Dee and Wanda,

Both wings of the SBC – Calvinism and Fundamentalism – battle with the sin of authoritarianism.

I think Ken Hemphill may be the the winner through all this imbriglio. Why? He was very sympathetic to Sheri Klouda and Karen Bullock and other women in ministry during his tenure at SWBTS.

You raise good questions about the anonymous letter.

My sense is Hemphill may end up being helped more by it than J.D. The people with whom you visited on the phone today may have motives too.

One’s person’s motive is deemed another person’s madness!

I’m just grateful authoritarianism is having to get into the back seat for a season. There’s still many innings until the game is over.

“‘Not recommending divorce does not mean approval of abuse,’ she revealed.”

Interesting. It DOES means staying in an abusive relationship minimally even if not actively or directly being abused.

I also am highly suspicious of this supposed woman who was the source of the black eyes story. I heard basically this same story many decades ago, and I am not a Southern Baptist. This is one of those stories pastors share, or pick up in pastors’ magazines. I’m sorry, but I seriously doubt there is such a woman.

truthseeker00 wrote:

I’m sorry, but I seriously doubt there is such a woman.

Even if the story was a falsified sermon illustration, IMHO, it doesn’t really matter because it’s still damaging to women: Patterson was using it to teach women they should stay in abusive marriages and put up with being hit.

If we learned from the investigative reporting in *All the President’s Men* to “Follow the money,” we learned from *Spotlight* to expand that maxim to “Follow the power and protection.” Seems to me, that’s part of how this all shifts from individuals to systems …

Control over the institutions of this largest Protestant denomination/convention in the U.S. potentially means access to all three: money, power, and protection. There is always much at stake with this organization, and the potential for damage is huge … as those in and around the SBC world observed (or experienced) with the Conservative Resurgence.

I appreciate that you’re stepping back a bit to observe and analyze, Dee and Deb, and withholding/adjusting interpretation in light of some sketchy stuff that raises legitimate questions. Important to go where the evidence leads, but also to interpret where there are gaps and excesses, red flags and red herrings …

Anyway, this is an important point for the SBC to potentially go into informed action and clean house — not simply do yet another resolution, this time about abuse/violence.

“Calvinists versus Non-Calvinists in a fight for the SBC is a possible motive to help you assess this matter.”

I suspect this is a big part of it. PP’s article here is intetesting: https://theologicalmatters.com/2016/12/02/concerning-remarks-on-calvinism-in-chapel-at-southwestern/

“Evangelical Women Are Condemning A Southern Baptist Leader’s ‘Sinful’ Remarks”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/evangelical-women-paige-patterson-petition_us_5af08114e4b041fd2d293d87

Wade Burleson wrote:

I’m just grateful authoritarianism is having to get into the back seat for a season.

Agreed but “season”? Did you really have to use that word?

truthseeker00 wrote:

And we do need to take these guys on about divorce. Forcing someone to remain in a marriage, even if ‘allowed’ to seek protection from an emotionally, physically or any other way abusive spouse is abusive. I will say it again – marriage, like any other contract, is conditional. The minute one party breaks their promises, the contract is null and void. Simply because the Institutional Church has been distorting and misinterpreting scripture on the issue of divorce for literally centuries does not mean we cannot call them out on the complete idiocy of their interpretation.
God is a divorcee. Why? Because it is abuse and injustice that God hates, and that is what Jesus was saying. A proper translation would read that ‘God hates ‘putting away”, which the Pharisees were doing unlawfully, casting off faithful spouses without giving them the proper legal papers of divorcement that would preserve their integrity and allow them to officially remarry. By ‘putting away’ a woman improperly, these men were condemning her to slander and a life of loneliness. This is much the same as today’s Church on divorce. Falsely sentencing men and women to ‘marriage without bail’ for life, people have been compelled to live lives of misery and despair.
It is time we took this on, and outed the lies once and for all!

I am so glad you shared this in a concise manner. It took me years to understand it because of my own conditioning. It’s time that this message gets out. Churches are twisting and using Scripture to further abuse. Thank you, Truthseeker00

Daisy wrote:

truthseeker00 wrote:

I’m sorry, but I seriously doubt there is such a woman.

Even if the story was a falsified sermon illustration, IMHO, it doesn’t really matter because it’s still damaging to women: Patterson was using it to teach women they should stay in abusive marriages and put up with being hit.

