"Repentance is siding with God against self.” ― Todd Nibert link
"No, no, a thousand times no!"
That is what was going through my mind when Wade Burleson, acting as a go between, told me that JD Hall wanted to speak to me. This was not Wade's idea and Wade didn't tell me I should do it. He merely forwarded the request.
I didn't want to speak with Hall. If truth be told, Deb and I have made it a goal to stay as far away from JD Hall and his pulpiteers as possible. They scared us and we don't scare easily. I mulled over the request for two days.
During that time, I spent time contemplating the story of David and Bathsheba. David used his position of authority in order to sleep with Bathsheba. She became pregnant and David made sure that her husband, Uriah, was killed. David was eventually confronted and repented. However, the child from this ill-fated liaison died. From what I can tell, this story took place over the course of a year. Repentance and forgiveness came after much sorrow and pain.
With fear, frustration and, I must admit, a bit of curiosity, I made the call. I could tell that Jordan (he told me to call him that because that is what his friends call him) was quite nervous in speaking with me. We have since spoken three times. He repeated (at least 10 times) that he felt he needed to contact me because he wanted to reach out to his critics in order to express the depths of his brokenness. In our conversations he never once blamed me or anyone else for the events that have occurred or the things that have been written. He takes full responsibility for the inappropriateness of his conversation with Braxton and for the anger of many in the aftermath.
In my conversations with him, I became convinced that he is repentant and has begun the process of a life transformation. However, I know that many others will not take that at face value. He doesn't expect it and neither do I (nor would I had I not spoken with him.) Only time will tell the full story; just as time told the full story of King David.
Jordan has some plans to change the trajectory of his life. He said he got caught up in the celebrity thing and that led to disaster. He wants nothing to do with that in the future. He said a number of times that he wanted to fade into the background, content that no one would know who he was except the small church of which he is a pastor.
I stand by the post that I wrote. Jordan did not presume to ask me to change anything. I was waiting for that and was surprised that he did not. From our dialogue, I believe that his goal was to tell his critics that he is deeply sorry and that he takes responsibility for his actions.
I do not think it is a coincidence that Eagle's Story Part 3 ,which dealt with repentance, was posted today. It still amazes me that Eagle would write 140 letters asking people for forgiveness. I have been blessed to watch Eagle change over the past couple of years. When he first showed up at TWW, I was a bit taken aback. But, Deb and I, along with many of our readers, sensed that there was a change taking place in his heart. It took time but that sense grew stronger with each day. I told Jordan to read Eagle's story. In fact, I think it would be great for the two of them to talk.
So, as hard as it is for me to believe that I am saying this, I believe that Jordan is telling the truth. I believe that he is deeply sorry and ashamed of his actions. I believe him when he says he is no longer going to pursue anything to do with Ergun Caner. I believe him when he says his life is going to change. However, I do not expect anyone who is reading this to believe the same. I believe that time will demonstrate the sincerity of his conversations with me. I do know this. I am no longer afraid of JD Hall and that I am planning on praying for him and his family just as I have been praying for Ergun Caner's family and friends.
Now, I am going to say something with which Jordan is uncomfortable but I think it must be said. He was quite upset that the news got out that there were death threats against his family. He said that it made him look like he was saying he was a victim. Jordan does not believe he is a victim. He says he brought this on himself and he will deal with it. I am bringing this up of my own accord and can truthfully say that Jordan did not ask me to do this.
Jordan is a husband and a dad. He has small children, including a baby and he fears for his family. It is despicable for anyone to threaten another human being with death or harm, no matter how mad they are. This blog stands against all kinds of abuse and such threats are abusive. This must stop.
What Jordan did was wrong. He should not have communicated with Braxton Caner via Twitter and he should not have spoken of it in a post or a radio show. He will live with that the rest of his life. Since I am now convinced that he is repentant, I know he will remember this with great sorrow until the day that he goes home to be with his Father. However, I am a believer in the God of King David. Jordan is not beyond redemption. None of us are.
Below is the reprint of Hall's apology which was read on the air during his radio show and released to the ABP as well as to TWW. Jordan did make me laugh in one regard. He said he knew we would spend hours transcribing the radio broadcast so he wanted to make it easier on us. I can truthfully say we are grateful for that.
This was first read to his church on Sunday and Jordan will be undergoing church discipline. He called today to ask me what I thought about his confession. He was concerned that he got his message out. As you read this, please do so knowing that he really cares what TWW's reading audience will think. I am sure he will be reading your comments.
The Bible tells us how to handle certain matters when there's conflict or controversy. We're not given multiple options for how to handle these things, and thankfully the Scripture lines out clearly how to deal with our differences. We've been well-instructed in these matters. As you know, the chief and core mission of this church is to glorify God, and the only proper method of accomplishing that goal is to do things in accordance to Scripture without hesitation or reluctance. So, although it is not part of our usual Lord's Day routine, we need to deal with a matter in accordance with Scripture for the edification of the body. If you're here as a guest and not a part of our fellowship, then please understand: We're doing something churches are supposed to do.
This is my confession to you:
After being in this body for a number of years, I began to see corruption, sin, and cover-up in our denomination. I struggled immensely with this, especially in the relationship of our church with the state convention — beginning around 2010. Three years of frustration, disgust, heart-brokenness, and struggle in dealing with these various issues that I believed (and still believe) are a horrible reproach to Christ and his church. All of that struggle came out in a sermon I preached in Helena in 2013 called "Modern Day Downgrade."
Within a few months that sermon had been heard many thousands of times and played on both conventional Christian radio shows and podcasts around the country. It clearly struck a chord. People began to call to see what I thought. They emailed to ask my advice. They began to download my sermons and quote me in their sermons. I was offered help to start and market my own program. People listened to it; many more than I thought would listen. All the while, I was trying to do the work of both a pastor and an evangelist.
I say all this because I've been fighting a war (a terrible, excruciating war), for about three years. I found myself in a movement calling for reform in the SBC. The next thing I knew people were listening to my concerns. People who shared my concerns listened and encouraged me. Again, there were many more like that than I ever imagined. But that came at a great price.
Locally, many may not realize that "JD Hall" became a household name in certain districts of the SBC or that I was often in the middle of skirmishes in faraway lands that most of you couldn’t care less about. Some of you may not even know I had my own radio program. Feedback from me was sometimes solicited by various media outlets around the country. I've tried to keep that to a minimum in my life and ministry, albeit without much success.
I also realize that this has been my fight. I told you this a number of weeks ago, prior to our celebration of the Lord's Supper. I realize this has been my fight. The vast majority of you don't care about the denomination that we are technically affiliated with; most of you weren't even Baptists before arriving here, and some of you may not even know what denomination we're in now because we don't talk about it, and for the most part, we don’t let it affect what we're trying to accomplish here. So, feeling like this is my fight, I've tried to avoid bringing people who are trying to walk with Jesus and live their lives into something that doesn't pertain to their existence.
In this part of my ministry over the last three years, I spent time on multiple issues including:
(1) the selling and marketing of religious goods that are spiritually toxic by our Southern Baptist publishing arm and bookstores — material that is Biblically inept and knowingly contrary to sound doctrine. They do this for reasons I can only perceive to be motivated by an obscene quest for profit. Some of the material promoted in our denominational bookstores is far more offensive than the moneychanging business in the temple. It includes material that if sold at Wal-Mart would be tragic, but the fact that it is being sold in Southern Baptist bookstores is downright traitorous to our calling.
I’ve simultaneously been embroiled in (2) a controversy at an SBC college in Louisiana dealing with the persecution of three professors who were dismissed for holding to Biblical beliefs in regards to soteriology, and some administrators who were fired for blowing the whistle on a related controversy.
And I’ve had a deep concern about the influence of (3) a college president in Georgia named Ergun Caner, who after 9-11 manufactured a false life story, claiming to have been born in countries he wasn't born in, raised in countries he wasn't raised in, speaking languages he does not speak, and a multitude of even more egregious falsehoods, all told countless times to various audiences. Through about ten years of embellishing his life story (not stretching the truth, but manufacturing lies with not the slightest basis in objective reality) he became one of the most prominent men in our denomination and president of the largest Christian university in the world. When his lies were exposed, he was quietly dismissed and our denomination went on the trail of cover-up and dismissal.
Of more urgent concern than the man's lack of repentance, confession, or contrition have been (4) a number of key church leaders who have covered for him and continued to promote him aggressively, thereby making a mockery of the Gospel's call for repentance, profaning their pulpits, and promoting a religion with a form of godliness while denying its power.
Finally, (5) I've tackled the refusal of the Christian press to report any of these issues. I've sought to expose that and call us all to repentance—not only for the culture of corruption (because there will always be corruption), but more pointedly, for the wider culture of complicit silence regarding that corruption — a shameful silence that is egregiously defended in the name of "Christlikeness."
I realized that I needed to back away from these conflicts through a number of loving brothers who saw the toll this battle was taking on me, my aging, my family, my sanity, my stress. They saw me reveal and speak truth, but sometimes be hard and speak too harshly. I candidly looked around and didn't recognize what I had become.
Simultaneously, about a month ago, I was approached by these friends who said that I should pray about an exit strategy from that part of my life. Its toll was too costly. I was reminded that God says, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people” (Hebrews 10:30). God will settle his own affairs. He doesn't need me to fix everything that is wrong in the church today. My friends suggested that the over-zealousness of a reckless critic is ultimately no better than error. I believed them, at first reluctantly, but the Spirit led me to agree with them.
So, I came before you about seven weeks ago and said that I realized I've erred in how have gone about trying to bring about change. That was on Father's Day, if I recall. I told you I would rebuke myself on account of that. Then, I gave a letter to the church council a few weeks later, suggested to me by no one but my own conscience, and said I would stop writing for my website or for other publications. I haven't written any articles since then. I said that my radio show was going on hiatus for a few weeks, and might be canceled for good. Some were pressuring me to continue the program and make it more devotional — just do an easy, devotional commentary of Spurgeon's Morning and Evening.
That's the route that I took. I didn't completely stop all engagement in these other affairs, but most. I spoke to those hosting my program and told them I was making these changes.
But before I took a break from the program, before I stated my conviction that I realign myself and ministry, I had an exchange with the son of Ergun Caner on Twitter. He had displayed various examples of public conduct that to me, at least, was clearly and plainly immoral, and I called him out on it. In regard to this young man's public behavior, I had made a statement along the lines of, "The immorality surrounding [Ergun Caner] is astounding." The son engaged me after that, and I asked him one question, and repeated it a second time, concerning a claim his father had made regarding him. I asked him if it were true. The third and last comment I made directly to him was that because of his age, I would discontinue the conversation but that he could email if he felt so led at a later time to seek or speak truth. He then continued to post rather terse comments on Twitter for some time afterward, but I didn't respond. He didn't seem terribly torn up over the incident; in fact, he seemed bolder and more defiant in his sin.
I received a considerable amount of pushback in the wake of that exchange. A few of my close friends told me that what I did wasn't a sin, because public sin can and should be addressed publicly and there is, no doubt, Biblical precedent for this. (This is, by the way, why we are addressing this publicly here and now in spite of the abject awkwardness of doing it during our regular Sunday morning worship.) Other friends, though, asked me if my heart was right in calling him out. Could I have done the right thing for the wrong reason, making it the wrong thing?
Here's the conclusion I came to: From to time to time, I see the youth of this church say or convey something that is off track or ungodly. On those occasions I usually contact the mom or dad to say, "Hey. Are you aware of this?" One time I posted the expression "Jesus wept" when a young woman had exhibited profanity on her social media page. But in all those situations, my heart was for the person who needed rebuked. My aim was to reconcile them; to restore them. It was, at its heart, pastoral. Even though this young man's sin was public, and we didn't go looking for it (it wasn't hidden, but laid bare for all the world to see), I confess I called him out for the wrong reason.
I posted an apology on my website within just a few days of that exchange. I acknowledged that it was wrong, sinful because my heart was wrong in why I did it, and I asked for forgiveness. I also sent an apology directly to Ergun Caner through a mutual acquaintance, who assured me he would receive it. I told him I was open to apologizing in person if he cared to call me. I also said I was wrong on something else that was gnawing at me but hadn't received the kind of push-back this other issue did, which is that I gave credence to a rumor I had heard. I apologized for that also and asked forgiveness.
It was after this, but not merely because of this, that I decided to make changes in the focus of my wider ministry—especially the radio broadcast. (This was prompted by the godly concern of my friends.) I asked three men to hold me accountable to make sure my radio program was tempered with a new spirit and that my outrage be tempered. The last several weeks after making these changes have been like a vacation. They've been nice. I've been throwing my newly found spare time into personal evangelism, open air preaching, and even something I haven't done in years — recreation. I felt back on track and in the Lord's will.
But then nearly a month later, last Tuesday, Ergun Caner’s son committed suicide. I don't believe my four-comment and rather cordial exchange with him had anything to do with it. (I don't think any reasonable person would if they knew all the facts.) But frankly, we don't know for certain what factors led to his suicide, and I'm not sure we ever will. (Apparently, the official cause of death has not yet been determined).
But in certain online forums, there was an immediate rush to tie the young man’s suicide to that brief social-media exchange with me more than a month earlier. One prominent commentator from a secular news network was asked by the Caner family to provide commentary within a few days of their son's death. That writer blamed "cyber bullying" and "thuggery." Some of the Caner's associates have accused me of "cyber-stalking"; "harassing"; and "bullying" the young man. People are angry. They want someone to blame.
For the last week and a half, I've made no attempt to defend myself. The facts are a matter of public record, and even though the whole tragedy pains me deeply, I have made no attempt to erase the record of my exchange with the young man. I wish to be completely transparent. What I don't want to do and what I refuse to do is minimize my own wrong.
It’s true, to my shame, that when I commented publicly about the inconsistencies in the young man’s testimony — and especially when I referenced my concerns about his father — I did not do it in the right spirit or out of the right motivation. It was sinful for me to challenge him publicly like that. I was not thinking or acting pastorally in how I addressed him. I certainly would have treated one of my own flock differently, albeit still directly. My heart leans strongly toward gentleness when dealing similar issues here. And yet when dealing with these issues out there, I have been too hard. I understand why some would say, "Why are you different out there than you are here?" I have been at war for three years. It is hard being both pastor and warrior. They don't go well together. So I've kept them separate. That's the best explanation I can give.
The irony is that about three weeks ago I made known to you, my flock, that I was walking away from these conflicts. It was too late to spare me from the consequences now engulfing me. In one sense, I am reaping what I sowed. When you live by the sword, you die by it .
Let me say this in all sincerity: I am profoundly sorry that Braxton Caner ended his life. Knowing now that this young man struggled with that level of despair, I am even more sorry that my interaction with him was adversarial rather than pastoral. News of his death hit me hard, and I was immediately smitten with shame for the lack of grace in my public interaction with him. All the combined invective that has been aimed my way in recent days does not even begin to equal my own grief and contrition. If these events (and my confession) ultimately end any influence I might ever have, I will accept that as our sovereign God’s perfect will.
I do realize that God never needed me to right every wrong in the denomination. He can settle his own accounts. His arm is long, both to save and to bring vengeance. In my zeal, there has been a disconnect between my theology and my methodology. I do know God is sovereign— and yet, I've relied too much on my own strength and not solely on the Spirit in my earnest desire to see justice prevail. That’s sin, even if the cause is right. I confess it.
Let me repeat: I never should have briefly interacted with that young man on the 2nd day of July, because my heart to him was not pastoral. Some have accused me of far worse things. Some seem determined to exploit a tragedy for theological and political gain. That’s wicked.
Nor do I wish to elicit anyone’s sympathy. Our prayers must be with the Caner family. Their grief can't be overstated. And I sincerely grieve with them in their sorrow (Romans 12:15).
I do realize that I've been heading the wrong way in ministry, and I need to repent of that; to turn, to do an about-face, to come back. I once said (and someone made this comment into an Internet meme): "Every time we fail to repent, we fail to demonstrate a proper response to the Gospel."
This is the best display of the Gospel, that I, in all my weakened, broken flesh can demonstrate for you. Right now, it's all I've got. All I can do in the midst of the unbelievable heartache and sadness I feel for the Caner family and my own family and the giant disgrace this mess has become is demonstrate something that we've been praying that so many at the heart of this very controversy would do for over four years: repent. To confess sin, to change our minds in repentance toward our erred trajectory, and ask forgiveness for the ways we fall short of the glory of God.
Let me assure you of this: This terrible, terrible tragedy has accomplished two things (1) I am broken. I am unequivocally, completely broken. I am a crushed man. My spirit is crushed. I am sorrowful. I am hurting. (2) This has forever changed me, in more ways that I can currently comprehend.
With those two realities and everything that accompanies them (the arguments, the warfare, the ridiculous absurdities, sinful failures, fallacious allegations, hysterical reactionaries, capitalizing upon tragedy, and the tragedy itself) the things of the world grow strangely dim, and what seems to burst forth in high-definition clarity is a blood-soaked, rugged cross where all our sin was atoned for. At this point, to me, to this church, to this situation, I think that's what matters most, and that's certainly the only source of comfort: a blood-soaked, rugged cross and an empty tomb.
We don't hide things here. We open up. We put it out there. We cling to the promise of Romans 8:1. We want to be real.
And so as my church, here's what I need from you as I struggle with this. What I need is for you to preach to me. I've preached to you for more than seven years the depths, the heights, the width of God's free grace to sinners on account of Christ's blood upon the cross. I've preached to you a grace of unmerited favor as Christ Jesus died for our sins. I need you to preach to me, each and every one of you in the coming days, God's grace that's given to all who can say through the Spirit's prompting, "I am a sinner."
First?
Dee, you may know that I posted the confession at SSB earlier today. There were a few parts of the confession that I did not like at all. I did not like the focus on himself. I didn’t think it was necessary to go on about how his popular sermon had XX amount of downloads. All of that could have been left out. I especially thought the part about Braxton’s sins was completely unnecessary and insensitive.
I did listen to the whole audio and at the end when I heard his voice and he got emotional, I did get teary eyed. Talk about mixed messages. As I was listening, I was typing notes and so I went over my notes again and again and was very conflicted.
When I posted the confession on my site, readers saw the things that I saw. They were skeptical. They’ve seen this pattern before, as have I.
Tonight while I was chopping red peppers for dinner, one thing would not leave me: his Twitter account had changed in the last 24 hours. His picture was gone. Now, instead of saying J.D. Hall on the Twitter profile, it said “Pulpit and Pen” as the name AND handle. This note was on the profile:
The twitter account of the Pulpit & Pen, managed by its contributors. A follow or RT is not necessarily an endorsement. Gideon Knox, LLC.
That is significant to me because so much of the damage has been done on Twitter.
This evening when I checked his Twitter account I saw this recent tweet:
The P&P contributors now manage this account. If you would like to contact JD, feel free to email him.
https://twitter.com/PulpitAndPen/status/498952896650956801
I hope this is the real deal. I really do. The rudeness and badgering has to stop. And death threats? That is ridiculous. Enough damage has been done.
Well, this gives me hope. I was starting to think that that leaders don’t repent anymore.
I grieve for the Caner family. What an unspeakable pain!
I’m grateful for the public acceptance of the guilt of wrongdoing by Hall. May his repentance be an example to us all.
Jordan Hall, as I expressed on another blog comment a few days ago, even before I knew you had apologized on Sunday and forwarded your message along to be published, I forgive you and I’m praying for you. My prayer is that you will model for the rest of us what true grace, repentance, and forgiveness looks like, and that in the end, both sides will repent and be reconciled – for the glory of God the Father. You’ve taken a courageous step. I was an outspoken critic when the news of Braxton’s suicide broke, since I was one of the ones who had tried to warn you on Twitter that your words were too harsh, and you blocked me. And so when Braxton died, I was angry. I repent now for letting my anger fuel my own comments, which I expressed in blog comments like this one.
Repentance can be a process, and so is forgiveness. Our hearts are stubborn and we need to yield to the Holy Spirit to allow us to do what our sinful nature rails against. We’d rather nurture our hurt and anger, and our self-righteousness than admit we’re wrong, or forgive one who has sinned against us. Knowing that, we need to extend grace to others and allow them time to to both repent and forgive.
I’ll be praying for you and your family, for your restoration, and that the Lord would use this as a conduit to show a watching world how Christians are known by their love for each other, even when things seem darkest, and love seems impossible.
I know you are broken. If I could hug you, I would.
@ Julie Anne:
Ronald Reagan used to say “Trust but verify.” The David and Bathsheba deal played out over time. So will this one. Please note that I am not changing my original post.
Thanks for the info on Twitter. Interesting.
I have to take him at his word on this, and I do feel it is heartfelt. I have to believe that this has in fact changed him and how he interacts–even though this interaction was likely not the turning point in this young man’s life.
As I have been saying for months now in regards to my local problem with MH, our actions–sinful in intent or not–have consequences and we must face the consequences in our own boldness of our original action.
Julie Ann, your comment of “so much of the damage has been done on twitter”… Though I know you are talking about this situation, I think goes further with the onset of social media in general. So much damage gets done daily on these sound-off boards. I am a little nervous to see what the next ten years will bring.
Jordan,
If you are reading this, I want you to know that I hear you, and I have gone too far when blinded by passion for something I believed was good. I’m thankful that you have made a public confession, and I commend you for setting an example of public confession and transparency by leaving up the record. You have set an example that I wish that the biggest names in the celebrity christian world had set, and I hope they will follow. They have chosen not to do so in the past, but perhaps that will change. I’m sorry you must bear the weight alone that they should share with you, because you have followed their lead.
I trust that the Lord will lift you up, that he will lift up the Caner family and friends, and that he will lift up your friends and that we would all grow to be more like him. I trust that the Lord will bring reconciliation wherever that needs to occur and that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone, including here at TWW toward that goal.
I trust that the Lord will work in all involved and in the greater church so that we see him first and not our affiliations and our labels and our friends and our causes and our co-combatants.
I pray that all of the people in the SBC and other groups–especially those in leadership positions and those with a platform–will take a good, long, hard look at how this happened, and that we will love one another well as Jesus first loved us. Being a leader is hard, especially when the Bible tells us that leaders lead by example and not by their power of position and influence.
Jordan, you have said you were concerned about:
“the selling and marketing of religious goods that are spiritually toxic by our Southern Baptist publishing arm and bookstores — material that is Biblically inept and knowingly contrary to sound doctrine. They do this for reasons I can only perceive to be motivated by an obscene quest for profit. Some of the material promoted in our denominational bookstores is far more offensive than the moneychanging business in the temple. It includes material that if sold at Wal-Mart would be tragic, but the fact that it is being sold in Southern Baptist bookstores is downright traitorous to our calling.”
I pray that you and your friends and all of the evangelical celebrities will stop and think about these few sentences. I agree with everything you have written in these sentences.
Jordan, do you realize the toxicity of the doctrines that your tribe is promoting? Can you even imagine how toxic they are to the souls of women? You and your friends have been misled. I don’t think that the celebrities can face that honestly. And for the very reason you cite. We must not let agendas divide us.
Calvinism is not the Gospel. Anti-calvinism is not the Gospel. Complementarianism is not the Gospel. Egalitarianism is not the Gospel. If anyone believes that the Kingdom and the Gospel are about a system–and especially about a narrow system–then I appeal to you to think about the implications of that. Jesus warned us about letting the doctrines of man nullify his Word. We cannot love his words if we love our own more.
Jordan, I urge you to get out of the echo chamber and the bubble that you have been in. It has broken you. Start listening more. You are young, and there is plenty of time for God to use you if you will be about his agenda and not any human agenda.
May the Lord grant you and the Caner’s his peace and comfort.
I wanted to thank you wartburg and spiritual sounding board and phoenix preacher and Calvary chapel abuse blogs, it has been helpful for me. We need to get the word out to faith based groups that people who struggle with mental health issues are not in sin. I think that would be a high calling. God be with all.
Well, I posted at SSB about how I see NPD in this explanation.. I just couldn’t see the apology in the letter. If he really is sincere, then hopefully this letter was just his rough draft and he will eventually see should have been whittled down to an actual apology and not a generic NPD form letter apology.
One of the apologies I made when I was going through my Eagle type saga included paying back money I had stolen 11 years prior. At the time I stole it I had felt justified. I kept writing explanations with my apology letter. I must have written it 10 different ways and crumpled each one throwing on the floor before the Holy Spirit finally gave me peace about the last note. It simply said, when I worked for you back then I stole money. I am very sorry.
Mr. Hall, I posted this yesterday under another topic ( they may not allow to repost here again)
I listened to the audio version and felt your emotion and sincerity.( I would encourage others to listen rather than simply read the transcript). I admire your courage. It is an example to follow. I pray this is the beginning of healing for all involved. Ty Gary
Gary Cheek on Mon Aug 11, 2014 at 03:08 AM said:
I had the pleasure of having Braxton’s grandparents, mom, brother and other family and friends at our home over the weekend. We fished, rode in the boat, had some laughs and cried a bit. We ate catfish and ribs. Worshiped together and got through another few days.
It’s so interesting to see the response, actually, the lack of responses when I asked for any of those associated with Mr Hall, to contact me regarding ALL the continued fighting and accusations that continue on other blogs, tweets and post.
I did not get one response.
On the other hand, I also tweeted about praying for Mr Halls child that was reportedly hospitalized and encouraging others to do so as well. That tweet, received minimal response.
Perhaps people on social media are more interested in proving a point and just like to prove something or someone is right or wrong on a particular subject. And, miss the opportunity to demonstrate sincere love for another. The only way anyone will receive true healing is to pray for at least a desire to give and receive forgiveness and promote the gospel to a lost world. The body of Christ has many parts. Each part has a different function or ability. If we, as followers, teachers and ministers continue to attack and discredit other parts of the body, I wonder how that body looks to the lost? Like Frankenstein? Or a fully functional bride that others would like to be involved in becoming .
Anger is part of grieving. Hate is not.
I believe Mr Hall is praying for the Caner’s I believe my God can change hearts, through conviction by The Holy Spirit. I don’t believe continual attacks out of either camp against the other will cause anyone to repent of anything. In fact it causes disfunction of the entire Body.
A physician can’t force a person to have heart surgery without that persons consent to be healed. Even if the physician knows it can save the patients life. God is the same with us. Without our desire to have our hearts changed, he can’t go against our free will. Even though He knows the plans He has for us.
I simply ask for people to pray for new hearts, give God consent. And if you can’t even fathom the idea. Pray for a desire to have the desire to have the heart God wants you to have. We all have sinned and fallen short. It’s gonna take time and some surgery perhaps. The woman at the well …. The accusations… The accusers … The stones laying on the ground, ready to be used as weapons … She didn’t have a chance. But Jesus was her only chance. He is our only chance as well. There are plenty of accusations, evidence, weapons to be used to prove our various perspectives. But Jesus gave us the example. Both sides of the issue were convicted at that moment of sin in their individual and collective lives. Let’s follow Jesus. Otherwise, I think He looks us all in the eye and then to the ground as he draws in the dirt… (Excuse typos and grammar, it’s difficult on phone to type) Ty. Gary.
Good for you, Dee! And more importantly, good for Jordan.
Gram3 –
Thank you for your comments especially the part in quotes that I pasted below:
“Calvinism is not the Gospel. Anti-calvinism is not the Gospel. Complementarianism is not the Gospel. Egalitarianism is not the Gospel. If anyone believes that the Kingdom and the Gospel are about a system–and especially about a narrow system–then I appeal to you to think about the implications of that. Jesus warned us about letting the doctrines of man nullify his Word. We cannot love his words if we love our own more.”
Also, some are understandably questioning JD Hall’s repentance.When I read his confession, I too thought there was “too much of this” or “too little of that”. As I was reading the comments about his confession all I could think is “can we ever really confess perfectly” . In other words when I am initially aware of my sin, I am not aware of all that my sin did , or even exactly what sin(s) I committed. I may have wrong beliefs that need to change etc. – all of which take time. As I pray and ask for wisdom, as I interact with those I’ve hurt sometimes I become more aware and can ask for forgiveness in a more real way. I am not sure if this makes sense. I know Christ took all my sins on himself when he died on the cross so I don’t mean that we have to keep repenting over and over again just that we can grow in our understanding of how we have hurt/sinned against others. What I say initially when repenting might look different days,months, years later after I have hopefully grown.
So, is JD Hall repentant – I don’t know and really none of us do but I certainly hope so.
"I told you I would rebuke myself on account of that." He's kidding, right? Where does the Bible say that an elder is to rebuke himself? I think JD Hall may be genuinely sorry. But he is still conducting his ministry entirely in defiance of Scriptural church authority. He is to be under discipline by other elders, if we are to take Paul's instructions to Timothy to heart. And he should be out of church office, at least until the elders who examine him validate genuine repentance and change in his life.
Patti wrote:
Thank you for sharing that. You are absolutely bang on. When we realize we screwed up, when we finally begin to admit that we screwed up, most times it seems our first admissions are loaded with self-justification to try and excuse what we did and a list of things we did right to try and balance things out. It usually takes us a while to cut through the cr@p and get to the heart of the matter just like you did – ‘what I did was wrong and I’m so very sorry’, no if’s, and’s or but’s, and truly mean it. Repentance is a process, not a single event, and I do hope that JD Hall is truly at the beginning of that process rather than just trying to make it go away. Time will tell.
Thank you, Jordan! It did take me HOURS to transcribe that segment.
I am praying for everyone involved in this mess, and I trust that the pulpiteers will fade into oblivion.
Has JD asked directly and personally for Ergun’s forgiveness? He owes me no apology. I have nothing to forgive. But there is one family and one person in particular that he owes a tremendous apology. And the “I reached out to a third party” effort is not enough.
Also will he be asking for forgiveness from the many other leaders he has slandered, belittled, and made fun of? Johnny Hunt, Ronnie Floyd, Steven Furtick, every pastor whose sermon he has picked apart in a derogatory fashion.
The Braxton episode is simply the climax of a season of mistreating people in the name of the gospel and standing for what he believes is the truth. Hopefully this incident will cause JD to seek forgiveness from the tribe of people he has verbally chastised in an ungodly manner.
Ergun first.
The many others second.
The rest of us – no need.
No doubt Jordan Hall is sorry that things turned out the way they did. No doubt he thinks his methodology was ineffective and in this case backfired on him. He has said that he was not able to be both a pastor and a warrior at the same time. What he has not said is that his “theology” of being a scavenger of other people’s sins and a vulture on other people’s weaknesses is wrong. He has simply said that he himself could not do it and be a pastor at the same time. And one statement would lead one to think that his “pastoring” includes keeping a hawk eye on other people’s children and going to the parents when the children displease him.
My personal and difficult prior close up observation of baptist fundamentalism is that it approves of and fosters the sort of understanding of “ministry” that Jordan Hall has exhibited. I doubt if anything has changed about that. I do not forgive Pastor Hall because he has not sinned against me and there is nothing for me to forgive. Nor can I forgive on behalf of someone else; that would be nonsense. But I remain an opponent of the underlying understanding of “theology” and “methodology” which set him on this path in the first place.
Perhaps the wisest move might be to give JD Hall the benefit of the doubt about his repentance until and unless clearly proved we should do otherwise.
This might avoid both pointless speculation and being gullible at the same time.
