

  66. You’ll never get any disagreement to sick over on teampyro. I’m surprised that he has the time to delete your comments. Usually he’s busy pushing his books on twitter or blaming everyone else for its lack of sales.

  67. Dee: “You sly person! Your comment regarding Mahaney prevailed because you did not name him. Everyone knows to whom you refer. ”

    Yup – I learned the hard way. Last time I mentioned SGM or CJ, it was deleted.

    Nicholas- BRAVO!!! Your comment is still there and it’s a good one.

    I’m getting annoyed at the way they remove comments and shut down the comments coincidentally when the comments get more on the egal side or are a challenge. These guys, like my former pastor, talk about strong men as leaders, yet look at their behavior. One minute they say they want to defend and protect women against abuse, the next minute, they are discussing women’s influence over men and arguing about what context they can “listen” to women.

    I already know they have issues with homeschool moms blogging. Do you suppose they have issues with guys reading my blog?

  68. Julie Anne, I’ll bet they don’t want anyone, especially women, to read your blog or this one.

  69. I was deleted from Denny Burk’s martyr to the cause post. I can’t remember exactly what I wrote, it was about four days ago. I responded to one of his comments about ‘real churches’, questioning that phrase. That comment is published (using the name Pam B). I got a snarky response from Dan Phillips of ‘wouldn’t it be nice if there was a book we could read to find our answer?…oh wait’.
    My deleted response was along the lines of pointing out that many Christians disagree on the interpretations of passages about the role of women, and that we shouldn’t judge other Christians for that. My post was apparently removed or never even published. I’ve just written another comment on the exact same thing, but given I commented on my deleted post and called Denny unethical, I’m guessing it won’t be published.
    I’m hoping he’ll take the bait of being called unethical though – gives him an opportunity to cast himself the martyr.

  70. Nicholas

    I did get a kick out of his response. Do not look at the past, only the future. The Gunn story is not really the past and is ongoing but who cares? Just wait until the SGM lawsuit takes a very hard look at the past. Those that do not look at the past are doomed to repeat it. Boy, oh boy, will the SGM thing throw them for a loop.

  71. Yes – I’ve been deleted again @ pyromaniacs. – ;-)

    http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=21212024&postID=1080762985936023186&page=1&token=1354988671850

    I figured I was on borrowed time – with Heb 13:17, being thrown around.

    In case you’re interested – this is the comment that was deleted.

    And – They had to read it – To delete it…

    ——————–

    DJP

    OK – I’ll try to stay on topic. You begin your post…
    “As I preach through Titus,”

    As I’ve searched for “qualified leaders/pastors/overseers”
    Using Titus 1:5-9, as a guide, I also became very discouraged.
    Some of Pauls “Qualifications” are kinda tuff – Yes?
    1 – Must be blameless. 2 – Just. 3 – Holy.

    Titus 1:6-8 KJV
    If any be **blameless,** the husband of one wife,
    having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.
    For a bishop **must be blameless,** as the steward of God;
    not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine,
    no striker, not given to filthy lucre; But a lover of hospitality,
    a lover of good men, sober, **just,** ** holy,** temperate;

    Why would someone become a pastor/elder/overseer?
    If they are NOT Blameless? If they do NOT qualify?

    1 – For a bishop *must be* **blameless**… Titus 1:7 KJV

    *Must Be* is Strongs #1163, die. – It is necessary (as binding).
    Thayer’s – necessity established by the decree of God.

    That *must be* is the same Greek word as:
    …You *must be* born again. John 3:7.
    Seems *Must be* is a small word – but very important. Yes?

    1 – **Blameless**… How important is this word?
    Strongs #410 anegkletos an-eng’-klay-tos
    KJV – blameless 4, unreproveable 1; 5

    Thayers – Blameless
    that cannot be called into account, unreproveable, unaccused,

    Dictionary
    Without fault; innocent; guiltless; not meriting censure.

    How many “Elder/Overseers,” who honestly examine themselves, seriously considering this one **qualification,** (*Must Be* **Blameless,**), can see themselves as **Blameless,** without fault, above reproach, and thus qualify to be an “elder/overseer?”

    And if you can see yourself as **blameless:** Is that pride?
    And no longer without fault? Oy Vey! ;-)

    Aren’t ALL “Qualificatios” for elder/overseer important?

    Which “Qualificatios” can we “Ignore?” Or “Twist?”

    —————-

    Well – Once again – These questions didn’t seem to be to tough.

    Why would someone become a pastor/elder/overseer?

    If they are NOT Blameless? If they do NOT qualify?

    Aren’t ALL “Qualificatios” for elder/overseer important?

    Which “Qualificatios” can we “Ignore?” Or “Twist?”

    So much for – the “inerrancy” of the Bible that these guys preach.
    And -The Bible says…

  72. Amos – They don’t want to read the truth that you expose. You are forcing them to see that they shouldn’t be lording over people in authoritarian positions. If they did that, they’d have to quit their jobs.

  73. Just a late night thought…

    After plate tectonics takes its toll, where is the land that God promised to the Israelites going to be located?

  74. All those things were fulfilled in Christ. There is no land promise today, and never will be again. Fendrel, I think you know that most people on this site reject the heresy of Christian Zionism. Have any more “gotcha” questions?

  75. Nicholas on what basis would you say that. Christ’s coming is about salvation not about land promises or anything else for that matter. On what basis do you say that promise is negated?

  76. The nation of Israel in the OT, as a nation called out by God from all the other nations of the world, was a type for the Body of Christ, the Church. This is the same as the typical nature of the Levitical Priesthood and the animal sacrifices. Christ has fulfilled these things.

  77. This comment is still in moderation at Justin Taylor Blog – since – March 6, 2010 at 11:57 am. ;-)
    His post was about a book “Leaders Who Last” by Dave Kraft a pastor at Mark Driscolls. :-(

    Dave says, on the cover of his book – Only 30% of Leaders last –
    Well – That means to me – 70% Fail. Ouch!!!

    I questioned Justin about Jesus telling His Disciples NOT to be called leader.. Mat 23:10 NASB
    And, of course, like ALL Abusive Leaders,” – He throws out Heb 13:17, “Spiritual Abuse 101”
    Thinking that should end the discussion. NOT likely… ;-)

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2010/02/28/leaders-who-last/?comments#comments

    I tried answering this comment by Chad West…

    ———–

    Chad West
    “Jesus told us not to be leaders? That is hilarious and some people are wrapped around the axle.”

    ———-

    Justin left me in modertion and closed the comments after only 8 comments – Go figure…. :-) :-)

    ———–

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Chad West

    You write…
    “Jesus told us not to be leaders? That is hilarious and some people are wrapped around the axle.”

    Sounded funny to me at first also.
    Don’t blame you much for seeing this as hilarious.
    But in the end, when 70% of “pastors/leaders” Fail and leave the “ministry”
    1600 a month at the latest count, that’s 19,000 a year Chad, That’s NOT hilarious, is it?
    “Each Year” 19,000 families, who are burnt, burnt out, kicked out, or crawled out,
    of “The Religious $ Corporations” they thought were “the Church of God.”
    That’s a lot of broken hearts. Feelings of failure. Depression, Sadness. Anger twords God.

    One of the fastest growing segments of “Christiandumb”
    Is ministries minestering to “Pastor/Leaders” and families who are suffering.

    Here are only two. Check out the states and see if it’s still hilarious?

    http://www.pastoralcareinc.com/statistics/

    http://www.intothyword.org/articles_view.asp?articleid=36562&columnid=

    80% believe pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families.
    77% say they do “not” have a good marriage.
    71% have felt burned out or depressed.
    70% do not have someone they consider a close friend.
    50% of the ministers starting out will not last 5 years.
    38% are divorced or seriously considering divorce.
    33% state that being in the ministry is an outright hazard to their family.

    And remember, these states are from ministries helping “Pastor/Leaders.”

    If “pastors/leaders” (as we see them today) are of God?
    He’s not taking very good care of His “pastors/leaders”; Is He?

    In His Service. By His Grace.

    Comments are closed.

    ————

  78. Blog Name: The Gospel-Driven Church (at The Gospel Coalition)
    Post Title: Safeguarding Against Abuse in the Church
    Written by Jared C. Wilson

    My Comment: “Has anyone at the Gospel Coalition reported or commented on the botched handling of sexual abuse cases in Sovereign Grace Ministries, and the subsequent lawsuit? I don’t recall seeing anthing here at the GC blog.”

    Time comment left: December 14, 2012 at 9:35 am

    The comment never made it through moderation. It was deleted without ever being posted. Jared Wilson did email me with an explanation as to why he didn’t allow the comment.

    This is what he said: “thanks for your comment. I am not approving it for publication mainly b/c given what I’ve seen of the discussion related to the SGM abuse cases online, there is much heat, and little light, and because experience has taught me it would open the comments to gossip. Not to mention that discussing specific cases is not really the point of the post.

    Assuming that your question was not rhetorical and you are sincerely asking, no, I don’t think anyone at TGC has commented on that case publicly. At least, I have not seen anyone do so.”

  79. “I’ve seen of the discussion related to the SGM abuse cases online,there is much heat, and a little light, and because experience has taught me it would open the comments to gossip.”

    What a copout…

  80. Stormy

    These guys use the word “gossip” whenever they do not want to discuss the problems of their best buddies. If it was one of us, we would be sold down the river. They want to protect children in everyone else’s churches.

  81. “If it was one of us,we would be sold down the river”

    So true, Dee, so true. We are the nobodys.

  82. Oy Vey!!! I think even my aliases have been banned from the TGC blog of Thabiti Anyabwile.

    He actually had an informative post and video about today’s “Illigitimate Bishops”
    And complained that in the interview “no basic biblical definition of “bishop” was given.”

    Thabiti did NOT like the interview with these Bishops who thought they were “Legitimate.”

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/thabitianyabwile/2012/12/20/bishop-mania-and-confusion-about-biblical-church-leadership/?comments#comments

    Now, “Fake Titles” in “The Corrupt Religious System” used “to control” – is a pet peeve.
    Senior Pastor, Lead Pastor, Associate Pastor, Doctor, Bishop, Reverend, Most Holy Reverend,
    Cheif Executive Apostle, (No kidding I really saw that “title”) ;-)

    And – Pastor/Elder/Overseers who say they believe the Bible, Then “Ignore” and “Twist” the qualifications, for Pastor/Elder/Overseer found in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9, – is also a pet peeve.
    And I love to pet my peeves. ;-)

    These two comments, posted by Amos as – Jimmy Justice – did NOT see the light of day.

  83. Thabiti

    Your first point was “First, no basic biblical definition of “bishop” was given. The guests failed to “open their Bibles” and show that “bishop” is simply another term for “pastor” or “overseer.”“

    IMO – Most of the time, people with titles “Fail to open their Bibles” and use “Basic Biblical Definitions” is because they know they do not meet the qualifications for elder/overseer that is given in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9.

    I’ve noticed, most elder/overseers today, and most congregations, “Ignore” or “Twist” or “Re-define” the “Qualifications” in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9, so they could obtain for themselves, or hire someone for, this postion. No, most today do not pay attention at all to 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9, because they are to difficult to fulfill.

    When you believe the lie you start to die…

  84. Thabiti

    Does anyone really care today about the qualifications in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9?

    Just look at 1 Tim 3:4-5, where this elder/overseer is
    “One that “ruleth well” his own house, (ESV – “manage his own household well” – Manage Well)
    having his children in subjection with all gravity;
    (For if a man know NOT how “to rule” his own house,
    how shall he take care of the church of God?)”

    “Manage Well “ – “ruleth well” – - This “Rule” is – Strongs #4291 proistemi
    Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament- Has “Rule” – proistemi as…
    to set or place before – to set over – to be over
    to be a protector or guardian – to give aid – to care for,

    “Ruleth well” “Manage Well” here also speaks of – protecting – guarding – careing for – Well.
    If this pastor/elder/overseer is NOT protecting – guarding – careing for his family – well.
    “how shall he take care of the church of God?”

    Here are statistics from ministries helping pastor/elders/overseers and families who are hurting.

    http://www.pastoralcareinc.com/statistics/
    80% of pastors spouses wish they would choose a different profession. (Pastors NOT caring well)
    80% say pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families. (Pastors NOT protecting well)

    http://www.intothyword.org/articles_view.asp?articleid=36562&columnid=
    77% of pastors say they do “not” have a good marriage. (Pastors NOT manging well)

    With 80% of pastor spouses NOT happy with this profession? And 80% of pastors saying pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families? And 77% saying they do NOT have a good marriage? That shows me, as I search for – “qualified pastor/elder/overseers” – I already know – 70% – 80% of folks who have that title – Do NOT Qualify. – Because – They do NOT “Manage Well” or “Rule Well” their own house.

    Nope – 70 – 80% are NOT “Managing Well” – protecting, guarding, careing for the family – Well.
    And – biblically that means…
    70% – 80% of these with the title pastor/elder/overseer can not manage well the church of God.
    And they do NOT qualify to have the title pastor/elder/overseer.

    And the rest of 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9, is real tough also.
    This is just one qualification that todays religious sytem will – “Ignore” or “Twist” or “Re-define”

    But – Why use the bible to see who qualifies?
    We’ll just have someone else, another pastor/elder/overseer, who does not qualify to
    validate todays wanna-be pastor/elder/overseer, who does not qualify.

    Just like the so-called bishops in this video.

    Who cares if they qualify — As long as they are validated.

  85. What’s your point Amos? Are you saying there should be no elders, even though the Apostle Paul says to appoint elders?

  86. Nicholas

    Yes – I’m in agreement with you – “the Apostle Paul says to appoint elders”
    Also – “the Apostle Paul” gives instructions, “Qualificatios” for “Elder/Overseers.” – Yes?

    Have you aver looked at ALL the “Qualifications” Paul gives for “Pastor/Elder/Overseer?”
    Are you, or your “Pastor/Elder/Overseers” – living examples of Pauls “Qualifications?”

    Why did Paul give “Qualifications” if NOT important?
    And very tough “Qualifications.” – Yes?

    The Bible talks about “elders/overseers” and **qualifications** for “elders/overseers.”

    You can’t have one with out the other – Can you?

    My point is…
    “I’ve noticed, most elder/overseers today, and most congregations, “Ignore” or “Twist” or “Re-define” the “Qualifications” in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9,”

    And the reason the “Pastor/Elder/Overseer” “Ignores” and “Twists” the “Qualifications.”
    Is… They do NOT “Qualify.”

  87. I agree Amos. And in addition to St. Paul’s qualifications, an elder/overseer must be a servant to all, as Christ commanded all Christians to be.

  88. A. Amos Love,

    The way “church” has evolved (or not evolved) is prohibitive to pastor/s attaining and maintaining the “qualifications”.

    It’s ridiculous. Perry Noble is an extreme example — pastors’ private lives turn into twisted, contorted messes because of the troublesome members, therefore the only solution is to stay on the periphery and not care.

    Just wish change weren’t so slow to come by. Thankfully, I think the times enable faster change.

  89. elastigirl

    Can you clarify – Not quite sure what you’re saying here…
    “therefore the only solution is to stay on the periphery and not care.”

  90. Nicholas

    Could this list of very tuff Qualifications be a test of someone’s “Integrity?”
    Seems, in the Bible, God tests and proves His people – a lot…

    What would you call a pastor/elder/overseer…
    Who does NOT qualify to be a pastor/elder/overseer?

    Could the list of very tuff Qualifications be a test of someone’s “Integrity?”
    Seems, in the Bible, God tests and proves His people – a lot…

    Why would someone assume the role of pastor/elder/overseer?
    And say they are a pastor/elder/overseer?
    If they know they do NOT qualify to be a pastor/elder/overseer?