I agree to an extent! Whether true or not, the story serves to illustrate PP’s views. However, if not true then it also illustrates that he is perfectly comfortable with being dishonest in the pulpit. And if dishonest in the pulpit then we can be sure that he will be dishonest out of it too.

The letter is at http://swbtsletter.com

Interestingly, whoever wrote it has some technical knowledge.

A look at WHOIS shows they used Domain Protection Services – so the purchaser/owner/letter writer can’t be traced.

The url was registered May 5, 2018 and expires next year.

Signing a website letter without sufficient information such as who/what doesn’t seem wise.

Bene D,

Are you suggesting that this wasn’t authored by, “Women of the SBC” but rather men using women as pawns for power motives? If so, that is a new low. The SBC women as the straw man? The affirming of subordination certainly makes it suspect.

The list also seems to me a target… Or in the words of Mark Dever “an easy target for church discipline.” Here’s Patterson and Dever scheming together about “easy targets.” They’re practically giddish about it… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=22IfJ3OzRbY Dangerous and Scheming characters – both of them. When the dust settles the 9marks crickets will come out with a 1, 2, 3 get ‘em plan for church pastors for every unsuspecting soul all while they gleefully go ringing their hands together and saying, “Aaaaah, the plan worked perfectly!“

I think Jesus talked about a greater condemnation for people like this. And I think the word Mill Stone came into play.

Who’s scheming whom at this point?! I am but one foot out of the SBC kingdom.

Rachael Denhollander signed the petition sans church identification. (Use the Find feature to locate by name or state.)

___

A brutal cultural war has progressively entered the American Church for some time now. The stakes are high. If kind folk were to bring up the individual issues, and discussed them,IMHO, they would be banned from future posting comments here at Wartburg Watch.This culture war has become that bad. ( In a particularly personal interesting situation —all my comments here have already been placed in a temporary holding pattern, and that for about four years now…) Aparrently, Wartburg Watch is not the place to entertain practical viable solutions to the overall problems the Church is facing today. TBD.

ATB

Sòpy

🙁

– –

Deb,

Good! I was scrolling through KY signees interested in seeing which churches were most represented. Rachael surprised me since she seems so keyed in to the politics.

The “lived prophecy” of Hosea’s pursuit of adulterous Gomer is an image of YHWH’s relentless pursuit of His people. It’s a head-scratcher to see this used as prescriptive rule in marriage counseling.

But if you are going to get your theology of marriage out of Old Testament narratives, replete as they are with ancient cultural practices, what do you do with the polygyny of heroes of faith like Abraham and David? Adultery is a capital offense under the Mosaic covenant, but we never see this charge brought against Israelite polygynists.

No question there is a Cal/anti-Cal war on…the anti-Cals have declared intent to elect likeminded folks year-after-year-after-year. If this is some strategem to assist JDG it is monumentally stupid. Besides, lots of non-Cals, including the current president have expressed support for Greear.

I don’t think the lady from OK is old enough to be the one PP was speaking of, 1964 or so.

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after controversy and acrimony, because in the SBC they will surely be satisfied.” – Actual SBC Beatitude

Augustine: Or in the words of Mark Dever “an easy target for church discipline.” Here’s Patterson and Dever scheming together about “easy targets.” They’re practically giddish about it…

It’s the 3d guy in the video, Matt Schmucker, who recommended churches 1st “discipline” the very lowest hanging fruit– that which is 6 feet under! “This outer-most ring should be the easiest to clean up. At you church’s next meeting for conducting business, put these names before the congregation with a motion to remove them from membership in the following meeting. Don’t ask the congregation to immediately remove these names, but give them time to think about the motion.”
The church secretary can’t simply remove dead folks’ names– pewsitters have to vote on it after having time to think about it!

I’m so glad to see this post. I am deeply cynical about this media “outrage” against Patterson. I think he’s disgusting, but no more so now than 5 or 10 or 15 years ago. His comments have been well known for a very long time. If the motivation if to shame or reject leaders with horrible, damaging words to Christian women, why not include John Piper? Doug Wilson (although not SBC)? Many others who use CBMW ideas as a weapon against women?
I have thought that this is a power play in the SBC against Patterson. Is it opportunism on the part of Calvinists in the SBC? Noting that his fellow architect of the CR, Judge Pressler has gotten some pretty bad press lately too, could it even be some payback for past battles?
The fact that I even feel the need to speculate about such nasty politics is enough to keep me and my children and my tithes away from the SBC. Well, that along with the fact that I’m just a woman.