Patti wrote:
Yep. He’s sorry that he wasn’t more gracious in publicly chastising a child he doesn’t know? He should never have spoken to the child in the first place.
Perhaps we have never called out a troubled youth in an unloving way for the wrong motives. Perhaps none of us are known for whatever harsh tactics JD Hall is known for. Perhaps we always seek to speak the truth in love, in words seasoned by grace. But I doubt that anyone who has lived at least a couple decades could honestly say, before God, that their words or deeds have never harmed and wounded another person, perhaps even so deeply that the damage cannot be undone except through God’s miraculous intervention.
If we are honest with ourselves, we are enormously grateful that our apologies were not held up to public scrutiny. Repentance comes in stages, in layers, much like peeling back an onion. God is a gentle God, and He does not best us over the head with the enormity of our sin right away. Besides, it is human nature to want to explain, to want to cling to some shred of human dignity. Some of us need to be broken in stages. For some of us, the grief over repentance is so profound that we are incapable of writing the perfectly crafted words that would put a watching world at ease, that would make them say, “Yes, Rebecca has repented correctly, by my standards, and has said the right words in exactly the right way, with the right tone of voice.”
Repentance bears fruit. When the sin isn’t directly against us, we don’t have the right to decide what form that fruit should take. God gets to decide. The actual victims certainly should have a big say in it. But we, the audience…we need to ask God to give us love and grace and patience.
I am not the repentance police.
Thank you for the spirit in which this article comes across. It gives me much hope this morning. A few of the comments, not so much.
I have a close family member who probably has NPD (no formal diagnosis), and she makes apologies just like this. If you plug your own greatness and point out every else’s “sins” while apologizing, well . . . Let’s just say that seminaries may want to start offering classes on “Apology 101.” I mean, clergymen are #8 on the list of professions that attract the most sociopaths. Just sayin’.
That said, I didn’t actually speak to the man. I believe Dee when she says she believes that he’s sincere.
Julie Anne brings up an important point about the Twitter account. “Pulpit and Pen” and the “Pulpiteers” are Hall’s babies. It reflects on him.
@ Caitlin:
I should add that I’m with Patti entirely. I trust Dee, who has heard and spoken with him, that his repentance is genuine. I just challenge Mr. Hall to think hard about what actually he is repenting for. We are told to point out public sin, but we’re also told to look for the log in our eyes before pointing out the splinter in someone else’s. I’d also challenge the idea that there is any way a strange adult could chastise a child publicly that *was* gracious. Being publicly shamed by your pastor on facebook is mortifying enough (seriously, that gave me chills as a 26 year old- not that far from being 16). The chances that a stranger’s comments would have changed my behavior at 15 are slim to none. I would have been embarrassed and skeeved out and defiant. Definitely defiant. Not everyone is a peer, you can’t treat everyone like they are full-grown adults with seminary degrees.
OK, so are we now demanding a perfect apology from an imperfect person? Are we insisting that an apology is not sincere if it doesn’t meet our standards?
Must Hall be perfectly repentant at this very moment?
May we allow a little grace, a little time, for him to walk this through, to live this out, for clarity and grace to restore his soul? Can we allow time for the fruits of forgiveness, or do we demand full fruition today?
Dee,
I want to say how much I respect you for being willing both to speak to Jordan and to take him at his word for now. I have long sensed a real reticence on the part of TWW to even think about considering the possibility that someone you have “reported” on might repent, and I have felt that this has hurt your ministry and your credibility.
Today you have taken a difficult and painful step forward in your development as a citizen journalist, and more importantly, your growth as a Christian. I have disagreed with many, many of the things that you have written, and I have caused my husband’s blood pressure to elevate dangerously by reading some of it to him. I will be thrilled to read him today’s post when he gets home because it is truly an unexpected and, dare I say, joyful turn of events.
You are setting an example for other bloggers who aspire to do what you and Deb do here at TWW…may they take to heart the fact that calling oneself a “Christian” blogger is meaningless unless one does indeed ACT Christianly…and that is what you have done here today, Dee. God bless you.
To Jordan,
I read the transcript of your apology last night and I think what sealed it for me were these two paragraphs:
“It’s true, to my shame, that when I commented publicly about the inconsistencies in the young man’s testimony — and especially when I referenced my concerns about his father — I did not do it in the right spirit or out of the right motivation. It was sinful for me to challenge him publicly like that. I was not thinking or acting pastorally in how I addressed him.”
“If these events (and my confession) ultimately end any influence I might ever have, I will accept that as our sovereign God’s perfect will.”
Contrary to so many “non-apology” apologies we are seeing today…I don’t think there is anything more you could have said to be in keeping with the Scriptural admonitions for dealing with our own sins. May God bless you, and use you as an example to all of us when we must confront our own sinful hearts before a Holy God.
Nancy wrote:
Agree 100%
Rob wrote:
Yes, but during that time, he should not hold church office. Until elders determine that his repentance bears out in consistent humility and gentleness, he should be a student, not a teacher
I love this post.
Nancy wrote:
Nancy,
I agree. This is what I don’t hear evidence of at this point. Consequently, this apology comes across as feeling really bad about things (which is appropriate and good as far as it goes) but without necessarily understanding where the wrong actually lies. He seems a bit like Eustace trying to scratch off the dragon skin when he needs a much deeper work done. It is like he is trying to form an adequate apology from within the existing framework and mentality, when the existing framework and mentality is what really needs to change. He is trying to operate under law but he needs to come under grace. He needs to repent of, as you said, the “underlying understanding of ‘theology’ and ‘methodology'” because that is where the error originates.
Now, being that he seems to at least be seeing as much as he has, perhaps the rest will be forthcoming. But that remains to be seen.
I pray that, as one commenter pointed out, that this truly IS the climax of the abuse that MANY have been heaping on their brothers and sisters in Christ.
Jordan, I deeply appreciate what Dee has related about your conversations. I will be praying for you and your family. What you must be going through now is unimaginable to me. I pray for your and your family’s safety and health.
Unfortunately, I don’t have the same cautious sense of optimism for the others who also participated in the pile-on of Braxton Caner. Jordan Hall may have been the loudest, but he was NOT the only one. I hope others realize that and don’t forget it. People like James White, Fred Butler, Chris Rosebrough and others whom I’m much less familiar with, need NOT to be given a pass in this situation.
These men, who all claim some sort of leadership among God’s people, were NO LESS culpable than Jordan Hall. Some could argue they were MORE so because they were encouraging of Jordan’s behavior.
As long as these men continue their current courses, I’m afraid we may well see more carnage and tragedy. And don’t think this only applies to Ergun Caner. I’ve watched these men attempt to destroy good ministries, never seeming to give a second thought to the repercussions.
To me, it looks as if their goal is “to draw away disciples after them”.
“For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” Acts 20:29-30
I pray that I’m wrong and they, too, have simply gotten caught up in the celebrity that’s been handed to them. Time will bear this out and God’s people will be watching.
I am speaking from far, far outside of the Christian huddle, so my words should be taken with a grain of salt. However, it struck me that a large portion of this apology was devoted to explaining how he was really right to begin with! — The father’s life story was “false”, the son’s behavior was “clearly immoral”, his “loving brothers” saw him “reveal and speak truth”. Blah, blah, blah.
Although his speech patterns and word choice are no doubt consistent with his vocation and denomination, for about 90% of the population a cloud of piety and self-righteousness is woven into the fabric itself.
Although I don’t know what’s in his heart any more than he knows what’s in mine, his WORDS still ring of justification and the inherent superiority of a zealot.
@ Darlene:
I wholeheartedly agree with your comment. Those who piled on are just as culpable. They behave like a pack of wolves in the social media. It must stop.
“. . .he became one of the most prominent men in our denomination and president of the largest Christian university in the world. ”
Can we at least get the facts of the matter straight? Caner was president of the seminary, not the university. Huge difference. That Hall doesn’t/didn’t know the difference is important.
Lovely start, Jordon. Here’s what I read:
1. Established credentials.
2. Established personal virtue
3. Established value of what you do.
4. Established the sins in the one who you offended
5. Established the essential virtue within your offense
6. Apologized for your wrong attitude
7. Stated that you’ve set up accountability partners for radio program
8. Stated that you’ve returned to personal evangelism and it makes you happier
9. Cast doubt on effect of your offense to the life of the offended
10. Complained about the nature of some of the public pushback
11. Mentioned that you didn’t defend yourself for 10 days.
12. Stated your new desire for transparency.
13. Recognized that you confused pastor and warrior jobs.
14. Apologized for attacking a vulnerable child.
15. Stated that you “invect” yourself more severely than the worst public pushback, then mention that some of the pushback was plain wicked.
16. Recognized that God doesn’t need you to bring justice even though you meant well by it.
17. Requested that all sympathy or prayers be sent to Caners rather than self.
18. Reiterated the depth of your suffering and sorrow.
19. Recognized that you’ve been going the wrong way in ministry and now you will go the right way in ministry.
20. Declared that you’ve bundled your wrongs along with the wrongs of everyone else, and have laid it at the cross where all is forgiven.
21. Declared that this is transparency, and it is what we all need.
22. Requested from everyone that in the same way you’ve preached God’s free grace to all for seven years, you now be given the same.
This is a process, yes? It would be sweet if you slowly, from your heart, took away the need for #1-6, 9-12, 15, 20, and 22.
Humility is tres difficile!!! I wish you well.
D.R. wrote:
Thanks for pointing this out. I listened to Hall's apology yesterday and remember this remark but didn't catch the error.
Forgive my snark:
When you’re wrong, you’re wrong.
When you repent, you’re still wrong.
And, as to the future, well, no doubt, you’ll still be wrong.
KJV: be ye…tenderhearted, forgiving…
How about we come alongside Hall, and support him as one who is walking out his repentance? I’m sure he won’t do it perfectly. Can we lovingly walk with this brother, encourage him in the fruits of gentleness and kindness?
PS: The fact that others around him promote harshness, is a sad reality, but should not minimize his repentance.
@ Patrice:
And 18? At least the suffering bit, it came across as “This has been really hard for me, you guys.”
@ Rob:
He wants our input. You can’t repent if you’re repenting of the wrong thing.
formerly anonymous wrote:
This is critical to the healing process of all so that this behavior will not continue.
Also what Nancy said.
Rob:
There is more to repenting than repenting.
@ Rebecca Prewett:
Thank you Rebecca for your helpful comments.
As long as humans are imperfect, our apologies will be to some extent. So knowing this, I try to look for the heart behind one: what is this person’s posture toward his or her own sin? toward those he or she has wronged? toward God? Sometimes that’s hard to tell. Overall, I appreciated his willingness to apologize openly and specifically, which is more than so many leaders are willing to do (ie-SGM, Driscoll, etc.). So while it’s not perfect, I’m grateful that he tried.
Deep breath all around, please.
Let’s cut through the rhetoric to a few facts. Jordan, please listen:
It at least appears a teenage young man (we western folks do not see 15 as a “child”) has apparently taken his own life. This young man had been publicly called out for what some see as immorality. And he must have been aware of the controversy over his dad. We can’t sweep under the rug that it is possible he saw gross hypocrisy in his own dad and that was what he could not deal with. The exchanges with Jordon Hall, while Hall was definitely waaaay out of line, don’t seem the sort of thing to trigger a much delayed suicide.
Jordan, you seem to be mixing Calvinism and fighting fundamentalism and thinking that constitutes serving God. Nothing could be further from the truth and nothing drives folks from Jesus faster.
If your faith were truly reformed, truly t.u.l.i.p., you would have understood right off the bat that God doesn’t need you running around sniffing out OTHER folks sin and calling them on it. That is the job of the Holy Spirit, not Jordan Hall. And you would understand salvation is all of God, all of grace, not of works.
This is where the truly reformed and truly Calvinistic part company with you, with John MacArthur, and with all the other works righteousness in the guise of Calvinism crowd. Real Calvinism recognizes that the work to be done will be done by God, not man.
It appears that you do not scripturally qualify to pastor a church or to preach. You are not apt to teach and are quarrelsome. I challenge you to live out the scriptures in your own life.
Rather than try to save your career, I challenge you to walk away from the pulpit. Go get a job over in Williston. Live the faith. Serve others. It may be in time, when you are living in righteousness, that God may let you lead a “tail gate church” over lunch in the oilfield. If He does, and you don’t blow it, maybe someday you can serve again in the organized church. Maybe not. No guarantees.
But know this: your behavior has been just as immoral as any hooker, or drug dealer, or profane cusser, or any other sinner.
We will know you get that when your apologies stop justifying sinful behavior.
I must admit you sound like a guy who beat his wife, then said “I was wrong to hit her but she wouldn’t shut up. I’m sorry she got bruised and sorry she has let that hurt her feelings, but I’m normally easy going and she just wouldn’t stop.” A real apology would simply be “no man should hit a woman, I did it, and I am sorry.”
And to those that rag on and on about Hall causing this suicide: in throwing mud on Hall you only lose ground. Have you never spoken out of turn, or trashed someone’s character or actions? Is your “discernment” and “calling out bullies” all that different, or is it just plain bullying?
Rob wrote:
While this is true, what is also true is that one of the fruits of real repentance will be tested when he decides whether his tribe is subject to rebuke or only ones outside his tribe. IOW, can and will he and others be righteous judges and not unrighteous, or rather self-righteous.
Please re-read Nancy’s first comment above. And think about her point about the underlying premises that brought about this trainwreck.
and I should add that knowing the contents of Dee’s conversation with him over the phone helped a little, at least for me, in thinking through this apology
Rob wrote:
These words demonstrate that you simply do not get it. In fact you have totally missed the point. Many, probably most, of the people here have experienced abuse by a spiritual “authority” or someone who has abused under a system which allows for abuse. I argue that the system itself is abusive.
I think that you and those who think like you need to think a little harder. You can start with Nancy and all the ones who speak of NPD apologies.
At this point, as Patrice pointed out, the apology has some things that need to be worked through. In my own experience, I have gravely sinned by hating someone. I could justify all day long why that was not a problem and even justified. It was not until I said out loud, “I hate ______” that the repentance process could start.
Please do not be so dismissive of the life experiences. Time will tell whether this is sincere or not. The Holy Spirit can work, and you are not the Holy Spirit and neither are any of us.
Truly, this reminds me of a marital spat. No matter, how or what one spouse says, the other is still mad, not going to accept any concession, and unwilling to find reconciliation and a reason to move forward. It’s often easier to stay mad, and angry, and “right” than it is to agree to walk forward in harmony, even if those first steps are tentative, uncertain, and even a bit fearful.
Some see arrogance in Hall’s statements. I see him laying out his thinking process, and showing how he ended up where he did. Sure, some of his thinking was wrong. Perhaps some of his thinking still is wrong.
Can we start here? Yip, I was wrong. I want to do better.
OK, brother, we accept that. We are joyful that you are finding new grace in your ministry. We appreciate that you recognize your calling is not to correct everyone in the church, and know you will experience greater peace in your heart as result.
Therefore brother, we also encourage you to grow in grace. We will walk with you, we will encourage you. We will help you put off some of those old ways of thinking that were not godly (even if they were modeled by some leaders) and we will humbly attempt to model and encourage you in more godly, spiritual attitudes. We know you will fall at times, but we will be there with you, to give you hand up, as you dust yourself off. And, as we’ve passed down this road a ways, we will look back at far we’ve come.
We will look back at how far we’ve come.
Dee, thank you for engaging Jordan Hall. I hope conversations like that will help him pursue a Spirit-led and grace-filled path of repentance and restoration.
I also think the people now running Pulpit and Pen should remove all tweets and posts that address Mr. Caner’s family. It would be best if they engage ideas and no longer attack people and their families.
Rob wrote:
I'll try this again. Rob, the ones who are skeptical her are skeptical for a reason. Look at how you start this comment. Please, just stop and look at what I quoted.
This is dismissive language and a deflection. Yes, yes it is. Many here have experienced these maneuvers over and over again. I am in favor of giving Jordan some time to process his repentance because I have had to do that.
But, Jordan is not "entitled" to remain a pastor until he has demonstrated that he is prepared to be an example of being conformed to Christ. I think that the suggestion that he get a job in the non-theological world is an excellent one. He will have so much more understanding that he presently does of how real people function in the real world and not the virtual Theological Twitter world.
Gram, please don’t be so sure that I don’t get it, just because I don’t totally agree with you.
Certainly, there is plenty of reason to be skeptical. Sure, we’ve seen it all before. (Most of my posts on this blog are “I’ve seen it before”.)
But, still, it seems to me, that what some folks want is an apology on their terms. And anything less is not acceptable.
I say, let’s start here. Now. Let’s walk it forward. More repentance may come. Let the healing start. Let grace abound. Here. Now.
Mr. Hall, apologies are never easy, public apologies are even harder. I wish you good luck in finding redemption and balance in your life. I’ve screwed up in my life as well, trying to pursue a better world. Redemption is a hard road to travel, but it’s worth it. Good luck to you, and I hope all your family is well.
Gram3 wrote:
Rob, these statements illustrate what is called a “double bind” or “no win” situation, and it is one way to emotionally abuse someone. It is wrong to do that.
Now, I’m going to show you how every single “complementarian” abuses women when they put women under their man-made system. If you can tolerate being taught by a woman in public, please think about what I’m writing here:
God has ordained that men are in authority over their wives.
Women are more easily deceived.
Women are always looking for a way to undermine or usurp their husband’s authority.
Women are not permitted to instruct men.
If a woman objects, then that is proof of the truth of this, and she is demonstrating by her objection that she is rebelling against God and her husband or pastor.
Rob, do you see how this puts women in a double bind and a no win situation? It is either capitulate (submit) or women are in rebellion against God. We are not even given the freedom to question the teaching (be a Berean) without sinning. At least Mark Driscoll was open about sinning through questioning. Women are assumed to be guilty of a crime that the prosecution cannot find in the statutes, and further women are not permitted to present a defense.
Please think about this. Please think about whether there is anything good or godly about that system of thought. Please think about whether you would want to be part of a “church” that puts you in a double bind.
Deb wrote:
As long as churches are run like private corporations, it won’t stop. This mess is created by a disobedient form of church government.
Rob wrote:
I am drawing an inference of what and how you think by what you wrote. Since what you wrote is dismissive and a deflection of the issue, I believe you need to revisit your underlying thinking, as Nancy pointed out above.
You betray the way you view people here by your words. IOW you are repeating the fundamental error that caused the trainwreck. You are insisting that people accept this apology on your terms (and trivializing their experiences) while accusing them of not accepting it on their terms. Do you not see a double standard in your thinking?
And I said that I accept this as a first step. I don’t yet have evidence that the cause has been recognized. But, as I said above, it takes time and processing and the work of the Holy Spirit in all of us.
Tim wrote:
I agree with this wholeheartedly.
@ Caitlin:
Well, ok, but look, I think he has a wonderful start. I really appreciate him coming forward like this. It takes huge guts! This is a very difficult thing to do!
I once had someone parse my apology in the manner I did here for Jordon. It was intended to show me just enough to allow me to explore my underlying problem. In my case, it was abjection to the point of demeaning myself. Jordon appears to have an opposite sort of problem, but he needs to figure it out.
True repentance requires that you know something about yourself, and that you are willing to learn a great deal more. It’s a process.
Neither ordering people around nor keeping silent will help. And the work can only be done by the individual.
@ Patrice:
Look at the difference between Jordon’s apology and that of Driscoll. There is some overlap but here there is also a good amount of genuine coming-to-terms. It is wrong to discourage good, when it is there, and it is wrong to encourage the false, when it is there.
@ Patrice:
I feel that, in an apology, you shouldn’t focus on the guilt you’re feeling. Maybe other people read it as a way to indicate that you really are sorry (“When I realized how I was affecting you, it just ate me up inside and I felt awful about it.”) But the apologizer has to walk a very fine line to avoid “It hurt me too!” Because of course it hurt him. It needs to have hurt him. That’s the point. Guilt: painful for a reason.
I guess the question to ask ourselves when we’re apologizing is: Who are we doing this for? If you figure out the answer to that, other things fall into place.
@ Patrice:
This I definitely agree with. MD’s apology sounded more like “I want this to go away now” and less like “Oh man, what I thought was right wasn’t so right.” I don’t know that I join with other people saying that Mr. Hall is disqualified from ministry, due solely to the fact that his (imo incomplete) apology seems in earnest. That being said, I stand by the idea that you can’t repent if you don’t understand what you did wrong.
Dee, this is something worth considering. The challenge is that if we do, many people will surmise and say that we are trying to hide/cover up something, when i’d just as soon have it as part of the record. a parallel would be when we took down the original post when asked, in large part based on your request, but then were instantly accused of trying to hide something, a charge directed from many people in your combox. For this reason I lean towards keeping it up- but of course your perspective on this would be appreciated
I can really empathaize…in early May 2013 I had a day that was the lowest in my life. I couldn’t believe what I was accused of. I tried hard to work things out with time. In my case I think approaching a Sovereign Grace Pastor was key to seeking forgiveness and working out a couple of my feelings of hate. Hate and bitterness can destroy and as you guys read what you read please consider this. There is much more to the story that I withheld as this is the internet. The Deebs know all the details of what happened and how severe it became. That said one of the things that hurts me and bothers me is that of all the people who acknowledged what I did with Sovereign Grace I thought for certain it would be Andrew White who would be helped the most and that he would react with joy. I thought he would be happy, pleased and amazed in what I did out of humility. When I met with him on June 20, 2014 and told him this and gave him the subsequent paperwork his reaction was bland. He said nothing, and in a brief subsequent email later he said nothing. That hurt and was frustrating because I don’t know if he knew how hard it was for me to do that. He didn’t acknowledge really what I did. I know a number of people who have been hurt by the SGM system and I still love and support them. So when JD Hall says that is sorry and delivers a message like he does AND reach out to people outside his sphere of influence my heart grieves. I know what is like. I have walked that valley. Many of you read that in detail yesterday.
@ Deb:
Pastor JD Hall is off to a good start but that’s just what it is, it’s a start. He has maligned and been so vicious to so many people.
I left my 2 legs on a battlefield in South Vietnam while serving my country in the United States Marine Corps. I discharged my duties and received an honorable discharge for my service. A few months ago Pastor Hall became angry with me because of my friendship with Ergun Caner. Hall retorted to name calling and the name he used was as low and despicable as he could have used towards me. To Pastor JD Hall I am a “Benedict Arnold” which in America is synonymous with the word traitor. Hall knew what he was saying and he took joy in saying it.
But I’m not the only one he treated that way. He has attacked Johnny Hunt and Ronnie Floyd and one of my best friends in the world, Pastor Jerry Walls. He had a segment on his blog/radio program he called “Downgrade”. He took pride and even was gleeful to place people he disagreed with in his “downgrade”. I have to admit that he wasn’t afraid to put some of his own friends in his “downgrade”. If memory serves me correctly he placed Al Mohler in his “downgrade”. Of course all of that kind of malarkey sounds like something the Pharisees would have done when Jesus walked on this earth.
I confess that I am still hurting from the loss of Braxton. He was my buddy. He came to our Youth Alive Conference last year in Oklahoma and hung out with me and the night Tony Nolan preached he made an important decision for the Lord. The last time I saw him was at the church we are members of in Garland TX, Lavon Drive Baptist. His dad was preaching and Braxton came with him. He came over and sat next to me. If teenagers are rebellious against God they don’t want to hang around preachers. He always gave me a firm handshake and always looked me in the eye when he talked to me. He had a smile that would light up the room. We shared a few stories and then when his dad preached Braxton and I shared a Bible.
Well, we can all hope and pray that this is the start of something positive and good. The key word is “start”.
To our readers
I wrote this post quite late last night. I am on vacation in Florida. One thing that I didn’t say is this.
Some who read here were caught up in theological systems which dominated their thought patterns for years. They eventually escaped the church, group, etc but some of those patterns of thinking continue.
While in DC visiting with a number of readers, particularly ex SGMers, I heard one of the most poignant comments from a mother whose child was abused. We asked her if there was anything we could do to be of help to her. She said “Teach me to think correctly about theology. I don’t know what is true anymore.”
Wow! We are going to attempt to address that issue.
However, for the moment, in this situation, think about this. JD Hall was caught up in a system which is high on judgment and low on love. He was taught to admire the celebrity leaders. In fact, there is far more to this part of the story that I am not at liberty to share with you all.
This is a problem that we have seen in the YRR movement as well. Young men, barely out of their early 20s, smitten with celebrity worship, do their darndest to mimic their idols.
When one begins to question one’s paradigm, it may take years to see all the subtleties of how that affects his/her thinking. It takes time to fully realize the pervasiveness of certain thinking that affect one’s entire world view.
In other words, it will take time. So think about that as you read Jordan’s words.
Repentance is the point where you recognize you are going the wrong way, you stop, turn around, and go a different direction. Repentance does not mean you have fixed everything that was wrong. It does not even mean you recognize everything has been wrong. It simply means, you are starting back towards the right direction.
It does not require you to have done all the things to prove your repentance is genuine. It means that you have recognized error, and you are starting a change.
Many more changes will come. Stepping down from ministry, recognizing the hurt caused to others, even disassociating with others who’ve enabled your behavior, engaging in accountability, are all issues than can be addressed as part of the process. It’s a process. It is not complete.
The repentance is where it starts. Let it start. Healing, correction, restoration will come. A year from now, Brother Hall can be in a different place. But, let him start the journey.
I apologize for yammering on about this. I’ve said far more than I intended, and certainly have no desire to hammer any of these points over and over.
“If a man should kneel to God and ask forgiveness I shall kneel along side him and also ask for my own.”
@ dee:
Thanks, Dee. Appreciate this perspective.
I think it takes time to get out of a mentality we have lived in for a long time. I, too, believe that time will tell with repentance. I do hope and believe we are seeing a true step in the process of growth for JD here. I respect him for making that step despite others trying to excuse his actions. This brings me to tears. I pray he continues on this path of humility. It is beautiful to see a leader taking responsibility in this way. So many could learn from this. I pray JD has good people around him who don’t excuse but do encourage in this process of change.
dee wrote:
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
Dustin- they could take down the twitter account, reset it or whatever it’s called, with a brief humble explanation in the box that describes the owner/whatever of the new account that it was taken down with remorse over the negative effects. Then be positive going forward……..
Tim Lee wrote:
I am so sorry for the damage that was done. It is now up to Jordan to read these comments and begin to cope with them.
Tim Lee wrote:
I can only imagine that you are. What transpired was beyond the pale. As I have said, I stand by my original post. I would imagine that Jordan will have much deal with in that regard.
Tim Lee wrote:
I know. That is why Deb and I tried to stay clear of them. We received emails from several people in Montana who expressed their deep anger towards Reformation Montana. You should see what we were called. Let’s see “cesspool” was the least offensive. The Planned Parenthood of the blogosphere was another.
Hear me. I am not saying that all is well or even forgiven. It has only begun. Time will tell.
Tim Lee wrote:
First let me say this. I thank you for your sacrificial service to our country. I stand in awe at your sacrifice. You, sir, are a hero in my book and I stopped and prayed for you this morning.
It sounds like Jordan has a lot of apologizing to do. I am hoping that he will take the lead of Eagle.
Personally, I think it’s offensive to have remaining tweets up blasting Johnny Hunt.
Rob wrote:
We can never hear enough on how to repent.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
It needed to come down in the days after the death of Braxton. It would have been insensitive to have the post up written by a critic of Braxton. If you note, I did not discuss the post until after the funeral.
In my opinion, it would be perfectly appropriate to repost the critique with a huge apology for it at the beginning.
There is a custom of standing stones in the Bible.
http://www.followtherabbi.com/world/encyclopedia/article/standing-stones1
“The Hebrew word translated “standing stones” is massebah and means “to set up.” The Israelites followed ancient customs by setting up standing stones as a reminder of God’s covenant and supernatural acts on their behalf. The story of the stone was passed down from generation to generation through oral tradition.”
Perhaps this could be your standing stone. This could be the place of your turning from the past and reaching out to the future, believing in God’s redemption and demonstrating it it with your love and kindness to all whose paths you cross. Perhaps one day you could say “That was us before. How God has changed our hearts.”
dee wrote:
You and I did a good job of steering clear of this crowd until the Caner debacle. Yes, we have been ‘downgraded’ in a very public way.
When I put ‘The Wartburg Watch’ and “cesspool’ in the search engine, here’s what comes up.
http://thepaperthinhymn.com/2014/05/19/a-small-sampling-of-the-wartburg-watch-combox-regarding-al-mohler/
May God have mercy on these zealots.
dee wrote:
He has written that he did very well in business in his early 20’s. If his paradigm concerning what he believed in hunting sinners down is really changing, is it wise to continue as a pastor/preacher after all that has happened? I would encourage him to step down, go back into business while working through repentance which is a “from….to” metamorphosis.
Being in authority (as he views pastors), having others acountable to him and obeying him (as he views pew sitters) and on a stage is probably not the best venue for such a metamorphosis
I once encouraged this for another person, the object of Hall’s hunt.
Caitlin wrote:
Or, you can be genuinely sorry for that which you do know, and work on the rest as you go.
Someone wise once told me that humility is knowing exactly who you are: nothing more, nothing less. That works for those who don’t think enough of themselves and for those who think too much. Learning humility takes a lifetime.
Rob wrote:
Yes, that is true. But you have not addressed the systemic problem and have avoided acknowledging the double standards that are in place and the double binds that *your* tribe places on people. Your tribe puts some men and all women in double binds to which you so forcefully objected. A double standard. Your tribe gets to make the rules to which they are not subject. That is not godliness. That is pure worldliness.
You want us to keep moving forward. But you will not engage with the abuse which continues from your tribe. You simply ignore facts which are inconvenient to your narrative. The evidence in this thread is that you love your theology and your tribe more than you love people, especially women. When will you call out your tribe for that ongoing sin?
You are not showing evidence of sincerity or a willingness to carefully and painfully assess what has happened and why. When you show that willingness, then I will believe you mean your pious words. You are not helping Jordan’s case for sincerity here. You are making it look like part of a coordinated PR move, and I hope it is not, for Jordan’s sake, the Caners, and the entire church.
You tie up burdens on other people’s backs but complain that others are tying you up. Do you not get the point because you will not get the point lest you be tossed out of the tribe?
@ Patrice:
Is the apology the beginning or the end? If this is just the start, then yes, maybe he’ll learn more and understand more and realize there is more to his behavior than he originally thought. But our culture likes to treat apologies like the end of the road. “I’ve apologized, what else do you want?” That is unacceptable in basically every case. If he wants to say “Okay, I apologized, forgive me and let’s move on” then he has more work to do.
Guest wrote:
The language used by this self-righteous crowd is some of the worst I have ever read.
Absolutely appalling!
https://twitter.com/PulpitAndPen/status/493494445103271936
Yes, more apologies are definitely in order…
I think what many of the people commenting here are trying to say is, “We’ll see.” Perhaps repentance really is a process in this case, but so is forgiveness. If we can’t expect him to fully understand all the hurt he has caused yet, neither can we expect those who have been lied to over and over again by Hall and his ilk to completely believe his words.
If Jordan is truly repentant and honest about turning away from his own “righteousness”, then one of the fruits of this will be a gradual understanding of the pain that his words and actions have caused, and a further turning away from those actions, and trying to make things right. As that happens, those of us who are skeptical will have no choice but to accept his sincerity.