    Could it be a lack of “Integrity?”

    What would you call a Medical Doctor, who said they were a Medical Doctor,
    and who knew they did NOT qualify to be a Medical Doctor?

    What would you call a Lawyer, who said they were a Lawyer
    and who knew they did NOT qualify to be a Lawyer?

    Would you recommend a Medical Doctor or a Lawyer to a friend?
    If you knew they did NOT qualify to be a Medical Doctor or a Lawyer?

    Wouldn’t it be dangerous and expensive to trust and depend on
    a Medical Doctor and a Lawyer who does NOT qualify?

    In my experience…
    It is dangerous and expensive to trust and depend on
    pastor/elder/overseers who do NOT qualify.

    Maybe that’s why “The Corrupt Religious System” of today…
    is in such a mess – pastor/elder/overseers – who do NOT qualify…
    “Spiritually Abusing” – The Church of God, God’s ekklesia, God’s sheep.

    The Bible warns us – a lot…
    About False Apostles, many False Prophets, False Teachers, False Christs’, False anointed ones.

    To trust NO man. To NOT trust in princes.
    Let no man deceive you. And the list goes on…

    And lot’s of scriptures about trusting Jesus.

    No thanks – Never met a pastor/elder/overseer, in “The Corrupt Religious System,”
    who meets ALL the “Qualifications” in 1 Tim 3:1-6, and Titus 1:5-9.”

    Could this list of very tuff Qualifications be a test of someone’s “Integrity?”

    Jesus… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul… Jesus…

  91. Challies.com
    “When A Good Guy Writes A Bad Book” (1/9/13)
    Tried posting it about 8:15 PM on 1/9/13. Got a message that I’m not allowed to post on that thread – no doubt because sometime last year I tried several times to comment on Mahaney – haven’t tried again until now.
    Comment is below:

    Mr. Challies – I will take your word for it that Driscoll’s book is solidly biblical. But does it not strike you as ironic that a book on Christian identity has been written by someone who has, over and over again, for years, publicly displayed grossly sinful behavior? He used to be called “The Cussing Pastor” – that seems almost quaint now. Have you heard his sermon on “The Song of Songs,” one of many instances of his obsession with graphic sexuality? Have you read all of his childishly macho statements, such as, “I wouldn’t respect Jesus if I could beat him up?” Do you know that on Facebook he solicited, for his own amusement, stories about effeminate worship leaders? There are many more examples.

    His pattern is to apparently repent of his behavior, and then, after a short while, continue it. I’m sorry, but I think you do new and young believers a disservice by not mentioning these things in a review of a book on Christian identity. (“Who Do You Think You Are?” would be an appropriate question for Driscoll.) From what I read, most of his “fans” are young people, so they know about him already. Do you think they might be confused that so many mature believers treat him with kid gloves? I think that anything less than outrage would qualify as that treatment.

    If the book is solid, then the best that could be said about him is that he’s a hypocrite – “Do as I say, not as I do.” I think that, in Driscoll’s case, criticism of his public life is legitimate in a review of one of his books, particularly one about this subject.

  92. Facebook posting on Atlee Community Church-Scottsville Campus was deleted. Posted Monday morning, Jan. 7, 2012, both comments deleted by that afternoon. I am new to the area and visited this church on Jan. 6th.

    Comment 1 under “Recommendations”: “‎66 books in the Bible, yet no studies on a single one???”

    This was to address that all their small group studies are “christian” published books (what I personally call “The Word according to [insert name of author]). In the Jan. 6th sermon video (link of the Facebook page), the pastor talks about how he wants all to be reading scripture, yet all of the small group studies at the Scottsville campus are not from scripture.

    Comment 2 under the “Real Marriage” small group announcement, directly after another woman’s posting of how this book “more than likely saved [her] marriage”. I copied a quote from the “Real Depravity” article at discollcontroversy.com: ‘Among the activities that the authors deem permissible within this taxonomy are masturbation, felatio/cunnilingus, sodomy (on both spouses), menstrual sex, role-playing, sex toys, birth control, cosmetic surgery, cybersex, and sexual medication. The Driscolls are careful to stipulate that these are activities spouses may participate in by mutual agreement, but not that they must participate in (p. 180). No spouse should be manipulated into doing anything that violates his or her conscience (p. 178)…

    Yet the Driscolls give explicit instructions to wives about how they might sodomize their husbands in a pleasurable way (p. 188). Yet where in the Bible is such an activity ever commended? The Bible only contemplates such activities in the context of homosexual relationships. The Bible condemns the “unnatural” use of bodies between persons of the same-sex (Rom. 1:26-27). Why would Christian couples emulate that unnatural use in the marital bed?’

    Both of these comments were deleted and I received the following email:
    Good Morning Lola,

    I would like to speak to you in regards to your comments that you posted on Facebook. We prefer to handle comments like this outside of the social media. This course has been offered in the past and taken by many of our attenders and I have not heard one negative comment about it until today.
    You also commented that none of the Scottsville small group studies were on books of the Bible. Studies are decided by the leaders and I can assure you that we highly recommend studies on books of the Bible and currently have 6 different studies being offered at our Mechanicsville campus.

    Please call me when you get a moment so we can discuss this matter. In the meantime, I have passed along your comments to our senior leadership at Atlee for their review.

    God bless,
    (I will leave the name anonymous)

    I wrote back:
    Ah, I see that those in Christ should not be publicly warned that “Real Marriage” (and yes, I have read the entire book), is nothing but a glorified sex manual and is the allurement of the lusts of the flesh (2 Pet 2:18). This is a graphic publication and those who profess to be Christians need to be aware of it. Silly me, questioning what has happened to “But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation” (1 Pet. 1:15)? I guess we can ignore the direction to “But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof” (Romans 13:14).

    As comments are being passed along, please also pass along an encouragement to quote entire verses. It is ” Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he” (Prov. 29:18). The word “vision” does not refer to goals or directions for an organization. It is Strong’s word H2377 meaning “specifically a vision from God respecting future events, prophetic vision.” Other uses of it from scripture are found in 1Chr. 17:15, 2 Chr. 32:32, Psa 89:19, and Isa. 1:1 – all having to do with visions given to the prophets. Interestingly, Jer. 23:16 refers to prophets speaking visions of their own hearts.

    This message was seen, but have not gotten a response back.

    This is a very small area/town, and it is very disheartening to see a tiny local church being influenced by the mega-church idols.

  93. Denny Burk had two interesting posts recently: the first was titled, “A Sad Tale of Feminism Gone to Seed,” which discussed gadly author Elizabeth Wuerzel’s recent admission that the lifestyle she pursued for 20-odd years left her very unsatisfied; the second was “ESPN Apologizes for Commentary; Season Over,” which discussed the uproar over announcer Brent Musberger’s fawning commentary on the appearance of the girlfriend of Alabama quarterback A.J. McCarron, which many considered sexist and over the top. So in the comment section of the post on the ESPN story, I wrote the following comment:

    “I, for one, was outraged by Musberger’s commentary. I blame feminism.”

    My comment never saw the light of day, despite my using my first AND last names, the criterion Burk typically points to as the reason for comments’ not being approved or for being deleted.

    Hmmmm…..maybe he just doesn’t like hyphenatedlast names?

    SMG

  94. Blog: true BGBC survivors
    http://www.bgbcsurvivors.org/the-suing-pastor-really/
    Jan 3, 2013
    Full week so far in moderation
    COMMENT
    “Could you please clarify one statement you make, and give some specifics about Job’s friends?
    By “criminal accusations” do you mean that the accusations themselves are criminal? Or that they falsely accuse you of being a criminal?
    Second, who are some ministers, churches, or associations who have, in your opinion, been true friends (unlike those of Job) toward you in this past year? Who, outside of your church, family, and personal friends, supports your decision to sue as the BEST approach in this particular situation? Posts or website links would be much appreciated. Thank you!”
    Reason moderated? Unknown. Attempted to be totally on-topic and polite with these questions, which I think any reasonable person might ask, and could not find answered elsewhere on the website. 

  95. http://www.dennyburk.com
    Post: “Albert Mohler Weighs in on the Debt-Ceiling Charade”
    Note: I am sick to death of hearing “Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr.’s” opinion on everything.

    Another commenter said that Mohler was oversimplifying the issue. So I replied something to the effect of “Of course Mohler is oversimplifying. That’s his job. It’s what he is good at. On another note, I hope that picture is tongue-in-cheek” (the picture that went with the article of Mohler sitting at his desk with a bow-tie and his name pretentiously displayed on his desk in an old script).
    I left the post sometime this morning (January 17) and it was deleted shortly thereafter.

    Did it contribute to the post? No. But certain bloggers don’t seem to get just how sick we all are of having Mohler’s views repeated throughout the Christian blogosphere, ad naseum.

  96. Caleb W wrote:

    Post: “Albert Mohler Weighs in on the Debt-Ceiling Charade”

    Interestingly I could use his statement to back up most any of the major positions on how to deal with the current fight. He basically says people need to do the right thing. But of course all sides claim to be doing the right thing.

  97. Caleb

    Good comment. Of course it was deleted. Thin skin is required for sainthood in the Calvinista world.

  98. Denny Burk’s site would not accept this comment.

    The thread: http://www.dennyburk.com/feminist-says-baby-is-a-life-worth-sacrificing/

    The comment:It is horrible. But why do anyone call her a feminist?
    Williams never, in this article, calls herself a feminist. And she is not promoting feminism here. Feminism say male and female should have the same rights. And she is not argueing for women and men to have the same rights concerning baby killing.
    ( Abortion cannot equate to feminism. Because we cannot even talk about men and women having the same rights with respect to humans growing in their bodies. Humans don’t grow in male bodies.
    The mere fact that China and India are – by virtue of different expectations of boys and girls – the countries with the most abortions, show that abortion does not equate to feminism.)

  99. The above comment was left about 12 hours bofore I put it here. It was never published, I assume because they found another comment of mine deletable and I am now persona non grata at that blog.

  100. The post is on The Gospel Coalition blog. A review by someone named Matt Smethurst on Driscoll’s book about Christian identity. It was, of course, totally positive, and included an interview with Driscoll comprising softball questions. I figured it would be deleted, so I kept it short: “Driscoll writing about Christian identity is as appropriate as Mahaney writing about humility.”

    I left it late afternoon/early evening on Jan. 29. It wasn’t deleted immediately, but it was deleted.

  101. JeffB

    Loved the comment. Thank you for sharing it with us. The Gospel Coalition is so afraid of the Mahaney situation that they are deep sixing all comments about him. They should be afraid. They have propped him up for years and he has become their liability.

  102. The Tolling Bell has been reporting that a student at the Sovereign Grace Ministries “Pastors College” has been kicking up quite the online dust storm lately in defense of the “family of churches”… So I took a peak in at young Caleb’s blog out of curiosity. The “About” section of the blog says, and I quote, “This blog is designed not only to be informative, but also interactive. Blog comments are welcome!”

    So I left the following comment, which has not been allowed out of moderation:

    “Hi Caleb,

    I hope this message finds you well! We’ve never met, although facebook tells me that we have a mutual friend (that you went to college with, and that I went to grad school with…small world!).

    To be perfectly up front, I found your website because your recent tweets with Justin Holcomb and Boz Tchividjian about SGM seem to have kicked up a bit of a dust storm online… taking a quick look around your website, it seems possible that you’ve become associated with SGM relatively recently. So I thought I would offer myself as a resource or dialogue partner: I was once a pastoral intern and assistant care group leader at an SGM church before my wife and I decided to cut our ties with the organization in 2007. If it would be helpful, I’d be happy to give you some background about why so many of us who spent so long with SGM have very, very deep concerns about it (even beyond what’s alleged in the law suit).

    Feel free to shoot me an email, or just reply to this comment!

    All the best in Christ,
    Ryan”

  103. Ryan – that seems pretty non-threatening to me. I tell you these people are paranoid. What I find amazing is so many of SGM people’s tweets profess the opposite of the fruit we’ve seen. I keep reminding them about the lawsuit. I don’t want them to forget. :)

  104. This is not a comment that was deleted but rather else more interesting. I once sent a comment (through contact us) on the Mahaney girl blog. I actually now, don’t even remember what my question was. That’s how insignificant it was. Probably challenging them on how they only talk about teaching their children to obey or something.

    I sent the message from my work computer (i work for the US government). A few days later, a person from IT came to my desk with a note that they got a message that someone from my IP location was sending inappropriate messages to their website.

    So assuming, I wasn’t hacked (possible, but I work for the government and in a position that getting hacked would be bad) They were able to track down my IP address (which is actually masked) and is generated from a location that is not near my physical location for security reasons. But they found me. So they have some really sophisticated IP trackers

  105. Wow! They are gangsta! Do you think It was that once they figured out it was your job, they wanted to get you in trouble?

  106. Philly

    Unbelievable! This comment is worthy of a post in, and of, itself. Remember, these churches are in the DC area. It is quite possible that they have someone from the government who is drinking their Koolaid and is helping them out. If said person is doing private work for a church using his governement position, this could be major.  They could get in trouble for such a thing. I am going to send this comment to a friend who works in such circles. If there is truly someone using his work connections to out someone’s private correspondence, there could be ramifications.

    I Hope Someone From SGM Central Is Reading This.See What Happened in the FBC Jax Lawsuit.

  107. Trina wrote:

    Wow! They are gangsta! Do you think It was that once they figured out it was your job, they wanted to get you in trouble?

    Possible, by my IT guy just kind of laughed it off. Gangsta indeed!

  108. Trina

    I think GirlTalk could get in trouble for this. I have sent this to a mutual friend  for advice. What do you think? 

     

  109. This is the typical pattern we see in spiritually abusive environments: bully behavior. What would be a typical Christian response? First of all, post the dang comment and dialogue. See if there is any truth to the comment. That is the way I would deal with it and I know Dee/Deb would deal with conflict. Put it on the table and talk. Is that really so difficult? But they are in a posture of defending and damage control and image control. They cannot let anyone know there are problems in the infrastructure, so they resort to bully tactics.

    The next best thing they could have done was ignore the comment. But noooooooooo, they have to pull an aggressive maneuver. They didn’t even have the courtesy to e-mail a response saying why they had concerns – they had to go all aggressive. And I think it’s interesting that they go to “authority” when it benefits them, but when victims come to them begging and pleading for help, THEY are the authority who handles all abuse cases. This is whacked, people. And it looks like I need to step away from the keyboard before I . . . . . .

  110. dee wrote:

    Did you get in trouble at work over this?

    No, IT however, did take my hard drive for a day and made “pictures” of it – whatever that means in IT speak. They came back a few days later and said they found nothing “inappropriate”

  111. Philly

    Could you let me know when this happened? With all the stuff with the SGM lawsuit, i would imagine that they would not want something like this to get out. CREEPY….I will be alerting the attorney in the lawsuit to be aware of this sort of thing.

  112. Julie Anne

    I think this one could go waaaaay beyond just being CREEPY. Creepy and Mahaney are so synonomous that it is expected.

    If a site solicits comments via a “contact us” page then, unless the comment was threatening, or there were a series of over the top comments that were unsettling, then there is the issue of harrassment. It gets worse. If this was a protected government computer, then some sort of security breach could be involved. That should be very concerning to the government.

     Now how could such a thing happen? 

    One possible scenario could involve a person who is “friends” with the SGM brigade and who works internally within this government division. If he/she, for example, were to  breach security to carry on a church vendetta I think there could be some potential issues. 

    Also, the IT guy has copies of what was sent and said that it was not threatening. Therefore, could the whiny, weak girls at Girltalk have gone crying to daddy to make the bad people stop disagreeing with them? Could daddy have called in a favor? Time will tell.

  113. Considering some of the comments by Brent, and now on Survivors regarding the ways of a certain Mrs. Mahaney, I think she is just as much a force to be reckoned with as CJ.

  114. dee wrote:

    Could you let me know when this happened?

    I just looked through my work email archives to see the communication with IT. Thursday, September 13 was the day I was contacted by IT. I was on leave on Friday, Sept 14, so that was the day IT “confiscated my computer”. I had another email on Wednesday, Sept 19 saying that there was nothing “inappropriate”.

    So because IT never told me what the questionable comment was, I went back to the girl blog and looked through the archives, and then I remembered! On Sept 10, they posted a “challenge” to lay off social media for like 2 weeks or something, and I posted something after the first day via their comments section, basically pointing out the irony in that they were using social media to talk about getting off social media, all the while they were still active in posting FB posts and tweets, and I think at that time they were having yet another “sale” on pictures with generic bible verses.

    I vaguely remember writing a fairly lengthy criticism via their comments pointing out all of the ways that this was strange and wrong. I wish I had the actual comment.

  115. @ Julie Anne:

    Julie Anne, keep up the good work of reminding them…on a related note, has anyone from the “TGC” crowd responded to your tweets about Mahaney speaking at their conference?

  116. Philly

    I have come to the conclusion that the Mahaney family are a bunch of whiny whackadoos. You know, the weird bully who finally gets punched in the nose and runs home to cry to mama. However, it appears that they may have stepped over a line once too often as evidenced by the lawsuit.

    There are all sorts of comments flying around SGM Survivors about Chad, baby brother, who has been protected by the whackadoo machine.Things are starting to emerge about their family. I bet that something is very, very strange with these girls who have grown up in such an enivironment. They continue like nothing is wrong yet their little world is starting to resemble the Truman Show.

    In the meantime, I am looking into a few things. We have “friends” too.

    SGM reminds of a movie called King of Hearts, in which inmates escape an insane asylum and populate a deserted town just before the Germans arrive. I hear rumor that two more churches are leaving the “happiest place on earth.”

  117. Ryan,

    Not one person from TGC has responded to my tweets. When commenting on their blogs, I have to very carefully word comments – basically disguise words, in order for them to post my comments. They know what I am talking about, but at least I can word it in such a way that it doesn’t name SGM and they feel more comfortable (ja: rolling eyes here). I am pushing them and they know it. There is nothing wrong with reasonable dialogue. These malignant church systems, when challenged, typically shift to the NO-TALK mode. And they act like bullies to enforce this rule (ahem, lawsuits). Guess what? I have a keyboard beneath my fingertips. I know how to do screen shots. Now, when leaving comments at those sites, I take screen shots because I know how they work. If they are not going to approve my posts, I do not have a problem posting them in a place where people can see them, here, on twitter, etc. They are doing exactly what my former pastor did – attempting to silence. We are attempting to draw attention to problems that have harmed countless people, leaving them without a voice. We, who are strong, have an obligation to speak up. I am not going to play their games anymore. I am not afraid of them. I will be a bully for victims. Sue me. Do you sense this triggered me? It did? I hate being silenced.

  118. Julie Anne

    Wait until you see what Deb dredged up for next week. it seems like a certain “leader” is trying to delete his supportive comments of CJ Mahaney. However, in the blog world, words float around until Jesus comes again and they can be found. TWW plans to do a public service post to help them remember what they said. 

  119. Anon 1 wrote:

    Nick, you cannot claim entrance into the wild west of the blogosphere until you have been deleted (or moderated) by the YRR!

    Oh, I remember that “The Newsroom” had an episode about a certain ‘trollgroup’ whereby if you wanted to join you had to start a flame war on an innocent blog somewhere. Some folks get their jollies out of it – google ‘troll outed’ for lots of stories.

    Anyhow, jest aside, I’m grateful for the ability in this thread to see how sincere, thoughtful and questioning comments are being ignored and cast aside. And Nick, verbosity is boringness usually in my case, but definitely never in yours ! (flattery, flattery)

  120. Dee: I think I know what you’re talking about. Fools. Do they not realize when they post something publicly on the internet, they left a footprint which can be tracked? Streisand effect is going to come back and bite him in the rear end. And I’ll be glad to help that along :)

  121. Philly

    I want to communicate with you offline. Is it alright if I use the email? I have talked with a few people and all of them think that this could be quite interesting…

  122. @ Julie Anne: Julie Anne, No one has responded to your TGC tweets? Shocking… I must say, though, that silence from that crowd seems to me to be a huge change from where that crowd was just a few years ago. When I left SGM in 2007, whenever I would post things critical of them or the other YRR on facebook or on different blogs I would get vehemently ATTACKED. Now? I haven't heard a peep out of anyone in probably 2-3 years, and I post criticisms just as frequently…Honestly, young Caleb's dust storms feel a bit like an anachronism. As my Irish forebears would say, "their silence speaks volumes." If their only remaining strategy is to try to pretend that no well-informed dissenting opinions exist, then they know in their hearts that they are wrong…

  123. I admit that I’m out of the loop on much of what is going on. I had to take a step back and get away from all the negative stories.

    That said…

    I’m somewhat sympathetic to people changing their mind about things. There were blog posts I wrote when I started blogging in 2005 and 2006 that I have since removed. I changed my mind about some topics. That doesn’t mean I was insincere or duplicitous. I sincerely changed my mind. I’m sure there are people who have stood up for some of the big dogs who are starting to regret it, have second thoughts, feel convicted, realize they’ve been deceived, etc.

    I guess I wouldn’t be so quick to condemn them. The Holy Spirit can change people’s views about things and open their eyes to the truth. Look at how many of us have changed our minds about doctrines, people, books, churches, etc.

  124. About a week ago I left a comment telling Denny Burk that he should enlist in the military so he can protect all of the weaker vessels in the military that he is apparenlty so concerned and offended about the United States sending into combat. I may have said something about their ability to run circles around him.

    Needless to say, it was pretty quickly gone.

  125. Caleb W

    Great comment. Piper also made some sort of statement that it would be an honor to go to war to prevent a woman for doing so. One of these days i really need to investigate how many of these guys have actually served in the military. Why do I get the feeling that few have.

  126. blog name: G. Craige Lewis Blog
    post: Super Bowl Sunday
    editor/moderator: G. Craige Lewis
    Comment: How many times did you watch the half time show to be able to give such a detailed report? Are men the only ones who can hear God’s will? Can God’s will be revealed to women?
    Time: around 5pm on February 6th, 2013
    The comment was never published.
    Why it was deleted: I wasn’t praising or whole heartily agreeing with the post or what everyone else was saying in the comments. I simply asked those three questions, and I doubt they/G. Craige Lewis liked being questioned.

    http://gcraige.blogspot.com/2013/02/super-bowl-sunday.html

  127. Caleigh

    Welcome to TWW. Well, just when I think it can’t get any worse, we now have some “Christian”dude, claiming to share only the truth,  discussing how the Illuminati is behind the Half Time show in the Super Bowl! Dee is banging her head on the kitchen table, scaring the pugs. I am now going to get another cup of coffee to shore up my constitution. Thank you for sharing this with us.

    Kevin Swanson meet G. Craig Lewis. You have a lot in common.

  128. haha, I know, I couldn’t help but comment! I wasn’t surprised my comment didn’t show up, but hey, at least I tried once. thanks for the welcome! I pop over here every once in awhile to catch up and always enjoy what I read when I do. :-)

  129. @ Jeff S:
    Wow! A couple minutes ago there were 21 comments and I was about to address Ray with #22. Suddenly, there are 18 and comments are closed! I wanted to ask him to consider addressing the man in question in depth, if he doesn’t want to address commenters. Also that, though he may not feel obligated to blog readers/commenters, he, Trueman and DeYoung ARE obligated to the man in question and to the Church as a whole to reassess their prior evaluation, and publicly affirm, modify, or retract their stamp of approval of 19 months back– based on a whole lot of additional facts. I would have let him know I think his evaluation, back then, was too hasty, but one now would not be.

  130. Jeff – great comment. I’m actually surprised that my comment remained. I think maybe from here on out, I will add this to my signature,

    Love,
    Julie Anne, woman, blogger, screenshot taker, deal with it

  131. Caleigh wrote:

    blog name: G. Craige Lewis Blog
    post: Super Bowl Sunday
    editor/moderator: G. Craige Lewis
    Comment: How many times did you watch the half time show to be able to give such a detailed report? Are men the only ones who can hear God’s will? Can God’s will be revealed to women?
    Time: around 5pm on February 6th, 2013
    The comment was never published.
    Why it was deleted: I wasn’t praising or whole heartily agreeing with the post or what everyone else was saying in the comments. I simply asked those three questions, and I doubt they/G. Craige Lewis liked being questioned.
    http://gcraige.blogspot.com/2013/02/super-bowl-sunday.html

    Ok, just clicked over and read that blog, and oh my goodness, I think the crazy’s going to infect me through the computer screen! The line ‘Knowledge of self is the enemy of God’ is mind-bogglingly stupid. Why do we have brains and intellects if we’re not allowed to use them? And why would having self-knowledge be a bad thing? It just makes no sense! And the whole Illuminati thing has always seemed bizarre to me, especially when promoted by Christians. They’re basically saying that there are ‘forces’ more powerful than God – hang on, but wouldn’t that be pretty blasphemous to say? But I guess my questioning is illegitimate because a) I’m female, and b) obviously bought by the Illuminati.

    It scares me that guys like him are listened to by people in an echo chamber of paranoia.

  132. Pam

    Illuminati, et al demonstrate that humans love a godd conspiracy theory.It’s kind of nice to blame the messed up world on “them” instead of plain old human screw up. I, too, love conspiracy theories when they are confined to fiction. Then, when my nose comes out of the book, I have to face reality once again. I had high hopes for a new television series called Zero Hour since it seemed to  combine conspiracies with sy fy stuff. Unfortunately, it runs like a bad Dan Brown novel with uninspiring actors. Darn. Waiting for Falling Skies this summer. Well produced show!

  133. “My Comment Was Deleted | The Wartburg Watch 2013” was a beneficial posting.

    If merely there were even more blogs such as this particular
    one in the actual world wide web. Regardless, thank
    you for your precious time, Ines

  134. It was’t my comment, but in a post by Adrian Warnock advertising a new book by Mark Driscoll. I was contributing to comments on Mark Driscoll and reports about some of his statements.

    The original comments were questioning whether what was referred as a possible darker side of Mark Driscoll should be challenged, some viewing them as abusive. Adrian Warnock replied. I comment on Adrian Warnock’s comment, fairly bluntly, but I believe fairly.

    Someone called Charles also posted a comment. This was moderated and removed. He then wrote roughly the same thing and it wasn’t removed. The original comments were then reinstated (looking at the posts you will see there are now two similar comments by Charles). I have wondered why the first one was originally removed, since it was faily innocuous.

    The overall comments address the issue as to whether to take notice if a church leader has a darker side. The debate then focused on whether the people around a person should speak out and I am pondering why they don’t. I am quite interested in this issue and in my comment drew a historical parallel – it has puzzled historians why apparently good people don’t speak out (see the comments). I have various candidates: apathy, ignorance, wishful speaking, blinded by hero worship, false sense of loyalty, not wanting lose influence and power and fear of negative consequences.

    For example, take the case Adrian Warnock. He can’t really be said to be ignorant. He is trained as medical doctor and a psychiatrist. He must know about personal interaction and the potential effect of abuse in a power relationship and be sensitive to the harm this can do, particularly to vulnerable people. His professional work code and environment would suggest that quite a few things Driscoll says should clearly not be tolerated. He is obviously a decent person and I have enjoyed reading his blogs. But he doesn’t seem to be able to bring himself to call a spade a spade (sorry if in the USA this gets lost in translation) when it comes to blogging about Mark Driscoll.

    Why not? I am trying to be charitable, but objectively, if he did speak out would that would be the end of his ability to have access to people like Driscoll, Molher, Piper, possibly Virgo, i.e. the powerful people in the new Calvinist movement that fuel his blogs and make them popular? I am not saying that is necessarily his reason.

    post to be found on

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarnock/2012/12/who-do-you-think-you-are-by-mark-driscoll/

    See below for moderated/removed/reinstated comments:

    Charles says:

    January 8, 2013 at 7:18 pm

    Hi Phillip,

    I take your point about compartmentalising things – I suppose the issue is the extent to which we ignore these type of remarks and don’t worry about them.

    Adrian seems to be saying go to a smaller church and experience a different type of leadership, if I understand him correctly, but I don’t quite understand what this has to do with smashing people’s faces in or running them over. Sorry if this sounds a bit depressing but is this a vision of strong leadership? Positive strong leaders I have encountered seem to be more at ease with themselves and don’t go around threatening people with violence. Maybe I have misunderstood Adrian on this point and apologies if this is the case and would welcome a further explanation.

    I am interested in your point as to whether journalists should feel responsible for challenging people. Again, it would be interesting to hear from Adrian on this point – have you ever felt you should challenge Mark on some of the things he has said? Would this be appropriate or would it just create a negative reaction and damage your good relationship with him. i.e. do more harm than good?

  135. http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2013/03/18/9-things-you-should-know-about-duck-dynasty/?comments#comments

    Blog: The Gospel Coalition. I commented on the above post.
    My comment: “I am so depressed about American Christianity right now.”
    Time of Comment: 5:40pm on March 18, 2013.
    Time of Deletion: Immediate.

    Reason: Duck Dynasty is apparently above criticism in the eyes of the GC because they sound like they might be conservative evangelicals and a lot of people like them.

    The Result: I am even more depressed about American Christianity.

  136. I give it about 10 minutes at most before this is deleted on http://jaredmoore.exaltchrist.com/2013/03/22/top-christian-blogs/#comments

    I don’t believe that you have never heard of SGM Survivors, which is frequently mentioned on The Wartburg Watch. You have made your prejudices VERY clear. And you are denying the entanglements and financial benefits that exist among blogs like yours, Cruciform Press, Tim Challies, The Gospel Coalition, SBC Voices, and others. You are defending the trough where you all feed. And if you expect to make money off of your discernment you better not quit your day job. I say to you as you said of The Wartburg Watch. You are a public liar.

  137. This one, which was my response to his asking for a response, was deleted.

    I want to begin by commending you for not deleting my comment and for responding to it. This is unusual among the prominent blogs of the reformed stripe.

    That said, in calling the ladies of The Wartburg Watch liars you mentioned in support of your accusation, two issues that are matters of interpretation. If you disagreed with their interpretation (what you call “connecting the dots”) you needed only to comment on their blog. They have a well-deserved reputation for encouraging, often soliciting and responding to dissenting points of view. In giving a fairly general critique of their blog you gave the impression that you are actually familiar with it but you are now saying that you have only ever read two or three posts (the ones containing the matters of interpretation.) Liar.

    Also, you parsed the answer to the inquiry about SGM Survivors very carefully so that it may not be technically untrue. (Clever device, asking for the web address.) However, I do not believe that you, as a person clearly familiar with SGM, are not aware of the existence of that blog. And I notice you didn’t respond to this in your responses to me. Liar.
    Also, I do not believe that you are so stupid that you don’t know that “on the payroll” is not the only beneficial financial relationship. That was deceptive.
    And you’ve admitted that you make money off your blog and advertise items for sale on it; which is NOT true of the Wartburg bloggers. You are at the trough.
    You have every right to list your top 200 blogs. Just don’t claim that your list was made solely according to some unbiased numerical algorithm. You admitted you were pro SGM and anti certain blogs regardless of numbers. Liar.
    Finally, you evidently feel that your blog is enough of a platform that people care about your Top 200 list and maybe you’re correct. But you haven’t used that platform to even acknowledge the pain of the many child and adult victims of sexual and other abuse within SGM. Worse than liar.
    Finally, if numbers are all that matters, a certain Jewish carpenter who only ministered in a small eastern nation and worked closely with very few would not be included. And He said, “My temple should be a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves.”