I am most skeptical of those who demand instant forgiveness. I guess what I’m saying is, “Time will tell.”
Toffeemama wrote:
I absolutely agree! Thanks for your comment.
dee wrote:
So very true Dee. I can attest to that from personal experience. Realizing how much one’s thinking is almost on automatic following old habits is super hard. Empathy almost has to be relearned.
@ Tim Lee:
Sir, thank you for your service and your sacrifice. My dad flew F-100’s over there in ’69, and I don’t think you guys have ever gotten the proper recognition. Thank you.
@ Deb:
Well, thank you for shining a bright light on the thinking we are attempting to engage here.
One could do an entire clinic on emotional and spiritual immaturity from this one post.
If the one who wrote this about cackling sycophants would look in the mirror, he would find the reflection of one.
May God indeed have mercy and grant repentance.
@ Gram3:
That was ambiguous on my part. The immature post I was referring to was Dustin’s that you quoted. Time for some lunch, I suppose. Sorry for that lack of clarity.
Gram3 wrote:
Oh, the irony! The one who wrote it is here in our midst. He has posted a comment in this very thread…
I think all of the tweets should remain public. If JD Hall is truly repentant, they would remain as a testimony to the work of God in his heart as a changed man.
I think the Pulpit and Pen Twitter account should remain under JD Hall’s name as they were his tweets. He needs to own them with his name on it because it’s not appropriate to attribute them to the Pulpit and Pen contributors when they didn’t send them. The Pulpit and Pen contributors should get a new account.
Dustin,
You’ve said to me that you thought JD Hall was out of line with Braxton. How about your behavior on the article posted above? What about Pulpiteers? Are they going to continue the same path – ie, calling the #downgrade stampede by passing out phone numbers for #pulpiteers to blast someone?
The pulpiteers have been some of the most hostile group of “Christians” I’ve ever seen. Yes, “Christians” in quotes because I see nothing of Christ in their behavior, actions, words. Christ becomes hollow and meaningless when the behavior is so horrid.
Deb wrote:
It’s very hard for idealogues to sense irony or logic or any kind of falsifying data. On the Driscoll thread, Janey linked to Challies on Driscoll. You simply cannot make this stuff up.
Rob on this thread is another example of the passive-aggressive phenomenon I have experienced personally with this particular ideology. Throw what you think are bombs and then run away when the bomb is tossed right back at you.
Or they curate comments to shape the narrative or shut down any negative feedback. The attitude that creates those behaviors is the same attitude that has created this. But they cannot see it because they will not, and the “mature” men in their tribe are encouraging them. They refuse to even hear female voices, so I’m not sure what can be done.
@ Julie Anne:
Here's the verse that came to mind upon reading your comment about this crowd.
Matthew 7:15-20 (ESV)
Are they false prophets? Jesus said we would know them by their fruits.. We will continue to be fruit inspectors here at TWW.
Caitlin wrote:
The principal at my kids school has taken on this issue big time. They must demonstrate over time the behavior has changed.
It is huge problem out there. We have become an “apology” driven culture. Not a “change your behavior” culture.
Julie Anne wrote:
Agree totally. The damage done by the tweets/posts is already done. But there is some possibility that they might serve as examplars of the real problem. In circles familiar to me, they could serve as case studies. If there were ears to hear, and students eager to learn. I fear we have neither, as Rob and Dustin have demonstrated here.
@ dee:
Yes, I agree with you on the system he was ‘raised’ with. In fact it’s quite possible that the only apologies that he has ever heard from his revered leaders is exactly what he emulated when writing this one. All the more reason to help him understand what it really takes to earn trust. If there is ever any minute detail of justification in our repentance then when the same temptation arises again we will repeat our error. We must not resist the blow to our ego.
Even the quote that this post is opened with “Repentance is siding with God against self.” ― Todd Nibert, is not quite enough IMO. I say that repentance is also siding with the self against the self. Until I come to that place in certain things that I need to be sorry to someone for I am miserable. Is it easy? No. But freeing? Yes!
Reading over JD Hall’s five points, I can see reasons for his frustration. I think the trap he fell into was getting so angry and frustrated over the things he saw, that he lost all perspective and began to think that if he didn’t become a “warrior” in opposing them, no one would do it. God Himself seemed to be taking too long in dealing with all that sin. I saw that same mentality when I used to check out Baylyblog from time to time.
Point 1) I can actually sympathize with, but that’s not just a southern baptist problem. Lifeway may have pulled Driscoll’s books, but they continue to carry a whole lot other things I would see as spiritually toxic or just unwise. However, I don’t have a blog excoriating them or the Christian Booksellers Association; I just won’t patronize any “christian” book/trinket stores.
If it is true that Ergun Caner (or anyone else)is basically another Mike Warnke, and is not only being promoted but covered up for as well by prominent celebrity pastors, I can see a place for exposing that within the sphere of discernment/abuse blogs. After all, these would not exist if churches had been doing their job in this regard. There does come a point when a thing needs to be told to the wider Church, both for the sake of the victims, the guilty ones, and to prevent anyone else from being hurt and exploited. Thankfully Mr. Hall recognizes that he crossed the line in exploiting Braxton to further go after his father.
Lastly, I agree with those who have said Mr. Hall needs to leave the pastorate. If finances are a concern, let the church help the family as he transitions to another occupation. I don’t believe he should be required to never preach the Gospel again to another living soul, just never to step into a position of spiritual authority within the body of Christ. Dee, I don’t know if you would be able to convey such a thing to him or not, but that is how I would exhort him, as well as encourage him.
@ dee:
I read Deb’s comment as well as Hall’s. We are all part of a culture where taking potshots via social media and the internet is quick and easy…but the aftermath and hurt can be so painful.
I think that this is an excellent opportunity for all of us, not just the pastoral “celebrities”, to look at our our use of media and how we choose our words and responses to others. A young man is dead, maybe not entirely because of a Twitter-feed, but he was still deeply affected by all of the internet chatter. If those of use in the body of Christ can begin to be more civil in the way we address each other, although we will still disagree, a great good could result from this hear-rending situation.
I would just like the entire idea of “spiritual authority in the the body of Christ” to go away . . . If people would lead by doing and not because they believe they have “spiritual authority” the Church would be much better off.
To any of Jordan’s friends and fellow participants, you will help him in his repentance and reconciliation effort if you will honestly engage the issues raised here. If you will become listeners–very intentional listeners–to voices you have vilified and reviled and silenced.
You have been taught to only listen to certain “safe” and “godly” and “Biblical” voices and to ignore and demonize all others. That is not honest. It does not glorify God. It only serves to glorify the men who have so instructed you and to glorify yourselves when you receive the praise and honor of these men. You have been deceived by something that you thought was good but is toxic. The proof is right here if you can stand to recognize it for what it is.
Refuse to be used as a parrot, a robot, a minion, a vector of a corrupt system. Imitate Christ, not men. Worship Christ, not your system. What you see in those you oppose is within you. Do what you have exhorted others to do.
Caitlin wrote:
An apology is the beginning of the path of repentance. It’s what gets one started on the long job.
And for those who have been hurt, forgiveness is the finale on the path of healing. It’s the crown of the long job.
At any rate, that’s how I’ve experienced both.
@ Patrice:
And I suspect that people put these two things, repentance and forgiveness, in the wrong places on the paths because they don’t want to look eye-to-eye at wrong-done or at damage-caused.
Facing these things causes all kinds of trouble, amiright? When you don’t face them, you can pretend that life is easier than it is.
Patrice wrote:
This is true, but forgiveness is actually unrelated to accepting apologies. Sometimes (often) we have to forgive people who have never/will never/can never apologize to us. To me, accepting an apology is over and beyond forgiving and signals a willingness to restore a relationship that has been damaged.
I’m glad he’s making the effort but I have to say I’m still somewhat skeptical. He may well feel genuinely repentant and be emotional about it, and that is good. But the focus on self, the background and detail about other people’s alleged wrongdoings, and the long detailed explanations of his own actions over time are all completely unnecessary and give some indication that the basic confrontational personality and approach remain. The whole thing strikes me as a baby step toward full repentance at best. Only time will tell the full story.
John wrote:
I certainly understand this. I made that point in the post. It is wise to be skeptical tempered by the hope that maybe a turn has been made. Time will tell.
Gram3 wrote:
I have no idea what you are talking about, and think you must have me confused with someone else. Of course I am not addressing the systemic problem, because that is not the subject of this post.
Further, I do not belong to any tribe, nor am I defending any tribe’s actions.
Gram3 wrote:
That was harsh. I have in no way belittled the harm done up to this point. I just saw no need to reiterate it all, as it has been discussed extensively.
I simply think we should be willing to accept an apology, even if it is not as good as we think it is. Fruits of repentance take time. Fruit does not happen in a day.
Sorry, I sure wish we had an edit option. “I simply think we should be willing to accept an apology, even if it is not as good as we think it should be.
Dr. Caner is guilty…of loving Jesus.
The only time I know for him to lie is when he told me my sermon in class was really good.
You “critics” have got a lot of nerve and need to start talking about Obama Care instead of a man who is trying to win the world to Jesus.
As his friend, I do not accept your apology until you shut down this blog.
You are wrong in tearing down God’s prophets.
Dee, I sent a comment that was rejected as spam. It is not.
@ dee:
CAN YOU TELL ME WHY THIS IS WAITING MODERATION???????????????????????Have you read the fable, “The Man, the Boy, and the Donkey?” If not, I challenge you to google it. There is a great deal of advice on these posts, an abundance of judging, a wealth of opinions. I am becoming schizophrenic, just reading them. As I have reached a “mature” age, I realize each day how little I know and how much I need the Lord. Jordan was raised in the fear and admonition of the Lord. He has made mistakes; he has sinned; he has repented. Should we leave the judging of his repentance and restoration to the Lord? Do we believe this is the Lord’s business? Do we believe He cares? Do we believe He is just? Let’s get down on our knees and thank Him for what is transpiring and let’s pray that He will restore Jordan to a place where he can use this to serve the Lord and help others. Does the Lord not use our area of weakness as our ministry? Where we are weak, He is strong. He has this. Please pray for the Caners and friends and family. Please stop giving advice and pray for them and pray for Jordan and family. I pray that God will use this for Jordan’s ministry to be better. For the grace of God, there go I. PLEASE. Read the story of the Man, the Boy, and the Donkey, and let Jordan listen to the LORD.
Jordan gave past details BECAUSE he was speaking to his CHURCH. They needed the background.
Rob wrote:
Please re-read your snark. Then re-read my response to your snark which was an explanation of a double-bind. I responded that the double-bind is placed on women in every “complementarian” church. And you should always address a problem at the systemic level, if there is a systemic problem, or you will be facing the same problem or worse.
If I have misread your snark, as you termed it, then I would truly appreciate it if you would correct my misunderstanding. I am all about understanding a situation, and I do realize that this medium can foster misunderstanding.
If you are not part of a tribe, then why the snark? I’m old, so bear with me here, and help me to understand. I may well be attributing to you the traits I have observed in personal conversations with elders in Jordan’s tribe.
Rob wrote:
Is it as harsh as John Piper smirking that women should endure being smacked around for the glory of God. That’s harsh if you happen to be a woman being abused. For John Piper, not so much.
Is it harsh to tell women they are being rebellious for questioning the teaching of so-called complementarians? That they require a “leader” and that they must be a follower. Forever. Is that harsh? For me, it is. For you, not so much apparently.
Are you “complementarian?” Do you think people should use words that are totally misleading, and that they should do so to mask the true nature of their teaching? Is that what being a man of God looks like?
If your only point was to say the apology should be accepted, then that is what you should have said.
This is such a tragic story on so many levels. While the Twitter exchange that took place never should have, people are basically holding court by speculation on social media. This exchange (although innapropriate) took place 3 weeks before Braxton took his life. His Twitter account also indicated having some “bad days” as an attempt to stay awake over 48 hours. We all know how lack of sleep in extreme cases can effect one’s judgement.
I live close to the town where the Caner family lives. The school Braxton attended is extremely competitive in football. EVERYTHING is about football. I’m sure for an up and coming player like Braxton, this could be stressful. It’s a very affluent area as well, which also can come with stressors for a young person.
My point here is NO ONE here knows why Braxton took his life. Just as easy as we can speculate about JD Hall, someone could speculate about other things as well. We tend to judge only by what we see on social media, when really no one here knew what was going on in Braxton’s life because we did not know him.
I think everyone involved in this story needs peace now. Allow the family to grieve, and perhaps we can all grow from this. Many people are behaving in a hateful way regarding JD and anyone associated with him. Is that any better than the Twitter exchange that took place in early July? Just my thoughts…
dee wrote:
I feel skeptical myself, mainly because of my experiences with leaders who “apologized” but there was no repentance. However, I can’t read anyone’s heart. Dee is right. Time will tell.
Was this the Lance Armstrong / Oprah Winfrey interview / confession of the evangelical world? I’m trying to figure out which church is over the “church discipline”. Hall’s church or Caner’s? Is it now a third-party mediator church that Dee belongs to? Just wondering.
Rob wrote:
Please re-read the first comment I made to Jordan near to top of the thread. That is where my heart is. It takes a lot for someone who has experienced grievous emotional and spiritual abuse from Jordan’s tribe to have any confidence at all in what he said. However, I do believe in the power of the Holy Spirit, and I do believe that this is a teachable moment for all of us if we are willing to see it.
Jordan wants to claim grace, but his tribe shows no grace to any women or men who disagree with them. None. Soothing words have no meaning if they are merely a cover. If you truly want to understand many of the people posting on this thread and you want to minister to other believers and not just do snark, then you need to seriously consider what has gone on here and why.
If you think that Jordan is sincere, then that is between you and the Lord. I am choosing to believe, against experience, that he is sincere. It is harsh, for you, to do a drive-by swipe at people who have been burned by trusting in elders who think like Jordan. I am one of them. It truly needs to stop, and maybe you can be part of the solution.
*
*
__
“He who is without sin cast da first stone, perhaps?”
J.D. Hall,
Hey,
The cock has crowed.
Yet,
Jesus, has forgiven you. (He shed His blood to prove it.)
Evidence enough.
FWIW I forgive you as well.
Please go and sin no more.
(N’ show deeds meet for repentance…)
Our Lord be with you.
(tears)
*
“I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and putting
both men and women into prisons, as also the high priest and all the
Council of the elders can testify. From them I also received letters
to the brethren, and started off for Damascus in order to bring even
those who were there to Jerusalem as prisoners to be punished.” ~ Apostle Paul
“But since I could not see because of the brightness of that
light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me and came
into Damascus…” ~ Apostle Paul
—
Now why do you delay? Get up and repent, that Jesus’ blood would wash
away your sins, –as you are heard by heaven, calling upon His precious name…
His robes are dipped in blood, and He is forever found faithful.
Yeeeehaaaaaa!
His eyes ‘ever’ upon da lit’l sparrow,
Sopy
__
Inspirational relief: “When I Survey…” en Español
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti4Nk1jKZ8Y
—
@ Bridget:
I fully believe that “authority” in the church must be very carefully overseen to avoid the problem that Jesus himself spoke to his disciples regarding. That is the human tendency to become power hungry and to abuse power. Equality of authority is appropriate in the church, if we believe in the priesthood of each and every believer.
I really appreciate the apology, but the events with Braxton Caner are fruits, not roots. There is an insidious theology at work here, and I encourage JD to think about how his unchristian religion results harming people.
@Dee – wow! God is truly using you and Deb. Now go put your toes back in the sand and a drink into your hand.
Would like to take JD Hall seriously, but even with this latest “improved” apology he’s still rewriting facts and history. There was a lot more than merely “holding to biblical beliefs” involved in the recent firing of some professors at Louisiana College and Hall knows that.
I thinks the man is sincerely broken and hurting but still tends to see reality through a somewhat distorted perspective, IMO.
I do not know the depth of Hall’s sincerity. Nor, do I have to know.
John the Baptist said: Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance.
The Apostle Paul said: But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.
He also said: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.
What I hope to see: Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted
I can't imagine how differently things would have gone had CJ Mahaney and the other leaders involved in SGM responded like this.
@ Rob:
Neither do I know or can I know the depth’s of Halls sincerity. I’m willing to take him at his word but doesn’t mean I have to start trusting his judgement.
Patrice wrote:
I completely agree with you Patrice – he has made a start. Because Dee has spoken to him, the things that would otherwise raise red flags for me in his post are now in my amber category…& I hope enormously he will learn from comments like yours. He needs to be deprogrammed, & there are those here who could help him with that…I hope this is the start of something brand new & better for him.
Whether the exchange contributed to the young man’s alienation or not, it’s severely wrong either way to go after a child because of who their parents are.
Caitlin wrote:
I completely agree.
Caitlin wrote:
I don’t see it that way. I’ve accepted an apology, hoped the offender well and healthy, and have never seen her again. I don’t think that releasing offenders from pay-back means they have rights to relationship.
There’s probably more than one way to do this, but this is how I’ve worked it out in my life.
Thanks for being willing to discuss it with me, Caitlin.
Beakerj wrote:
I hope that too. Life is far more wonderful than what I’ve read/heard from Jordon online.
I respectfully disagree with those here who are calling for Hall to leave the ministry. While I am in total agreement with those who found not only his correspondence with Braxton Caner, but also much of his public crusading wrongheaded, immature, harmful, and even sinful, these all happened outside of his ordinary church ministry. Whether or not his public repentance communicated 100% sanctified sentiment, it should not detract from the fact that he possessed enough humility to repent and to begin to address the issues that lead to his public sins.
As I understand Hall is a Baptist, meaning it us up to his congregation and congregational leadership do decide what he should do. The rest of us outside of his church ought to respect their rights to self-governance. Defrocking a minister is serious business, and should not be entered into lightly. If we follow the biblical model, an elder/pastor who sins publicly should be likewise rebuked publicly, and repent accordingly. All of these seem to be in place. If JD Hall’s public crusading is separate from how he conducts the business of pastoring his flock, and his public sins have been dealt with biblically, then we as the Christian community at large should step back and let his church/elders handle the rest as we hold Hall, his church, and even those who have been hurt by his public sins in our prayers and let God lead those involved in healing and repentance.
The church has a long history of God using weak, sinful leaders to accomplish his purposes. Peter preached the inaugural Christian sermon at Pentacost, with 3000 coming to faith weeks after he had denied Christ. Later in his ministry he had to be sternly rebuked by Paul for not acting in accord with the gospel. These were grave sins, yet he was not defrocked as an apostle – he repented and continued to be fruitful in ministry. I could go on and on with historical examples.
I think that Deb and Dee have done good work in bringing this issue to light, and many of the commenters here have added valuable insight into the dangers and damages that Hall & co. have unleashed online. And this process has worked, Hall has come forth with a public apology, and seems to be pursuing fuller repentance (which takes time). We could only hope that this process would play out in other situations that TWW reports on. But, I think there’s a real danger for those of us who are not close to the situation to seek to make the court of public opinion the jurisdiction of record and play the part of judge, jury, and executioner.
My prayer is that Hall will continue in his repentance by seeking out those who have been directly hurt by his online crusading, and try to make amends. In doing so he can be a great example to many in the New Calvinist camp that have been high on pushing their agendas in the church, and low on humility. Maybe it could help some in that camp drop the hero worship that seems to plague this sector of the church. But, the last thing I would want to see is a small congregation sent into upheaval over loosing a pastor if that can be avoided.
Rob wrote:
Are any of these things true of the theology promoted by Jordan and friends? I visited Dustin’s blog linked above, and it is disgraceful.
Really, the more that you say, the less I believe Jordan. What does it take to get you guys to look at causes and at sinful doctrine that substitutes man’s word for God’s? Look around you at the wreckage from these doctrines. And I’m not saying Caner’s group is any better. I’m just personally more familiar with this group.
Rob, it is hard to take you seriously when you will not engage seriously. You snark at the people here, and when you are called on it you say I have misunderstood. OK, then help me understand what it is about your snark that I have misunderstood.
It would be easier to take Jordan seriously if there were any indication that the heart of the matter is being examined. Instead, we get drive-bys and deflection and pious words.
When you are a new commenter, as determined by your email, name or IP, the comment goes into moderation. It would do so to me if I misspellled my name wrong. Do not shout at me via capitals. I am on vacation with my family and doing my best to approve all comments. I am going to approve only one of your comments. You sent us two that said the same thing under different names.There is no consspiracy involved merely my family who wants to see me for a few hours on our vacation.
Sometimes your comments (and mine, btw) get rejected as spam due to a full cache on your computer. It is an automatic setting and not a conspiracy. Reboot your computer when it happens and try again.
@ Jed Paschall:
I agree with much of what you have said. However, these men have prided themselves on being doctrinally pure and faithful to the words of the Bible while accusing others of being unfaithful. They have pushed the idea of elders, which is Biblical. However, they then ignore how many instances of elders disqualifying themselves? It is not sufficient to hide behind Baptist polity. The godly thing, at the very least, is for Jordan to voluntarily step aside until such time as repentance is demonstrated.
How can they have it both ways? The sheep are accountable but the elders are not. Women may not be elders who are otherwise qualified, but a man who violates the explicit qualifications can just continue on the strength of words alone?
This looks a lot like special pleading and a rank double standard to me. Maybe that’s because this simply would not fly in the out-of-church world. So we have the surreal situation that the elders of a church are actually held to lower standards than people in the world, and the consequences are erased by words before deeds have demonstrated their sincerity.
Hmm…I read this post just before going into work this morning. I have been thinking about it all day.
First, it gives me hope. A slim sliver – but still – hope that the institution might be salvageable.
Second, Jordan, thank you for taking this step. You have started down a good road. I pray that (ed.) Our God and Father will guide you gently ever more into His light.
As to the apology itself, I agree with some that it (at least on the surface) bears a resemblance to an NPD apology. And having been raised by an undiagnosed NPD, I know what those sound like. That said, I really like the breakdown Patrice posted at 10:10 am. It shows things more clearly.
But as I have been reading the comments, this is what occurred to me. I have posted here more than once my view on what a genuine apology looks like – and one of the things that strikes me about this apology is that I don’t recall hearing a demand or plea that anyone must forgive him because he apologized. The demand for forgiveness is a sure sign of a fake apology. I see no such demand here and that gives me hope in the sincerity of the apology….in fact, my ‘gut’ is that it is indeed a sincere apology.
And as many have noted quite eloquently, the change that comes from recognizing wrong behavior/attitude (or theology) is a process – not a light switch. It will take time to sort and I again pray that Jordan Hall and his family are protected and guided through this process and come out the other side truly transformed more into the likeness of our (his and my) Savior.
In the meantime, only time will tell how deep the apology runs.
Jed Paschall wrote:
I will disagree with this
statement implication (ed.), but it’s not intended as comment on Hall continuing ministry with those who agree with his theology.God sometimes, here on earth, brings meaning out of horrible actions, so should we keep in place those doing the horrible actions, because God is so good?
Also, to say that we all are weak doesn’t mean that there is no weakness that would disqualify us from the work we do. To say that we all sin doesn’t mean that all sins have equal effects.
This is dangerously poor reasoning, and I hope you put it to bed for good.
Gram3 wrote:
I wish I could respond more in depth, but I have to take the kids to swim lessons. That said, I am not saying your points are not well founded, I agree they are. We could talk about the church polity side of this as well, as a Presbyterian, I have my own opinions. I agree that none of this would fly in the outside world, but, this is the church, and we operate on a paradigm of grace, and the world does not.
All I am saying is that whether or not Hall stays in ministry, or doesn’t should not be decided in the court of public opinion. I find much of his online presence to be completely out of line, and damaging to the church. However, if he is willing to address this appropriately, I am for letting those closer to the situation speak into Hall’s life and future in ministry. I don’t think it is wise or prudent for him to think that by issuing an apology that he has completed the process of repentance, but I do think that repentance needs to be done in the context of his community, those who have spiritual authority over him (hopefully he has this), and to deal directly with those he has hurt or maligned. Beyond this, I think the best posture for us is to take a step back, pray, and let God work.
Suffice to say, if he were to step out of line publicly again, he would have a very short leash – because plenty of people would be watching. But, if he is genuine in repentance, that will be clear as well, especially to his community even if we never see. I am more of the opinion that we should be cautiously optimistic, because to my knowledge, Hall is the first of the New Calvinists to respond, even if imperfectly, in an appropriate way to public outcry for being out of line. My prayer is that he will be the first of many, for the health of that movement, before they end up doing more damage to the church at large than they already have.
Well, I meant the *implications* Jed makes by such a statement, not the statement itself. Oy!
@ Jeannette Altes:
Argh…sorry for the typos..
“I pray the Our God and Father” should be “I pray that Our God and Father.”
And I messed up the html….sigh
Deb wrote:
Since I’ve been commenting freely in this thread, I want to clearly state that these words by paperthinhymn about Deb/Dee and TWW commenters are beyond the pall. They are ignorant, immature, mean, and genuinely libelous.
It is difficult for me to believe that an adult who says he belongs to Christ would even think this way about anyone at all, much less about fellow believers and then write it out for public consumption.
Blech.
@ Patrice:
Sorry Patrice, I just disagree. I have been in and around many church discipline issues, and something like defrocking a pastor is an action of last resort. Not just for the pastor, but the family, and broader community. I’d say more, but typing on an iPhone is a nightmare.
Jed Paschall wrote:
Again, I agree with most of what you said, and I am familiar with both Presbyterian polity and Baptist polities.
The issue is not whether the church should have more grace than the world. That is surely true, I hope. The question that no one wants to talk about when elder disqualifications becomes an issue is that elders are to exhibit higher standards of behavior than the world. In effect, if you consider only the high profile cases of SGM, Mars Hill, and this one, then it is apparent to me that:
It is not disqualifying to cover up child molestation, but being female always is.
It is not disqualifying to engage in blackmail, but being female always is.
It is not disqualifying to spiritually abuse the flock, but being female always is.
There seems to be glaring problem here for any fair-minded person. Even if one sees the Bible permitting only males, you can’t with any consistent hermeneutic insist on wooden literalism there while ignoring the explicit character qualifications for elders; that is, we can’t if we are going to deal with the text with integrity. If we go down that road, then we are saying that the only real qualification for eldership is being male.
Jed Paschall wrote:
I’m talking about Jordan demonstrating repentance by voluntarily stepping aside while the process proceeds. Baptists don’t do defrocking. They don’t even do frocking. OK, maybe Founders does. 🙂
@ Jed Paschall:
I specifically wrote that I wasn’t making comment about Hall’s ministry, so maybe you didn’t read it very well?
The poor reasoning that accompanies the statement I quoted from you, is something people bring up across the internets but it is nonsensical and dangerous. I would like to see it laid to rest.
Patrice wrote:
Perhaps we’re using different terms. Releasing offenders from pay-back in my book is forgiveness. Accepting an apology is saying to the offender “I want to know you again”. The offender of course is able to decide whether they want to have a relationship also. Relationships are two-way.
BTW, Jed, I also appreciate Jesse’s Cafe Americain and am all for Lessig’s campaign reform proposals.
It’s not that I don’t agree with the comment posted by “Phoenix” above (or that I do, ftm) but some folks recognize my history from my moniker. As an SGM survivor I’ve been in the odd position of shaking hands and saying, ” Hi, I’m Phoenix.” That Phoenix isn’t this one. See icon:)
@Tim Lee, thank you for your service and sacrifice!
@Jenn Grover, I so agree!
Dee, good job! Next time you and Deb get to DC I’ll be there!
Phoenix wrote:
I'm sure there will be a return visit. 😉
@ Patrice:
I certainly could’ve misread that, woulnd’t be the first time.
@ Jeannette Altes: I attempted to fix these for you. 😉
@ Phoenix:
@ dee:
I did not suspect a conspiracy. I merely did not understand. I did not mean to be yelling. Give me a break. I am very close to this.
Jed Paschall wrote:
Stepping down from the pulpit aka stepping down (aside) from ministry in the baptist dialect does not mean “defrocking” if by that you mean revocation of ordination. It just means go get another job for a while until you work things out in your own life. Stepping aside from ministry for a time is sometimes done for health reasons or family reasons or for a faith crisis or for early burn out or for a period of discernment concerning future vocations options–such like that. In the best of circumstances where such a “time out” is best, the individual himself recognizes the need to do that and does it.
As to the congregation, under the old system in baptist-dom there could be a vote of no confidence and in the old days when the deacons had some authority this meant loss of job, and if the pastor refused to leave at his point his salary could be cut off. The old baptist terminology for this is “running off the preacher.”
There is no good accountability system in baptist-dom. If there were, conversations like this one about clerical misbehavior would not have to happen as often as they do.
@ Nancy:
That should read “defrocking a pastor” not a “pasto”. Sorry folks.
@ Daffodil:
Yes, Dee is on vacation, and I was tied up all afternoon (appointments, errands, etc.) Remember, we have a life outside of blogging. Welcome to TWW BTW.
@ Deb:
Thanks – your attempt was successful. 😉
Thank you Deb and Dee for accepting Jordan’s request to speak to him. I have not heard of him until recently. I agree with JA that his apology seems to ramble a bit about his good qualities. However, he has been cast into the role of “the man who contributed to Braxton Caner’s suicide”. Anyone who is familiar with the dynamics of suicide knows that Jordan’s brief interaction had nothing to do with Braxton’s suicide. I can understand his reaction to want others to know that he is not a vindictive man. I do believe he should have kept it more humble, but I can understand his need to try to reject the burden of being the monster who caused a teen’s death. Hopefully he will continue examining his heart and prove to be an example of true humility and love to his children. It is easy to do the right thing when all is well. As humans we all sin and screw up. Hopeful the difference with believers comes in confession and a willingness to make amends with those they have hurt. I am sure Jordan’s children would prefer to have an imperfect father who admits his faults as opposed to a so-called perfect dad.
Caitlin wrote:
I see that as the fundamental of forgiveness too. But if I’ve already forgiven a person when he offers his apology, I might say, “I am relieved that you see the wrong for what it is. I don’t want payback and I no longer carry resentment. Go in peace.”
And that doesn’t necessarily mean I see him as eligible for trust re-development. Sometimes the damage goes too deep for trust to begin again, but if so, I’d still like to give the offender release from payback so that he can move forward. (And “moving forward” includes restitution.)
I guess we’ll just have to disagree on that bit. 😉
In seeing all the condemnation being directed toward J.D. Hall for his sin over the period of a few minutes in engaging a juvenile over the sins of his father which took place over the period of nine or ten years, while it was wrong on J.D. Halls part to have done this, their seems to be a piling on against Hall even though he apologized soon after, but on the other hand Ergun Caner has never apologized and he seems to be getting a pass.
I cannot imagine the pain and suffering that the Caner family is going through and I pray for their healing and peace in this process, but at the same time I feel that we should expect that we are hearing the truth, especially from the pulpit, when we hear someone preach.
Doug wrote:
It was not a few minutes. There was the Twitter exchange, the piling on my the 'pulpiteers', the blog post, and the broadcast. We have already gone over this. 🙁
Caitlin, I replied to a wrong comment of yours. Ach! This is the one I actually wrote for:
Caitlin wrote:
(I’m too tired. I spent the day, between comments, in my basement, wet-vac-ing water-with-sewage from flooding in Detroit area. Thankfully I had good help but…ewwww)
@ Patrice:
So sorry Patrice! We had a flood warning here in Raleigh this evening. Lots of rain…
Deb wrote:
Wish we could send it all to Cali.
@ Patrice:
August can sometimes be a dry month here in N.C., so the rain is making the farmers happy.
I have (what I hope will be) one last thought about JD’s repentance and restoration, since I already stated at the top of the comments that I accept his apology, believe it to be sincere, and that he is on the road to restoration.
JD, I know that at this time you have elders and mentors speaking into your life during this time of restoration. I hope however, that you will distance yourself from certain people who I know you’ve been close to, but are not at all helpful at the moment in being peacemakers. I speak of your high-profile Calvinist friends. I won’t name them off but people on Twitter will know exactly who I mean. These men have not helped your cause. I would imagine that you have been staying off Twitter and probably are not aware of the firestorm, or how these men have handled it in your absence. In the days following Braxton’s death, they stoked the fires by tweeting unhelpful, unloving comments. Granted, hardly anyone was tweeting anything loving at that time, but in your time of silence, these men kept up the snarky comments, the name calling,and the quarreling. I’ll name one – Rhology even went so far as to tweet that only those who had called Ergun Caner to repentance had any right to offer condolences to him. I mean, seriously? This is junior high behavior.
Now that you, JD, have humbled yourself in repentance, these men continue in their arrogance, continuing to quarrel. They do not help your cause, and their behavior reflects badly on you because everyone knows they are your friends. Where you confessed you were unloving in picking fights, these men have seen no need to repent for the same things they used to cheer you for on the sidelines, and they carry right on doing it. I fear that if they are now allowed to be part of your “restoration”, you will end up right back where you started from. Just something to think about.
@ Doug:
First, you make a good point that we should expect truth from the pulpit. How I wish that we could. I might still be attending services at mine. My understanding of the Caner problem was very troubling to me. Each of us has to clean our own rooms, and that was not happening in mine. My room has what the Deebs call Calvinistas.
However, I have been in a church that is widely know that is not Calvinistic, and a messy situation arose where the pastor should have stepped down for awhile. Unfortunately he did not, and his allies recast it as a personal attack on him. You no doubt remember the shameful statements put out by the Big Names regarding the SGM lawsuit which tried to recast the uproar as a personal vendetta against Mahaney. It is not a Calvinist distinctive or non-Calvinist distinctive to be a bully nor is it a gender distinctive. I like to think that I would oppose female bullies, too. That’s the point when you try to live according to principles and not particular cases.
A second point was thoroughly discussed in the other Jordan thread. Briefly, one does not hold the sins of the father against the son. I don’t know if you have a child, but I hope that you would not want others to hold your child accountable for your actions. That is unjust.
Third, many pastors have lost their *privilege* of being a pastor due to a “few minutes” of sin. It wasn’t this particular sin, but the few minutes part makes no difference. The qualifications for ministry are broad and generic, requiring wisdom and discernment. Surely you can think of examples of this from your experience. Being an elder is not a right that one can assert. It is a privilege that comes with responsibilities, and setting an example for the flock is a good summary of the job.
Think about whether you are letting personalities or positions trump the principle. Been there done that myself. That’s easy to do, but that is not the wise way to think about this.
Patrice wrote:
We would take it!!
I believe the Mr. Hall's confession is sincere, but I have similar questions other posters have written. The confession appears to involve deeper issues than the unfortunate interaction with Braxton Caner. I hope Mr. Hall finds some peace. Placing himself in the position of moral arbiter of the SBC denomination and personal morality must be extremely draining.
Daffodil wrote:
We try and give everyone a break. Just remember when you visit any blog you are visiting someone elses property. And need to learn the house rules. Look in the menu at the top of every page for The Basics
http://thewartburgwatch.com/about-us-the-basics/about-us-blog-rules-of-the-road/
Also I think you (as one of your names used) made a comment about a comment being rejected as SPAM. Can you give us the exact message or did you just infer that we thought it was SPAM. Please use the Contacting Us menu link.
Posting under 2 email addresses and 3 different handles is a fast way to get us to start flagging all your comments for moderation and later review.
Keep it simple, to the point, civil, and on topic and we let most all comment through.
Patrice wrote:
Amen to that Patrice. If the Almighty does indeed send rain to the unjust, the unregenerate, and the wicked (Potter included) too, we sure could use some. Our Central Valley’s agricultural industry is on the verge of becoming a repeat dustbowl.
The mighty Colorado is rapidly becoming just a trickle, and if it does, the reduced water pressure will not be enough to spin the turbines at Hoover Dam.
Because several people have said that they think the apology is sincere, I have read this post again. I had read it first at SSB. I really have tried to read it with an open mind to the ones who are believing it is an apology. What I would like to know is does anyone have record of the apologies that he says he already had given to the involved parties before this tragedy. I ask, because, after reading again hoping to find something he said that he does not turn around and unsay it. I cannot find the apology in this supposed apology so maybe you all are referring to something else because this just seems more like a statement about the tragedy, not an apology, and maybe he never intended for us to perceive it as one since he already apologized about the way he interacted with Braxton beforehand. I’m not sure though, does she ever say that he apologized to Braxton himself? Why does this matter so much to me? Because as someone on JD’s side this is learning for all. If I have to interpret this statement as being a sincere apology to the people he hurt then I need to accept my NPD’s letter if explanation as an apology to me. Same thing, same thing, same , same. Same goes for all the others of us who think we know what we are talking about through experience and education. I don’t know JD, I’ve never paid attention to him. I’m totally going off this address to his church.
Oops, I meant as someone on JD's side 'said' this is learning for all. Also..I would need to accept my NPD 'brother's apology.
Thanks, Dee, for talking to Mr. Hall, and for following through with this very difficult situation.
It was good to read the apology – and I appreciate that Mr. Hall gave some background and explanations of the situation. I did not read those explanations as excuses.
Apologies are difficult, and oh, so rare in the situations that have been covered on this blog and many others. Thanks to Mr. Hall for trying to right a wrong, and for contacting you.
Nancy wrote:
This friend speaks my mind.
Jordan, Nancy & I have discussed this subject before, in another entry altogether on this site. At that time, I shared personal & deeply painful information about myslef & my family. I feel led at this time to restate this story, in the hope that you will read it, & pray over it as you move forward in your life:
As a child I was in an auto accident with my parents (aged 28 & 30 years old). They were both killed; I was pronounced dead several times, but by the grace of God, I survived. When the drunk driver sobered up & was told what he had done, his reply was, “Talk, talk, my head aches & I want a drink”. (His “punishment” was having his driving license suspended for 6 months).
My beloved godmother adopted me, & she & my grandmother raised me. Time moved on, & I was in my teens when that selfsame driver wrote to my (new)family, requesting that I meet with him, as he wanted to apologize to me for my parent’s deaths. When I was told about this, as a Christian, I felt the need to pray about what to say. What I received (& I believe this was given to me by the Lord)was this: “He has a problem. He has a BIG problem. I cannot forgive him, because *I* am not the persons that he killed. He murdered my mother & my father, & the only people from whom he can receive forgiveness are, therefore, unavailable to receive that apology. He is welcome to visit their graves & beg THEIR forgiveness, but they are not there; they are with God, & I have no idea if they would even be able to hear him”.
Jordan, you can ask for forgiveness from God, you can ask for forgiveness from the Caner family, but….. Braxton Caner cannot forgive you for whatever part your words had in his suicide. He is with his beloved Lord, & I don’t know whether he would even know that you had spoken.
This is why playing a part in the death of another person is such a profound sin: It denied its victim the oppportunity to forgive.
I don’t know what else to say, beyond hoping that you are sincerely sorry. I have to admit having some doubts, because too much of what you say is about you & your pain, & so little is about the child who died.
But you have my sincere prayers. Among them is a prayer that you will, as Nancy says so well, realize that what set you on this path is a philosophy & a way of living in the world that is long on the OT law, & a dearth of God’s amazing grace.
Gram3 wrote:
Yes, indeed. And, once upon a time, Someone really, really smart said, "By their fruits you will know them".
Gram3 wrote:
Amen!
Gram3 wrote:
Exactly. Grace is expected for the Wee Happy Few In Cloudcuckooland. For the rest of us in the church of Christ? It is all laws & rules, & condemnation.
Feleina Rain wrote:
I agree.
Nancy wrote:
Yes, I do not understand this view either. Perhaps it is thought in some quarters that discussing the events is “unforgiving”?
zooey111 wrote:
The mistake zooey111 and Gram3 are both making, is associating me with “this particular ideology”. I have no involvement with this group, this ideology, their doctrine, their behavior, their club, their tribe, their radio program, their website, whatever.
It is silly defending myself on a blog where no one even knows me, because I pointed out we should allow room for repentance, and not judge a person guilty for the sins they have not yet committed.
I am certain that the issues Gram3 are upset about, such as complimentarianism, are certainly hurtful and damaging. But to assume and then accuse me of endorsing these practices is wrong.
Gram3, you’ve made an awful lot of assumptions, and appear to be angry at me, and you don’t know anything about me. You are associating me with people you find hurtful, but I am not those people.
If you disagree with my statements regarding repentance, that is fine. After all, I was disagreeing with some here. But, please, leave the assumptions and personal attacks out.
I also agree with Feleina’s comments. Mr. Hall….if you’re reading this….please now consider your associations and prayerfully consider if there is a need for separation. God tells us that “evil communications corrupt good manners”.
Off topic but of interest: Lee Grady’s current “Fire In My Bones” column at Charisma Magazine’s web site is titled, “So What Do We Do Now With Mark Driscoll?”
http://www.charismamag.com/blogs/fire-in-my-bones/21041-so-what-do-we-do-now-with-mark-driscoll
Pingback: Catching Up… | PhoenixPreacher
rob wrote:
As I said, I drew inferences based on what you wrote. If your are not the Rob who wrote the snark, then I apologize for confusing you with that Rob.
But if you are that Rob, then you are still missing the point. The snark was aimed at those who are not at a place where they can trust what are proffered as apologies. Yet you assert that his incident is comparable to a marital spat. You beg pardon for what you describe as snark write what I infer to mean that there is nothing Jordan could say that would be enough.
Then when I respond to your snark, diminution and deflection–all of which are characteristics displayed by Jordan’s tribe–you retreat to a victim stance. Which is yet another tactic used by abusers. I illustrated how that same double-bind is what all women are placed under in a completmentarian system.
If you are not like Jordan’s tribe, then I encourage you not to emulate them. And if you are wise and really care about people, you will not inject snark into a thread that is about the results of a particular way of thinking that results in people being emotionally and spiritually abused.
Let me say something else. One of the talking points from Jordan’s friends is that Braxton “gave as good as he got” in the exchange. I was never a 15 year-old boy but I have observed many up close. What one sees on the surface–his tweets back–may not reveal the emotional and spiritual effect of the tweets to him. Let’s not forget that the tweets came from “leaders” who hold themselves out as Christian.
Words can not heal. They can only be a start. But words can grievously wound.
I am not angry at you; I don’t know you. I am angry at the attitude that you project because it hurts people. Please stop and think about that before you write dismissive snark aimed at people who have been wounded by the church and “leaders” in the church.
This is a teachable moment for a lot of people, including some here like me who need to work on trust and forgiveness. Are you willing to think about that with us, or do you merely want to snark like Jordan did and his friends continue to do?
I don’t know JD Hall. I have never read anything he has written or heard his radio program. I just read about him here, and then over on Peter Lumpkins’s blog.
I am not surprised that the hardest thing for him to live with is reflecting on the lack of pastoral care he gave Braxton in his final days. I said as much on this forum before I read this apology. So that rings very true to me. I am sure that as pastor he regrets that.
I am glad for his expressions of repentance.
We all learn the most through our failures.
I am hoping and praying for him and his family, and I pray that God will give him great years of pastoral Christian ministry in the future.
Snark is another word for sarcasm. It is a way to may a point, quickly, simply, without a lot of explanation. It is a form of speech, that is also used in scripture.
I think you used a bit of snark/sarcasm yourself, with that crack about age. 😉
@ Lydia:
I have found myself believing the same way. I have told my NPD brother that I am willing to have a relationship with him after his ex wife and his children can tell me that he has done all that he can to apologize to them and make as much recompense to them as possible, not holding it against him if they refuse to reconcile with him but that they can at least tell me he tried and tried hard. It is not my privilege to forgive him for what he did to them. I just know I can’t trust him unless those who were closest to him can vouch for his supposedly changed character. When I told him that, he became furious and said I have no right to deny him relationship with me based on that. He retorted that I was saying that he should have my kids reveal my deep darkest sins before he could have relationship with me. I had said nothing about his kids revealing anything to me other than that they believed he tried to make to make amends with no explanations or demands. Even though I am tempted to reconcile without even an apology for the parts that he did do wrong to me, it’s tempting because it would make my mom happy and it’s tempting because he is my flesh and blood, but I can’t trust him and I feel that I would be betraying his ex wife and my nieces and nephew, even though I know they would not hold it against me because he is my brother, but I want them to learn that there are some things to stand for even if it means the family is divided.
@ singleman:
Thanks for sharing. Finally, something simple and not to vulgar that I can share with people why I have been having trouble with Mars Hill. I've always tried so hard to keep my speech better than Mark Driscoll's. Since I am AOG Lee Grady is well accepted in his opinions. I feel a wee bit of relief.
Pingback: Ergun Caner’s Son Commits Suicide | 1st Feline Battalion
singleman wrote:
Sounds like a filk:
“What do you do with a Marky Driscoll,
What do you do with a Marky Driscoll,
What do you do with a Marky Driscoll,
Early in the morning?”
@ singleman:
Thanks for this link. I thought it was a well-written article.
@ Patti:
I’m glad somebody at Charisma finally gets it. You may remember that earlier this year Charisma News published Lyall Mercer’s infamous description of Janet Mefferd as “the enemy within” due to her exposure of Driscoll’s plagiarism, following which the powers that be closed the comments. Charisma has generally been sympathetic toward Driscoll, at least until recently.
Shannon wrote:
And if you’re not a football jock, you’re a Nobody. You’re a subhuman.
Been through that. One of the three worst times in my life. Took 30+ years for the damage of those four years to fade and some of the scars are still there. And when going through High School Hell, one of the dangers is suicide.
Patti wrote:
I have heard this one several times from narcissistic types. It is a clever response to deflect from the main issue and try and put everyone else on equal “sin” footing with them. I am proud of you for not falling for it. And you are right about others who have been harmed. There is nothing worse for children than having such a parent. They have no physical bruises or scars to point to so people will understand. And no way to explain the mental and emotional abuse to folks who don’t get it. It is a dark world of smoke and mirrors with those types.
rob wrote:
We disagree on the nature of your snark. I would characterize it as trolling. Because the actual remarks had nothing to do with making a substantive addition to the discussion. The snark, as you called it, was an elaboration on your characterization of the entire issue as being a marital spat. IOW a “he said” “she said” issue. It is a technique useful to those who wish to avoid dealing with the substantive issue and want to dismiss everyone who does want to engage the issue.
Yes, the Bible includes sarcasm and irony, but always to make a point of exposing something false. What is false in this thread that you wished to expose? I inferred that you wished to highlight an overreaction to the incident or an overvaluing of the significance of the incident. I can’t think of any other positive purpose for the snark.
I am old, and I do recognize that there are worldview and cultural differences between generations. Mainly because I have lived through a lot of those cultural changes and have engaged people from several generations. People from other cultures are fascinating to me. Unlike some, I often ask young people to translate culture for me–I’m from the slide rule and tables era, calculators not available. So, no, that was not snark. But the fact that you believe it was may reveal something. Think about it.
A modest proposal: If you want to seriously understand and meaningfully engage, then don’t lead with snark unless you want to exacerbate the problem. Make a thoughtful comment if you want to be part of the solution. And consider the effect your words might have on people whose experiences do not mirror your own.
My final comment on this post:
I do not know what JD Hall will do in the future.
I do know he has opportunity for great personal growth, as well as potential for healing in his ministry.
If I could encourage him, it would be to:
1. Surround yourself with a group of men (outside your personal, doctrinal circle) who are full of mercy and grace.
2. Consider seeking professional counseling that is secular based (free of any religious, doctrinal biases) for yourself and family.
3. Give yourself time. You have nothing to prove to anybody at this point. No rush. Take time for healing, forgiveness and restoration.
4. After a time of healing, restoration, growth, then (not now) revisit some of the doctrinal issues that have been part of your foundation, and that may have contributed to the hurt that has occurred.
All the best,
Rob
@ Rob:
Thank you. That is good counsel, and I hope Jordan and friends take it along with the other good counsel on this thread.
See, I can be agreeable! 🙂
Let me see if I understand. Some of the pastors of Acts 29 churches were already complaining. MD says that he used to be “like that” but not any more. JD Hall kind of confessed to kind of more or less not handling something too well. So perhaps a few pastors of similar persuasion will decide to polish their overt clerical public conversation a tad because they don’t need that kind of trouble. In the meantime SBTS is partially untangling some issues with the SGM pastor’s school. Russ Moore really does not think that one has to completely run off from the family one’s gay child, never mind what JMcA said. This is all because of these folks adherence to the biblicalgospel as more or less agreed upon by them.
I keep trying to hear the hallelujahs of the angel choir in the background, but I don’t hear it yet.
Patrice wrote:
Pretty much where I’m at too. No arming codes and no launch codes in retaliation. One of the first things you learn in AA (alcoholics anonymous) is that those to whom you extend gestures of restitution are under no obligation to restore anything to you. We reap what we sow and I’ve reaped a whirlwind of consequences from my alcoholism and the wrongs done to others. By the hand of Providence and good fortune I didn’t lose everything and for that I am eternally grateful.
What I take from this:
We must all be more careful with how and what we write about people we criticise (and I’m preaching to myself here as well: “Gus, cut down the snark!”).
The world definitely doesn’t need a “godliness police” (neoCal or other). Pastors and christians in general do not have a duty to make a statement à propos everything the see and hear. And they definitely DO NOT know everything better than the rest of us or have special insights outside their area of expertise. Not all human behaviour they do not like is sin.
Teenagers are both adults AND kids, and are doubly vulnerable sometimes.
“Winning” the argument shouldn’t and needn’t be a priority.
Whatever we think about Ergun Caner’s résumé, he is not the “enemy”, and even then we would be called to love him.
Ergun Caner is a gifted man with an interesting personal history. It would be interesting to hear it without the “extras” added.
Those who enabled and promoted Ergun Caner’s exaggerations (pastors, seminary presidents), and continued to do that when the first doubts showed up, are at least as responsible as EC. They helped him paint himself into a corner instead of helping him be free.
JD Hall’s statement – in my view – is a bit too much about him, and his frustration about EC’s faults, but let’s give him the benefit of the doubt. His is not an enviable position, and – as has been mentioned here – he needed to explain the whole thing to his church.
Some of his acolytes were a lot worse on the internet than Hall himself – I think he should dissolve his pulpiteers completely, and close down the twitter account, instead of handing it over to someone else.
Paul wrote:
Should we not all stand for what we believe to be the truth? I do not believe he did right by contacting the child, but shouldn’t we all have the conviction of our faith? I believe too many people are compromising their principles in order to build their numbers and followers. Is it not possible for him to be wrong in this one act, but not wrong in his principles? Should we just stand by and not speak out when we see wrong being done?
@ Jeanette:
Agreed. I can understand the concerns others here have expressed here, but ultimately I feel the same way you do. Because I focus on patriarchy issues, I can’t help but compare Hall’s apology to Doug Phillips’, and how vastly different the two are. Phillips’ was obviously a lawyerly avoidance exercise (thus the clarification that came immediately afterward). Hall’s seems heartfelt and I am glad for that.
Speaking of patriarchy, I’m finally back on the Big Box bandwagon. I thought I was supposed to have more time in the summer…? 😉
http://scarletlettersblog.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/hollywoods-most-despised-villain-tbb/
Gus wrote:
“Godliness Police” have been tried. In Calvin’s Geneva, in Saudi, in Iran, in Talibanistan…
Nancy wrote:
How about the hallelujahs of the sock puppets and “elders’ boards”?
Gus wrote:
Such an important point that few want to think about, much less apply. This is why I’m more than skeptical about Acts29’s latest maneuver. When I first heard of Driscoll ~9 years ago, my question was, “What ever happened to Biblical qualifications.” It was obvious *to me* that he was selling what young men wanted to buy; he tickled the ears of a particular psychographic cohort. And he would make a marvelous case study of success in doing that.
He seemed to be reaching a culture resistant to the gospel, but actually he was drawing a crowd after himself while using Jesus as a cover story. Furtick is another example, and on and on. It is my opinion, based admittedly on limited personal experience in them, that most mega-churches are largely personality cults, though I expect most in the church would deny it.
The older Big Names, whom one would expect to “exercise a high level of discernment” demonstrated that they possess no discernment that they were willing to act on. The question is why did they abdicate their responsibility to do what they said they were called to do as leaders, i.e. lead by example and protect the flock?
My hypothesis is that they loved him (insert Driscoll, Mahaney or any others) or, at the very least, were willing to overlook his manifest disqualifications because they wanted to tap into his psychographic’s enthusiasm and energy, to bolster their own reputations and to ensure their legacy and names. I will give MacArthur and the Pyros their due for seeing through him and being willing to oppose Driscoll though they zealously guard Mahaney.
Looked at another way, the entire “Big Name” system can be considered a huge conglomerate that cross-sells to various sub-markets. Therefore, they must all agree to mutually support and defend one another, despite their individual doctrinal or praxis differences. Or at least they must to so until the situation becomes unrecoverable, as it appears to have become wrt Driscoll.
If this hypothesis is true, then the people in the pews, in the seminaries, and on the web function as individual revenue streams as well as a widely distributed and viral marketing system. This is brilliant strategy if that is what they are doing. Many simply do not realize that they feed the monster which obscures rather than proclaims the gospel whenever they ignore or minimize or excuses or support these “leaders” actions which are contrary to their stated mission.
The alternate hypothesis is that they are what they claim to be, all about proclaiming the Gospel. We need to ask what we would expect if a given hypothesis is true and then look at the evidence we have. Then we can reach a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence and not personal or doctrinal loyalties.
If it looks like milk chocolate truffles and you are at a dairy, it might or might not be milk chocolate truffles.
Hester wrote:
I have to admit, I avoid “Christian” media like the plague. Somewhat proud of it too. Well, I say that. I’ve read much of CS Lewis and GK Chesterton- you can see where my bent is. but other than that? Thanks, no. Too much religion.
Gram3 wrote:
Coattails.
@ Gram3:
Sheesh, I meant to say that the mega I was in would be more receptive to Caner than Driscoll, and this was the dynamic I observed. So the phenomenon is doctrine-neutral, I think.
Good counsel, Rob
*
*
__
Pastoral Sickness & The Prayer Of Faith, Perhaps?
hmmm…
Has J.D. Hall now fallen ill over this recent, very tragic event?
huh?
Let him call for the elders of his church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord Jesus, and the prayer of faith will save this pastoral man who as fallen ill by his own un-doing, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven…
Worth a try, savy?
(sadface)
Sopy
—
The biggest problem I have with JD is the self-serving nature of the written repentance. It seems to be virtually all about JD, how important he is, how much this affected him, how wicked his detractors are. The written word, which he surely had time to vet, only makes him look less repentant to me. I don’t buy it.
@ lawprof:
Bingo
I corresponded on this site on Complimentarianism back in March. I brought up a certain woman of Ministry who has excellent teaching.
Some of the commenters here made some really vile comments about her, that this well known woman of ministry did not count as she was wealthy, and that she should “go back to her mansion. I wrote back that the comment was inappropriate and mean spirited, and how would they like if this same person I had mentioned commented in return that they did not count because they were not wealthy.
I believe it was Dee that threatened me to be cut off on moderation because I called out sin.
I have not commented here since due to the vileness and unbiblical attitudes on this site. This site is a hate mongering site and is tearing down the church rather than building it up.
Sam McGarrett wrote:
I doubt very much that God was fine with your decision. Stop lying.
DEB and DEE!! Yay! Wonderful moderators, the love of Christ shines in you. Your calmness, patience (straightening out the smallest error): your wisdom, seeing points of view, your patience, your patience. You ave gone through emotional experience with Pastor Hall hearing his confession, and you have communicated his thoughts to us. My heart was touched. Your caveat was non judgmental; we shall see. I have a question, naive I guess. Why would anyone want to tell us that Hall’s repentance is not true, not good enough, etc. Even if I did feel some negativity, I would not say this. It is not my business to judge this man’s repentance. There have been some loving comments, of course.
This was Dee’s comment:
dee UNITED STATES on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 10:33 PM said:
Nancy Leigh DeMoss: Multimillionaire
Just so everyone knows, Nancy has led a charmed life. She is the daughter of Arthur DeMoss and the Chairman of the Arthur DeMoss Foundation
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arthur_S._DeMoss_Foundation
Nancy S. DeMoss, Chairman of the Board and Treasurer, ($254,500 in 2004) This is her salary-not her inheritance which was probably significant considering her lifestyle. The foundation has $404 million in assets.
From Time Magazine
Nancy plays host at evangelizing dinners for the rich and powerful at her houses in Florida and Manhattan (one invitee estimated the events’ cost at $80,000 each). Privately, she contributed $70,000 to Newt Gingrich’s political-action committee, GOPAC
Read more: Who Are Those Guys? – TIME http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,28859,00.html#ixzz2xJaoA100
Arthur made his dough in selling life insurance to “clean living” Christians
http://articles.philly.com/1986-06-16/news/26045434_1_leighton-ford-evangelical-
Here’s where I said wow to your comment.
Thornton CANADA on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:01 PM said:
I copied Dee’s comment and inserted the word: WOW to her comments.
Then I got labelled a troll to her nastiness/.
I am beginning to think that you have a real problem with women.
Just so everyone knows, Nancy has led a charmed life
My bet is the DeMosses would have not allowed Nancy to be abused. Back to the mansion for Nancy.
Wow !
dee UNITED STATES on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:18 PM said:
@ Buck Thornton:
I am concerned that your rhetoric is getting way over the top. Please dial it back on the women have mental health issues, want divorces from good men issues, are taking over academia from men, etc.
if this continues, i will have to consider you a troll.
@ Sam McGarrett:
How can we believe you Sam after reading your confession about lying?
Sam McGarrett wrote:
You’ve got to be kidding. I hope this is one of those faker posts.
Hanni wrote:
I’m not Deb and Dee, but I’ll comment anyway. I believe that with the amount of time this played out and the scope of the offense(s) and the number of people offended by it, even if JD managed to repent perfectly, there would still be people who would not accept it. Repentance is hard, and so is forgiveness. Repentance is a process, and so is forgiveness. JD may still be in the process of repenting completely. Our job, rather than folding our arms and shaking our heads and saying “not good enough” is to be part of his process. I applaud the steps he’s taken. Yes, he has more steps to take. But if he’s allowing God to work in his life right now, then those steps will be taken, IN HIS AND THE LORD’S OWN TIMING – not in ours.
For us to stand here and continue to beat on him makes us no better than what we all have accused him of, bullying others into repentance. Don’t be guilty of that sin. Show grace. Show mercy. He’s our brother. Encourage him along the way to keep doing the right thing. The Bible tells us to forgive 70 x 7 times – and not because we feel like it, but because we also have been forgiven for much, and we ALL are in the process of repenting our own sins, and none of us are perfect at that.
Sam McGarrett wrote:
The ends justifies the means eh? I wouldn’t trust you further than I could throw you. And…troll.
Sam McGarrett wrote:
I say you are a fake. Any Indian who is Hindu could expose your lack of knowledge about Hinduism as fast as I can exposes your lack of knowledge about Christianity. The ones who are Muslim or Christian wouldn’t be impressed by your knowledge of Hinduism
You don’t win people to the Incarnate Word by breaking one of the 10 written words which he fulfilled.
No troll style points for you, either.
Thank you Feleins. I am too old to put your good wise thoughts together but what you said is perfect.
@ Feleina Rain:
thank you for this
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
Your welcome. Tell JD I send my love.
Patrice wrote:
Maybe. To be honest with you, the snippet you included is borderline mentally handicapped. There is no way any thinking person, or anyone with an education beyond maybe tenth grade is going to take it seriously. It is not merely Vogon poetry, it is illogical Vogon poetry. So from my perspective it is one of those things where you just smile and wave and think to yourself, “Dear God, there are people like that on the planet? And they call themselves Christian? I do hope it isn’t contagous.”
Ann wrote:
That is complete bull$*** (edited). You do not and cannot know that.
Deebs –
I had no idea that Dustin Germain (@paperhymn) had written about TWW this past May. He certainly has some ugly opinions.
Gram3 wrote:
Gram3 and HUG too who was reminiscing about high school. I was my HS’s class nerd and, with a couple of others, walked around with my K&E Log-log Decitrig in a case hung from my belt. Using one of the things it quickly taught you was how to manage powers of 10 and what logarithms were. I still have my old slide rule and get kick out of showing all the arithmetic you can do with a couple of pieces of wood to today’s tablet/smart phone youngsters.
We nerds were considered a little weird but I don’t remember any really overt hostility from the jocks since we didn’t represent any serious competition for girls.
Sorry for the off topic post but there aren’t many of us slide rule fans left.
OT
Ken, if you are reading here, I read the entire Phillips thread, and I think I understand where you are coming from a lot better. Thanks again for linking it and for your patient interaction there.
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
Are you going to apologize and repent of of your ugly comments about TWW?
Buck
There was more to this conversation than this and you know it.
@ Feleina Rain:
Exactly.
oldJohnJ wrote:
LOL. Did you have one of those ginormous over-the-blackboard ones in Jr. High? And, let us not forget that slide rule nerds got us to the moon and back. Kids nowadays will never know the sheer joy of tossing bags full of punchcard confetti from the top row of the opponent’s bleachers on Friday nights. There is no app for that!
@ Hanni: Why would anyone want to tell us that Hall’s repentance is not true, not good enough, etc.? No one wants to.
But there are so many reasons for feeling the need to, and I think people have explained those reasons pretty well.
Buck
Vileness, unbiblical, hate mongering, tearing down the church…I think I’ve got that right. Bless your heart! I recommend chocolate. I am currently sharing with my family a large chocolate dipped apple at the beach. It does wonders for your spirit.
Sorry Dee I have one in moderation again, I just saw my error, I will b more careful to keep my hand off the post comment button before my comments are ready..
mot wrote:
That would be a demonstration of good faith and a start for Dustin to make toward unwinding this mess, or at least his part of it.
@ Feleina Rain:
Sounds to me like you are trying to beat the skeptics into repentance yourself.
Hanni
This was a difficult situation. I have had the benefit of speaking with JD Hall on several occasions. I have listened to his voice and listened to his tone. That is why I said that others may have difficulty since they have not had the opportunity. Also, the unfortunate things is that his apology is playing out at the same time Mark Driscoll has apologized for the umpteenth time for repeated problems.
That is why the story of King David was helpful to me. That scene played out over a year. We can read the beginning, middle and end in 5 minutes. Sometimes time is the best healer and illuminator.