  138. I’ve just replied to Gavin on Jared Wilson’s blog – He made the claim that his comment there is what got him banned from TWW. Gavin has stated that if anyone wants to reply to him then please ask Dee for his email address & he’ll answer in private. I decided not to take him up on his offer as he made his statements publically, how on earth could he deny public right of reply to others? It’s a very interesting tactic – say something outrageous in public & then ask for private response only, so as not to ‘take up space on the blog’…simper simper…hysterically manipulative & passive agressive. Here’s my reply to him:

    Oh Gavin, you & I both know that’s not why you got banned from TWW. It was just the final straw after numerous crass remarks & patronising comments, & your inability to allow people to disagree with your reformed theology. You had had a warning & short ban before, & unfortunately just couldn’t play nicely when allowed back.

    You have, in short, displayed all the signs of someone trolling the website looking for trouble. I wish you well, but have to say quite clearly that TWW is not anti-Christian, that’s just ludicrous. It is pro-having a wide communion of believers, agreed on the primary issues, & genuine discourse with others, which you may believe is anti-Christian, but most do not. Please reconsider your words.

  139. Well I’ve not been deleted yet, but Gavin has asked that I discuss anything with him via email. Lovely – he can make any public claim he wants, but all criticism has to be in private… Here’s my reply:

    Hmmm Gavin, you get the opportunity to publicly say on this blog that you believe the TWW is anti-christian, & somehow I don’t get the same public right to reply to say ‘no they’re not’? Don’t hide behind the blog excuse, it’s exceptionally disingeuous.

    Jared, I apologise for interacting with Gavin in this way if it offends, I just felt that a public response was called for to his very serious charge. I get a huge amount out of the Christian blog world & am very grateful for its existence.

  140. Wooo…now I’m ‘disrupting’ things…
    ‘ Dear Mr Moore
    I am sorry for the disruption to your blog but I think what has happened amply demonstrates the tactics of the Wartburg Watch. Could you please block all comments addressed to me? I am quite happy to deal with these people directly.
    Regards
    Gavin White
    Reply
    Beakerj says:
    March 30, 2013 at 7:25 pm

    Dear Jared, in my time reading TWW I have discovered that they are more scrupulous than most in researching their facts, & are hugely more open than most to being critiqued. I highly recommend you ask Deb & Dee questions if you have them. I’d also like to point out that one of your commentators is making unsubstantiated claims about the christian character of TWW, why he was eventually banned from commenting & on ‘tactics’. There were no tactics here, just me pointing out some lies. If truth telling is a tactic, so be it. I have no idea why someone would want to say such serious things in public, but only get criticism privately, do you?’

    And that, as the Actress said to the Bishop, is that.

  141. This was very difficult for me; but I just sent Jared an e-mail apologizing for my tone and attitude and asking his forgiveness. A conscience can be a very uncomfortable thing; but I don’t dare not listen to mine.

    As someone who very regularly makes an ass of herself I have learned to be good at apologizing. Sigh. And thank you, Jesus, for your patience with me!

  142. “I don’t believe that you have never heard of SGM Survivors, which is frequently mentioned on The Wartburg Watch.”

    Phoenix, I did not believe it either considering the blogs I have seen Jared comment on. A lot of these guys played dumb about Driscoll, too, when a bunch of really bad stuff became more publicly aware like Joyful Exiles and the Discipline scandals. Even though his teachings were everywhere and they had been promoting Driscoll for years. One would think they would have been aware of Driscoll’s sermons, books,videos and aware of his type of thinking/behavior. Me thinks they wait for their leaders to send the signal for them to know what and how to think on issues.

  143. Phoenix

    That was kind of you. It has been most difficult fo me since he is accusing us of sinning and talling lies.It is a good insitinct to defend that which you know to be good.  I will be dealing with this in the coming week. I plan to poke a little un at the whole situation. 

  144. Dee, one of the difficult things about apologizing for my attitude was that I don’t want to leave the impression that I am not 100% supportive of my Wartburg ladies! You are right, it is definitely a good instinct; but I responded to that good impulse in the wrong way. Sigh.

    God help us all.

  145. It just baffles me that these guys delete comments that criticize them. I mean, if you are on a public blog, of course you are going to get criticized. I get criticized on my blog. So what? I look to see if there’s any truth to what they are saying and if there is, make correction, if not move on. Who cares?!

  146. @ Julie Anne:

    To many people and organizations a blog is a PR device. As such of course they will delete comments.

    Remember there is no internet police force that enforces conduct on blogs and other web sites. Of course Russian, Cuba, China, and others WANT there to be such a thing. And at times the US Congress starts to pass laws which would allow such things. (This is done by both parties so don’t be quick to make this a political debate.) But to date these efforts have been stopped.

  147. The name of the blog: Lysa Terkeurst
    The name of the post: Will You Join Me (http://lysaterkeurst.com/2012/11/will-you-join-me/)
    The name of the editor (if more than one): Unknown
    Your comment: Written below
    The time it was left: November 28, 2012 PM
    The approximate time it was deleted: She would not post it.
    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious):I was asking financial questions.

    What I wrote:

    My family and I get together to research organizations for our annual giving. It is something we do with our teen-age children as well as my parents in order to have my children understand the process and give wisely.

    I like to use Charity Navigator as well as Guidestar to guide our decisions.

    I’ve used both to get information to evaluate what you’ve written in your blog post.

    Perhaps you can give additional information based on what I’ve found? In the 2011 Form 990 for Proverbs 31 Ministry, Inc., you are listed as receiving compensation. Of course, Form 990 is not listed for this year, so it’s difficult to know if or how much compensation you may have received.

    In addition, in 2011 you set up a limited liability corporation(LLC) in NC. I believe this would be how your speaking fees are received, i.e. separate from Proverbs 31 and received solely by you?

    Technically, you are correct about receiving little to no compensation from Proverbs 31, but you have the LLC to receive speaking monies. Do you fund Proverbs 31 out of the LLC? In other words, how do you donate on an ongoing monetary basis to this non-profit (Proverbs 31) you are asking monies for today?

    I firmly believe transparency is vital when asking people to give hard-earned money and also when so many folks have been taken by scams in the past. Thankfully, tools exist on the internet to guide our giving decisions.

  148. The name of the blog: Challies.com
    The name of the post: Joni and Ken: An Untold Love Story (http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/joni-ken-an-untold-love-story)
    The name of the editor: Tim Challies
    Your comment: Written below
    The time it was left: April 11, 2013 @ 10:51 a.m.
    The approximate time it was deleted: It was NOT deleted
    Why you think it was NOT deleted: Because hard-core Complementarianistas are incapable of detecting sarcasm.
    NOTE: Comment posted under my real name: Ted Kijeski

    BACKGROUND: This comment thread concerns Challies’ review of Ken and Joni Earackson Tada’s new book. I read through the comments eagerly to see if anyone was going to be insensitive enough to pull the “where-is-her-husband-card” with someone like Joni Eareckson. Sure enough, someone did.

    a commenter named Diana Dar wrote:

    It’s a huge question for me how can a marriage be biblically right and a good example to follow if the wife is the one on stage and the husband is always beside her?! Isn’t it supposed to be the other way around?! Of course it is. I am a wife myself by the way. :)

    To which I responded:

    Just so, Diana! I was thinking almost the same thing and I was hoping someone would speak out Biblically. I have admired Joni over the years and even listened to her radio program, but I always wondered: Where is her husband in all this? Of course, the world–and worldly Christians–will argue that after all, she’s the one who’s a quadriplegic; she’s the one with the testimony; shouldn’t she be the one ministering? But any Titus 2 woman worth her salt would have her husband speak for her: the woman is to remain silent. Ken Tada can give Joni Eareckson Tada’s testimony for Joni Eareckson Tada. She can appear on stage with him, if necessary, but she is not to speak. If someone in the audience has a question that Ken can’t answer, then that audience member can ask her own husband at home.:

    Not only was my comment not deleted, but it was actually responded to by none other than Tim Challies himself, who wrote:

    There is nothing in the Bible that forbids a woman from speaking on a stage at a conference or event. And certainly nothing about her husband speaking and her having to ask her own husband at home. There may be a seed of truth to some of that in the context of the worship services of a local church, but Joni isn’t a preacher and isn’t taking the place of one at any conference I’ve seen.

    The original commenter, Diana, did actually rejoin the conversation, but did not address my comment. So both she and Tim Challies believed my comment to be totally serious. This despite the fact that I suggested that a woman who poses a question to Ken Tada about his wife Joni that Ken cannot answer, that this woman is to ask her own husband at home! Apparently no one realized I was being facetious (except, possibly, one person, who posted a comment, “Seriously?” in response to my comment).

    So you see, boys and girls (well, maybe just the boys ;), sometimes we can learn as much from the comments that aren’t deleted as we can from those that are.

    Here is the LINK to the comment thread.

  149. SMG,

    Not everyone understands your sarcasm like we do!  Thanks for posting that comment on Challies’ website.  So women can speak at a conference but cannot read scripture in his church.  Interesting…

  150. SMG – Now that’s funny

    I vote for – This is the – BEST COMMENT – Of the year – And – Attempted Biblical Answer.

    And that Challies attempted to give you the “True” biblical understanding is “Priceless.”

    “but Joni isn’t a preacher and isn’t taking the place of “one” at any conference I’ve seen.

    So – If Joni took the place of a preacher? – That would disqualify her????

    Maybe they have already been turned over to a reprobate mind???

  151. Sergius!!!! I am spewing coffee here!!

    They seriously do not see how ridiculous they are!

    (When there is a building and elders are present, women cannot read scripture aloud in front of men. Got that? It right there in 1 Corin 14…. right after Paul talks about women prophesying in the Body in chapter 11. :o)

  152. Hi Anon 1

    Check out that site – People are really questioning Ted.

    And I left a comment – by Blest – You might want to read it before it’s deleted. ;-)

  153. Challies has sort of painted himself into a corner there. We get back to what is the definition of the ekklesia. Obviously it is NOT when believers gather… anywhere…. to him. Obviously he thinks it is some special building with those who have Christianese titles in charge of the other believers.

    I guess the conference cannot be a a gathering of the ekklesia so it is ok for her to teach men (which is exactly what she is doing whether it is reading scrpture or giving a testimony)

    Guess those with the indwelling Holy Spirit did not show up and that is what makes it not a gathering of believers?

  154. A. Amos Love wrote:

    SMG
    Don’t know if you noticed but
    http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/joni-ken-an-untold-love-story#disqus_thread
    A couple of folks are questioning Ted – you – there…
    It’s only polite to respond… Don’t ya think?

    I’m really torn on this, Amos. The woman whose husband died in prison really got to me. If anyone deserves a response, it’s that woman. However, I’m concerned that by doing so I might make matters worse.

  155. Would it be wrong for someone to clue them in that your comment was sarcastic, or would that defeat your whole purpose?

    I don’t know. It does seem sad, though, how greatly hung up these people are with headship and all.
    Just so sad.

  156. Mara wrote:

    Would it be wrong for someone to clue them in that your comment was sarcastic, or would that defeat your whole purpose?

    Not sure, Mara. I guess I’d feel better if someone did that. I can’t figure out how someone could read that and not realize that a suggestion for a woman to ask her husband to answer a question about Joni Eareckson Tada that Joni’s own husband couldn’t answer could possibly be serious.

  157. Sergius Martin-George wrote:

    I can’t figure out how someone could read that and not realize that a suggestion for a woman to ask her husband to answer a question about Joni Eareckson Tada that Joni’s own husband couldn’t answer could possibly be serious.

    I always find it sad when women are going to these gurus about the rules for this or that. I mean every single contingency as I used to really watch this stuff early on in blogging. It reminds me so much they live in a sort of Talmudic Christianity with no power of the Holy Spirit.

  158. Anon 1 wrote:

    We get back to what is the definition of the ekklesia. Obviously it is NOT when believers gather… anywhere…. to him.

    Anon1:

    Was that you who chimed in with the comment this morning (Monday)on the Challies thread under an initialed pseudonym?

  159. Sergius Martin-George wrote:

    Was that you who chimed in with the comment this morning (Monday)on the Challies thread under an initialed pseudonym?

    No way. I don’t want those viscious people having my IP addy. I am well aware of how they operate and then claim it is love.

  160. Blog: Ed Stetzer: The Lifeway Research Blog

    Date: 4/22/13, comment left this morning

    Post: http://www.edstetzer.com/2013/04/morning-roundup-042213-holy-spirit-is-the-bible-true-obama-on-abortion-ministering-to-boston.html

    Comment: “Mr. Stetzer, please acknowledge this open letter written to you by Christa Brown of SNAP: http://stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com/2013/04/dear-ed-speak-up.html You spoke up about ABWE. Please do not be silent now.”

    Note: When I left the comment this morning, no comments were published on Ed’s post. Now he has published a comment by Bob Cleveland, but he has not published my comment. I also sent an e-mail through his website over the weekend linking to Christa Brown’s open letter and asking him to acknowledge it and speak up against the scandal in the SBC. I haven’t received a reply.

  161. I got blocked on Twitter by Matt Chandler and now have decided to keep track of all of this foolishness on my blog. I have a tab at the top entitled “Negative Responses” in which I will keep track of people who have blocked me on Twitter and also will start the list that Dee told me to start over a year ago in which I failed to do – - – keeping track of silly names people call me (ie, Jezebel, Woman of Mass Destruction). I should be able to recall some of them. Check out this exchange that got me blocked. Wow. It never ceases to amaze me. I’m such a threat, evidently.

    http://goo.gl/hbToU

  162. Blog: Peter Lumpkins: SBC Tomorrow

    Date: April 30, 2013

    Post: http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2013/04/sovereign-grace-ministries-and-cj-mahaney-wants-lawsuit-to-end-.html

    Comment: Peter, I am glad you are writing about the child abuse and coverup scandal at SGM. Mahaney’s neocalvinist T4G celebrity-pastor friends won’t acknowledge it because Mahaney is one of “their men.” These celebrity pastors lack conscience. I’ve learned much about this situation from the news and websites like The Wartburg Watch and SGM Survivors.

    But I want to ask, Peter, why have you never acknowledged the work of Christa Brown and SNAP? Mrs. Brown has worked for a long time to document the child abuse and coverup scandals in the Southern Baptist Convention at her websites stopbaptistpredators.com and stopbaptistpredators.blogspot.com. Mrs. Brown has tried to help the SBC put an end to the child abuse and coverup scandal in the SBC, but they have both ignored and attacked her. As far as I know, the only Southern Baptists who have positively acknowledged Christa Brown are Wade Burleson and Dwight McKissic. Not only is there no mention of Mrs. Brown’s work on this site, there is no mention of the ongoing Prestonwood scandal involving the pedophile John Langworthy. Why are you only talking about child sexual abuse and coverup scandals outside of your own denomination?

  163. @ Nicholas:Now you’ve gone and done it. He dislikes Wade Burleson. He is also an extremist about consumption of alcohol. You should have added that you would “tip one back” in honor of his post to round out your comment. You would be put in his permanent banned box!!

  164. dee wrote:

    @ Nicholas:Now you’ve gone and done it. He dislikes Wade Burleson. He is also an extremist about consumption of alcohol.