Let me make a quick statement. I think some good things are going on behind the scenes on all sides. Please pray for everyone.
Sam
Beyond telling your wife that she looks awesome in her bathing suit when she is feeling old and tired, lying is not a virtue. As for what is important, I am not sure that yo get to define that for anyone else but yourself.
@ Patti:
I agree with your assessment of Felenina Rain. I am glad JD repented but this is only the beginning. Much damage has been done by JD and others and his repentance does not undo all of that damage.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Vogon poetic (third worst in the universe) transobliterated with P. Thinym:
“Oh freddled gruntbuggly,
who lobs at anyone who slights them,
Thy micturations are to me
a free-for-all wasteland of sophistry bombs.
As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee,
As embittered, cackling sycophants
Heaped on with snarky and angry assertions.
Groop, I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes,
deviants at the lowest recesses of 4chan,
Hooptiously drangle me with crinkly bindlewurdles,
and with wildest, nonsensical excoriations.
Or I will rend thee in the gobberwarts,
in words bent towards bitterness,
With my blurglecruncheon, see if I don’t!”
(TL;DR – You’re awful. I’ll get you.)
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
As someone who has attempted suicide and lived more than 40 years with it as a dance partner….Dr. F, thank you. It is complete nonsense to suggest studies would support no correlation. For someone fighting this internal battle everything that comes at you and questions you value (and let's be honest, modeling morality the right way = value in Christianese) is a brick in the wall. Especially when you bring the religious faith equation into it and have your faith questioned. Was it the sole or primary cause? Probably not. Was it factor a all? Highly probable.
Preacher’s kid
Well, here is the problem. I bet if I hung around your house for few days, I could find out a bunch of things you do which are not “godly.” In fact, I bet those around you could name a whole bunch of things that you do or have done wrong. You would find the same thing if you hung around me. If you look at Corinthians and see where the church stepped in to “discipline” it was or something afr more serious than smooching a girl.
Christians have become known for their sin picking-especially sin that belongs to other people. I do speak out-I speak out about child sex abuse and coverup in the church but that subject is a bit too yucky for many peopel who would prefer to pick apart the sins of “outsiders.”
It might be helpful to me to if you would make a list of sins that we should should start ragging on each other about.
@ Patrice:
😀 Very well done. 😀
Anonymous
I think your first comment on this situation is the finest one that I have read. This next one is not far behind. Thank you!!!!
@ dee:
When I have counseled people to confess to whomever it is they need to, whether it's a teen confessing something they have to to their parents or a spouse to their spouse, etc. I have helped them see that although they are coming clean and apologizing and feeling sorrow for what they've done they must allow for anger about the situation to run its course. The parents may need to yell for awhile. The spouse may need to scream for a while. They will eventually calm down and get over it if the offending one is truly sorry. Let the offended be the ones to ask for explanation.
Let the offended's friends ask for reasons why and how could you and all that stuff that comes out when a wrong has been exposed. So yes, Dee, even though you are privy to something we are not, thank you for allowing the freedom here to express rather than bottle it up.
@ Jeannette Altes:
Oh but that’s not my poem! (I could never do so well.) It is composed by Jeltz. P. Thinym, his very own self, jazzed it up and made it personal.
@ Patrice:
clap…clap…clap
Patti wrote:
very well said, thank you.
I have the same problems often. I noticed that halls apology began with clarifying that he had nothing to do with b caners suicide, that wasn’t anything to do with the tweets and that anyone would clearly see that. then its followed by endless explanations and excuses. I pray that I can get to the point where I can follow the Holy Spirit’s leading also, and just confess my sins and apologize and leave it at that.
Jesus doesn’t forgive excuses, or explanations, He died on the cross to forgive sins. btw, the cross and the empty grave are our salvation but I pray that mr hall would look up and see Jesus face to face, He’s alive and not retired and the very best one to deal with how to be truthful and really repentant and His blood cleanses us from all sin, not just forgives our sins. I need that also.
Dee,
I read this post a couple of days ago, and as I have been preparing to preach this Sunday I remembered this particular post. I just wanted to say thank you for displaying grace. You displayed grace as you shared that you did not want in any way to hear from JD Hall. And you displayed grace in hearing from him.
I do not share the same theological convictions as you do (I say that because I have been before a very staunch Reformed Baptist/New Calvinist), but as I have followed (not only you but this blog) I am thanking God for you. I thank God for different people with different back grounds to show me his grace. I am overwhelmed right now at what God has done in your life and in the life of JD Hall and what I hope God is doing in my own heart as well. I am convicted once again of my own self-righteousness and complete lack of love I have shown other people that I know I have displayed in the past, especially to those on “the other side of the theological fence.”
Thanks for this post.
JD, Dustin, and their friends say the meanest, ugliest things about people with different Christian theological perspectives, but when Dee and Deb call out actual criminal and abusive behavior, Dustin excoriates them and us commentators. That makes no sense. What were you thinking, Dustin? Seriously? Was this because you don’t care about cover ups of child abuse or because you have issues with women?
this might clarify what I was trying to say above:
I forgive hall for:
“I did not do it in the right spirit or out of the right motivation. ”
and for: “when dealing with these issues out there, I have been too hard.”
and: “my interaction with him was adversarial rather than pastoral”
and: “I never should have briefly interacted with that young man on the 2nd day of July, because my heart to him was not pastoral.”
but I don’t forgive him for using his position as a pastor and bullying a minor publicly repeatedly online, followed by publicly shaming the kid and his dad on a radio show, who later committed suicide, cause mr hall never confessed that, actually he denied that.
“I don’t believe my four-comment and rather cordial exchange with him had anything to do with it. (I don’t think any reasonable person would if they knew all the facts.)”
@ Patrice:
Having Vogon Inspector Jeltz in the vicinity is not especially comforting…..but still, well done. 😉
I’d be checking ISP’s and such. It looks like the pulpiteers are working their social media magic again. Seen it too many times before.
@ Gram3:
Thanks for the comment, I was intrigued by what you would make of it all. It doesn’t help I suppose that so many words and labels used amongst Christians of varying hues are perfectly innocent to one person and set of alarm bells and flashing red lights to others, depending on their background and peronsal experience.
My impression is that JD Hall is trying to do the right thing like the rest of us. He is trying to be a good pastor. It appears he has wisely attempted to separate his actions from his flock, by attempting not to embroil them in controversy. I can relate to his critique on the state of the SBC. I would probably take doctrinal exception to the books he is describing at Lifeway books. Neo evangelicalism and fundamentalism are not immune to problems, especially where big money and power are concerned. So much what is critiqued here at TWW are the abuses of religion, some of which is due to the corruption of money and power and fanaticism and egos and polemicists from different schools of thought. Mr. Hall’s confession seems self absorbed. It is and it isn’t self absorbed because he is describing a personal tragedy and a tragedy of our fast changing times. I don’t know Mr. Hall, but if I did, there is a chance I would call him friend. Mr. Hall and his family are in my prayers.
Marsha wrote:
i don’t recall ever saying ugly and mean things about people with different christian theological perspectives. that is to say- even though i am reformed, it doesn’t bother me or mean much to me that others are not- I attend a Church that isn’t reformed or particularly monergistic, and its not something i feel the need to comment on or correct.
Also, I openly support the calling out and the jailing of any and all criminal behavior. Of course I would. I’m not “excoriating them for that” I’m saying that there are several ways to respond to this, and that when someone sins, or acts abusively, Christ is not served by speculation of motives or equally sinful personal attacks in the combox
And to reiterate, I love women as sisters and Christ and I hate cover-ups and scandal. I just think that all people [myself included] can do better when we are speaking of people we disagree with. I applaud Dee and Deb for their calling out of someone like Driscoll, for example, whom I’ve spoken against for years. But I don’t applaud when he gets crucified in the combox. And so on and so forth.
Nothing I’ve said has even hinted or suggested I have an issue with women, and even bringing that up as a possibility or suggestion is insulting, and is exactly what i’m talking about. What kind of weird false dichotomy is that?
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
Dustin:
Are these your words on your blog?
“For this reason I thought he would make an excellent candidate to demonstrate the sheer depravity and vitriol that exists in the comment box at the Wartburg Watch- an self-styled online discernment ministry who emphasis is topics relating to the spiritual abuse of parishoners by Christian pastors, teachers, authors and bloggers. At the Wartburg Watch, the only place discernment is not applied is inwardly to themselves. While the two main writers of the blog are bad enough in their unrelenting slander and outright lies against anyone who does not adhere to their skewed understanding of biblical authority as it plays out in the Church and home, most of the more egregious back-biting and venom takes place in the combox, which is regulated and moderated by the its creators who sit back and watch the fray.”
If they are, then they are ugly by any definition.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
I ask this because you don’t seem to have a problem with men like your good friend Rhology who call people faithless liberals and write that Braxton Caner was never a real Christian but you do have problems with Dee and Deb who are concerned with abuse. I thought perhaps It was because they are women. Now you are saying it is because of the comments here about people like Driscoll. I don’t see a problem with them. We aren’t crucifying him, we are agreeing with the concerns and in some cases citing additional confirming information. How is that different from the comments on the Pulpit and Pen and associated blogs?
dee wrote:
How is that lying? I’d say it’s the very epitome of “speaking the truth in love”!
Buck Thornton wrote:
Great stuff! Thanks for letting us know.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
You say you love women as sisters in Christ. Is that code for “equal in dignity, value, and worth?” If so and if you promote the so-called complementarian doctrine, then you do not love women, at least the the sense that the NT calls you to love them. Do you consider the way you and so many others have spoken about the commenters here loving? You have a big issue with females and a big blind spot.
Seriously, Mark Driscoll crucified in the comments here? Interesting that you would compare Driscoll and Christ is quite that way. Do you see any problem with that? Driscoll uses a vulgar term about women to demean men who don’t measure up to his standard of manliness. Clever and oh-so Christlike for someone who talks so much about Jesus.
Driscoll and his fellow travelers put women into an inferior box that they call “equal.” Christ lifted women up from their lowly position in that society to an equal position in his kingdom. So, there is a comparison to be drawn between Driscoll and Christ, but not the one you drew.
Surely you can do better than trivialize our Savior’s suffering to polish your image here. Are you repentant or are you using the goodwill of the people here to get you and your friends through a rough PR patch?
What do you have to say to all of the counsel you have received here? Why should we believe what you say now?
LInn wrote:
Agree… without trying to take ourselves over-seriously, we do well to remember that the interweb has changed the landscape of preaching. In a limited, but real, sense, we step into a pulpit every time we click on “Post Comment”. You never know who’s reading.
@ Ken:
Very true about different reactions according to experience. I try to understand where somebody is coming from, especially if they demonstrate grace under pressure. Maybe we can have a conversation in a thread where it is the topic. 🙂
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
Ok, so how about you go ahead and be an example? Perhaps those few comboxers will follow, those you have felt free to malign worse than anything any of them have so far written.
As a leader, I mean. Yes? We will wait and see how you do that.
Buck Thornton wrote:
I have three points:
(1) You have commented here since that exchange – three times, in fact. Once in April, once in June and then in July.
(2) Please learn to spell “complementarian” correctly. Those who invented the term would probably appreciate it.
(3) Nancy Leigh DeMoss will never be my role model. She has never been married, has never had children, and has lived a life of privilege that not many here can even fathom.
@ Nick Bulbeck: Totally agree!
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Ah, yes. I am thinking that it is just this aspect of changing the landscape that is disquieting to some who may have had a lock on preaching prior to e-communication like this. That would be quite apart from what is said or how it is said, the very fact that the masses have so much voice changes some of the variables of “preaching.” Preachers are no longer the only ones doing the preaching, for better or worse.
Deb wrote:
Still the trying to figure out why Nancy was chosen as the spokeswoman for a lifestyle she has never lived . . . all I can determine is that she agreed with comps and was female.
Patrice wrote:
To begin with, Dustin needs to stop the hyperbole. No one was ‘crucified’ or came anywhere near being crucified in a comment. To compare peoples’ opinions to ‘crucifying’ JD is trying to equate what JD is going through to what Christ went through. For me, anyway, the connection doesn’t work.
BTW, I liked/appreciated your thoughtful post Dee. Sen
Gram3 wrote:
May I say, Gram3, that it is no longer true that women have no voice. All that people have to do is step outside protestant fundamentalism and there are the voices of women right along with some other voices which have been silenced for too long–the abused, the marginalized and the dissenter–to mention a few. The fact that protestant fundamentalism has a problem with this need not make it my problem when there are other options.
May I add that within the larger christian tradition there have “always” been women who exercised gifts in teaching and organization/ administration (those seem to be the areas of most concern) and they have been called sister and mother and martyr and saint and even doctor of the church. And there have been women gifted with gifts in some things that protestant fundamentalism rejects under the umbrella category of “mysticism.” I am thinking that some of the passionate rejection of many of the things like visions and dreams (which Islam recognizes, BTW) is at least in part because such things have been found in not only men but also women. My point is, at least in part, that protestant fundamentalism has its work cut out for itself if it thinks it must pit itself against all the things it seems to pit itself against in the face of a couple of thousand years of evidence to the contrary within christianity.
Bridget wrote:
Don’t forget the money!
In other news, Mike Newman, from Manchester, has driven a car at an average speed of over 200 mph in a controlled two-way run at an airfield in northern England.
This would be unremarkable were it not for the fact that Newman is blind.
More on the BBC website for those interested.
@ Bridget:
Yah, taking that back would be a good first step.
So how about it, Germain? Your words trivialize and demean Christ’s crucifixion.
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
Nancy wrote:
BINGO! Money definitely talks with this crowd. Obviously, it's the motivation behind the conference circuit and book promotions. 😉
Nancy wrote:
Yes, money, I suppose. But I hope that doesn’t mean the love of money . . . because they’ve all preached against that, although I have to wonder about the motives of preaching against the love of money and then passing the basket so the money can now be transferred to the coffers. Or books sold, or conferences attended, and million dollar homes bought, while the people in pews are told to give it up.
Nancy wrote:
The problem that fundamentalism has with women is just a part of the overall problem, as I see it, of an elitist attitude toward any who have a different point of view. There used to be room for discussion about issues we saw differently, but that is no longer possible in most “conservative” churches. They have changed into something very ugly, unfortunately.
I’m happy that you were able to find a place that fits you. I love the people and leadership at the church I no longer attend, but I am mortified by what the leadership believes and teaches on certain things.
Appreciate your comments and the way you think through things.
I guess what I mean is that his repentance is God’s business, not my business. All the reasons seem to add up to one thing, payback. I never heard of the man before seeing his name on this blog but I do believe that God loves him and it is not my duty to judge his repentance. It wouldn’t hurt to wait and pray.
Just have to vent for one second….
If my pastor idolizes Driscoll SO MUCH that he has decorated our sanctuary with that same wood background that Driscoll loves so much (You can see it on his twitter pic & tons of other places) then I should find a less idolatrous pastor, right? Mind you this pastor also gave me a talking to about my objections to MD.
It’s really sad, actually. Pray for all these Driscoll fanboys, that they will repent of their idolatry. Jesus is Lord! Not Driscoll, obviously.
This pastor is signed up for The Resurgence 2014 in October. Wonder if that conference will actually take place now……
Bridget wrote:
She is the defeater, as they see it, of the objection that “complementarianism” doesn’t value women or, as Nancy said, give women a voice. Notice that the speakers at women’s events are seminary professor wives or others who have their comp credentials in order and benefit from being part of the system. If they can get you to bite on that distraction bait, they don’t have to deal with the hermeneutical or logical problems with their position.
“Some of my best friends and speakers here are women, and they agree with us, so what’s your problem?”
Hanni wrote:
Not sure what you mean about payback. Do you see Jordan as the victim in this who needs space to recover? Or is he someone who has publicly done something that should not have been done by anyone and certainly not a pastor?
I don’t think it is reasonable to demand total privacy for Jordan and his friends in this process. If they have offended God and humans by their behavior, which was quite public, then why the implicit suggestion or demand that we Move On and Let It Go in public.
Of course we should pray for all concerned. Praying for repentance and reconciliation does not preclude also asking for evidence of repentance or continuing movement in the reconciliation process.
So I’m not sure I understand your point.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
Sweet! How did he do that, I wonder? I suppose it was on a straight course? Has he super-developed his sense of directional shifts or did he have someone telling him when to adjust steering? How frightening, really, to drive full speed ahead in darkness. And probably exhilarating.
Patrice wrote:
I just assumed he was able to do it because Nick had supplied him with Nick’s famous sugarless lemon curd and cheese spaghetti.
Totally amazed at what people can do to overcome obstacles and wish I had that kind of determination and endurance.
@ Patrice:
There was an episode of Mythbusters where they asked a man who was blind (from birth if I remember) to drive a car around an abandoned air force base (like city street driving) using only voice directions from a mythbuster in the back seat to direct him. Very cool, he did a good job (and they did a good job giving directions), and he looked like it was a lot of fun.
Gram3 wrote:
You can tell the value of a spaghetti recipe by the fruits it bears.
Gram3 wrote:
…contains lemons, not lemon curd. But a blind man breaking 200 does remind me to get on with various important things that are “impossible” for me because of my history of unemployment.
@ Hanni:
The reason that it is everbody’s business is because he made the offense everybody’s business when he used public media.
The Matthew 18 privacy chance for an offender is only applicable if you never made your offense in the sight of everybody. Some leaders have it backwards. Many will stand up sinners before the church whose offense was private and that would be nobody’s business. I grew up in my Baptist school periodically with some poor soul baring all at the podium in chapel, it wasn’t me they were consensually immoral with, why tell me about it if I never knew.
IMO this horrible offense can be used for good as a learning for the rest of us. I am so sorry though for the family and friends of Braxton who are suffering for it, so I certainly do not include them in that insensitive thought. I do imagine however that if it were my child, I would rather have this ongoing public discussion than having people just waiting and praying after reading an explanation that is still disconcerting about the repentance and that some people would still just not ‘get it.’ So in that way I also disagree with you that it couldn’t hurt to just wait and pray when there are markers that bring up more questions. There is a whole new generation of sin sniffing leaders out there in cyberspace influencing our children through media and they need to hear all of this discussion.
There are plenty of other blogs out there for the repentant leaders to be soothed. This blog I believe is for the people who were hurt by them. The blog owners however have been very gracious to this particular leader and I think that they are handling it all perfectly.
@ Gram3:
Sorry Gram3, I guess I said sort of the same thing, I just took a lot longer to write it.
Bridget
You forgot the most important factor-lots and lot of money to donate.
Gram3:
I am a complementarian, with a few idiosyncracies, yes. I’m sorry you feel that this means I cannot love them according to your view of what the NT says, but I assure you that I do.
I also do not have any issues with females, and your choice to keep on repeating it will not make it so. Nothing that I have said has so far indicated that this might be the case.
You’re also reading too much into my use of the word “crucify”. I might have just as soon said “excoriate” or “denigrate” or “destroy” or a bunch of other terms.
Todd
Thank you for bringing tears to my eyes this morning. As time goes on, I hope that more can be said about our conversations. Last night, as I sat out on the beach, watching the sun go down, I remarked to my husband that much has changed for me in a week.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
I remember well the day that I really ‘got it’ about how much my even seemingly minor offenses could be a contribution to a crime down the road. I was worshipping God in church and I can’t remember exactly where my thoughts were but I saw a picture in my mind of a drop of water causing that circle of waves out, out and out. Just an impatient unkind word or look to someone in our day can have a ripple effect of which we have no clue who all got hurt in that wake of our teensy offense. I have been much more conscientious since that day.
Also, Gram, complementarians have a vast range/swath of theological beliefs that they hold, all with differing nuances and emphases and different ways of having them play out on a practical level. Some complementarians I really don’t like. Some spectrum of beliefs i really don’t like [Tony miano and his book “should she preach” for example, which is an awful book]. I’d like to think that there could exists a way of holding this beliefs and having it play out that even if you don’t like it, or agree with it, or respect it, that at least you’d have to say that it’s not abusive and doesn’t mean that I’m misogynistic or have problems with women.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
Sorry. But when you mean human females, “women” or “women and girls” is considered more respectful. Saying just “females” suggests that you include cows and ewes and sows and whatnot.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
You can blame Ken for this. I am the victim here, so let’s remember that.
Ken linked to a thread that linked to your recipe that has made so many delirious as the recovered their Joy. I checked it out, and it looks like sugarless lemon curd to me what with the lemon juice and rind and cornstarch. You have departed from the lemon curd faith and corrupted the mac and cheese faith in one recipe.
Lemon curd should be eaten straight from the jar with a large spoon with no intervening scones or totally superfluous clotted cream. Lemon juice, lemon rind, cane sugar, eggs, butter, cornstarch. Why would anyone eat clotted anything?!?
Furthermore, mac and cheese should have a roux base, not cornstarch. I checked all of this with not only Nancy Leigh DeMoss *and* Carolyn Mahaney but also Dorothy Patterson, Ph.D. who is a recognized authority on all domestic matters.
Where are the culinary Pulpiteers when one needs them to war against Nick’s culinary downgrade? If we don’t stop this heresy, he will drag us all down the slope into adding green food color to Key lime pie and other horrors we cannot yet imagine.
Is there an Al Mohler who is willing to stand up to this outrage which is *nothing less than the end* of cooking as we know it? Or will all of you here just yield to cultural pressure and go along with perversion of cooking?
Patti wrote:
Yes, and the converse is true, too. We often never know how one word or act of kindness has made a difference in someone’s life.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Yah, but it’s likely he’s unemployed too, at least in the way you mean. I think it shows that you too should break 200 down a stretch or two, perhaps daily. Gotta car?
@ Gram3:
It seems to me that if you really think of women as sisters than complementarian thought doesn’t fit. That is unless you think that sisters have less authority than brothers, and if that is the case, since sisters are women and brothers are men then women have less authority than men.
If soft Complementarians believe that brothers and sisters are equal (hardcore comps don’t believe that they are) then they really are considering their Christian women as more perpetually underage daughters since they have perpetually less authority. In that way I can understand how they say they can love women, but it’s just not the brotherly/sisterly equal kind of love. It is the love we have for children. A grown up despises this kind of love for themselves. A grown up wants to be loved as an equal. Christ’s love for the church causes him to lift her up standing right next to him. That is what Paul was trying to tell them in Eph. 5. You don’t stand your daughter up right next to you, why? Because she doesn’t have equal authority with you. A wife does. A sister does. That was a huge message for that culture. Even Christ who has all authority stands his bride next to himself and calls her equal in righteousness before God. How much more human husband and human wife should be equal in all things.
@ Marsha:
Thankyou for the reminder, melancholy is a weak wolf mine. But I certainly don’t want to think that my good actions balance out my bad actions. They are separate from each other.
Lol, I promised to proof read better and I didn’t, ugh , I might have to send some of my auto corrects off to ellen.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
So, it appears that you say a lot of things that you don’t really mean.
You don’t get to define “love”. The Lord requires you to love others as you love yourself. Not seeing that love from any comps, though they pay lots of lip service to “love” and “service.” The “as yourself” part is a little sticky for that position.
You cannot get to your conclusion with your own hermeneutic. That’s why I keep saying what I say. You guys put yourselves out as the ones who are faithful to the text, but you add words and narrative details which are not there and then say “Because God said so” when he did no such thing.
Tell me how you get from Genesis 1:26-28 equality without distinction and joint commissioning by God without distinction between the male and female to “gender roles?” That text is explicit and is never modified or revoked in the text. Anywhere. You can only get to “roles” via putting ideas and even words into the text and appealing to fear and authority and wielding emotional and spiritual blackmail against any who dare to dispute this novel teaching.
Consult chapter 3 of RBMW and you will see the use of just about every logical fallacy accompanied by strong doses of spiritual blackmail and creative insertions of his own vain imagination into the text.
Really, you guys need to clean your own houses.
You can preach whatever you want. But you may not, with any integrity, demonstrate that you are reaching your conclusions based on a conservative hermeneutic, grammatic-historical or redemptive, and the Greek text.
Gram3 wrote:
Well, there is always cottage cheese (a variant of curds and whey). And then there is clabber, introduced into the US via ulster scots in the southern appalachians. We used to have this at breakfast sometimes sprinkled with sugar.
If the conversation shifts to what did the poor and comparatively poor eat in the south back in the day, I will just say that the niceties of which you people speak are light years away from that. However, when and if this economy tanks and you all have to eat some of the stuff we did I believe y’all will be pleasantly surprised.
Nancy wrote:
Those are my people. They were apparently a little troublesome on the border, they say, but they behaved somewhat better in County Tyrone. I was just kidding Nick about how “clotted” has a different connotation here. I enjoy lots of things that are “clotted.” We are so privileged now in so many ways. It always amazes me to think of the things previous generations overcame and provided for us to enjoy.
Nancy wrote:
We Wisconsinites, can regale too. During the Great Depression my father and his buds used to trap rats out by the grain silos and on a good day they’d score enough to have a Steinbeckian feast with a hickory fire. Rat is quite a delicacy with the Vietnamese peasant farmers too.
I am inclined to agree. Gram was the one who said it and I was just quoting him. Perhaps you could ask him why he chose to word it that way.
Caitlin wrote:
Patti wrote:
That is an important point. In Genesis 1:26-28, God gives the Father’s blessing to the man and the woman jointly. God gives the creation mandate to the man and the woman jointly without distinction. God never says anything about “roles” or “leading” and “following.”
They have taken words like ezer and toned them down to something like personal assistant who helps males get the real work done. The description of the woman is something closer to “one who embodies what is essential to man’s life and work and which is a counterpart to the man.”
Both are necessary to the other. Both are created strong to do the work God gave them to do. Sin messed that up. Comps want to say that sin corrupted an existing hierarchy, but they cannot do that from the actual text.
But, but…Grudem!
Dustin Germain wrote:
Gramp3 is not at all amused that you have confused us. I am the female/woman, and he is the male/man. I try to be somewhat precise when using language, and the male/female gender distinction seemed more appropriate when discussing gender roles.
Would you care to respond substantively to what I have written regarding “complementarianism.” I am a woman requesting that a pastor who is comp instruct and correct me from the actual Greek text using a conservative hermeneutic and using something like comprehensible and generally recognized as safe logic. No points are given for creative re-imagineering of the textual content.
Since you guys are big on correction, please proceed. I’ve offered this Genesis 1:26-28 challenge before, and I have not received a substantive response. I don’t do Twitter as I was banned for verbosity, so a response here would be appreciated.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
If you have pets, I suppose you love them but still wouldn’t see them as your peers.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
According to you, oh complementarian, I could not possibly be more capable than you of leading male humans, and especially those in spiritual groups and families. I could not possibly be more intelligent or wiser than you.
It is not possible because God isn’t a wasteful God. He would never have given female humans such gifts since we are created to submit to you both at church and at home (two of the three contexts in which Christian humans live/exist).
If it were possible that I am more gifted than you, or than some men, or that some among my sex were more gifted than most men, then less-gifted humans across the world would be leading groups in spiritual practice. And since besides being non-wasteful, God always wants the best for His children, these are not possible scenarios.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
If you meant those other words, you should have used them. Such sloppiness inclines people like us to suspect Freudian slippage, and it is wrong of you to lead weaker vessels into sin.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/child-sex-abuser-from-gaithersburg-area-church-to-be-sentenced-on-thursday/2014/08/13/4fc244ca-235d-11e4-958c-268a320a60ce_story.html
“Mr. Morales you are a pathetic human being,” Judge Terrence J. McGann said as he announced the sentence.”
As are C.J. Mahaney and all the other SGM pastors who covered up this heinous crime; additionally those who continue to enable Mahaney and promote his books, including Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Wayne Grudem, Thomas Schreiner, Bruce Ware, Tim Challies, Kevin DeYoung, John Piper, John Folmar, Thabiti Anyabwile among others.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
I see. I disagree with how you frame most if the cimmenter
@ Bridget:
That was an accidental “post comment.”
I disagree with the words you use to describe the comments from those giving an opinion on your friend’s behavior. I don’t believe that most of them have denigrated, excoriated, or destroyed JD in any way. I believe JD will be just fine and hopefully changed; a bit more caring toward the human beings in his midst.
Dustin Germain,
Can you ever just admit you were wrong and own responsibility? Have you ever? Or maybe you just haven’t had the opportunity because you have never been wrong…
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
That’s a solid list! If these men had integrity, they’d step down.
It’s not as if there are too few mature people capable of speaking into the spiritual lives of Evangelicals. And surely it wouldn’t be all that difficult to do a better job than they have done.
But they don’t have integrity; that’s why they covered up such crimes in the first place. And they will continue until broad membership removes them from their positions.
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Also Ligon Duncan, Don Carson, Tim Keller and every single one of the men and women who affiliate with The Guy Coalition who tacitly went along with the party line when the 3 put out their statement. Disclaimers after the fact with no names are inadequate.
However, we must not be impatient. I’m sure they will step up and be manly men who masculinely defend and protect young children. And surely the T4Guys must be in the final stages of issuing a statement repenting of their slanderous statement (how long ago was it?) against those of us who think children must be protected.
I think that there was a tell in their statement, though. They said that those who opposed Mahaney remaining in the pulpit were angry about the successful ministry he founded. Think about that for a minute.
Is that the first place anyone would go when commenting about the lawsuit and the molestation situation? I don’t think so, but I believe it reveals what these men truly value and what they are really afraid of losing and therefore what they are zealously guarding.
Phoenix wrote:
‘
I don’t have Dustin’s CV handy, but I’m guessing based on the available evidence that he hasn’t ever had a job in the real world that exists outside academia and Churchland. If you have a keyboard in VirtualLand, you can be important without really producing anything that someone, maybe even a woman, might critique.
I’ve asked him here to produce some pastoral correction, but so far nothing. Being somebody in VirtualLand means never having to say you’re sorry. Or produce evidence.
I think we left out Justin Taylor and Joe Carter. Joe Carter because of his famous spiritual blackmail post about not slandering Christ’s bride. The precis of that post is, “Shut up.”
Patrice wrote:
Agreed! All they really seem to care about is fleecing the sheep when their job is to tend & feed the sheep. I believe at the core is control but also greed which is idolatry. It’s all about “Buy my book & buy this other pastor’s book! In fact, look at who else recommends us on Amazon & then buy their stuff too and go to their conferences! I’ll be speaking there!!” It’s so sickening.
Just a point re complementarians: all are not created equal.
The little SBC church of my childhood did hold to gender roles a la the comps. However, women most definitely were not seen as less than the men. If anything, the traditional role of women was so highly valued that they would have to lower themselves to be equal to men.
Preachers and deacons were male, yes, but in a church overwhelmingly female, with females voting and staffing the committees, all I can say is woe to the preacher or deacon who ran afoul of the women.
They would run a preacher off in a NY minute and deacons were “retired” quite regularly.
Only when being the preacher or deacon morphed into being “elders” with “authority”, meaning “better than” others, did women suddenly want the positions.
Nah, give me an old fashioned SBC church (pre 1979) with some strong women and we can get this mess cleaned up. Either the egal gals will run off some elders or the comp gals will remind said elders that they rank far below the high status God accorded to women that those elders will run for the sandhills tails tucked between their legs.
But all of this is why, although in church every Sunday unless providentially hindered, we refuse to join and “come under authority” since our BIBLES tell us the only spiritual authority over us is the Lord.
@ linda:
That sounds rather familiar. In the SBC churches I was involved in during my youth and young adult years there were no women preachers or deacons, but there were some well respected adult women SS teachers and women missionaries as well as quite a few women professionals. This was during and rather soon after WWII and before the post war back-to-home with station wagon and large dog idea took over. I can’t remember any women thinking there was anything wrong with that. But under the pre-elder system there were a number of “groups” and individuals with real power in the church. That would include the board of deacons (especially the chairman), the trustees, the WMU (women’s missionary union) especially the president, the SS superintendent, and various individuals who were influential just because they were. And don’t forget the choir, which apparently made more decisions than just how to sing. Preachers used to reassure the congregation that they understood that both the women and the choir had to be kept happy. They would pretend it was a joke, but actually I think they were making sure that everybody understood that he (the preacher) knew his place in the existing power structure.
Apparently now, from what I gather people are saying, all the power is vested in the preacher (and his staff?). That is a radical change from back in the day. I do observe that some churches seem to have gotten the women “under control” but they need to work on the music department some. I have no idea what went wrong with the laity that they let this happen, but it not my business at this point because I am long gone.
@ Patrice:
@ Phoenix:
My guess is Dustin thinks he is never wrong because he has the correct purified theology. I am asking is he a pastor?
@ linda:
Ditto Nancy. That’s how it used to be a long time ago.
But in the 1980’s Piper and Grudem formed CBMW and that is all about hierarchy. Meanwhile, Mohler is consolidating his power, Dever and Founders start advocating for SBC churches to adopt the Founders model of church government which is based on the 1689 LBCF. The 1689 is based on the Westminster CF, and of course that prescribes elder rule.
Some SBC churches are dually aligned with Association of Reformed Baptists Churches in America (1689 LBCF) who are very Founders-friendly, and some SBC churches are dually aligned with CBF or whatever that group is called now.
Mohler tries to stay a bit distant from Founders, but he and Dever are buddies, obviously, and Dever is from Founders. Tom Ascol is the one you don’t hear from, but he and Tom Nettles are two of the ones pushing the SBC in a very bad direction. We all know who Nettles reports to.
Founders has never accepted the Great Awakening and its effect on Baptist thinking in America. They simply deny that it was important at all or else that it was harmful. They deny that the time that Baptists spent in Holland exiled with the Anabaptists had any influence whatsoever on English Baptists after they returned. Except for the bad stuff, of course.
I had to learn this stuff to figure out what in the world had happened to a lovely young woman who had been spiritually abused and harrassed by one of these churches. Founders-friendly or ARBCA means 1689 straight up. And I think that there are Baptist churches that are 9Marks-affiliated where the real confession is the 1689 and not the BFM despite what is put forward.
Short version is we got elders in Baptist churches from men who follow the 1689. The strictly male elder rule comes from George Knight in the Presbyterian church which Grudem and Piper have propagated through CBMW.
If I got anything wrong here, somebody other than Timmy Brister please correct me.
Gram3 wrote:
Gram, there was another event which really changed the “Founders” oriented Southern Baptist thinking: The Civil War.
Bruce Gourley has written a bit about it. But there are some interesting old articles one has to dig up to see how doctrinal thinking changed in the SBC changed after the South did not win.
@ Lydia:
Theologically or socially as the old social structures were destroyed? Or both?
Lydia wrote:
I may be old, but not that old!
@ Gram3:
I think it was for the majority both, eventually. But that is only my opinion from the bit of research I have done.
An interesting read concerning the thinking of some SBC Founders is Broaddus’ bio of Boyce. Then reading some of the stuff 40 years or so later from SBC Theologians. It evolved for many.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
@ Nancy:
Hee Hee. I feel that old sometimes!
@ Lydia:
Followed you tip and found some interesting essays at civilwarbaptist.com that remind me a lot of Dabney’s thinking about abolitionists and feminists being ungodly and influenced by the atheists behind the French Revolutionary idea of equality. Sounds kind of familiar to the appeals made today to *resist the culture* reflexively rather than carefully considering what that really means. They imply that resisting culture is somehow virtuous in its own right and justifies whatever means necessary.
@ Lydia:
Found this in Gourley’s article about slavery, quoting Richard Furman: “…the right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example.”
Sounds like Furman was a Dunkin’ Dabney.
Gram3 wrote:
thank you gram for this. I suffered a head injury about a year ago and I have problems with anger always wanting to crop up in my life. I used to see things from a different patient, always look to Jesus and the Holy Spirit perspective when I was wronged. I always sought understanding and forgiveness and the ability to know when to say something or to just let the Holy Spirit convict the person Himself. it is harder now since I have had a lot of concussions but I think I will print out this part of your comment and put it on my fridge, thanks!
Eagle wrote:
I understand your empathy for this man, but because he is a public figure that has a history of being publicly critical of people, we ought to weigh wether he is truly apologetic, or if he is still self centered and scrambling to save his ministry which probably is ruined. Ruined because people everywhere can see that it wasn’t enough for him to publicly point out the sins of adults in ministry, which is often biblical, but his comments to this minor, even bizarre trying to prove a point about what language was spoken in the home, and then going on a radio slamming the child and his father. adults in ministry will get public criticism a lot, they know its part of the territory. a youth on the other hand who does not have an adult ability to deal with pressure and condemnation when given so publicly is put at psychological risk. to be rebuked by someone that is a public minister and well known and has a radio broadcast is a very big thing for even an adult to deal with. if a minor is in sin it must be dealt with differently or there are tragic consequences for the youth. I know some have said that he wasn’t that young etc, but I don’t think even a 24yr old could handle that kind of public criticism, especially when it was done on twitter, radio and probably in church services that hall led, and talked about in a lot of groups that this kid was formerly associated with. I am sure he heard a lot from former friends and social groups that told him also how bad he was and felt right to do that because mr hall led the way to public blasting of people. just my opinion, and as I said earlier because of a head injury I am very susceptible to doing that myself since the invention of modern internet. so what do I do? I don’t do public ministry, I try to judge my comments several times before I say them, and I mostly hang out in blogs lkike this one because if I am wrong and don’t see it, someone on here that has been a member for along time will point it out in love.
@ sam h:
Thanks for writing this, Sam. It is tough not to try to be the Holy Spirit to someone else. It sounds like you have been through a lot, and the Lord is walking you through it one day at a time. People [Matt Walsh, lookin’ at you] just do not understand how emotions are tied to our bodies and how damage to our bodies can determine to a sometimes overwhelming extent how we feel and rob us of hope. But that is a rant for another day…
I’ll be praying for you, and I would really appreciate your prayer for my attitude whenever you look at your fridge note. Thanks again. You made my day. 🙂
There’s the saying about birds of a feather flocking together. It’s been said by others here and I agree…if he is sincere he is going to have to replace his circle of friends and allies with those who are gentle, patient, kind, who will encourage him in what he says he wants to be. Hanging out with the same mean, hateful crowd, no matter how well intentioned they are, will not be helpful. I’m not saying he has to cut people off, but when you are wanting to change, you invest yourself and time in those who encourage the path you want to be on.
@ Tim Lee:
thank you so very much for your service to this country. I am so sorry that you were treated this way by people who profess to love Jesus. I very glad that Jesus put you in Braxton’s life before he left this world to show him what true friendship and compassion is, in spite of how far we are along the road to “perfect righteousness”. God bless you and fill you with His love.
Gram3 wrote:
It unfortunate that you have chosen to mock me and launch a string of personal attacks, without knowing anything about me. I don’t know why you feel the need to launch into speculation, or try to ascribe to me positions that I do not hold.
As far as asking me to produce some evidence- how many hours ago was that? 2 hours passed between asking me and accusing me of not answering. Can you not allow that perhaps I am busy and not able to answer you right away?
Jeannette Altes wrote:
I like what you said but one of the concerns of mine is actually related to what you said in this post. it is that he didn’t demand an apology but he instructed his church to only give him grace and forgiveness as he has always only given them. “And so as my church, here’s what I need from you as I struggle with this. What I need is for you to preach to me. I’ve preached to you for more than seven years the depths, the heights, the width of God’s free grace to sinners on account of Christ’s blood upon the cross. I’ve preached to you a grace of unmerited favor as Christ Jesus died for our sins. I need you to preach to me, each and every one of you in the coming days, God’s grace that’s given to all who can say through the Spirit’s prompting, “I am a sinner.””
I am hoping that this apology of his is indeed a first step of true repentance. I think however that as others have said, the doctrine and complimentarianism is the root of the whole problem. the hero worship, the noting how many times he was on the air, how many people quoted him and asked his advice, shows a deeper problem. not something that cant be fixed by the Lord if someone is willing. but that would take more than only letting people minister to you in grace and mercy from Jesus, it would take a real conversation that would be uncomfortable.
if I apologize to you for hurting you and then say to you, you shouldn’t talk about my mistakes, you should forgive me without discussing it, and you owe me grace and mercy, btw I preached grace and mercy to you…blah blah blah it just sounds weird.
another thing is that while I haven’t gotten to the bottom of the comments yet, I notice that so far mr hall hasn’t spoken in response to any of the comments. he made a point to have dee print his apology, I would hope that he also would make a point of receiving feedback and also give some feedback, I am sincerely hoping that he didn’t just tell his church about the public apology on here and then encourage them to come blast any of us that comment about his “repentance”
I am going to keep reading and see if he made any comments here himself. was wondering also if he has gotten back to dee or deb about any of this since it was posted.
In Other News:
The Rosetta deep space probe has been successfully parked in orbit about Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. Kudos and accolades go out the men and women of The European Space Agency for their soaring feat and testament to the human spirit.
Ann wrote:
that burden is called guilt and all of us are tempted to dismiss it, justify it, point out that people who are familiar with suicide would agree…blah blah blah.
the only way to deal with sin intentional or unintentional, the only way to deal with guilt is to take it to the Lord Jesus Christ who died for our sins. it is not helpful for anyone to rationalize responsiblilty, theorize the odds of our being a part of such a tragedy, tell our congregations to only treat us with grace, etc. if I had been in halls shoes and read any comments on here and seen the comments on NPD I would hope that I would have the humility and grace of God to look that up, seek counseling to determine if I did indeed have these traits, and continue to see my sins and continue in Jesus led repentance. I agree with the consensus of stepping down from the pulpit for a season because these things I just mentioned take time, time alone with Jesus. I get the feeling that there is a “conspiracy” (not really) of supporters of jd hall to come here and defend their beloved pastor by rationalizing his errors and sometimes by other posters to outright insult the posters here, instead of maybe looking at what is being said. that is exactly what people are concerned with in mr halls ministry previous. that I hope is not the whole congregations mindset also. some posters that say they are mr halls supporters blast people that don’t agree with them, defend the undefendable actions of a preacher, dismiss as nonsense that his actions could have led to the death of a minor. the point on here is not to blast people but to hold people in office accountable to bring them to true repentance. I believe that is what has begun by dee/deb conversing with mr hall. for halls supporters to take the same attitude that caused him to sin is not helpful in my opinion.
Gram3 wrote:
Do rant on there Gram3, I for one have rejected the notion of the soul existing as a separate entity apart from the physical body as a product of Hellenism. Ancient Judaic thought (prior to the Axial Age and all things Greek) maintains that no such bifurcation exists, body and soul are an integral unit.
dee wrote:
I am seeing what you are saying, but I am the sceptic to the core because of past experience with people apologizing. I think sometimes it is very helpful to see a persons emotions and that helps to see if they really mean it. on the other hand though, mysogynists and others are very good at using their emotions and tears to convince people of their repentance but if you separate their “act” from what they are actually saying in words it is very revealing. I am not saying jd is doing that, I am just explaining why I am skeptical based on his words and way of “apologizing” I hope you are right because it would be way way awesome if he is truly repentant. and like others have said, possibly the beginning of others in ministry repenting. I think one of the biggest problems with ‘famous’ pastors is that it is so difficult for them to apologize because of their peers. no one has gone first yet, so in jd’s doing that I am very happy. still I will wait and see if their is fruit..
@ sam h:
sam h, thank you. I am not sure how I missed that, but you are right. Hmm…we will have to see what he does from here….
sam h wrote:
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
the word abusive means the abnormal use of something. to abuse something is to use it in a manner not intended. so no matter how you spell it or paint it, comp is abusive, not as our Creator intended “them” to be used.
by the way are you suggesting that we use the words you listed as synonomous in reference to what happened to Jesus on the Cross? I think you have ‘I am never wrong syndrome’ I used to have that also, my good friend told me to practice saying, “I was wrong” “I was wrong” “I was wrong” until it became natural to me. good advice.
also, you are quick to jump to the comp defense, but what about apologizing for the tremendously ungodly comments to the posters in the combox?
@ Muff Potter:
gram said: People [Matt Walsh, lookin’ at you] just do not understand how emotions are tied to our bodies and how damage to our bodies can determine to a sometimes overwhelming extent how we feel and rob us of hope. But that is a rant for another day…
muff potter said: Do rant on there Gram3, I for one have rejected the notion of the soul existing as a separate entity apart from the physical body as a product of Hellenism. Ancient Judaic thought (prior to the Axial Age and all things Greek) maintains that no such bifurcation exists, body and soul are an integral unit.
sam h says: ok look, I don’t speak ‘christianese’ but how does the relation to my having my 8th concussion resulting in tinnitis, migraines that last a week at a time, extreme pain on the good days, occosainal brain swelling, (loss of spelling skills lol), vision loss, pain from herniated disks in my neck which all result in my emotions being wacked. ie, I am irritable and quicker to judge people’s sins when I get annoyed, make me anything like a Hellenistic whose “soul existing as a separate entity apart from the physical body”? you two have fun with that convo, I am going to bed lol
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
This is one thing on which we agree. (Get this, peeps, I’m not only Twitter friends with Dustin, but now Pulpit and Pen has unblocked me – whoa – what a week – lol.)
Question for you – have you personally tweeted about this book and that it is wrong and puts limits on women that are not Biblical?
What Tony preaches on this is ridiculous – that women can’t even read scripture in front of a man without being their authority because scripture is authoritative – – – yet, he was at John MacArthur’s Shepherd’s conference in the audience when John MacArthur introduced Joni Earekson-Tada who spoke and read scripture, yet he didn’t walk out of that conference. HMM..#hypocrite
Changing subjects, Dustin, DOOOOOOOOOOD, you’re not looking too manly by ignoring all of these comments asking you to address the rude and obnoxious blog post about Wartburg Watch ladies. Please clean up that mess. It’s gross.
@ Julie Anne:
I noticed that the Pierce gentlemen on the Twitter thread with James White accused you of being the woman who sinfully took your Pastor to court!! — Ha! Did you straighten him out Julie Anne? What a shock it will be for him to learn it was your Pastor who tried to sue you.
Yea, Bridget, I did and he said something like “whoa, wow” 🙂
Bridget, I answered your question and Ed’s on the Hall thread at SSB. You asked if Hall’s church found out about his online activity. Yes, they were informed about it.
Julie Anne wrote:
Since you brought it up, Julie Anne, you will be pleased to know that Dustin has edited that post (I think yesterday) and provided this update at the top. It reads as follows:
http://thepaperthinhymn.com/2014/05/19/a-small-sampling-of-the-wartburg-watch-combox-regarding-al-mohler/
@ Lydia:
@ Gram3:
Of course. The old saying; if it had been a snake it would have bitten me. Or how about; looking right at it all the time and not seeing it.
When we first moved from the urban cultures of Louisville and St. Louis to a small town in the south I saw this plainly and clearly–this attitude that would have been fertile ground for the neo-Puritan thinking. But I got really busy for a long long time, and then moved back to the city and found a different religious tradition for myself, and didn’t think about it any more. Besides, my children tell me that I spent too much time in the radiology department and lost touch with reality.
When we first came over here, my husband used to say that we had a front row seat to observe the last residuals of a vanishing culture. But some in that culture kept saying something like the south will rise again. I thought they meant politically. Now there is this neo-Puritan back to the seventeenth century revival of pre-everything religion. Pre-great awakening, pre-Fench revolution, pre-American civil war and for sure pre-American social revolution of the 60s and 70s. You all have said correctly. I have not researched anything, I have just lived adjacent to this attitude while it was not wearing these exact religious vestments and did not recognize it when I saw it.
But now I have had a good night’s sleep, renewed my aging brain, and (so they say) “worked on it” while asleep, and had a moment of clear recognition (to me) of what this looks like. Repeat: you people have spotted it correctly I think. The emphasis on a hierarchical caste system, the rejection of some “power to the people” even in it’s good aspects. The suspicion of education. The isolating of peoples and cultures (take your kids out of public school for example) as a religious duty. Setting up the church and state as opposed to each other, enemies even. Promulgating the idea that society and religion must be run by a rigid and complicated set of inviolable rules and customs, partly for the purpose I think of showing who has achieved to the higher levels of the religious caste system but also to adapt the masses of followers to, in fact, submit to the bit and the harness quietly.
I would say that the south has indeed risen again, but I also say that there are masses of us who live here for whom this neo-Puritan stuff is a no sell. I say this based on the churches I see in the local yellow pages and the limited size (for this population) or the local SBC mega. And I say it based on the history of western NC vs eastern NC during the civil war. That is a different story, however.
If the intensity of feeling that I have heard back in the day about some of these ideas gets stirred up again, then we are in for a difficult time. May it not be so.
@ sam h:
It just means that people who tell you to get over it or pray more do not know what they are talking about. They are not speaking biblically but rather from Greek philosophical ideas which strictly separate spirit from body.
We are embodied soul/spirits. Trauma to the body is trauma to the spirit and trauma to the spirit is trauma to the body. The nouthetic zealots need to talk to some folks who have survived head injury or trauma to the CNS.
Julie Anne wrote:
So here I am trying to catch up with new realities that I have failed to see and/or failed to understand. And what you have said here is something I would like explained a little more, if you don’t mind.
Are you saying that if this man did not agree with the idea of a woman speaking and reading scripture then he had to get up publicly and walk out in protest or else he is a hypocrite? This is new thinking to me. Why the necessity for public protest over everything(?) one may disagree with? And, and here this is crucial to my question, if so at what level of disagreement does the requirement for public protest set in?
I don’t know about other people (obviously) but if I had to publicly protest everything all the time, I would become a public buffoon and a joke to humanity. For me this lies somewhere on the continuum of always taking offense, which I am thinking is a bad idea. I don’t mean to remain silent always, like Bonhoeffer said, failure to take sides is taking sides. I just mean public displays of disagreement under the circumstances you mentioned. I don’t see that, but if there is a good reason that I ought to understand, then I am willing to listen to the reason.
Gram3 wrote:
I think that man is better described as tripartite, body, soul/mind and spirit. We could get a conversation going about that some time, but today is not the day for me. Lots of errands first off, and after that I will be too tired to think clearly (aging body and mind). But the descriptive terminology is interesting and there are some hints in scripture, I think, about what is man that are thought provoking.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
That was a lot of explaining that didn’t answer the questions put to you. You say “complementarianism” is not misogynistic. Complementarianism asserts that women are created to be led by men and must defer to men. So-called soft comps limit this to marriage and the church. I’m a cynic who believes the softs want all the benefits of women’s contributions in the public sphere without yielding their suthority privileges in the home and church. The essence of complementarianism is that women lack some vital capacity or lack divine authorization to act (agency) independent of a male.
Now that I have recapped and nuanced Complementarianism, would you kindly respond to the questions I posed to you. Demonstrate this deficiency that women have, and demonstrate *from the actual text of the Greek* where it is that God revokes or modifies the equality between the man and the woman that is explicit in Genesis 1:26-28. This should be be difficult if this doctrine is so central to the gospel.
I see your editorial note to your post about the commenters here. Sorry, Dustin. That is inadequate. You invalidated the very existence of this blog. It was not a matter of using “winsome” words but a matter of your thinking about whether another voice is even legitimate. The real issue is that there is a certain kind of individual who cannot bear to have other voices heard.
I encourage you to think about the content of what you are saying in addition to the style. The style of the post was not accidental but flows from the underlying presuppositions you hold about women and about persons who differ in doctrine.
Looking forward to your defense of “complementarianism” from the Greek text and not from Grudem’s mangling of it in the ESV.
sam h wrote:
Precisely – this whole “weighing” thing is fundamentally important, whether it’s a disputed accusation of abuse (with one person’s word against another’s) or a situation like this, where the historical events are not in dispute but the condition of a person’s heart (which we cannot see) is in question.
I can’t evaluate Jordan’s apology. If I like him, then I’ll celebrate how heartfelt it is regardless of whether it’s real or not – rather like Fiscal fans talk about his “humility” whenever he uses an appropriately sarft ‘n gennul voice. If I don’t like him, I’ll pick holes in it – even if he writes the perfect apology, I’ll just conclude that it has to be fake because it’s too good.
To “repent”, both in English and in new testament Greek, literally means to change one’s mind. If your mind is different, then your behaviour can’t help but be different too. And whilst sorrow and remorse aren’t bad things in themselves, they’re only very indirectly related to repentance. One big gesture of repentance is much less significant than a long series of little ones that don’t need a strong emotional spark to drive them. Somebody once wrote that nothing changes your life unless it changes something you do every day.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Well said.
“@ Phoenix: My guess is Dustin thinks he is never wrong because he has the correct purified theology. I am asking is he a pastor?
I am not a pastor, no, nor do I think I am always right. I’m pretty sure I’m right about a lot of stuff, as is everybody else in this world, but I freely admit when I don’t know something or haven’t fully studied or considered something. But I like to hold most secondary and tertiary doctrinal issues pretty loosely and open-handedly, sometimes even uncomfortably so.
sam h wrote:
I suspect we probably agree that much of what passes for complementarianism can be abusive, for sure. I also believe that it can be practiced in a practical way that is not abusive, but I understand that we probably will not agree on that.
As far as my use of the word crucify, its usage has changed substantially in the last millenia. It is informally used to mean to ridicule or to treat harshly or unfairly. I’m sorry if you don’t accept or like or appreciate this modern usage of it, but its is completely used correctly and appropriately. You can check any dictionary if you would like- usually it is the secondary definition.
Also, I update my post early yesterday morning to reflect some changes.
Julie Anne wrote:
I’m not sure if I tweeted that directly or not. I know that on my website I posted an article that was critical of something he said on a facebook comment, and I said this : ” I think these are very important things to be said [especially his refutation of Tony’s position that women shouldn’t OAP or share the gospel publicly. That needs to be opposed at every turn]”
I know that I’ve also posted the link to Rhology’s book review many times which goes into great detail how Tony is misusing scripture to try to place burdens and restrictions on women that the scriptures do not place. Needless to say Tony and I have very different understanding of how these things ought to look like and take place.
Also, Julie, I hope you can appreciate that I do not buy in to these modern evangelical notions of what “biblical masculinity” ought to look like. And no, I do not believe that, to quote Piper, “Christianity has a masculine feel”, and so appealing to that won’t work with me, haha, but yeah- as has already been stated, I’ve been in talks with Dee about the blog and fixed it yesterday morning. 🙂
Patrice wrote:
As to the first point, I do not believe it comes down to an issue of capability. I also would completely reject the idea that someone, women especially, could not be more wise or intelligent than me. I’ve been married for almost 5 years now, and I openly and unequivocally have no problem saying that in many ways my wife is wiser than me, and she has been invaluable counsel who has corrected me, rebuked me, taught me and has played a role in sanctifying me and helping me become a better husband, father, and Christian. I can only pray that other men would let their wives, in partnership, do the same for them, and not reject this good gift from God in their stubbornness, pride and sin.
Nancy wrote:
Great question and I’m glad you asked. I mentioned walking out because I’ve watched Tony’s behavior with things long enough to know that if he found something offensive he’d do something bold to air his disgust like walk out, tweet about it, blog about it, discuss it on his podcast. He is very black and white with everyone else. He’s so into this authoritative preaching thing that he even recommended that women bloggers put a disclaimer on their site so that men don’t fall into sin. So this all has to do with hypocrisy – he tells others how to behave, but he’s okay to “sin” by his definition by sitting under “Joni Tada’s authoritative teaching.”
Deb – I’m so glad to read that Dustin updated the blog. I had checked yesterday, but must have been before the edit. Thank you, Dustin.
@ Deb:
IMO Dustin’s edited item is another great example of a non-apology and very little repentance. Why is it so hard for him?
Gram3 wrote:
In many churches it is. Same for preachers, pastors, deacons, priests, teachers, etc., depending on the denomination.
@ Julie Anne:
Thanks. I understand what you are saying–it makes sense.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
Then you aren’t a complementarian. Not really. When one person has authority, they don’t get rebuked or corrected by their inferiors. Only in societies where “authority” is really just a delegated sense of “sometimes there needs to be just a guy.”
Think about modern “democracies” versus totalitarian governments. We can criticize our leaders openly, because in a very real sense, we are simply choosing them to be the ones in charge for now. The real power rests with the people and those “in charge” only serve at their sufferance. (insert monty python quote). Meanwhile, in a dictatorship, there is no criticism, because the people have no power, only the autocrat. Complementarians are inherently autocrats. Sure, they may be gracious and serving and put their wives’ needs first instead of their own. But the power never rested in their wives, it always rested in them (God-given, after all) so their wives can’t criticize, can’t rebuke. Their wives didn’t opt or elect or delegate the authority to their husbands. God organized it that way. (and when you start digging down deep, a lot of them don’t think the wife even chose when she got married- it only represented a transfer from father to husband).
Basically, like so many other healthy marriages, there’s a sense that both parties have equal power. So what if one decides to let the other take the lead for a season or forever? The fact that you choose to let someone else make decisions for you means that you feel that you have the right to make decisions for yourself.
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
When the scenario is reversed Complementarians use the word lead as in the husband led his wife in all those things. In actually your wife led you in those good wise things that you appreciated her for. Leading doesn’t mean authority, it just means you are going first. I will follow anyone through a trail that has spider webs ahead. I am capable albeit femininely hysterically capable, but I will definitely follow my husbands leading through spiders territory.
Gram3 wrote:
I’m not going to get into a discussion on this, as I about to go my hols (vacation to American brethren) for a fortnight (two weeks). Need it too! 🙂
I still use the RSV on which the ESV was based. The RSV is a fairly conservative translation produced by men who often were pretty liberal in their theology, and it shows at times. The newer version which I also have is clearly better in some places though.
I don’t think poor old Grudem can be accused of much in the famous 2 Tim verses, as the ESV waters it down a bit – women are now enjoined to ‘quietness’ rather than ‘silence’.
Patti wrote:
And mice. We’re getting married in 3 weeks and going to move into my late grandmother’s house for awhile (yay for the underemployment and great uncertainty that has characterized my life for 6 years now). The house apparently has a rodent problem. I’m less than thrilled. He can rummage, so that I don’t get tainted by mouse-sight.
@ Patti:
I find it funny that Complementarians use the word ‘let’ as in ‘allow’ to encourage the notion of authority. So, when I ‘let’ myself be subject to my husband as Eph. 5:22 says, if I use complementarian logic I actually become the leader. I am leading the way with voluntary joyful submission. That is how I ‘allow’ (boss) my husband into leading me. Woo hoo I’m the boss! I actually think a lot of comp women believe this and that is how they rule the roost ‘allowing’ (leading) their husbands to think they have the power.
If apostle Paul was talking here, I think he would finish this rhetoric with “but logic dictates that one does not always lead the other in the Lord, therefore I make no law about it neither do the other assemblies.”
@ Caitlin:
I’ve got a great mouser cat you could have. Well actually it’s not mine to give away, it’s my daughters boyfriends cat that was only supposed to stay 2 months but it’s been a year now. Upside? Less rodents and bugs.
Congrats on getting married!
@ Patti:
Husband-in-three-weeks has wanted a cat for a long time, so heading down to the local pound is a possibiitiy. I’m less worried about the cat qua cat and more worried about how this hypothetical cat will handle it when we inevitably have to pack up in move at some point between October and the End of Days.
And as far as your insight into allowing… that’s exactly what I was trying to get at too- I let my Husband-in-three-weeks handle some aspects of our lives entirely because he’s better at them than me. In my mind, that means that I’m giving up, delegating, reassigning some of my authority- sure, it’s for the sake of efficiency (we don’t both need to call the health insurance company to see what our joint rates would be), but our patterns so far have been that whatever is suggested by the primary fact-finder is the option we go with, so he isn’t just working for me but also making the decision for me (with my “Sounds good” or perhaps after I ask a few clarifying questions and then a “sounds good”)
But. I am not technically married. Maybe there’s a secret drop box or something up at the altar that I didn’t know about.
I wish I could leave this JD Hall subject alone, but it’s just not leaving me even when I’m not online. In light of more posters supporting of the sincerity of this apology I decided to read it again, hoping to be able to feel better about JD Hall’s letter of transparency to his church. I don’t think I question his sincerity as much as I question if he really gets it.
I’m afraid that reading again has only made my cognitive dissonance even worse. The enormous amount if detail takes a few readings to absorb. Dee, of course I don’t know what your conversation was with him over the phone so this is all I have to judge by. I think it is very transparent, so transparent that I still don’t think he really gets it or can’t admit that he gets it. Just the fact that I can’t seem to leave it alone is a clue that his statement is full of NPD rhetoric. I don’t trust him. I don’t have to feel guilty for not trusting him. Just the fact that there is a temptation to feel guilty for not trusting him is another clue of being emotionally affected by an NP.
This has nothing to do with whether or not I like the person or agree with his theology and doctrine. It is nothing more than an objective reading of this particular address that he made to his church.
@ sam h:
Gram3 gave a good reply. Because of a Scripture reading that is heavily influenced by Greek philosophy, you may have been told that the problems you’ve listed are ‘spiritual’ problems and will magically go away if you just pray and read your Bible more. They even have all the right clobber verses from the Apostle Paul’s lengthy missives to ‘prove it’.
mot wrote:
Please provide a specific example of my non apology.
“Would you care to respond substantively to what I have written regarding “complementarianism”
I do not care to respond to it at all- no. Your hostility, misrepresentation, insults, and assuming and ascribing evil intent to me has withered away my desire to converse with you.
In any case, even if you had been less vexatious, even though I could offer a decent defense of complementarianism, I have no desire to do so. I’m simply stating what I believe. At this point I choose not to elaborate on “why”, and I would hope that i have the freedom to do so.
Patti/Caitlin. This is why I took pain to qualify that I have my idiosyncracies, and that complementarians exist on a spectrum- a spectrum I think on one end has some really damaging stuff, and why I said it’s possible to be a comp without NECESSARILY being abusive.
I believe that the way God designed marriage and the familial relationship is that my wife should “submit” to me, so long as I can define that term biblicaly and without the excessive negative baggage it tends to hold, but honestly I’m still working though how that practically impacts our marriage, because at this point that specific bit of theology has not flourished in a negative way, and because we are such partners in every aspect of our marriage, its difficult to see where the practical ramifications, if there are any, tangibly take place.
We do everything together. We decide everything together. My daughter is not even a year old, but we decided its best for our family if my wife “leads” with the decisions regarding the specific way she is to be raised and kept alive, haha.