    True, but it looks like I was incorrect about him deleting my comment (it had appeared that he did earlier). He has published my comment and responded with a denunciation of child abuse and coverup in all denominations, including the SBC: http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2013/04/sovereign-grace-ministries-and-cj-mahaney-wants-lawsuit-to-end-.html?cid=6a00d83451a37369e2017eeab4ff3d970d#comment-6a00d83451a37369e2017eeab4ff3d970d

    I am glad that he didn’t respond like commenters on the SBCVoices blog have responded to Christa Brown’s work in the past.

  165. Hi Dee and Nicholas,

    Nope, Nicholas’ comment was never deleted. I found the comment in the spam bucket as I sometimes find even regular commenters’ contributions in the spam bucket (including my own at times!!). My spam filter seems way too sensitive, but alas we’ve learned to live with it. For the record, then, I posted the comment as soon as I discovered the comment.

    As for Dee’s apparent reasoning why she seemed to think (and think wrongly recall) I deleted Nicolas’ comment, I find to be of the strangest sort. Apparently Dee reasons that since Peter Lumpkins a)”dislikes Wade Burleson”; and b) remains “an extremist about consumption of alcohol,” then c) it follows I would delete Nicolas’ comment containing a question about why I never have acknowledged the work of Christa Brown and SNAP, et al.

    Is this the level of reasoning skill I read on many original posts coming from this site? Happily I can say without reservation it is not. Indeed I read much here with which I have agreed. And, for the most part, I’ve noted the original posts seem to offer those whom they criticize an honorable reading when they choose to engage. Fortunately, the sad reasoning Dee offers above cannot and should not be viewed as a model representing the more sober side of TWW.

    With that, I am…
    Peter Lumpkins

    P.S. I’d love to send you a complimentary copy of Alcohol Today: Abstinence in an Age of Indulgence (Hannibal Books, 2009) for your consideration. While some see it, as you put it, the view of “an extremist about consumption of alcohol,” I but view it as a sober (no pun intended) interpretation of the biblical text coupled with a modern application of revealed Christian ethics. Drop me an email and I’ll gladly send you a copy…

  166. peter lumpkins wrote:

    Fortunately, the sad reasoning Dee offers above cannot and should not be viewed as a model representing the more sober side of TWW.

    I can take it!

  167. peter lumpkins wrote:

    ’d love to send you a complimentary copy of Alcohol Today: Abstinence in an Age of Indulgence (Hannibal Books, 2009) for your consideration

    And trying to be more “sober”, I will take you up on this offer. My poor deceased father will turn over in his grave. He was a Russian and a doctor and firmly believed that spirits, in moderation, were beneficial to one’s constitution. However, in keeping with my policy of reading diverse thinking as opposed to restricting ideas, I’ll take you up on your offer.

    I do have one question. There is this Chantix commercial on TV. It is a smoking cessation tool and they say you are allowed to smoke for the first week of the program. Can I sip a glass of wine to calm my nerves while I read your book?

    dee@thewartburgwatch.com

  168. @ peter lumpkins: “Fortunately, the sad reasoning Dee offers above cannot and should not be viewed as a model representing the more sober side of TWW.’
    Dear Mr Limpkins– As legal console representing the more sober side of TWW (note my initials– AA–) I must insist that you desist (and seize) from impugning the sobriety of glorious blog queen Dee on your blog at SBCtalks. ;0 :)
    David of AA, Legal Console, Freedom and Dignity University

  169. PS Phil Driscoll is welcome to play his trumpet at our university any time he likes, so sotp bashing him!

  170. I readily admit that I have control issues. I strongly dislike it when someone tries to control what I can and cannot say. Last night I commented on Denny Burk’s new article (wp.me/p1I00q-6mj ) asking him to define “feminism” because it appears that his definition is different from mine. I was the first commenter and it immediately went to moderation. I went back to look at it and 2 other comments were approved. They came in around 30 min. AFTER mine. ARGH. I posted the screen shot with my blog post here: http://goo.gl/UKwiO. What do you know, Gary W., one of my readers just informed me that Tom Parker got to ask the same question. As far as I know, Tom Parker is a dude. I am not. His question got posted, mine did not. Go figure. Blech. Did I say the topic was on “feminism?” The irony of all of this.

  171. @ Julie Anne:

    Just read the article and left my own comment, which almost certainly won’t be published. So here it is for when it’s inevitably rejected:

    Hi Denny, I haven’t read much on transgender issues, but from what I have read it isn’t as simple as you present it in terms of sex and gender. Many transgender people (if it wasn’t 1am here I’d find some stats and journal articles) actually have brain chemistry that matches the ‘other’ sex (i.e. the one they identify with), and there are also those like buddyglass mentions who have chromosomal differences, such as XXY, XYY. Then there are people born intersex (what used to be called hermaphrodite), who have both sex and gender issues to deal with. While for most people sex = gender, be careful before making assumptions about why those who identify differently do so.

  172. Marge: So, 8 hrs later my comment was posted – within 30 minutes of the personal e-mail I sent asking him why it wasn’t posted. Keep in mind, that he was surely getting hits from my blog as well as a ping-back. He surely read my blog post and the pressure was on. I have had no response as to why the delay. I just added a new comment that posted immediately (got a screen shot just in case):

    I am troubled that it took 8 hours for my original comment to get posted. I am especially disturbed that commenter Tom Parker asked the same question as me and his question was posted, but mine was not. Can you please help me to understand why my comment was delayed for so long when it was the same question? I’m sure my readers would be interested to know, too.

  173. Dee/Deb – I got a response from Denny Burk. He says that first-time commenters go to queue. He wasn’t aware of it until I sent an e-mail. I am satisfied with his response. Feel free to remove my posts.

  174. Ok, so it appears that all of my comments are getting posted, but an interesting thing is happening. It’s like he intentionally doesn’t answer my question that I’ve asked now twice publicly and once via e-ail: “what is your definition of feminism?” And Pam, btw, I told him via personal e-mail that I knew of another post that was in moderation and identified yours. I notice that he hasn’t published it.

  175. Pam wrote:

    @ Julie Anne:

    It might be because I didn’t have surname added to my comment. I’d forgotten he deletes comments without surnames.

    Right. Except for Brave Lass. Somehow she gets through regularly without a surname.

    Hmmmm. I wonder how that works.

  176. I’ve never posted on here (I like to lurk) but this got me a little fed up, so I decided to go ahead and post this.

    The name of the blog: The Gospel Coalition
    The name of the post: Why Rising Social Awareness in the Church Should Be Encouraging
    The name of the editor (if more than one): Justin Holcomb
    Your comment:
    I’m sorry, but I find it somewhat insulting to run a post about the importance of social injustice for the oppressed and victimized when this site has yet to acknowledge the oppression and victimization happening under your noses with Sovereign Grace Ministries, much less shown care for the victims.

    To not sound too antagonistic, I will pose this question: In regards to how this post claims we should act with social injustice, how should The Gospel Coalition (having ties with Sovereign Grace Ministries) respond to the alleged victims of these crimes? How should they act in “tangible acts of love, service, and mercy” as you stated?

    The time it was left: 1:24 AM
    The approximate time it was deleted: Sometime in the night
    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious): Never got past moderation. I said the “Ministry-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named”. Or maybe it was my one spelling error :P

  177. Posted on the same blog post that Invalid_Nate did – same result :

    The name of the blog: The Gospel Coalition
    The name of the post: Why Rising Social Awareness in the Church Should Be Encouraging
    The name of the editor (if more than one): Justin Holcomb

    Your comment:
    And yet, there is no compassion or outcry of support for the victims named in the SGM lawsuit. You don’t have to condemn the defendants to support the abused.

    The time it was left: May 17, 2013 at 9:09 AM
    The approximate time it was deleted: Around 11:00 AM the same day
    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious): Also never made it past moderation. I’m guessing the reference to “SGM” had something to do with it… ;-)

  178. I notice a trend. I find it so ironic that they decided to post an article about social injustice the day after the 2nd amended lawsuit came out. Baffles my mind that they see no issue or hypocrisy in it.

  179. Just as an FYI, I posted the following on TGC and it WAS NOT delete:

    “And the church is largely no different: we will go to the mat for protecting the life of the unborn, but when there are innocent children at stake who are born and alive under everyone’s definition (for example, those sexually molested in SGM churches who were NOT defendend by the church and continue to be ignored by the Christian community at large), it makes it clear that pro-life is a stance taken for the sake of something other than the protection of innocent life. When the church doesn’t protect these lives, the credibility of pro-life position is really shot.”

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2013/05/03/how-to-change-a-society-in-5-easy-steps/?comments#comments

  180. The name of the blog: — OutofUr.com

    The name of the post: — “Dallas Willard Changed My Ministry Forever”

    The name of the editor (if more than one): — There are several editors: Skye Jethani, Marshall Shelley, Drew Dyck (and of course, my favorite Url!)

    Your comment — I was commenting about Dallas Willard, a man who was well deserving of praise. A truly honest man of integrity. Then I said that Christianity Today’s Out of Ur blog needs to post about the Sovereign Grace Ministries Lawsuit. I said that I had seen Skye Jethani speak in person and I know he cares about what non-Christians, the unchurched, and the dechurched think about Christianity. I urged him to speak up.

    The time it was left up — About 2 days.

    The approximate time it was deleted — Still missing in action

    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious) — I think that people at Christianity Today haven’t read the 46-page lawsuit yet.
    http://spiritualsoundingboard.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2nd-amended-lawsuit-filing-may-14-2013.pdf

    If they had, they would be sounding bells and not be so frightened. This is not going to end well for SGM and Mahaney. Starting with paragraph #29, you read more than 180 separate horrifying accusations giving names, locations, and descriptions of the acts that were allegedly done to little children as young as 2 years old by leaders of Sovereign Grace Ministries and Covenant Life School. No average person can read this and not think there is something behind these allegations. Several of the alleged victims have revealed their names. And we heard on Janet Mefferd’s interview with attorney Bill O’Neil (on 5-16-2013) that more alleged victims are coming forward to be added as Plaintiffs on this class action lawsuit.

  181. @ Jeff S:

    Touche. I guess it’s not so much the act of actually naming it as much as it is pointing out their silence about it, which, in my opinion, is the important part.

  182. Christianity Today appears to be protecting the Sovereign Grace Ministries big-wigs who made public Victory Tweets celebrating that most of the child sexual abuse lawsuit against their buddy C. J. Mahaney was thrown out of court. These include Tweets from: Denny Burk (@DennyBurk), Kevin DeYoung (@RevKevDeYoung), Justin Taylor (@BetweenTwoWorlds), and Owen Strachan (@ostrachan)

    - * – * – * -

    The name of the blog – Christianity Today Gleanings

    The URL for the blog post – http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2013/05/judge-dismisses-sovereign-grace-ministries-abuse-lawsuit.html

    The name of the post – Judge Tosses Out Most of Abuse Lawsuit Against Sovereign Grace Ministries

    The name of the editor (if more than one) – Harold Smith.

    Your comment – “In my second comment (above) I mentioned there were several public tweets from Christian leaders who are sympathetic to defendant C. J. Mahaney, regarding the judge’s action yesterday. Julie Anne Smith, a blogger on church abuse, has posted screenshots of their tweets on Spiritual Sounding Board.”

    The time it was left – 6:50 pm ET 5-18-2013

    The approximate time it was deleted – 8:30 pm ET (less than 2 hours later)

    For the attorneys: Everything from this point forward is “alleged.”

    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious) – In my opinion, “Christianity Today Magazine” is protecting the Sovereign Grace Ministries big-wigs who made public Victory Tweets because their friend C. J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries got off most of the allegations in the lawsuit due to the statute of limitations (when the victims turned 21). Two victims are still under 21 and that part of the lawsuit is still active.

    See the Tweets here:
    http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/05/18/sovereign-grace-ministries-lawsuit-whirlwind-recap/

    Why are these men celebrating? Don’t they realize how horrifying this lawsuit it, and that the victims need to tell their story and the defendants need to demonstrate their innocence, if possible?

    - * – * – * -

    Here’s a few highlights adapted from the lawsuit. GRAPHIC.

    The Sovereign Grace Ministries child sexual abuse lawsuit is a public document and is available online. It is a class action civil suit.
    Download it here: http://spiritualsoundingboard.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2nd-amended-lawsuit-filing-may-14-2013.pdf

    Nearly every paragraph is horribly graphic, detailing names, locations, and description of sexual abuse.

    Summary of some key paragraphs, which are abridged and not quoted verbatim:

    Paragraph
    #1
    Describes this as a lawsuit seeking damages for all persons harmed by an ongoing conspiracy that permitted sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.

    #2
    Abuse of children occurred at church buildings, school buildings, during church retreats, and other events.

    #29
    From 1982 to present conspiracy of defendants to permit sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.

    #34
    8 year old child was forced to meet with the defendant who molested her and another defendant and was told to “forgive” the molester. The defendant did not report the molestation.

    #36-37
    Youth ministry leader Morales molested several boys who admitted it to Chris Glass but were cautioned against talking about the facts. [Ed: Morales is in jail for child sexual abuse as of 5-18-2013.]

    #51 Defendant David Adam was convicted and served jail time. He was welcomed back into the church without the church taking any effective steps to prevent him from having continued access to children.

    #75-77
    Second-grade girl pushed down and gang-raped by defendants and by others who were wearing masks.

    #109
    Defendants Ecelbarger, Mullery and V. Hinders, conspiring together with Mahaney and Loftness, violated the mandatory reporting obligations and conspired together to cover up [name withheld pending court ruling on defense motion]‘s molestation of children.

    #128
    The church provided babysitting services for Home Group members, many of whom homeschooled their children, but failed to advise them that the defendant had raped and assaulted Jane Doe.

    #131
    Defendants made a series of misrepresentations to the parents of Jane Doe to prevent them from attending court appearances and to prevent them from filing a victim impact statement…

    #132
    …Defendants falsely claimed that they were speaking on behalf of the parents of Jane Doe, and falsely claimed that the parents did not wish to participate in the court proceedings regarding the sexual assault…

    #138
    Discovery will show that Defendants Mullery, David Hinder and Vince Hinders (sic) spoke with Maryland-based Defendants Mahaney and Loftness, and together conspired to prevent any reporting to the secular authorities. 

    #150
    Defendants conspired to permit the pedophiliac to have unfettered access to children…in a back hallway where children routinely played

    #157 – Mahaney alert
    Rather than report the ongoing abuse to secular authorities or take any steps to stop the abuse, Defendants informed the father that his children had reported the abuse.  This led to further abuse by the father.  In exchange for the conspiracy of silence, the abusive father paid to send Defendants Mahaney, Ricucci, and Layman and their families on vacation to the Kiawah Islands, South Carolina.”

    #173
    …they permitted Griney to teach and have unfettered access to children, and conspired to cover up the facts.

    #177
    On or about August 17, 2011, Defendants admitted during a meeting that they placed protecting the churches from lawsuits over and above the safety of children. This admission revealed ….[they were] acting for financially motivated reasons, had designed and agreed upon a plan to obstruct justice, yet permit predators to continue to have unfettered access to children in church and school settings.

    #178
    Defendants permitted David Adams, a known pedophile, to attend church-sponsored sleepovers without advising parents about his sexual deviance.

    - * – * – * –

    I think the victims deserve their day in court. And if C. J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries and Covenant Life School are not culpable (2 Defendants have already gone to jail for child sexual abuse), then let them be exonerated in court.

  183. Nicholas wrote:

    CT is pathetic.

    Nicholas — What’s so disappointing is that over the past 30 years I’ve known several people whom I’ve admired and respected at Christianity Today. I always thought CT was a cutting-edge news organization. It’s so sad to see that their flagship magazine is little more than propaganda.

  184. Nicolas —
    “Christianity Today” has now posted 2 articles on their Christianity Today Gleanings blog on the Sovereign Grace Ministries child sexual abuse lawsuit since 5-14-2013. At least the online version of CT is doing something. Let’s see what the print side does. That’s better than “Christian Post” and “World Magazine,” which have been completely silent.

    What’s so interesting is that The Wartburg Watch has gotten more than 1200 reader comments in the past 7 days on these stories. No other Christian website is getting that level of reader activity right now. What does that say?

  185. Janey wrote:

    That’s better than “Christian Post” and “World Magazine,” which have been completely silent.

    Those publications are both sympathetic to these guys. Richard Land is one of the heads of CP. Al Mohler makes contributions to it.

    Marvin Olasky is Presbyterian. World Mag has done exposes of men outside the neocalvinist camp, such as David Barton for his fraud and Dinesh D’Souza for marital unfaithfulness. I hope that they will write about the infinitely worse sins of child abuse and coverup engaged in by a group within the neocalvinist camp, that being SGM. But the fact that they haven’t already covered it is bad enough.

    And to my knowledge, neither CT, CP, or WM have covered the child abuse and coverup scandal of the SBC which has been known for even longer. Among the Christian newsmedia, Bob Allen of EthicsDaily.com and Associated Baptist Press has done the most to cover that tragic story.

    I agree that we should give credit where it is due, and CT is at least publishing the story. But you are correct that TWW has done more to make this story public than any official Christian news publication.

  186. The name of the blog — The Alabama Baptist

    URL – http://thealabamabaptist.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/sbc-leaders-stand-by-accused-colleague/#comments

    The name of the post — SBC leaders stand by accused colleague

    The name of the editor (if more than one) — Bob Terry and Jennifer Davis Rash

    Your comment — (See below)

    The time it was left — approx 7:10 pm ET on May 29, 2013

    The approximate time it was deleted — It was never posted.

    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious) — I hope it’s not a code of silence to protect perpetrators rather than children. But that’s how it seems.

    My comment was in response to an earlier commenter:

    Griffin, let me give you actual paragraph numbers that show a different story…

    (Everything beyond this point is “alleged,” for the lawyers out there.)

    The vast majority of the 218 paragraphs are horribly graphic, detailing names, locations, and description of sexual abuse. Summary of some paragraphs, which are abridged and not quoted verbatim, are below:

    Paragraph #:
    #1
    Describes this as a lawsuit seeking damages for all person harmed by an ongoing conspiracy that permitted sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.

    #2
    Abuse of children occurred at church buildings, school buildings, during church retreats, and other events.

    #29
    From 1982 to present conspiracy of defendants to permit sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.

    #34
    8-year-old child had to meet with the defendant who molested her and another defendant and was told to “forgive” the molester. The defendant did not report the molestation.

    #36-37
    Youth ministry leader Morales molested several boys who admitted it to Chris Glass but were cautioned against talking about the facts.

    #51
    Defendant David Adams was convicted and served jail time. He was welcomed back into the church without the church taking any effective steps to prevent him from having continued access to children.

    #75-77
    Second-grade girl pushed down and gang-raped by defendants and by other adults who were wearing masks.

    #109
    Defendants Ecelbarger, Mullery and V. Hinders, conspiring together with Mahaney and Loftness, violated the mandatory reporting obligations and conspired together to cover up [name withheld pending court ruling on defense motion]‘s molestation of children.

    #128
    The church provided babysitting services for Home Group members, many of whom homeschooled their children, but failed to advise them that the defendant had raped and assaulted Jane Doe.

    #131
    Defendants made a series of misrepresentations to the parents of Jane Doe to prevent them from attending court appearances and to prevent them from filing a victim impact statement…

    #132
    …Defendants falsely claimed that they were speaking on behalf of the parents of Jane Doe, and falsely claimed that the parents did not wish to participate in the court proceedings regarding the sexual assault…

    #178
    Defendants permitted David Adams, a known pedophile, to attend church-sponsored sleepovers without advising parents about his sexual deviance.

    #138
    Discovery will show that Defendants Mullery, David Hinder and Vince Hinders (sic) spoke with Maryland-based Defendants Mahaney and Loftness, and together conspired to prevent any reporting to the secular authorities.

    #150
    Defendants conspired to permit the pedophiliac to have unfettered access to children…in a back hallway where children routinely played

    #157
    Rather than report the ongoing abuse to secular authorities or take any steps to stop the abuse, Defendants informed the father that his children had reported the abuse. This led to further abuse by the father. In exchange for the conspiracy of silence, the abusive father paid to send Defendants Mahaney, Ricucci, and Layman and their families on vacation to the Kiawah Islands, South Carolina.”

    #173
    …they permitted Griney to teach and have unfettered access to children, and conspired to cover up the facts.

    #177
    On or about August 17, 2011, Defendants admitted during a meeting that they placed protecting the churches from lawsuits over and above the safety of children. This admission revealed ….[they were] acting for financially motivated reasons, had designed and agreed upon a plan to obstruct justice, yet permit predators to continue to have unfettered access to children in church and school settings.

    For the entire lawsuit (which is a public document), do an internet search for: SGMsuit – SGM Survivors pdf

  187. The Alabama Baptist just put my post UP again, either that or my cache last night causing trouble. (5-31-2013, 9:45 am ET)

  188. The name of the blog : Denny Burk

    The name of the post : “Mohler, Dever, and Duncan issue statement in support of C.J. Mahaney” (http://www.dennyburk.com/mohler-dever-and-duncan-issue-statement-in-support-of-c-j-mahaney/)

    Your comment : “The allegations are extremely serious. Mahaney should step aside for now and you guys should stop welcoming him with open arms to every speaking engagement in the Western hemisphere. If he is innocent, he should be spearheading his own investigation into what actually happened to the victims(remember them?) and get justice for them”

    The time it was left : Approx 10:30PM on 5-JUN-2013

    The approximate time it was deleted : Never made it out of moderation.

    As an aside, this is the 3rd comment I have tried to leave at his blog that has never seen the light of day.

  189. The name of the blog – Out of Ur, a blog owned by Christianity Today, which has stubbornly refused to talk about this issue.

    The name of the post – Friday Five Interview: Kevin DeYoung
    http://www.outofur.com/archives/2013/06/for_todays_entr.html

    The name of the editor (if more than one) – Harold Smith, the President/CEO, but Skye Jethani, Marshall Shelley, and Drew Dyck are also listed on the blog.

    The time the comment was left 7:40 am ET on 6/20/2013

    The approximate time it was deleted – was never posted

    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious) – Christianity Today is part of the cover up, which is so obvious, since the Christian Post, Huffington Post, Associated Baptist Press, Washington Post, and ABC TV affiliate WJLA have all reported on it since the new horrifying and graphic allegations came on publicly on May 14, 2013.

    What I posted:

    Kevin, it’s important that you and Don Carson and Justin Taylor apologize to the 11 alleged victims of child sexual abuse in the Sovereign Grace Ministries cover up lawsuit for your May 23 statement. Nearly 1/3 of the defendants in the lawsuit have already been convicted either criminally or proceeded in the juvenile system. Rather than siding with your friend C.J. Mahaney, the senior pastor for years at one of the churches, you should have shown concern to the children. Penn State and the Catholic Church teach us that cover ups happen and leaders turn a blind eye to the pedophiles in their midst in order to shield their institutions.

    Jesus said a lot about the lure of money and image, and those who sacrifice children to get it are in deep trouble with the Lord.

    + + + + +
    Know the Basics of the Sovereign Grace Ministries Child Sexual Abuse and Cover Up Allegations in 15 minutes or less

    1. ABC TV Overview + discussion of defendants who have already been convicted for other child sex crimes (4 minutes, ABC TV affiliate WJLA) – http://www.wjla.com/video/2013/05/church-sex-abuse-allegations.html

    2. ABC TV Update on the lawsuit (2 minutes, ABC TV affiliate WJLA)) – http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/05/sovereign-grace-ministries-class-action-civil-lawsuit-involving-child-sex-abuse-88894.html

    3. Huffington Post article about the evangelical pastors who are standing up for Mahaney, the key defendant- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/c-j-mahaney-scandal-evangelical-leaders-defend-pastor-accused-of-abuse-cover-up_n_3334500.html

    4. Christian Post article featuring updates from Boz Tchividjian, grandson of Billy Graham, and Janet Mefferd, Christian radio host. Discusses the surreptitious change in the statement by C. J. Mahaney supporters Al Mohler, Mark Dever, and Ligon Duncan
    http://www.christianpost.com/news/billy-grahams-grandson-responds-to-sovereign-grace-ministries-lawsuit-97590/
    + + + + + +

  190. Brian wrote:

    As an aside, this is the 3rd comment I have tried to leave at his blog that has never seen the light of day.

    I think we simply need to keep speaking up and keep the pressure on. They are starting to feel the heat. Let’s keep it going and even step it up.

  191. The name of the blog: The Gospel Coalition
    The name of the post:“The Least of These”: An Example of the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Text
    The name of the editor:Justin Taylor
    Your comment:
    I’m sorry, but I am a bit confused. Justin, are you actually implying that when Jesus says “the least of these” and “the hungry and thirsty” he is talking about pastors and religious authorities? If so, I would have to say I am very concerned. Not only is that a complete twist of that passage, but it doesn’t match up with any of Jesus’ teachings on helping the poor and oppressed.
    I don’t think I have ever seen an American pastor hungry or thirsty, especially ones associated with TGC. I believe that the entirety of the passage (because there is more then just those 5 verses you provided) is directed toward pastors and missionaries, as in when he talks about the sheep and the goats. The hungry and thirsty are those that need to be taken care of within the community they are part of, not the leaders of the community. Leaders are in place to feed, not consume. To bring justice to the oppressed, not bathe in the followers splendor.
    I am a bit questioning the timing of this post, but I can definitely say that there are quite a few victims of sexual abuse that are in need, and that TGC could make Jesus’ teachings a reality by helping them out instead of defend your pastor buddies, who I highly doubt are starving right now. Just a thought. If this post even makes it past moderation I’m sure I’ll get a stern talking to.

    The time it was left: 8:59 am
    The approximate time it was deleted: Within minutes of posting
    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious): I questioned his interpretation of scripture and suggested he care for victims of sexual abuse.

  192. @ Invalid_Nate: I believe that this post by Taylor was an attempt to justify the despicable statement that he signed about SGM. Talk about turning things on their head. The Pharisees are the least of these.

  193. @ dee:
    It just blows my mind that they will accept zero form of push back. It’s not like I was sending “hate mail” (which I also got a comment deleted for asking about hate mail via blog comments) but a question with serious concern for that teaching. It’s exactly like you said, the Pharisees are now the least of these. Good Lord save us.

  194. The name of the blog: Christianity Today Gleanings

    The name of the post: Three Interesting Decisions Made Today by Southern Baptist Leaders
    http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2013/06/interesting-southern-baptist-convention-resolutions.html

    The name of the editor (if more than one): Harold Smith, Melissa Steffan

    Your comment – See below

    The time it was left – June 12, 2013 10:44 pm ET

    The approximate time it was deleted – My comment was never posted

    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious) – I’m clueless as to why they didn’t post this. It was factual and informative and in no way sensational or accusatory.

    Christianity Today’s main headline news website has not published any article on the Sovereign Grace Ministries child sex abuse and cover-up lawsuit or the ongoing criminal investigations since the new and horrifying allegations came out on May 14, 2013. Of the 10 individual defendant about 1/3 have been brought to the attention of the authorities for child sex crimes: 2 have been convicted; 1 proceeded in the juvenile system, and 1 case is currently ongoing in Maryland. The cover-up and collusion allegations against Pastor C.J. Mahaney, the senior pastor for two decades, are quite serious. Here’s a quick overview of the situation from ABC TV affiliate WJLA – http://www.wjla.com/video/2013/05/church-sex-abuse-allegations.html

    ——- This is the comment I left ——-

    Here are some of the key paragraphs from the “On Sexual Abuse of Children” resolution that was passed by the Southern Baptist Convention this morning. SBC pastor from Georgia Peter Lumpkins made the resolution. He has been writing about and monitoring the Sovereign Grace Ministries child sexual abuse and cover up lawsuit for many months.

    —-

    
RESOLVED, That we remind all Southern Baptists of their legal and moral responsibility to report any child abuse to authorities in addition to implementing any appropriate church discipline or internal restoration processes; and be it further

    

RESOLVED, That we likewise call upon all Southern Baptists to cooperate fully with law enforcement officials in exposing and bringing to justice all perpetrators, sexual or otherwise, who criminally harm children placed in our trust; and be it further 

RESOLVED, That we strongly urge Southern Baptist churches to utilize background checks like those provided through LifeWay Christian Resources (www.lifeway.com/backgroundchecks), databases of sexual predators such as the US Department of Justice sex offender database linked at SBC.net (www.SBC.net/localchurches/ministryhelp.asp), or other relevant resources in screening all potential staff and volunteer workers, particularly those who minister to children and youth; and be it further



    RESOLVED, That we encourage pastors and church leaders to develop and implement sound policies and procedures to protect our children; and be it [further]

    “RESOLVED: that we encourage all denominational leaders and employees of the Southern Baptist Convention to utilize the highest sense of discernment in affiliating with groups and/or individuals that possess questionable policies and practices in protecting our children from criminal abuse; and be it finally”

  195. Now that I’ve looked a little more closely at the article on the Christianity Today Gleanings blog, it appears that Christianity Today is deliberately trying to avoid the fact that the Southern Baptist Convention child sex abuse reporting resolution that passed was directly connected to the Sovereign Grace Ministries lawsuit.

    We know that the resolution is connected to the SGM lawsuit because Peter Lumpkins proposed it and has been blogging about the SGM lawsuit for months. I mentioned Peter Lumpkins in my comment, and I’m guessing that might be the reason my comment was not posted.

  196. The name of the blog – Christianity Today Gleanings, owned by Christianity Today

    The name of the post – Alan Chambers Apologizes to Gay Community, Exodus International to Shut Down
    http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2013/06/exodus-international-alan-chambers-apologies-to-gays.html

    The name of the editor (if more than one) – Harold Smith

    The time it was left – 1:00 am ET on June 21, 2013

    The approximate time it was deleted – It was never posted.

    Why you think it was deleted (If not obvious) – I have no idea why my comment (below) wasn’t posted. It is a reasonable comment, far more measured than many of the incendiary and even silly comments the Gleanings editors had already approved (see Angelina’s comment as an example). One possibility is that I’m being banned from commenting on Christianity Today due to my criticism of their silence on their main news website about the SGM child sex abuse lawsuit and defendant C.J. Mahaney. The lawsuit and ongoing criminal investigations is American Evangelicalism’s worst sex scandal, and yet Christianity Today’s main news site and print magazine is silent. Christian Post, Huffington Post, Associated Baptist Press, ABC TV affiliate WJLA, and many others have run the story of the alleged cover up and the pastors involved, but not Christianity Today on their main headline news site. Silence. Silence. Silence. (World Magazine hasn’t run any articles yet either. It’s shocking that Christians’ best information comes from blogs like The Wartburg Watch.)

    Comment that wasn’t posted:
    I was posting about Alan Chambers’s decision to shut down the ex-gay ministry Exodus International:

    I wrote: “Alan Chambers was courageous in what he said and what he did. Whether people agree with him or not, I hope people read his statement closely.”