She’ll run things by me of what she’s thinking and planning to get my feedback- not because she has to ask for permission, but because she cares about what I think. I give my input, and she’ll weigh that and do what she feels is best for our family. On the rare occasion where I feel super strongly about something, I would never think to “pull rank” as some of these other complementarians do, but rather we’d talk about it, hash it it, and compromise. I can’t imagine ever making a decision that I know my wife is super strongly against. We have made it a habit of each deferring to the other as much as we can, and it has worked well for us.
Even a basic example like I used to believe in spanking as punishment- that it was how God desired discipline to take place, but my wife counseled me and taught me out of it, And now we have no intention to ever use corporal punishment as a way of teaching or disciplining her. [Which would probably make half the comps I know crazy]
If you asked my wife who “leads” the family and who is “head of the household” she would point to me, unquestionably. But the idea that a man thinks that as “head of the household” he cannot be questioned or rebuked or taught by his wife and family? That’s sick. That’s twisted. I think anyone doing that has a warped sense of what complementarianism ought to be like and should be rebuked.
Patti wrote:
Cometh the hour, cometh the man who loves spiders. Accordingly, I not only take charge of spider-removal in our house, but have supervised teaching the weans to do same.
Our native species are all harmless to humans, but if you visit Butterfly and Insect World near Edinburgh you get to hold a tarantula *. I took both the weans there when my son was 6 and my daughter 3. So their arachnaphilia is nicely developed now.
Tarantulae can bite humans, but their venom is mild and they’re not aggressive. Bit of TLC and everyone’s happy. And they’re fluffy – what’s not to love?
* And a small python, and a large millipede as well. But I was there for the tarantula TBH.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
… is not, let me emphasise, some bizarre deviancy, but the simple opposite of arachnophobia.
@ Deb:
I’m glad to know he has changed his article. I haven’t read it. Reading the original one earlier this week was shocking enough for me. The title and picture were enough for me 🙁 although I read the entire article.
Gram3 wrote:
this is a very enlightening post, I have seen this in this side of the country also, in certain religious groups, thanks for posting this.
also @ Gram when I read your culinary critique of nicks recipie, I laughed so hard I snorked! thanks for cheering me up!
@ Nick Bulbeck:
nick wrote: “One big gesture of repentance is much less significant than a long series of little ones that don’t need a strong emotional spark to drive them. Somebody once wrote that nothing changes your life unless it changes something you do every day.”
nick that is awesome, it made me sit here and think about how truly different my life became when I surrendered to Jesus as Lord and said, I will do things Your way instead of mine. every day since there is a noticeable change in my life, and every day I don’t act like I used to in the areas the Lord delivered me from and changed my thinking and then I didn’t want to do those things anymore. it is truly amazing what Jesus can do with a persons life. I hadn’t even noticed it or thanked Him. I have more issues for Him to deal with in my life, but what a joy to go through life with Him as Lord instead of me!
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
You are just too funny, Dustin. You just are blind IMO to what you did as far as what you said about TWW and the commenters her such as myself and then you think you edit the post and have undone your nastiness. No you did undo it.
And no you get no specific example from me–search it out yourself-I trust the Holy Spirit to give you specific examples, not me.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
my point wasn’t about the correct dictionary usage allowing that to be used more commonly, its about your lack of reverence. its similar to how fashionable it is to say OMG! but if you really have a reverence and love of God you wont be inclined to use that kind of disrespect about Him. If you truly understood what Jesus went through on that Cross and the agony of Crucifixion, which is still occurring in radical muslim areas of the word, you probably wouldn’t use it so lightly. using a lot of slang about things in the world is indeed common but when it is in respect to the prescious blood of Jesus, it is more like blashpme than slang(using the name of the Lord in vain, the things of our salvation in vanity), again its about you being a professing Christian with a lack of reverence for things most Holy that I was offended by. it really doesn’t matter what the dictionary says about it. When Jesus died on that cross, His blood dripped and poured out onto the ground and people trampled through it without a thought at all. This is just one area (crucifixion) that I am highly sensitive in. Crucifixion is why I am alive today, and I will be forever thankful to Jesus for letting them crucify Him.
@ Nancy:
I swear my computer has a hidden program that says anything that I want to say to or about nancy must be botched and misquoted! Sorry again, trying to remember to copy paste instead of reply w/quote.
nancy wrote:
When we first moved from the urban cultures of Louisville and St. Louis to a small town in the south I saw this plainly and clearly–this attitude….
sam h says:
this is a very enlightening post, I have seen this in this side of the country also, in certain religious groups, thanks for posting this.
Patti wrote:
The more you read it, the worse he sounds. At bottom, I don’t think a fair reading of his apology could be anything other than: me me me.
mot, in the absence of a specific example of how my apology was a non-apology, i’ll let you have the last word on that.
sam. though on first read i understand your opinion, and don’t feel the same way, I think at least what you say is worth considering. i’ll think about it a bit.
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
Dustin:
It is not about who has the last word. This is not a matter of who wins or loses.
You just do not get it do you? You can not say mean and nasty things about people, pretend you say say you are sorry and then walk away as if you have done something good. Are you afraid of letting the Holy Spirit show you the error of your ways?
” pretend [to say you are sorry”
clearly you see something that i do not, as you claim to know that i am merely pretending.
if this is the case, perhaps the holy spirit can use you as the instrument of showing me the error of my ways by giving me specific examples of my non apology and what leads you to know that i am not sorry for what i posted and am simply pretending?
Ken wrote:
Hi Ken. I’m traveling, too. Have fun.
Grudem mangles 1 Corinthians 11. Don’t have my notes for the other instances. I would be interested to know the actual timeline. Grudem, Piper and Co. pitched a royal fit over the TNIV being so liberal, so that got that one yanked. Then they went to a revision of the RSV and did a sloppy job the first go round, fixed some things, and now we have what we have. I think mangling is a fair representation of the English or American they used. Very kludgy. That said, the RSV came out before gender was an issue, so not sure that means much now. Maybe the RSV was public domain and that’s why they used it? I don’t know.
Maybe Dustin will sub for you on Comp.
“Maybe Dustin will sub for you on Comp.” Nope. I wrote something a few comments up that was put in moderation for a bit, in case you missed it. It succinctly explains why I will not be doing so/
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
Wow, I leave home for a bit, and I get promoted from cackling sycophant to vexatious woe of man. Well, I imagine it is vexatious to have your presuppositions questioned and for a mere woman to have the audacity to ask you to produce evidence from the text. Yeah, that is vexatious. Or maybe Berean. Paul was all about people being vexatious for some reason. Maybe men who asked questions were noble and it’s the women who were vexatious. I dunno.
I don’t know what kind of bubble-wrapped world you live in. Perhaps the fact that you consider inquiry vexatious has more to do with you than with me. Why should I believe that you can defend comp if you just throw a hissy fit and say you don’t want to and you don’t have to but you could if you wanted to? Seriously?
See, Dustin, you don’t get to be the Korrection Kops if you don’t have the evidence. That is just how it works in the real world. You blow through a lot of pixels to avoid just explaining where in the text Genesis 1:26-28 is revoked or modified. Where is the hierarchy and authority?
No, you are not required to respond to anything here. Likewise, we are not required to take you seriously if you will not respond substantively from the Greek text.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
I believe you are mistaken. Ware, Grudem, Piper, and fellow travelers would categorically deny that men ever should submit to women in the church nor husbands to wives in the home. Ephesians 5:21 does not apply in those instances.
Will you speak out against this false teaching put out by famous men who are corrupting God’s word and misleading the church?
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
Sooo….. this is being egal. Sorry.
sam h wrote:
Well, in fairness to Nick, I did receive rebuke and correction from Nancy Leigh DeMoss, Carolyn Mahaney, and Dottie Patterson, Ph.D They realized, after consulting their conference materials and books plus calling in John Piper on an emergency consult that Nick was actually functioning in the role of chef, which is a male role. Therefore, I was usurping his authority because I was merely writing from my kitchen with only somewhat clean countertops and a less than crisply starched and ironed apron. I received a vexatious email, believe you me and will not make that mistake again. Nosireebobtail.
So, Nick, I was wrong, and I apologize. I ask your forgiveness humbly and hopefully winsomely. 🙂
Lol! You know the late Roger Nicole , an inerrantist and Calvinist Baptist was egalitarian. Egalitarian views may not seem a very common theological belief among conservative evangelicals, but it does exist. Not all conservative evangelicals fall lock step into complementarian views about women and men. I don’t know what Mr. Nicole, a man with an irenic spirit, would make of the new Calvinists and Puritans. Some of these radicals would walk out if a woman spoke in a religious assembly. What is a woman, such a weak vessel, she has no right to speak? Is anything a woman says within a religious context a contaminant to be eschewed? So is a woman in the end only for sexual pleasure and procreation? Perhaps one of these women preacher has something to say that is from God and you haughty men are refusing her to say something very important? All these arguments that put down women are fiddlesticks !
sam h wrote:
That is so beautifully said and a testimony to what Jesus has done in you, Sam.
Caitlin wrote:
Comp in spirit but egal in practice? 😉
Gram3 wrote:
Amen and amen!
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
You are trying to play games with me–I am not going to play with you. Good night and maybe one day you will get “it.”
Off topic but of interest: For the second time in three days, Charisma published a good article concerning Mark Driscoll, this time on spiritual abuse. What’s even more interesting is that news editor Jennifer LeClaire wrote this article.
http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/watchman-on-the-wall/45039-mark-driscoll-spiritual-abuse-and-cultish-ministries
Gram3 wrote:
I did not call you vexatious for asking me to defend my complementarian beliefs. I called you vexatious for these jabs, among others:
“You have been taught to only listen to certain “safe” and “godly” and “Biblical” voices and to ignore and demonize all others. ”
Refuse to be used as a parrot, a robot, a minion, a vector of a corrupt system. Imitate Christ, not men. Worship Christ, not your system
If there were ears to hear, and students eager to learn. I fear we have neither, as Rob and Dustin have demonstrated here.
Jordan wants to claim grace, but his tribe shows no grace to any women or men who disagree with them
You say you love women as sisters in Christ. Is that code for “equal in dignity, value, and worth?” If so and if you promote the so-called complementarian doctrine, then you do not love women, at least the the sense that the NT calls you to love them
You have a big issue with females and a big blind spot.
So, it appears that you say a lot of things that you don’t really mean
I’m guessing based on the available evidence that he hasn’t ever had a job in the real world that exists outside academia and Churchland. If you have a keyboard in VirtualLand, you can be important without really producing anything that someone, maybe even a woman, might critique.
I’ve asked him here to produce some pastoral correction, but so far nothing.
Being somebody in VirtualLand means never having to say you’re sorry. Or produce evidence.
The style of the post was not accidental but flows from the underlying presuppositions you hold about women and about persons who differ in doctrine.
Like I said before, you don’t anything about me. You don’t know what I’ve been taught, or who taught me it. You don’t have any basis for the suggestion that I might worship “my system.” You do not know how deep my love and care for women runs. You do not know anything about my job experience or where I have worked. You don’t know what I’m been through, the way my theology has developed, my experiences with abusive churches and abusive leaders, both spiritual and sexual, my view of some of the big names in the reformed camp, my specific theological beliefs and idiosyncrasies.
So when you speculate, or make stuff up, or insult me, or assert things without a foundation or basis, THAT is what vexes me. That. When you challenge me to defend comp, and then follow up TWO HOURS LATER to give me grief for not having defended them already, even as I’ve been at work for the lat 10 hours- that vexes me.
You wanting to engage me in my specific defense of comp? That doesn’t vex me. I’m cool with you doing that. You have asked me to defend them and I have no interest in doing so, as is my right. I do not owe you a defense and elaboration on the basis of you wanting me to. It doesn’t mean I can’t offer up some bibly thoughts about it, it means I don’t want to/don’t have the time/energy/inclination/ whatever.
And you berating me for not giving you an answer to a question, as if I owe you one by virtue of you asking- that vexes me too.
Buck Thornton wrote:
But you’re the same guy who was mocking me for being unmarried over at Spiritual Sounding Board blog about a month ago.
Bridget wrote:
Many churches do the opposite. I’m a childless, never married adult, but I am all the time reading about, or have gone to, churches where the churches won’t allow never married or divorced people to teach the singles classes. They insist that a married person leads classes for adult singles.
singleman wrote:
whats bizarre is that Jennifer LeClaire is the director of IHOP Ft Lauderdale. isn’t IHOP Fl the home of the dearly beloved Todd Bentley? Isnt IHOP everywhere noted for its cultish and abusive practices? (not the pancake house, they can do no wrong in my sight!)this is bizarre to me, the doctrine of being a prophet and fighting jezebel is the doctrine that IHOP is famous for and their doctrine and prophets are on the Elijah list! Cultish ministries calling out cultish ministers. what a world what a world! also makes me want to really really check myself daily for my own hypocrisy!
footnote of the article:
” Jennifer LeClaire is news editor of Charisma. She is also director of IHOP Fort Lauderdale and author of several books, including The Making of a Prophet and The Spiritual Warrior’s Guide to Defeating Jezebel.”
@singleman thank you for posting these updates, I really appreciate it because I keep coming into contact with people that attend or did attend mars hill here. I am also praying for the acts 29 church in this area I recently moved to though, the acts 29 decided to distance itself from mark driscoll but the local church here has spent years eating drinking sleeping mark driscoll doctrine. they had to go to boot camps, read all his literature to become a member of acts 29 network, they have to go for retraining all the time and while I understand that mark hasn’t had a front stage presence recently, as of a few months ago his books were still recommended as sound doctrine and almost required to become a member of acts 29. the church here is structured the same way, follows the same exact doctrine, style of leadership and does everything exactly like mars hill church. I don’t like to use such stong language but I think the acts 29 church network has already been filled with the poison of driscolls ministry and can distance themselves from a man, but until they distance themselves from the doctrine and structure it wont make any difference. from speaking to some from the seattle campus of mars hill that don’t attend there anymore, I have heard that not all acts 29 churches are this way, but have all had the requirement of ‘resurgance’, boot camps, etc. getting rid of driscoll but replacing him with chandler whose handling of women in abusive relationships is abhorrant, makes me hope that its not just a leapord painting their spots a slightly lighter shade and going on with business as usual.
O/T sharing this laugh that reminded me of Nick B. its robin Williams explaining the invention of golf in Scotland. I have to laugh sometimes when I see too much abuse in the world and even in churches so I don’t cry. if you don’t have facebook I think it can be googled to find where its posted other places. I never heard of the site before but someone shared this link to Williams talking, hilarious.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=566099650202238&fref=nf
@ sam h:
Can you steer me to some of Chandler’s handling of women in abusive situations? I googled but didn’t find. I know he is in the mysogynist camp though, so no surprise.
In the mean time, I came across thevillagechurch.net where he was pastor and read one of their attempts at making complementarianism palatable:
“The husband is called to serve and sacrifice for his wife as an expression of his love for her. At the same time, the wife is called to submit to and respect her husband as an expression of her love for him. In this way they complement each other. Though equal, they have distinct roles in their homes.”
This is how my intelligent brain comprehends that statement: Server and sacrificer are roles. Subordinate and respecter are roles. It doesn’t matter how equally human you are, husband gets the role of master. Wife gets the same role as the dog.
And:
“Although man and woman are equal, it is not true that there are no commanded role distinctions. Rather, the Scriptures teach that we each have proper roles in the home and church. It is our belief that confusion of these roles will result not only in a sinful application of the biblical text, but, consequently, the loss of joy in our pursuit of Christ.”
Really? I mean really? I suppose they could perceive a loss of joy in me because I feel slobber knocked by the very suggestion that I might lose my joy in Christ if I don’t believe in complementarianism and I’m angry at that manipulative tactic! In actuality my joy and contentment has increased with God since I’ve been sure that God encourages equal level roles for all humans.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
I mean, yeah. Pretty much. And if comp were really God-given, then you’re doing it wrong. But honestly, I’d rather you have a healthy marriage than an ideologically consistent one. Just think about what that means for the philosophy, especially given that there are other ways of interpreting the verses.
dustin germain (@paperhymn) wrote:
Dustin, you really have no idea what is going on here, do you?
I have tried to show you a few things, but you have decided to just get angry instead of thinking through the actual issues. You can grow and mature through interaction, which is what happens when people challenge you, or you can refuse to grow into maturity.
I have not said anything to you that ascribes evil intent to you. I think you are allowing yourself to be used in ways that are very harmful to the kingdom. I think you apply double standards, like asking for specific examples of where you have gone wrong in your edited post.
I have challenged you firmly on the belief held in your circle that women are created to be subordinate to men. Not that women yield their own rights, as all Christians ought to do, but that males are created to me in authority over females and females must obey them or be in rebellion against God’s authority.
If you want to be taken seriously, you must conduct yourself in a serious manner. If you want to be a sock puppet for older men who need an army to do their dirty work, then go ahead. Just don’t fool yourself that you are doing God’s work.
You cannot lob verbal grenades toward others and then demand that others respond to you in exactly the way you want. You cannot demand respect if you do not extend respect.
I think your comment about me ascribing evil intent is actually projection. There is no place where I have ascribed evil intent toward you. As I said, if you think my questions are too aggressive, then you need to get out into the real world and see how your thinking and production is examined and assessed. It is apparent that you do not live in that world of mature adults. I think you live in a world of young men who are passionate and older men you use your energy and passion. Don’t be used by any human.
This is an opportunity for all of your group, and young men like you who hold beliefs passionately but who have not really examined them to look at them closely like Bereans. It is an opportunity to show humility and a teachable spirit and to do a little soul-searching and repentance. That is the way of maturity. Or you can continue in your current thinking pattern and remain in immaturity.
You can continue to have double standards demanding of others what you are not prepared to do, or you can choose to do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Don’t attack other people when you are not prepared to be challenged strongly yourself.
Don’t look for problems outside your own circles while ignoring grave injustices and wrongs committed by those with whom you are like-minded. That is why I pressed you on comp. It is an effort to get you to stop and think about the glaring example of Biblical infidelity and injustice committed by men with whom you agree. That is where you can have the most positive influence.
This is an opportunity for you, and you should not let it pass.
Dustin
I am not going to be able to do much communicating until tomorrow. However, I need you to think about something. This is something I did before I started blogging. “Seek first to understand rather then to be understood.”
Sometimes that means holding back and really listening. You are young. There are many on this blog that have lifetime of experience and have reasons for what they say. Listen, really listen. Answer gently.
You have a “right” not to discuss something. But you come to a blog in which it is considered polite to answer people. You have a blog upon which you can pontificate to your hearts delight. Here is a place of dialogue.
I am approving this comment but I do not like how you are answering some people on this blog. Remember the Greatest Commandment and think “Is this the best way?” Please take it back a notch.
sam h wrote:
I’m not aware of any connection between IHOP and Todd Bentley, although I’m open to correction if one is found. I pointed out Jennifer LeClaire being the author of this article because of her position at Charisma. Read this TWW post from March to find out more:
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/03/21/the-mark-driscoll-implosion-janet-mefferd-the-enemy-and-world-down-syndrome-day/
Caitlin wrote:
Yep! Calling it Comp and practicing Egal. Bet there’s lots of Comps doing the same, all the while keeping the “ace-in-the-hole” in case they choose to use it.
Victorious wrote:
hmmm. where in “comp theory/theology” does it say that comps cannot/should not behave this way? or i guess another way of saying it- where would i find the imperative that comps are not to treat their wives this way?
@ Patti:
“Can you steer me to some of Chandler’s handling of women in abusive situations? I googled but didn’t find…”
we discussed it a little on this thread-
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/06/11/7-things-you-should-know-about-2014sbc/
Eagle UNITED STATES on Thu Jun 12, 2014 at 11:02 PM said:
“This was posted on the Repeal the Bylaws page on Facebook which is led by Rob Smith. You know what John Piper has taught about domestic abuse, and this response below is toward his video about a women enduring “being smacked”. So now that you know where John Piper stands on domestic abuse…do you want to know where Matt Chandler stands? READ….
I was agreeing with Piper until the smacking part…and I do agree with him about involving the church…however, the church should give her shelter from her husband and help her call the police. That type of thing should never be handled solely in-house. You could pretty much bet he WILL hit her again if he doesn’t go to jail the very first time he hits her.
“One of my best friends was being physically abused by her husband and he was spending over $8000 per month on hookers and gambling. Matt Chandler (Acts 29 President) told her she would be kicked out of the church if she divorced her husband… because his own mother was abused by Matt’s dad…and she took the abuse for many years. He (Matt’s dad) later became a Christian, and said it was because of Matt’s mother’s witness of love and kindness to him in his worst state). So glad that worked out for them…but really…who’s to say she wouldn’t have been killed? That kind of thinking and counselling is highly irresponsible and just insane.””
sam h says: I also saw this conversation on facebook on robs group discussing this. it seems in matts opinion that victims of d/v are supposed to only respond in love and kindness and win their husbands to Jesus through years of suffering. I would also add that a very good reason to separate from a misogynist spouse is so that the children don’t grow up with the same idealogy as the abuser, even if they don’t physically hit their spouse, the emotional blows are just as deadly.
about the matt chandler discussion on facebook. It was a conversation on a closed facebook page by ex members of mars hill church and I was really hoping that it would get more attention and discussion in an open arena. I have no reason to doubt the young womans account or the person that related it to that group, but if it went public outside of that group by the actual people involved it would give matt chandler a chance to respond, or not. in the piper video exchange I note that piper, to my knowledge, has made no attempt to change his opinions publicly so we just have to go on thinking, yep that’s what he believes, a woman should not call police or remover herself or the children from the home in the event of being assaulted by her husband, she should just take it until she can make an aoointment with an elder from her church and wait till they advise him to treat her better. that is why women die or stay in abusive marriages so often. that is why the world looks on perplexed, saying, “why didn’t she leave if it was so bad?” or ‘why did she go back to that man?’ ‘its her own fault’ my anger is that people that use the cloak of religion are actually often responsible for the victims suffereing in domestic violence. any rational person would indeed leave a situation where they were being assaulted, but like the radical muslim religions do, the ‘church’ makes it a point of the woman being out of God’s will, (therefore in danger of losing her very salvation) to not submit to their husband even if he beats her or the kids. it usually takes a divine intervention by Jesus to convince a woman that this is a lie and that this is not the cross that was ordained by God for them. Jesus didn’t submit to ungodly men and become their servants, He laid down His life only when it was God’s timing, God’s appointed cross, and God’s will. He actually told a man to let the dead bury the dead in a situation where a man was concerned with the care of his dad who said let me first go bury my father and then I will follow you. there are times when following Jesus means to stop doing things that the world says are our responsibility. We cannot serve people and Jesus, no man can serve two masters. but in following JEsus in the HOly Spirit, we do both in His leading and His will. It is also written, be not the servants of men. it is a mystery and hard to understand, but if a man or woman gives their lives to Jesus they then must stop following mans teachings, mans traditions, mans rules, and follow Jesus in every thing, thereby becoming a servant as Jesus was a servant. Submitting only when it is the will of the Father, even though sometimes the devil quotes true scriptures to tell us to do something that is true but outside of God’s will for us. “Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.Matt 4:5-6 (KJV)” that was a totally true scripture that the devil quoted, it is true that God would indeed do that, but the temptation was about who Jesus was going to obey though, the devil using the word or His heavenly Father who is the only one Jesus obeyed. When churches try to become the Lord over people it opens the door for the devil to use valid scriptures to cause people to do things outside of Gods will. this includes the submission of all those men in comp churches like driscolls to the unquestioned leadership of the elders. the men are not encouraged to pray and see what the Lord Jesus Christ would have them do, but to always run it by the leadership and get their orders from them, orders in everything, including how to treat their wives and what things they can do in church. done with rant lol
Many years ago in NM we attended a very Calvinistic, very fundamentalist, very comp church. A lady member told the church her husband was abusing her and the kids. The church moved her out, supported her and the kids, and paid for counseling for the family. When the shrink said it was safe, they help her move back although the church urged her not to do so. In a few months the husband again started smacking her. The church again moved her and the kids out and supported them until she could find a job. The husband was the subject of church discipline, lost his membership, and held “as” an unbeliever. That meant only God knew if he was saved or not, but he was not acting like it. He was sent packing.
She divorced him, never lost her membership, received great help, and all from a Calvinistic fundy comp SBC church.
On the other hand, I knew of the opposite happening to women in a local Wesleyan holiness connection church that was loudly egal.
Kinda shoots the theory it is a comp/Calvinist thing to shreds. Bad advice, or good, can flow from both camps it would seem.
@ singleman:
ihop Bentley and joyner all began together under bob jones, the main “Kansas city prophet”. they all talk the same, walk the same, talk to the same angels, fly to heaven whenever they feel like it, etc. I thought before Bentley got into so much trouble there was a lot more publicity of his relationship in ministry with ihop, but I could be mistaken. a lot of people including bickle distanced themselves from Bentley after he divorced his wife. the teachings at ihop are identical to the Bentley teachings.
some of that can be found here:
http://www.wordconnect.org/page_article8.php
snip:
Bob Jones is now the main Kansas City Prophet. He had the prophecy that led to IHOP being set up as well as the prayer behind Bentleys return to ministry. However both Jones and Bentley claim to go to the third heaven, at will, whenever they want, (view video). Bentley’s promoter, Rick Joyner, also claims to visit heaven often too. They also call upon the spirits of the dead to return to earth to minister to them. But is this not spiritualism? In the early 1990’s, Jones was forced to step down from public ministry after he admitted using his spiritual gifts to solicit sexual favours from women in his congregation. So why would God anoint them more than other Christians, and does this scriptures apply, Matt 7; 16 “You will know them by their fruits”?
Advancing Branham’s beliefs: Is Rick Joyner promoting Bentley because he advances the same strange spiritual beliefs as himself? Joyner, Bentley, Bob Jones, Paul Cain and Mike Bickle, (leader of IHOP and the Kansas City Prophets group), have all been greatly influenced by the ministry of William Brahman and his strange belief in being led by angels etc. “
@ dustin germain (@paperhymn):
I often make seeminly brash comments in reference to mark driscoll and his church mars hill, that is not because I go around making brash statements out of mere opinion about people. it is because I have spent so much time researching his ministry, listened to way too many of his sermons, read way too much of his books, talked to people that actually attended his church, prayed about him and his ministry and by my knowledge of the things he has said I do now make off hand statements based on all those things. I can make assumptions reasonably about what I think his doctrine is and what he believes because of all the research. I don’t know anything about you or your ministry or hall, but I am thinking that perhaps why some people on here are addressing you in the same kind of manner is because they have researched the ministry you are associated with and you, and read your comments, well we know now that everyone here has read your opinion of the posters of this blog and the hosts of this blog. if I came at you with very much insult and outright slander before I had ever even tried to converse with you online or in person, wouldn’t you expect yourself to react the same way as posters here have towards you?
on another topic, as you pointed out about the word crucify and its current dictionary definition I think that probably the word complementriary in regards to marriage is the same. it means one thing to one person, another thing to another person, one thing to a church, another thing to another church. Some reasons the word comp is such a point of contention is that the example of comp churches that have made that a part of their belief statement have used it to demean and abuse women. the same is true of the word ‘christian’ it was originally used in the bible to describe those apostles that followed Jesus. now it can mean anything from a person who has asked Jesus to be their savior at one time to someone that actually follows Jesus in Spirit and Truth. Acts 11:26, and John 8:31. also if you ask certain people nowdays the definition of Christian you might get a profanity laced definition tied to the word hypocrisy. It would be good in my opinion to drop all the labels and when we meet people just engage on the basis of what does Jesus mean to you and I and how do we treat others.
if I am aware of the gross misuse of the word complementarian by so many in the public eye, I personally wouldn’t call myself one just to avoid it being assumed that I agree with the illegal mistreatment of women such as them having to submit to spousal assault. just a thought.
also I was wondering if you ever considered that the prophetess anna spoke in the temple under the leading of the Holy Spirit, Jesus first command after being resurrected from the grave was to tell the women to instruct the men. John 20:17 and that Priscilla and Aquila ministered together. wishing you well in your ministry and walk with the Lord, sam h
Daisy wrote:
Yeah. The local SBC mega now requires that the SS teacher of singles be a married male, since the classes are co-ed. In practice that turns out to be any of the following: a married male who teaches alone while his wife is elsewhere in the church doing something else; a married couple who come to class together and which may team teach, or he may teach or she may teach as long as he is there and approving (supervising?) I don’t think this is in writing, just put into effect by the adult singles minister working as part of the pastoral staff. But, guess what. There is a single (divorced) male teaching one of the singles classes. Apparently gender is more important than marital status, though married status is the “official” position, with the divorced single man being the exception. There are no women only adult singles SS classes, co-ed is required, so there are no adult single women who are allowed to teach.
However, in the class my daughter was in prior to leaving for greener fields, there was one never-married woman psychologist who pretty much ran the show, tried to control everything and everybody, insisted that her own opinions not be successfully challenged, and who was asked by the pastor to speak to the entire congregation at one of the Sunday night services–about how to raise children of which she had none and with whom she did not work as a professional. This same woman, though she was allowed to speak to the entire congregation in an official service, was not eligible to actually teach the SS class because of her gender.
This same church was not like this some 10 years or so ago, but it sure is now.
My daughter thinks that she and her girl children are going to really “belong” with the episcopalians just fine for a number of reasons, one reason being that she won’t have to worry that her girls will be taught any such nonsense as that at church.
Re. the posts by linda and the one above by Nancy
I’d wager more often than not it’s going to be the opposite for both situations.
You’ll be able to find egalitarian churches here or there that give a divorcing/abused woman the shaft, but I’ve seen so many more anecdotes by abused/divorced women from complementarian/ fundamentalist/ Calvinist churches where they were mistreated.
You might on occasion be able to point to a childless or single woman permitted to lead or teach in a church, but more often than not, you can find 20 stories for each one of those of single, childless women (or men) who are given the shaft in favor of married people.
I read of a 50 year old preacher who had preached at his church for 20 or so years. The minute his wife died, his church demanded that he step down, since they did not want a single man being their preacher.
Those church members did not care that he had served them faithfully for 20 some odd years, all they cared about was his marital status, that trumped everything in their minds.
He asked if he could at least be the Sunday School teacher for the single adults class, and they said no to that; they would only consider married guys for that position.
That is a lot more common than this vice versa situation of a church that will do an exception once in a blue moon and permit a never married, childless woman speak or lead in some capacity.
Shafting and curbing adult singles is more common among various denominations than the other way around.
@ sam h:
Bob Jones is now the main Kansas City Prophet.
You might want to recheck your information. Bob Jones died in February.
I’m not but so familiar with IHOP. Julia Duin wrote about Mike Bickle and IHOP in her book, Quitting Church, which was published in 2008. I’ve also read some of Jennifer LeClaire’s material at Charisma’s web site. I really don’t feel like I know enough about them to form an opinion one way or the other. Again, my reference to Jennifer LeClaire in this instance has to do with her job as news editor for Charisma and not her role at IHOP.
After the suicides of Braxton Caner and film actor Robin Williams, I began noticing a lot of insensitive comments, some coming from Christians (and a few Non Christians).
I don’t know if Deb or Dee might be interested in revisiting the topic of mental illness at some point in a new post.
There’s still a lot of Christians who are under the impression that taking medication for psychological problems is wrong, that Christians can never have such problems to begin with, or that suicidal people are weak or in sin.
The proposed Christian remedies continue to be things like all depressed, suicidal people need are “Joy in the Lord” and some regular Bible reading to conquer it, and so forth.
Some Christians assume that if someone still had trouble with drug addiction or went through with suicide, this is evidence that the person was not saved, or never accepted Christ.
Here are a few examples of what I mean.
From the Christian Post, “Robin Williams ‘Considered Christ’ But He Was Never Set Free, Says Christian Media Critic“, which says,
“…Robin Williams had an interest in God and religion but he never experienced a genuine conversion or commitment to Christ, says Dr. Ted Baehr, chairman of the Christian Film and Television Commission and editor-in-chief of Movieguide .com.”
“I’m not sure he [Williams] came to Christ, I’m sure he considered Christ … because when you come to Christ, your life changes 180 degrees. I don’t think he had that explicit experience of being set free,” Baehr told The Christian Post.”
Rock singer Gene Simmons (of the rock band KISS) recently said (and later apologized for) these comments:
“And for a putz, 20-year-old kid to say, “I’m depressed, I live in Seattle.” F–k you, then kill yourself. I never understand, because I always call them on their bluff. I’m the guy who says “Jump!” when there’s a guy on top of a building …”
There is a Christian blogger named Matt Walsh who wrote a blog post headed, “Robin Williams didn’t die from a disease, he died from his choice,” which contained comments such as,
“…We are all meant to lead joyful lives, and the key to unlocking our joy isn’t hidden under a pile of money and accolades.
“… Second, we can debate medication dosages and psychotherapy treatments, but, in the end, joy is the only thing that defeats depression.”
~~~~~~~~~~
Should anyone here ever give a rebuttal to Walsh on any of that, you have to be careful and precise in doing so, because Walsh splits hairs and parses words.
Walsh seems to declare in his first post that suicide is a choice, but depression is not a choice.
Walsh became miffed in his response post or in some other post to his critics that nobody got that distinction. I got it when I re read his page, but I still found it insensitive and incorrect.
Walsh seems to feel that people just happen to choose to die by suicide without any prior reasons, or without any basis, as though depression plays no role in it at all for anyone.
IMHO, these are subjects worth revisiting every so often because these views can be harmful to people who are depressed or suicidal, and ill informed ideas about them continue to turn up in blogs or interviews with Christians (and some Non Christians).
You would think the Christian community would have developed some sympathy or sense after the suicide of preacher Rick Warren’s son in 2013, but I guess they didn’t learn anything. The old prejudices, stigma, and awful advice are still going strong.
sam h wrote:
Bear with me… a bit of a Nick Late-Night Novel coming up. (At least, it’s late in Scotland.)
I know almost nothing about IHOP other than that it exists. But, if I might say so, I followed the link out of curiosity and I didn’t find any of IHOP’s teachings there, nor Todd Bentley’s. Well, to be fair, one of the links did show a FaceTube clip of Todd Bentley, the late Bob Jones and Patricia King in a conversation. (The last of those three is another person the writer of the article felt led to warn of.) Another link was a grainy FaceTube clip of one of Bentley’s weird and noisy meetings, but no teaching. The other link I tried was to a blog that no longer exists, so I can’t comment on it.
In other words, the site contains a lot of claims about what Bentley and others teach. But little if any substantiation of those claims.
I did follow one of them up: the article claims that William Branham considered the Bible, the zodiac and Kufu’s pyramid to have equal authority. Indeed, it explicitly quotes him as saying this. But the quote is almost certainly not authentic. For one thing, its use of the past tense strongly suggests that it was said about Branham, not by him. More curiosity on my part: I know nothing about William Branham, although I’ve heard the name. So I did a few minutes’ research, which turned up several pages hostile to Branham which accused him of this, and one page sympathetic to Branham which quoted him extensively as denying that the zodiac or the pyramids were equal to scripture. (Attributed to a sermon in 1964, but no full transcript available that I could find.)
I found other specific causes for concern with the article. But it’s approaching 1 a.m. here in the UK, so I really need to summarise and go to bed. But in short, I am highly sceptical about http://www.wordconnect.org. They demonstrate a lack of accuracy or honesty, and those are the very first things I would expect to see from a ministry God has raised up to stand for truth against a culture of deception. The site hints that Branham et al was/are false prophets. For all I know, wordconnect may be correct there, but if so, they are “right” for the wrong reasons. Sites like that are themselves quite as unhealthy as their targets.
Dustin
And precisely where is comp theology defined so that I know what I can and cannot do?
dee wrote:
Yes, Dee, I hope Dustin gives us the list of thing we can do. My mom swears she’s a comp, and has worked in executive positions all her life and out-earned my dad for many years in the prime of their careers. I cannot imagine my dad telling my mother to do anything. I’ll be THAT kind of comp any day.
dee wrote:
I’m not Dustin, but, to comment on this anyway.
The funny thing is, it’s not even what a woman can or cannot do that gets discussed among complementarians (and yes, it’s poorly defined, one of the issues with their view), but it’s also how a woman does something.
I remember reading somewhere that John Piper said if a woman is standing road side and gives directions to a lost man who pulls up in a car, she must do so in a way that doesn’t make the guy feel less manly.
I don’t know what that means. I can only guess it might mean (to Piper) that a woman must flutter her eyelashes at the man, and blush and giggle a lot while giving the directions.
As in, “Oh gosh golly, tee hee, *blush blush*, turn left on Elm Street, then, tee hee hee hee, *flutter eye lashes* go a mile and a half and hang a right on Oak Lane, tee hee.”
If it’s woman- on- woman directions this would be acceptable:
“Yeah, you’ll want to turn left on Elm Street at the next intersection here, and hang a right on Oak Lane. On the corner of Oak, there’s a used car sales lot with a big, inflatable, purple gorilla on the roof, so keep your eyes peeled for that.”
@ Nick Bulbeck: There are most definitely reliable sources out there, tough it might take a while to separate the good ‘uns from the bad. Google will get you there.
Since this has come up before (within the past month, no?), I think it’s only fair play to see what some of us have been talking about. Be forewarned: it’s pretty crazy stuff. (And, as sam h. said, it does begin a few decades back, with the so-called Kansas City “prophets.”)
IHOP is part of a broader strangeness that is (wait for it!) the New Apostolic Reformation, but even though I don’t think there’s ever been any association between IHOP and C. Peter Wagner (of “Operation Ice Castle” infamy – the “we killed Mother Teresa with our prayers” crew), they’re all equally nutty. Herein lies the rub: this stuff is taken pretty seriously by many US office-holders, very much including Texas governor Rick Perry. He had a big NAR prayer rally before the last presidential election, when he was trying to run as the Republican nominee.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
thanks for the heads up nick. I will take that one off my list.
there are like numo states, numerous more sites and I cant find my favorite one that tracks the whole Kansas City prophets movement, but I’ll keep digging.
here is one I think is pretty accurate:
http://www.banner.org.uk/kcp/kcp-roots.html
but again I don’t know how wonderful this org is either!
@singleman, thanks, that was the quote of the article, and I should say this is a different bob jones than is often talked about here on twbw isn’t it?
@ Nick Bulbeck:
here is a link that ties a lot of people together under doctrine, calling it the NAR. ihop and Bentley are always in it no matter who is writing their concerns. I understand the problem with ‘watchmen’ and also that a lot of people throw out any spiritual gifts as part of a false ministry, but I think the numerous concerns are valid in regards to the NAR. also the Toronto blessing was said to have three rivers here that were prophesied to join, Toronto, one in KC, one in Redding Ca. namely bickle kc or Bentley FL and Johnson, CA. the doctrine has been extensively examined out of the mouths and quotes and books of the self appointed ‘prophets, apostles’ of the NAR. a good 3 part video on this is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBpw2oQrvMM which is made by a Spirit filled gentleman that believes in the gifts of the Spirit named Andrew strom. Also Derek Prince had a lot to say about false outpourings of the Holy Spirit and I think he had better discernment than a lot here in the US because we have never seen many outward manifestations by people with kundalini spirits or animal spirits as had Derek being well traveled and from the UK. Also there is a difference between drunken manifestations and being filled with joy by the Holy Spirit. If one is filled with the HOly Spirit, they are still able to have coherent conversations even though it might be hard to stop grinning, in my opinion. and when I got filled with the Holy Spirit, I became very sober, and full of joy. I became sober from the drugs and alcohol I had been ingesting an hour before… I think because of knowing both experiences I understand the fine line that Derek and Andrew are talking about but still have difficulty articulating it. after reading a lot of the work Derek prince did ‘piercing the darkness’ I decided to watch whenever possible people that were claiming Holy Spirit baptisms and found that a lot of them immidietly after ‘receiving’ never glorified Jesus or God or had fruit in their personal lives that reflected holiness.
@ sam h: Sam, with respect, I believe Derek Prince meant well but had a very messed-up take on many things. I can say this partly because I once attended a church that had very close ties to him plus other members of the Ft. Lauderdale Five.
Appearing to be an authority isn’t the same as actually being one, and Prince and Co. were immediate precursors of the NAR.
Dustin Germain wrote:
Hi Dustin,
I’m back from my trip. Let me try to clarify some things. So-called complementarianism is a novel theology created in the 1970’s and brought to market in the mid-late 80’s by a bunch of folks, male and female, who were ostensibly concerned about the family disintegration in society. So far, so good. Who’s not in favor of having strong families?
The problem is that these folks were and are really talking about patriarchy, which some will frankly admit. The reason I am so adamant about this issue is that I trusted people, Christian leaders, who used the word “complementary” to actually mean “complementary.” But they were being intentionally deceptive, because there is nothing hierarchical in the notion of two things being complementary. But CBMW doesn’t really mean complementary. They really mean hierarchy (patriarchy) which is “authority over” and “under authority” where the one who is the “authority over” is always male, and the one who is “under authority” is always female. There is nothing about this that indicates equality of dignity, value, and worth.
That is the essence of complementarianism: males rule, females drool.
Of course, that does not sound very churchy and bibley, and doesn’t sell nearly as well as “being a servant leader,” “leading by serving” and “laying down your life for your wife” and all those cliches they spout to make it sound so Christ-like when they actually mean that a man needs to exercise authority over the woman because God has ordained it. That is why the idea of mutual and reciprocal submission is anathema to them and why they act as if Ephesians begins at 5:22 with a command for wives to submit, although that imperative is nowhere in the text. It is inconceivable that a man could or should submit to a woman, so therefore, they change the text to fit their doctrine.
It is not about who does the dishes and who mows the yard. Those are distractions to keep you from thinking about what is really being taught. It is setting up a power struggle between the sexes. In short, it is an example of Genesis 3:16 in action. It is teaching men that women are always looking for ways to usurp or undermine their husband’s authority. The anti-male radical feminists indoctrinate their idealogues with the idea that men are always trying to take advantage of and dominate women. Thus, comp and radical feminism are really two sides of the same demonic coin. This is deadly to one-flesh union and is a devious trick of the enemy.
They are not telling the truth, and they are using you and a lot of young, well-intentioned people to sell their product. What is the product they are selling? They’re selling the Calvinist version of “Your Best Life Now.” If you want a great family and want to please God, come to our conferences and buy our books and you will have a great family! Formula guaranteed to work, but your money will not be cheerfully refunded if you or your wife is dissatisfied.
That is why all of your description of how you and your wife work things out is utterly beside the point. You are being used to promote something that is not biblical, and is in fact anti-biblical because it adds to God’s word. And that is why I was so insistent that you take a good long look at Genesis 1:26-28 and think about where God revoked or modified that. It’s not in the Greek text. It’s only in the imagination of some master marketers. Don’t be used. Be wise and search the scripture.
sam h wrote:
Yeah, this is the part I don’t get. Shouldn’t a Christion hedonist like Piper be asking somebody to smack him around for the Glory of God if allowing yourself to be smacked around glorifies God? No, something tells me his buddies would call the police if somebody helped him Glorify God like this.
dee wrote:
You can do whatever your husband or elder allows you to do. You cannot do anything your husband or elders do not allow you to do. You must do whatever they order you to do unless it breaks God’s laws other than the non-existent law of male authority, and you must not do anything they tell you not to do.
That is my current understanding of the state of the doctrine. Hope that helps. 🙂
sam h wrote:
And this is how a speculative interpretation of an individual situation is transformed into a universal and ironclad principle.
Gram3 wrote:
I’m gonna disagree with Gram3 here juuuust a wee bit. Because I think your description of your actual marriage is precisely the point. Because you are behaving egalitarian in practice, that’s what the dynamic you describe is. Your wife has authority to correct you and to do what she thinks is best. Sure, you talk about it, but push comes to shove, she’s not asking you to get your permission. And the fact that you call yourself comp but live egal is crucial to understanding why so many people here get all up in arms about the distinction.
See that’s really crucial, because that means when you say “comp works” or “comp is healthy” you aren’t actually talking about comp. *Your* marriage is healthy, but your wife feels comfortable confronting you if you need it, feels comfortable taking charge on things and not just in her limited realm but anything where she has experience or knowledge. Your marriage is healthy but it isn’t comp. Because there *are* marriages out there where the wife *does* have to ask for permission, and those marriages are falling in line with what comp is teaching. The system relies on the idea that men have authority because they are men, especially in marriage (though many try to apply it to all women submitting to all men, which is absurd). In a comp marriage, your wife is not your partner equally able to do what you can do (leaving out the idea of splitting up tasks- nothing non-egal about having realms of influence- it’s practically a necessity). In a comp marriage, she’s a subordinate. In a comp marriage, she has to ask permission to do things your wife does on her own authority now.
Something tells me a lot of the healthy marriages who claim to be comp work in practice like yours. And maybe you think this is semantic hair-splitting. But, and this is where I pick back up with Gram3, it’s crucial semantics because the same language is being used to justify households where the wife has to ask permission before she can get a haircut. The same language is being used to justify forcing women to stay with their husbands who beat them or abuse their children or are otherwise ungodly. And everyone going around saying “Hey, I’m comp!” but actually living a more egal life-style (because it, sociological evidence supported here, leads to happier, healthier marriages) are whitewashing. So you’re the bait and switch. I doubt very seriously that you are doing it intentionally, but those guys selling the books and seminars are so glad that you’re advertising for them.
Patrice wrote:
Precisely.
Words have meaning. Dustin seems to forget that.
sam h wrote:
Sam, thank you so much for saying this so very well! I really do believe that throwing about the word “crucify” as Dustin did (& then trying to justify it by referring us all to his favorite dictionary)is one of those things that we who name the Name of Christ need to be especially careful about.
A nonbeliever may be permitted such things; for one who is saved by what Jesus Christ accomplished on the Cross of Calvary, there needs to be a higher standard. I take this post of yours to heart for myslef, too. I hope I may be more aware of my own misuse of language.
Bless you.
dee wrote:
Sounds like your bitter tm. Your violating the 11th commandment “Thou shalt not be bitter”. Examine youself to see if your in the faith. 🙁
Seriously, as an ex-comp of sorts, comp theology allows women to do anything at all– except hold the biblically mandated gospel office of Senior Pastor. (see II Barnabas 13:17 (obey your Senior Pastor) for the biblical mandate). Everything else is negotiable. Of course, most churches give lip service to Jesus being the Senior Pastor. Since he’s a man, and not retiring any time soon, that’s why a woman can’t hold that office.
Dustin Germain wrote:
By some complementarians.
Some Comps are upset that other comps are comps in name only but have egalitarian marriages.
Such as,
Russel Moore: “I hate the term ‘complementarian’…”
http://baylyblog.com/blog/2008/05/russel-moore-i-hate-term-complementarian
Russell Moore:
“I hate ….the word ‘complementarian’, I prefer the word ‘patriarchy’…
Because complemnetarianism doesn’t say much more than the fact that you have different roles. Everyone agrees that we have different roles, it just a question of on what basis you have different roles? So an egalitarian would say, “Yeah, I’m a complementarian too, it’s on the basis of gifts.”
I think we need to say instead, “No you have headship that’s the key issue. It’s patriarchy, it’s a headship that reflects the headship, the fatherhood of God, and this is what it looks like, you then have to define what headship looks like…
————–
I hope everyone saw my post above about the ongoing need for Christians to speak out so often about depression and suicide, to correct some of the wrong things being taught about both.
Gram3 ” The anti-male radical feminists indoctrinate their idealogues with the idea that men are always trying to take advantage of and dominate women.”
Where can I find proof from the horse’s mouth on this? I’m not sure I’ve met any anti-male radical feminists.
Thankyou sam h for answering the Matt Chandlerquestion, I forgot about TWW comments on it.
@ linda:
I have never heard of that kind of abusive counsel from complete egals. Are you sure that that Wesleyen church was egal in marriage? I ask because there are even church denominations listed in the directory at cbeinternational.org as being egal but I that one, mine, the AOG is only egal in ministry. I would really like to see something documented from egals who don’t believe that divorce or leaving is an option. I want to make sure they do not get recommended in my egal world.
I am asking for back up on commenter’s statements because I do not like to repeat stuff second hand when I’m talking to people about what I learn here. So, on that note, has anyone seen any documentation to substantiate the rumor that MD’s salary is 900k? Everything else I say about him I’ve taken from his own material. This bit I found myself saying it’s been rumored, and it don’t like doing that.
Caitlin wrote:
That is an important point. The Big Names talk about functional differences, but that is a distraction from what they are really saying: women are *created to be* followers and males are *created to be* leaders. That is not language referring to differing functions which might change with differing circumstances. What the Big Names are really advocating is distinctions in *being* which they try to hide with language of equal in dignity, value, and worth. They need to be honest about what they are really advocating.
Patti wrote:
Gender theory is not my area of interest or study, so you can help me out here. I was thinking of an attitude in the 60s that the problem with societies are due to males being the ones holding the power. My thinking about this was formed in the context of the second wave, and more particularly in the era of the Vietnam war and the War on Poverty when I engaged with some women who believed that we would not have been in a war if a woman were president because women care more about people than politics. We would not have poverty if a woman were president because women are more compassionate, etc. I disagreed because I didn’t see gender as relevant (ed.) to the challenges our society was facing. What I did agree with is that the voices of gender in the discussions surrounding these challenges were silenced or absent for whatever reason.
As a Christian and one who believes that males and females are more similar than different *as humans* I believe that problems in society are not due to which gender is in power but the fact that whoever holds power is tempted to abuse it. Therefore, merely putting females in power where males have exercised power will not cure the fundamental problem: we are sinners.
IOW I see the problem being human sinfulness and not human gender. I believe that adding female voices would improve many institutions, but that is not, I believe, because the voices are female so much as it is that half of humanity’s perspective has been blocked in those institutions that silence women.
I do not know the current state of that discussion. Do you have some information that would broaden or focus my understanding? I was attempting to highlight the difference between lifting women up to a position of real equality (pro-female) vs. deposing men (anti-male.) Does that make sense from your perspective?
Patti wrote:
You are right. Thank you for saying this.
I think that only when someone has actually seen the harm, the pain, the utter destruction dealt out by those with NPD, & other personality disorders, that only then can they speak to this subject. Sharing your own experiences is so helpful in making others see the truth about these folks.
Patti wrote:
Sorry I cannot give you any links to all examples I’ve seen over the years, but I’ve bumped into them. They sometimes have entire sites or leave comments on blogs.
There used to be a site with the word “b*tches” in the title, where they not only ran men down, but they hated women who were dependent on men.
I’ve also seen secular feminists on sites leave comments saying that women who have college degrees but who choose to stay at home and raise a kid are “wasting” their degrees.
I’ve seen feminists argue that consensual marital sex is still rape. (This was years ago, reported on in the papers, maybe as far back as the 1980s, I think by some college professor or author.)
Secular left wing feminists do not like conservative/ right wing/ Republican women, or pro life women in general. They will take pot shots at right wing women frequently.
There’s far out there stuff such as,
Feminist journalist: Standing outside a window with a boombox is rape culture
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2014/08/15/feminist-journalist-standing-outside-a-window-with-a-boombox-is-rape-culture/
@ Gram3:
This is an important point. I think this is probably as good a time as any to make an observation from linda’s comment above:
What this actually describes, to my mind, is a church dominated by a small minority of controlling, but unaccountable, de facto leaders, who escape accountability by the cleverly un-Fiscal-like expedient of not officially having any authority. In other words, it’s the photographic negative of Mars Hill – but every bit as bad.
In practice, I seriously doubt whether “the women” means “all of the women”, a broad and thoughtful ecclesia free of any personal agendas. The last congregation Lesley and I were part of was in practice run, not by “the women”, but by a small handful of women. And woe betide anyone, male or female, who ran afoul of them.
When a localised congregation has a “shadow government”, it is by no means always predominantly female. But whatever its gender mix, it can certainly be very cruel and abusive. I heard a lecture many years ago by the leader of a large UK church in which he described his own first experience of a church business meeting, back when he was a new Christian. In it, the pastor and his wife – also newly arrived in the church – were chewed up and spat out by the dominant cabal of old-timers.
The then-new Christian was so appalled that he vowed (as he told us) never to be a part of any such thing, and to attack it at every opportunity. He went on, from what I have heard, to develop several authoritarian traits in his own leadership – perhaps out of fear. I often wonder to what extent the rise of authoritarian pastors came about in reaction to – or revolution against – a culture of authoritarian members.
Wow–Nick, you set yourself up as judge and jury of a whole group of people you have never met, in a place I’ll lay odds you never were, and decide they were evil beings because they did things differently than you would do them.
Seems to me that is the very definition of abusive behavior, exactly what TWW says it was started to battle.
But of course, and it pains me to say this, TWW, and its comment stream, has become a bad girls/bullies haven.
Daisy wrote:
This idea goes way back. In my mother’s era there was the idea (very common idea I think) that it was trowing your money away to send your girls to school (college) because they would just get married and waste their education. Only it was not the feminists who were saying it.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
Did you read Nick’s entire comment? He’s mainly explaining what happened in a congregation that he and his wife were in. Is it possible you misunderstood what was being said?
The comment stream is not a bad girl bully stream . . .
@ Bridget:
This was actually for @ linda.
@ linda:
Not sure what comment you read…? The one I read was telling how this situation reminded Nick of one he encountered…and then he described the one he encountered. Not sure how that is judging people he didn’t know…and you are calling your fellow commenters “bad girls” and “bullies?” I don’t think we read the same comments…..
linda wrote:
I think you misread Nick’s comment. At any rate, you finished your comment doing exactly what you said Nick did with his. How would you know that any/all of the commenters here are bad girls or bullies. Bullies of all kinds should be exposed for what they are. You might benefit from others’ experiences if you would listen to them and think about what they are saying.
Could you give us an example of bullying here so that we can understand your objection to TWW?
Nancy wrote:
On the sites I am talking about (including the one I mentioned above), it was feminists – with left wing views. I’m right wing, so I normally just lurk at those sites, I don’t post.
Dave A A wrote:
You are making my case for me. There is so much money, too many conferences, interminable sermons, books, audios and, of course, Piper pronouncements on the matter. Yet the only thing they will all cop to is pastor and elder. Frankly, it is a waste of lung aeration if that is what it is all about.
linda wrote:
Did it really pain you to say it or did you say it with a sardonic grin?
rob wrote:
OK. I have re-read this a couple of times. I *guess* you are saying that I shouldn’t have agreed w/Gram3 when she said something other than what you may (or may not) have thought I was agreeing with.
I agreed with her that you were being passive-aggressive. I did this because you were being passive-aggressive. (You still are, & it annoys the very dickens out of me…..)
I don’t agree with every word that she, or anyone else here (or elsewhere) says. (Some I agree with more than others….). You, like everybody, will simply have to put up with me. (Except the Deebs, in whose intellectual drawing room we are, as it were, seated when we post here.)
zooey111 wrote:
Maybe it’s just me, but this is a feature and not a bug. Growth, whether physical, emotional or spiritual, does not occur in the absence of challenge. If I only listen to those who agree with me or who share my life experiences, how can I possibly learn anything new? Certainty may be more comfortable, but I think it is overvalued.
Gram3 wrote:
My keyboard mistyped. The last sentence should have said “relevant” rather than “irrelevant.” And I have no idea what my keyboard meant by “the gender” which should have been “gender.”
Patti, maybe Kate Millett would be a good place to start looking for actual quotes. Sometimes it is hard to trace lines of thinking to individual persons or quotes, though the quotes may illustrate the thinking.
Gram3 wrote:
Fixed these typos for you. 🙂
Deb wrote:
I studied DeMoss’ book Lies Women Believe and the Truth That Sets Them Free with a group of women from my church. The women in charge of my group said that they more they studied the book, the more impatient they got with her. The person who had selected the book wasn’t aware, at the time she selected it, that DeMoss wasn’t married and didn’t have kids.
Gram3 wrote:
Good catch Gram3, seeing that the simpler solution in plain sight is a better fit to the grid of data than the preconceived notion of gender alone. Ideologues (of any stripe) and their devotees care nothing for reason unless she can suit them as whore. Reason answers to no one and toes no line but her own.
dee wrote:
But it does help them sell more books!
linda wrote:
Folks, I think the only way of making sense of Linda here is either:
a). She skimmed Nick’s comment without much understanding and went off half-cocked against him, like Gram3 and Bridget hypothesize,
or
b). She wanted to get off her cheap shot “bully girl” comment at TWW and used Nick’s commentary as a springboard.
One of those two must be correct, otherwise, we’re left with utter incoherence, because her “judge and jury” diatribe have little or no relationship to anything Nick said. Then again, presuming she’s an apologist for the JD Hall crowd, utter incoherence might be expected.
Law Prof wrote:
What I was trying to highlight was her utter lack of self-awareness which leads to hypocritical accusations that exactly describe her own critical comment. Pretty much what we saw here from Dustin.
Mature individuals do this, of course, but they also value the perspectives of others which offers some correction to their own view. Those who are not yet mature or who are insecure in their beliefs do not value other perspectives. They feel threatening.
She views the comments here as threatening to her beliefs or tribe. However, the only way to gain maturity is to make lots of mistakes and have an environment that fosters recognizing and learning from those mistakes. The real world does this, but bubble-wrapped environments do not. Reality testing is our friend.
Gram3 wrote:
And this would seem to be exactly what a truly Biblical environment would entail: iron sharpening iron, all parts of the Body of Christ receiving equal dignity, leaders being servant/slave-only, and openness to a divergence of views on non-essentials given that we all “see through a glass darkly”.
This is, of course, exactly the opposite of the world that Hall, Mahaney, Driscoll, and, perhaps Linda, inhabit.
Law Prof wrote:
Life has a way of showing one that any doctrinal certainty one has is actually less certain than would make us comfortable. But certainty sells well, and being “right” feels good, and being around people who agree with us makes us feel superior to the unenlightened. However, as you said, we only see through a glass darkly, and that applies to the “leaders” as well. Maybe the Lord is more concerned with how we live toward one another than how perfectly out doctrine is thought out. Just thinking out loud…
Dave A A wrote:
Nor, of course, can any other man… this message is not universally understood. Though it’s always worth remembering – indeed, celebrating – the fact that there are exceptions, in the form of localised congregations where those in shepherding roles have never forgotten that (before Jesus himself) they, too, are sheep. And that the rules are different for them only insofar as they are responsible for conspicuously following them so that they can lead by example.
Gram3 wrote:
… and just intruding into your interesting reverie… I’m inclined to believe that the Holy Spirit deliberately cultivates differences of doctrinal interpretation among believers. Because the end goal of every other commandment is love; and if we only love those alongside whom we effortlessly fit, what has that accomplished? Any sinner can do that.
@ Gram3:
Don’t know a great deal about where Linda’s coming from, but more generally, I think Wikipedia have developed a very good rule of thumb for editorial discussions, which Mr Wales might have borrowed from 1 Corinthians 13. They even have chapter and verse for it! The rule designation is WP: AGF, or Assume Good Faith (wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AGF is quite short and well worth a read for those interested).
A point made on the Wiki page is that “assuming good faith” actually means two things:
Do not be quick to take offence at others’ comments to you;
Do not be quick to assume others are taking offence at your comments
There’s actually a second rule, WP:AAGF, which states “assume the assumption of good faith”! To quote the article:
For a whole raft of reasons (which themselves make a fascinating psychological study), there are many contexts in which telling someone to “calm down” or that “there’s no need to get angry” is itself a highly aggressive and inflammatory move. Stated in english, it’s very hard to remain calm in the face of someone persistently telling you to stop being angry.
Gram3 wrote:
I’m several days late with this reply, because you made this comment ages ago, but I think this is probably the most succinct and accurate summary I’ve yet seen on the “entrepreneur-driven church” phenomenon.
Gram3 wrote:
This is so true.
Gram3 wrote:
Yes, especially because we can be nigh certain none of us have perfect doctrine, understanding, anything. As if the majesty of the Creator of the Cosmos could be fully apprehended when filtered through our pathetic human languages. Absurd conceit. I (and most Christians I know, the real ones, the ones with a bare minimum of humility, not the frauds and phonies and pharisees and petty tyrants whom the Lord will one day humble) know we’re worshiping something a lot bigger than our inefficient minds and doctrines. These people who think the Bible is the Fourth member of the Trinity and that the Lord can be understood and apprehended by putting verses together like some great jigsaw puzzle are only toying with the vague idea of a God.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Absolutely.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Absolutely.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
This reminds me of a recent situation. A certain professorial colleague and spouse very aggressively encouraged the spouse and me to join their church (a heavy shepherding cult along Elevation/Furtick lines). After indicating in so many polite words (truly polite, really, we were actually nice) that we were not interested, they started attacking us and our character, after being shushed and shouted down for about 20 minutes, we finally decided “enough” and started holding our grounds and told them they were taking “spiritual poison” at their church. Their response? Not more of their shouting down and aggressiveness, they totally backed off and used a new strategy: “Oh, we’re praying for you! Praying for you! Praying for you!” Over and over. It was maddening, I wanted to throttle them.
Pingback: What Hamas and Ergun Caner Have In Common? | Do Right Christians
Still catching back up and I promise this will be my last reply to an old post. Two things come to mind: as my deceased and much-lamented mother used to say, “Sorry don’t feed the bulldog.” You can say you’re sorry until the cows come home, but that does pretty much bupkis. Makes the person saying, “sorry” feel a little better, possibly, but does little for the victim(s).
Secondly and somewhat apropos of the first point, if he was the proximate cause in some way of a young man’s death, I *don’t* forgive him. Hall’s an adult–he’s the one that’s supposed to have experience and the ability to take the high road on his side. He attacked a young man in writing – and Hall, dude? If you know so little about social media that you say things like, “Wellllll….I didn’t actually “contact” him, I just put his Twitter address in a tweet which, of course, means it posts to his time-line, but I totes didn’t “contact” him”, stay the *expletive deleted* off of social media. He attacked one family member to another. He offered to talk to him “off the record” (i.e. via private message) so the son could learn the “truth” about his father. You honestly expected that not to raise the hackles on pretty much any kids’ back? Really? I can forgive an awful lot, but killing someone, seriously hurting someone, and/or being stupid are pretty high on my list of unforgivable offenses.
Pingback: Fifty Six Days | Do Right Christians