  197. My comment was nev published:

    http://www.dennyburk.com/gender-bending-ad-to-discourage-teen-pregnancy/

    I left a comment on this article yesterday at about 3 PM, saying that the point was that boys have a stake in teen pregnancy. I also posed the question “where are all the teachings directed to boys to watch what they do?”. And teenage boys (and i inferred its a problem with men too) show a lack of commitment. The comment was never published. What’s wrong with that?

  198. VelvetVoice wrote:

    The comment was never published. What’s wrong with that?

    VV — I think that it shows that certain Christian bloggers cannot handle the common sense observations of normal people. It’s impossible to have a reasonable conversation with an unreasonable person. Keep up the good work and keep commenting. Their pattern of deleting and censoring will be evident to everyone.

  199. By the way, Christianity Today Gleanings has changed their commenting system in the past 7 days. Now you have to register to comment.

  200. A few observations about Christianity Today and their punitive censorship

    1. All of my comments on the Christianity Today blogs have been respectful. However, ever since the Sovereign Grace Ministries allegations became public on May 14, Christianity Today has deleted or never published most of my comments. Note: Christianity Today regularly approves all manner of silly and even disrespectful comments.

    2. They have blocked my old proxy IP address. No problem, I’ve got lots of proxy IP addresses and have no trouble getting around their blocks, but that tells me that their censorship of me is deliberate.

    3. So why have I been singled out for this? Since it started on May 20, I believe Christianity Today is part of a cover up about the Sovereign Grace Ministries child sexual abuse and collusion lawsuit.

    4. Called by nationally syndicated Christian radio host Janet Mefferd, “American Evangelicalism’s Biggest Sex Scandal,” the SGM story and the child sexual abuse allegations have been covered by many other news sites in the past 6 weeks, including the Christian Post, Huffington Post, Associated Baptist Press, Washington Post, and ABC TV affiliate WJLA. All have reported on Pastor C. J. Mahaney and the new horrifying and graphic accusations — but not Christianity Today Magazine.

    For those of you who wish to comment freely on Christianity Today’s blogs, I recommend you use a proxy server.

  201. @ William David Wallace: It is interesting. He does not seem to have any ties to the Neo-Calvinists who have been involved in defending some of the ministries to which the statement alludes. Perhaps it is due to some of the more conservative ties of those involved on the GRACE board ? A couple of people brought up the connection to a Mars Hill pastor. Mark Driscoll’s church is somewhat on the outs with some of the more moderate Christian thinkers. Same with Liberty University. Just a thought. I, on the other hand continue to believe that common causes make strange bedfellows.

  202. That’s bizarre. That is Scot McKnight’s blog. He signed the statement early on (his name is on the list of early signers on the front page of the statement). I just checked the netGrace.net site and his name is still listed.

  203. @ Julie Anne:Post has gone back up. Maybe a technical glitch, who knows. I checked over several days and it was absent but today it is up again.
    DaveW

  204. Jared Wilson posted the following Tweet:

    “Charlie Brown can forgive Lucy without ever taking another run at that football.”

    …to which I responded:

    “Yes, but will got grant Lucy repentance? Does she even know how deeply broken she is?”

    It stayed up for about 10 minutes. Then it was gone. I noticed someone else’s response–which came later than mine–was still there.

    I’ll leave it to y’all to speculate as to why he deleted it.

    SMG

  205. It would appear as though I have a permanent ban on internet monk. I can’t remember the particulars on my previous comments, but they never saw the light of day. Today I submitted a respectful comment on their current thread pertaining to the Virgin Mary. I used a different moniker thinking perhaps that ‘Muff Potter’ might carry a certain unsavory ring to it, but to no avail. Maybe my ip address alerts the censor(s) that the comment is to be s#!t-canned on sight.

    I fully realize that it’s their blog and they’ll do as they see fit. Like a wandering medieval Jew (metaphorically) who may or may not be allowed a money changing booth next to the brothel, I can really appreciate how genuinely different TWW is from the rest.

  206. Blog: The Gospel Coalition
    Article: The Problem with the Childfree Life
    Half my comments on this site get “lost” in moderation. The one’s that get through are the ones I had to bend over backwards in sugary sweet submission in order to not ruffle feathers.

    My comment:
    Wow, just wow. When did being a parent to a child get confused with being a follower of Christ? The argument about a person controlling their environment sounds like helicopter parenting but it is also the argument against birth control in general.

    (I want to be a mother and a wife and it is so sad that the concerns of my sisters in Christ are being dismissed because they do not conform to other peoples ideas about who they should be)

  207. I forget how many days ago it was, but I had recently left a comment on this post on JD Hall’s blog: http://pulpitandpen.org/2013/02/28/why-ive-left-the-convention/

    Here was my sole comment:

    “Shouldn’t this also be a reason to leave the SBC?: http://www.stopbaptistpredators.org/index.htm” [End of Quote]

    My comment went into moderation, but now Hall has deleted it. Neither in that post, nor in his sermon calling for repentance from the SBC, did he ever mention the child sex abuse and coverup scandal in the SBC.

  208. Nicholas, if you would like to send my an email with supporting links, I’ll be glad to review. We’re not all the bad guys. Considering your allegations, I would need more info to allow you to use my blog as a forum.

  209. JD

    Welcome to TWW.

    I do not know what you mean by using one’s blog as a forum. People raise issues over here all the time. Blogs are a place for discussion and asking questions. I think that is far more important to encourage a free exchange of ideas as opposed to just listening to us blog editors bloviating. I frankly get tired of listeing to myself all the time, don’t you?  That is why I love challenging comments by readers. Nicholas is asking a reasonable question. He is a valued reader and commenter on our blog. You do not need to be afraid of him “using you blog as a forum” whatever that means.

    I think it is great to get comments, lots of them. Have you followed the discussions on this blog? It is awesome to learn from others.

    Christa Brown’s blog is one of the best ones out there in terms of documenting the problems of child sex abuse in the Baptist world. Her blog carefully documents, via links to news stories,  pedophiles arrested, sent to jail and the response of various churches. In fact, she well documented the trial and conviction of a pedophile in a church that I was attending.  The church’s response to him was one of the reasons I left that church and committed to exposing child sex abuse and the church. It is one of the reason that I left the SBC as well.

    I hope you are aware of Christa Brown’s blog Stop Baptist Predators. If you care about the SBC and the welfare of children within the SBC, you should avail yourself of that information. Frankly, you should have clicked on the link that he provded and educated yourself. It would have opened your eyes. I always like to click on links and read what our readers send us. Your readers can be your greatest resource.

    I do not see why he needs to send your more supporting links tohave his comment punished. Click on the one he sent you. There’s enough reading there to keep you busy for aa week. If you need further information, let us know. TWW has similar information.

  210. JD PS

    We look on people who visit our blog as valued guests. If they leave a comment and we delete it, we put a comment on my blog for deleted comments. We also have a policy that they can protest to us that their comment was deleted and we reconsider it. If we do not print a comment from someone who is new, we try to contact them to tell them why. Now, if it is a comment that is full of cuss words or is indicative that the person is nuts or if they threaten us, we do not respond to those. But, those are very few.

    I find it odd when I vist blogs and only read comments that are suck ups to the editor. “Oh, you are awesome.” X 50. Yes, you will get lots of compliments. But, you should get pushback. That is where the rubber meets the road. 

    We havea an awesome list “What the world is saying about TWW.” On it are the names that we have been called. We have published all of these names in the comments. It keeps us humble. You can see it under our about us but here it is. I have such a good laugh over this.

    • Wartburg witches
    • Obscure 
    • Wenches
    • O glorious wenches
    • Minions of Satan
    • Hatemongers
    • x#&**#xx!@
    • Narcissistic zeroes
    • Morons
    • Warthogs
    • Quite a gossip column
    • How did we ever get along without you?
    • Assyrians
    • Philistines
    • Full of ****
    • Bored housewives
    • Yellow journalism
    • Discernment Divas
    • Feminist Heretic
    • Discernamentalist Diva Mafia
    • Poor reading comprehension
    • In Need of ESL
    • Anti-Christian bigot
    • E Pharisee
    • Discernment blogger
  211. Boo Hoo

    Deny Burke deleted a comment – Twice…
    http://www.dennyburk.com/the-weekly-task-of-pastoral-ministry-revkevdeyoung/#comment-128575

    He quoted a Kevin DeYoung Tweet – “The weekly task of pastoral ministry”

    The weekly task of pastoral ministry:
    read yourself full, write yourself clear,
    pray yourself hot, preach yourself empty.

    And I responded with…

    ———–

    Was Wondering…

    Is any of what DeYoung said – in the Bible?

    Seems when you actually search the scriptures about pastoral ministry…
    And you can NOT find today’s “pastoral ministry” in the scriptures…

    Paid – Professional – Pastors – in Pulpits – Preaching – to People – in Pews.

    You might want to ask some different questions as you search…

    Did any of His Disciples call them self – pastor/leader/reverend?
    Did any of His Disciples call another Disciple – pastor/leader/reverend?
    Did any of His Disciples take the “Title” – pastor/leader/reverend?
    Were any Disciples , Hired or Fired, as a – pastor/leader/reverend?

    Seems, the only one in the Bible with the “Title/Position”
    Pastor/Leader/Reverend – Is…

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}

    And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
    them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice; “
    and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
    John 10:16

    One Voice – One Fold – One Shepherd – One Leader

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}

  212. I don’t know if this WILL be deleted, but I wouldn’t be surprised, so here it is:

    “Christiane November 13, 2013 at 4:04 pm

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    DAVID MILLER
    as moderator, will you not at least take a look at this before you admit certain guest bloggers, please:

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2013/09/06/the-senseless-death-of-hana-williams/

    is it ‘disruptive’ to want to protect children?

    have you read Vanatta’s other posts on his website?

    I don’t understand.

    Reply
    - See more at: http://sbcvoices.com/gospel-parenting-part-1-by-jeremy-vanatta/#comment-211888

  213. I did just check again, and my comment was deleted.
    I am concerned that SBCVoices would promote a guest who advocates certain ‘disciplinary’ practices.

    How widespread is hitting children to the point of pain in Christian fundamentalism? Has it gone so far as to be ‘acceptable’ to the SBC itself ?

    ? . . . very concerned

  214. http://timfall.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/hospitality-lacking-the-gospel-coalition/

    The link above is to a post I wrote about my experience recently at The Gospel Coalition. TGC had a fairly decent post written from a comp perspective no pastors encouraging women teachers. I complimented the post and suggested that those same pastors should also sit under those women teachers in order to learn from them. Deleted. And when I contacted them as to why, no response.

  215. i am very impresed with it.The link above is to a post I wrote about my experience recently at The Gospel Coalition. TGC had a fairly decent post written from a comp perspective no pastors encouraging women teachers. I complimented the post and suggested that those same pastors should also sit under those women teachers in order to learn from them. Deleted. And when I contacted them as to why, no response.thanks keep it up.

  216. This is an apology. I deleted a comment on this site by mistake last night/early this morning. It was by a new commenter and I hit the wrong button (TWICE!) and the comment is now gone.

    So if you commented for the first time last night and it never showed up blame me. And please try again. This does not happen often. In fact it’s the first time in 4+ years for me.

    Sorry.

  217. The liberal Christian blog Hacking Christianity censored my comment from this discussion:

    http://hackingchristianity.net/2013/12/redefining-marriage-has-biblical-precedent.html

    One might assume it was censored in light of differing from the predominant theological views expressed therein (shorter contrarian posts were allowed from other conservatives, whereas the liberal theologian posting under the name zzyxz made several posts of great length).

    Strictly speaking, redefining marriage does not have biblical precedent; rather, certain forms of marriage that were permitted under Mosaic Law, and indeed, certain modes of divorce, were prohibited either implicitly through the Golden Rule, proclaimed by Jesus Christ, or explicitly, in the case of the new restrictions on divorce. It is worth remembering that the Mosaic Law was intended to govern a people under a time that one might euphemistically describe as “harsher” than the world we live in; compared to other law codes we have from the same era, it is certainly one of the more merciful. At the time it was written, before the establishment of the Israelites in Palestine, the nation of Israel was essentially a roaming hoard, similar to the nomadic bands of Tartars, Mongol raiders of more recent memory. Their survival was, to a large extent, dependent on plunder. Thus, one might to some extent say that portions of the Mosaic Law are, by contemporary standards, a law for pirates and brigands; however, such banditry is now expressly prohibited by the imperative of Christ towards mercy, enshrined in the Golden Rule, which overrides all Levetical commandments.

    This would preclude all forms of non-consensual marriage that were allowed the Israels, for example, in the case of the Midianite virgins. However, Levirate marriage is legal and expected in many parts of the world; I see nothing unethical in it, provided the marriage is consensual. Marrying the brother of the deceased husband, or for that matter, the sister of the deceased wife, might well offer substantial consolation, and provide for a social safety net that otherwise would be lacking.

    Regarding Polygamy, the situation does become somewhat more cloudy. Paul, in his Epistles, commanded that deacons and elders should be husbands of one wife; which implies the exclusion of those with more than one wife from the clergy. Throughout the New Testament, monogamous marriage is consistently held up as an ideal of love, and also as the model between Christ and his Church. However, polygamy is not explicitly condemned. Of the Church Fathers, St. Basil the Great likened polygamy to fornication; St. Augustine deprecated it, and Tertullian declared it unlawful; it was also unequivocally condemned by Justin Martyr and my beloved St. Irenaeus. However, in a lost work, Eusebius of Caesarea, the illustrious author of the Ecclesiastical History, who was later condemned as a heretic for attempting to serve as a peacemaker between the Orthodox and Arian factions at Nicaea, may have offered a partial reconciliation of polygamy to the New Testament.

    The Patristic condemnation of polygamy did not stop Martin Luther, who it must be remembered did exhort us to “sin boldly”, and who did write many horrible things about the Jews, too terrible to mention, illustrated in the most perverse and scatological manner by his friend Lucas Cranach the Elder, but at the same time, who did successfully stand up to the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church, and who did with great brilliance (aside from the ill advised rejection of the Septuagint) translate the Holy Bible into the German tongue, and who did preach the doctrine of a loving god, a message of hope, to many despondent Christians in Northern Europe, this man, whose personal morality is very much within what one might call a “shade of grey”, did himself say that he could find no scriptural injunction against polygamy, and speculated that at one point in the future, Christian men might legitimately take multiple wives.

    I cannot help but feel in light of this there is no Biblical precedent for the idea of reforming marriage; rather, certain forms of marriage allowed under the Torah were implicitly prohibited through the commandments of Christ. Another form, polygamy, became deprecated; however, as Luther points out, this deprecation is not scriptural; rather, it is on the basis of Church Tradition that we do reject polygamy. I would agree with Luther, that certain emergencies are foreseeable that could re legitimize various forms of plural marriage; the huge disparity among the Han Chinese between the number of men and the number of women, resulting from the disastrous One Child policy, may well force polyandrous marriages to become the norm in China in the next few years, at least amongst the Han majority, in order to avoid civil unrest due to the gender imbalance. In like manner, an event that substantially depopulates the earth, such as a survivable nuclear war, if such a thing is possible, might well legitimize polygamy, as a means of facilitating the most rapid re-population of the planet. However, in countries with an even balance of men and women, it seems to me the most ethical course if for one man to marry one wife, and for the two to, without resort to abortion or contraceptives, aim to have two children, maybe three or four, but not so many as to create unsustainable population growth, as is occurring in Africa.

    Lastly, I would propose that the modern church, and society, given the general depravity of the population that has led to such a high rate of adulterous affairs and divorces, consider polygamy as a possible alternative to divorce, especially in the case of families with children. As undesirable as polygamy is, it seems to me to be almost infinitely superior to the manner in which houses are now routinely torn asunder. The current prevalence of divorce was not a situation faced by the Church Fathers, who either prohibited it in most cases in the Roman patriarchate, or strongly discouraged it in the Eastern patriarchates. Perhaps polygamy, having not been expressly prohibited in Holy Scripture, except it would seem for clergy, might be a legitimate answer to the exceptionally high divorce rates, and the damage this is doing to our society. I should like to close by restating that I feel very strongly that any married priest who divorces his wife ought to be immediately defrocked; this would instantly rid the Methodist church of hundreds of men of dubious virtue, who presently occupy our pulpits in a state of pure hypocrisy.

  218. Pauk

    Welcome to TWW. Fascinating comment.I need to do some reading to get me caught up with you.

  219. http://thewartburgwatch.com/2010/07/26/what-is-spiritual-abuse/#comment-6749

    This comment SHOULD be deleted.

    This post is not true and the information is bogus. There were some issues for sure at BT but this is simply false accusations. I would have hoped that Wartburg would be responsible when it comes to exposing charlatans. I am all for that. But this information is heresay and slander. Its not based on proof or facts but somone who has a personal vendetta. The links do not work for this post because most are just bogus. Plesae expose RESPONSIBLITY and not just by gosspip or heresay.

    Please delete this post.

  220. RLady

    Many links do not work after a period of time. I will remove the comment for now since the links are outdated. It is important to realize that the links did work in the past. However, I will put it back up if the person who posted it can give updated informaion.

    However, R Lady-can you tell me if Pastor Cymbalta lives in an expensive home? What do you mean by “some issues for sure at BT?” Remember, slander can go both ways. Are you absolutely sure that Cymbalta is not now living, or has ever lived, in a $3 million home? 

  221. My following comment was deleted from The Gospel Coalition blog under the post “Preventing Sexual Abuse in the Church” by Matt Smethurst (January 7, 2014).

    MY COMMENT:
    It’s very difficult to read articles like these knowing TGC’s past stances regarding the alleged sexual abuse within the TGC camp and/or affiliates. If we claim to care about preventing the sexual abuse of children, we must care about doing so for ALL children, regardless of when or WHERE the abuse occurs.

    “We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant. Wherever men and women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must – at that moment – become the center of the universe.” — Elie Wiesel, The Night Trilogy

    I shouldn’t be surprised that this comment didn’t survive TGC’s moderation, but I am sad nonetheless.

  222. @ Sara:
    Mine isn’t deleted yet, but just in case,
    ‘Obviously, this brief article and video aren’t comprehensive, yet they did miss something very important. Mr Holcomb suggested that churches “investigate every allegation”. Not quite. REPORT every allegation of sex abuse, which is a CRIME, to the proper authorities. Churches are easily hoodwinked by perps. Let trained, experienced investigators do the investigating. Policies must direct churches NOT to handle these investigations “in house”.’
    Of course,I was careful not to mention TGC or their humble buddy from a certain “family of churches”. I wanted SOME pushback to show up and stay up there against church leaders thinking they can “handle” sexual abuse themselves (sometimes by hushing up the victims).

  223. Dave A A wrote:

    @ Sara:
    Mine isn’t deleted yet, but just in case,
    ‘Obviously, this brief article and video aren’t comprehensive, yet they did miss something very important. Mr Holcomb suggested that churches “investigate every allegation”. Not quite. REPORT every allegation of sex abuse, which is a CRIME, to the proper authorities. Churches are easily hoodwinked by perps. Let trained, experienced investigators do the investigating. Policies must direct churches NOT to handle these investigations “in house”.’
    Of course,I was careful not to mention TGC or their humble buddy from a certain “family of churches”. I wanted SOME pushback to show up and stay up there against church leaders thinking they can “handle” sexual abuse themselves (sometimes by hushing up the victims).

    Dave A A, your point is excellent and you articulated it much more effectively than I did! Here’s hoping your comment stays up and that there are more comments like it.

  224. This I just left, and Dave’s comment was still there.

    Another key to prevention is to set up spaces so that there is nowhere that is not visible from outside the space when children and youth are present. Glass is a marvelous prevention device. ALL offices should have glass, walls if possible, large “windows” otherwise. And staff must be taught that they are NEVER the best person to counsel anyone one-on-one. Refer the person to an outside counselor or do counseling as a team. It is dangerous for one staff member to counsel, too much opportunity for accusations, false or otherwise

  225. Not much interest in preventing sex abuse at the old’ GC. :(
    In other news, I tried to comment on Scott Brown’s NCFIC blog over 24 hours ago — never mde it out of moderation– nor have any others– at all. https://ncfic.org/blog/posts/nine-ways-church-elders-are-to-be-held-accountable. Strangely, the website is asking folks to be the first to comment– not saying comments are closed.
    He had hundreds of comments about rap musicians last month. The current topic of holding church elders accountable must be of no interest. Keep in mind that Brown’s BFF Phillips claimed lack of accountability as a factor in his waywardness– just a couple months back– a fact I may have mentioned to Brown in my attempted comment.

  226. Dave A A wrote:

    Not much interest in preventing sex abuse at the old’ GC. :(

    I do wonder how many comments were submitted but never made it through moderation…

  227. Website: Associated Baptist Press

    Post: http://www.abpnews.com/opinion/commentaries/item/28204-ergun-caner-and-the-integrity-of-baptist-institutions#.Us2ijq2A3mQ

    Comment: “Good article. If only this wasn’t the same John Carpenter claiming that Mark Driscoll has never plagiarized or ghostwritten. This same Carpenter got his post deleted from Christian Post due to how rude he was to others, including the CP moderator. Hundreds of rude comments from Carpenter at Warren Throckmorton’s blog as well. It seems Carpenter won’t apply the same rightful standards to those in his own “reformed baptist” camp as he can to those outside of it. Will Carpenter support his denominations ongoing relationship with Mark Driscoll and Acts 29? Yes. C.J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries? Probably.” [End of Comment]

    My comment was publicly posted yesterday (1/7/14) and deleted sometime today (1/8/14).

    Carpenter responded to my ABP comment over here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/01/06/dreamweaver-the-visions-of-mark-driscoll/#comment-1192040020

    He probably requested that ABP delete my one comment under his article.

  228. @ Nicholas:
    And the ABP left up a reply to yours, which now of course makes no sense!
    Ya really gotta wonder who’s minding Johnny C’s family and flock– he doesn’t have any “staff” that I know of…

  229. Nicholas

    I was so mad about Carpenter’s statement, that I just commented on his comment over there. He will not be amused.

  230. Nicholas on the above mentioned Dreamweaver article:

    “So now John Carpenter is defending oral and anal sex, all for the sake of dying on the hill of Mark Driscoll. Will you also defend his heresy and blasphemy in the Scotland sermon?”

    Very good comeback.

    And if John Carpenter is reading here (and I assume he wouldn’t be caught dead anywhere near this ‘gossip’ blog) it wouldn’t hurt to reconsider Mark Driscoll as being worthy of hill-to-die-on status.

  231. I’ve been able to leave a couple of new comments at The Gospel Coalition blog under the post “Preventing Sexual Abuse in the Church” by Matt Smethurst (January 7, 2014). The comments don’t implicate TGC in anything untoward so hopefully they’ll stay up. As a survivor, I feel so strongly about this issue. And if I’m speaking up about this issue until my final dying breath — whenever that is — I still don’t think it will feel like enough to me.

  232. Sara wrote:

    nd if I’m speaking up about this issue until my final dying breath — whenever that is — I still don’t think it will feel like enough to me.

    I have seen your comments. Thank you for your courage.

  233. I left a comment at the sgmsurvivors.com which immediately went into moderation, and then vanished. Usually when a comment is in moderation you can still see it there, but mine appears to have been removed and deleted.

    If you go and look at the sgmsurvivors.com site, the comments have stopped at #57 as of the time of this writing. It’s possible that my comment was moved out of moderation and deleted by accident, but it’s doubtful since this has happened to me there before. And also because my comment doesn’t reflect positively on the moderator.

    In any case, here is my comment word for word (warts and all). I took a screenshot because I suspected it may be removed. I’d also like to share that I was one of the first commenters on the sgmsurvivors.com site when it launched in Nov. of 2007. If anyone would like copies of the screenshots, feel free to contact me. Thanks.

    58
    Paula Rice Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation
    February 22nd, 2014 at 1:39 pm

    Stunned, at first I thought Kris was going to close the blog itself. Personally, the impression I’ve always had is that this was a forum, more or less, for SGM Survivors – that’s certainly what’s insinuated in the name. Kris’ ongoing commentary has resulted from the information she’s gleaned from the comments people have left under her posts. Since she didn’t have an SGM experience of her own to write about, naturally her thoughts have been formulated through her interpretation and analysis of what others have shared.

    A lot has been unpacked here, and the comments aren’t serving much of that same purpose anymore ie they aren’t providing new insights and information for Kris to post on.

    So, it appears what Kris is planning to do is close just the comments, and just continue to share with the world her thoughts, analysis, and conclusions regarding SGM when she feels like it, and doesn’t like people squabbling over doctrine, especially the ones that bring her out of lurkdom, the ones she’s seemingly keen on protecting because they’re rooted in fundamental Christianity, which is what she seems to believe about male hierarchy.

    So, I hope she does just that honestly. And I think that blogs for the most part, are exactly that – a personal place for the individual blog owner to share with the world their personal views. I’m all for it.

    Many blogs close comments altogether, and aren’t really designed for close interaction. I’m sure it’s very time consuming.

    I do think that Kris has done a good job taking in a lot of information about SGM that’s been shared with her, and through analysis and her break-down of the organization and events as they have unfolded, has provided a place for people to gather and discuss SGM. It’s been rather fascinating, and for her, unexpected. And even if she’s reluctant to say so, I think she has benefitted in many ways from her having voluntarily entered into the whole event and has learned a lot, in many ways, that has enriched her life and made her more the wiser. So, it disappoints me to see her appear seemingly ungrateful, as though this has all been more or less a burden she’s carried all these years.

    I think if she closed comments, most people would understand, but I think she would miss that component, especially if she were to remain fixated exclusively on SGM. But she knows enough, thanks to all of us, to take it from here. But I think a name change would be in order, something like “Kris’ Thoughts on SGM As She Sees It.”

    But maybe she’d be happier blogging about her own personal experiences and sharing her beliefs through a broader lens, and not one that’s only focused on SGM. After all, she doesn’t have a dog in this fight, so what’s the use? I personally think she’d be happier, and it would be healthier for her to let this all go.

    But not without a word of thanks and appreciation. That’s my opinion anyway.

  234. Internet Monk just $hit-canned another one of Potter’s comments on sight. The comment was relatively innocuous and in response to Miguel’s comment on a fundamentalist mega preacher’s insistence that communion at a college chapel they run not be done anymore. Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot? as Eagle would say.

  235. I have heard several names mentioned as possible successors to Elliff: Fred Luter, Paul Chitwood, David Platt, John Floyd, David Rogers (Adrian’s son), and Johnny Hunt.

    1. Maybe Platt can be radical in an attempt to rescue international missions from the American dream.

    2. David Rogers doesn’t even want to be considered, and that’s probably wise. He admittedly has the right DNA – Do Not Apply.

    3. Luter should change his first name to Martin and nail his application to the front door of IMB’s Richmond headquarters. Then he could try to reform the Baptist Identity movement among the trustees.

    4. Chitwood was Chairman of the Board when Rankin retired and appointed the search committee that eventually found Elliff. Being from Tennessee, maybe he could Volunteer for the job in light of impending budgetary troubles.

    5. My personal endorsement for IMB Prez: Wiley Drake.

    6. If you think Chitwood won’t become prez, don’t forget that he sat on the search committee for the KBC Executive Director spot before actually taking that position. He knows how to get good positions and is politically clever….plus, his buddy Hershael York is a trustee and a Landmark, Baptist Identity guy.

    7. If Chitwood becomes prez, I’ll make a motion from the convention floor in 2014 and speak in tongues over the microphone….just to show my support for his Baptist Identity crusade.

    8. If John Floyd is chosen as IMB prez, and Ronnie Floyd becomes SBC prez, they should blare Pink Floyd over the sound system at the SBC. After all, when it comes to fundamentalists, “we don’t need no education.”

  236. Blog: ABP News
    Heading: Critics question support of former ministry head accused of covering up abuse
    Editor: Bob Allen
    My Comment (posted under a different screen name):
    “Yes, yes, and yes! Mahaney and all those who support him need to be called out and held to account. Brent Detweiler said it best — their attitude is “unconscionable”.

    I hope that more media outlets pick this up, because it needs to be discussed.”

    (Note: I had to edit my post while it was in moderation. Hit “post” to early — computer’s acting up.)

    Time posted: Around 12 noon Japan time on May 17th. Was deleted within half an hour.
    Reason for Deletion: (shrugs) I checked their comment policy, and I don’t see how I violated it. They deleted another of my comments on a similar article just the other day. What gives? Is this a new thing with ABP News? Or have I been banned and no one told me?

  237. Blog: The Gospel Coalition
    Heading: TGC Council Meeting: Day 3
    Editor: Matt Smethurst
    Posted: Friday, May 16, approx. 11:45 PM using a different handle; received message that comment was “in moderation” but still not posted as of 10:30 AM Saturday, May 17
    Reason: Evidently they’re not interested in posting comments questioning the actions of TGC council members

    Comment: So when will we hear a response from C.J. Mahaney and Joshua Harris, as well as the rest of The Gospel Coalition council, regarding the Nate Morales trial? Also, what about Grant Layman’s testimony under oath that he didn’t report the sex abuse allegations even though he knew about them? Covenant Life Church and its current and former pastors, along with their supporters in TGC and Together for the Gospel, have much for which they must answer.

  238. @ Serving Kids in Japan:
    I have had comments posted (under a different name than here) and I have had comments under that name deleted after moderation. No idea why, because I usually scrupulously follow the rules or do not post. So I am not sure what that system is.

  239. An Attorney wrote:

    Really weird at ABP — some of my comments that had been up for a couple of days have disappeared since!

    I checked back a little while ago, and the comment I reported was back up again. It is weird over there!

  240. I tried to post this (twice) today on Joe Carter’s 9 Things You Should Know about the Southern Baptist Convention. My comment went from “Waiting for Moderation” to simply disappearing. My comment seems entirely “fair” (I think Joe does not like criticism. Or, if Joe is at the SBC annual convention today, whoever the moderator is.) Here is the comment:

    These two parts of the article don’t fit together:

    From point 3:

    As church historian Miles Mullin explains, southern Baptists desired to make slavery a non-issue, while abolitionist forces in the North (and among northern Baptists) desired the convention to take a moral stand against it. The following year group of representatives from Southern churches created a new denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention.

    From point 4:

    In 1995, on the denomination’s 150th anniversary, the Convention voted to adopt a resolution on racial reconciliation that apologized for its racist roots

    If southern Baptists desired to make slavery a “non-issue” in the founding of the denomination, why did they apologize for its “racist roots?”

  241. Thanks.

    As of this morning, my comment was in the thread at Joe Carter’s article (at TGC), as was a response from Mr. Carter (good for him! Seriously.)

    I’ve posted a response to his response just now. It too seems to have disappeared, but I suspect/hope/believe it will eventually show up.

  242. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Philmonomer:
    Completely off topic here, but is the “monomer” bit a play on the chemical term? Just curious…

    Nope. Phil + Philmont + Misnomer

    BTW, my reply never appeared in the comment thread (and I didn’t save it! Ugh.) But I suspect it is more likely that it got lost in transmission, rather than deliberately not posted. But that is just a guess.

    Maybe I will try to recreate it today. It wasn’t particularly long.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>