The events behind the original incident of the woman with two black eyes, be it Angie Brock, someone else, or a composite of her story and others’, are irrelevant to the issues at hand. The fact is that that Paige Patterson frequently told this as a parable as to either how ministers should counsel in this situation (passive aggressive prayer that could ignite more abuse) or how women should respond in this situation (endure abuse.. divorce is not an option), depending on the audience. When recently challenged on these issues, PP essentially lied about what he had said before and lashed out at others for “misrepresenting” his position.

It could be stranger…

“TELEVANGELIST JIM BAKKER SUGGESTS THAT IF YOU WANT TO SURVIVE THE END OF DAYS, THE BEST THING YOU COULD DO IS BUY ONE OF HIS CABINS IN MISSOURI’S OZARK MOUNTAINS. AND WHILE YOU’RE AT IT, BE SURE TO PICK UP SIX 28-OUNCE “EXTREME SURVIVAL WARFARE” WATER BOTTLES FOR $150.”

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/false-teacher-jim-bakker-selling-cabins-in-the-ozark-mountains-as-safest-place-to-survive-the-apocalypse/

It would be perfect irony to stumble over a less then acurate, composite sermon illustration. The story felt like a wannabe urban legend. Also ironic, is that it can never be proved or disproved, if it never happened as discribed.

It of course is surpassed by the Niagra Falls wheelbarrow highwire guy.

The purpose of a sermon (rhetoric) is to instruct, delight and move. Two of these are emotional, not factual. The first, is to instruct in the proper way to think. That is, to submit to the teacher’s think. Again, it’s largely an emotion connection to a way of thinking, not so much the act of thought itself.

Deb: as women now (as sinners) want instead to have their way, instead of submitting to their husbands to do what they would like to do — and [women] seek to work to have their husbands fulfill their will, rather than serving them.

That line of reasoning is assuming that man’s will is automatically always the same as God’s will. Nope. There’s a reason the Bible warns us that there’s a way that seems right to a man but the end is death.

So the question for Bruce is what happens when man’s will differs from God’s will?

Bruce is rebelling against Phil 2:13 which makes it clear that God is working inside women to do God’s will. Women being willful can actually be obedience to God. Something Bruce will never accept.

The motives here are mixed, but I do not see them as nefarious. They are heartfelt, in my opinion.

But for those who are jumping on the band wagon now (you, Wade, and others who have spoken out for years – are excused), it repeats a familiar pattern.

Many of the guys in the SBC, especially the young Reformed crowd, are particularly susceptible to public pressure. They desperately seek the approval of those in their generation and especially intellectuals.

In the last part of the 19th Century and the early part of the 20th Century, pastors, theologians and others who were opposed to the continued theological decline in major schools and denominations stood out in opposition. I do not agree with many of them, but they were courageous people. Think of Moody, Bob Jones, most of the SBC (though not the ascending intelligentsia), John Rice, Lee Roberson, J. Gresham Machen, and others from almost every Christian tradition.

These people walked away from power, knew they were walking away from power, and suffered great ridicule for most of their lives.

I believe that many of the young, Reformed guys hold convictions that go against the grain, so I give them a plus for that. But I note a tendency in that crowd to quickly jump on any societal trends or issues (which does not offend traditional Christian positions) which are promoted by the larger culture. They often do so while poking and belittling Christians who disagree. The young, Reformed crowd see themselves as representatives of a true Christianity, and they see Christians of other stripes as rubes and nabobs. Often they accuse them of racism or nativism.

Paige Patterson is a complete embarrassment to them. They want to be part of the #MeToo movement, and since Patterson is the subject, they have attacked and will continue to attack.

But as you and others have noticed, there is a lot of rhetoric and there are a lot of positions they hold (or have held), that they do not want discussed. As long as Patterson is the target, they will tweet, blog, and speak out.

But if their heroes, John Piper, John MacArthur, Al Mohler, Danny Akin, Russell Moore and others ever become the targets, it will be interesting to watch – not in the short run, but over the long run.

My own sense is that these guys are convictional about gender issues, but I also believe they have some suppressed embarrassment over their views. Time will tell how devoted they are to these principles.

Regardless, while I do not agree with some of the actions of Paige Patterson, I do not believe they disqualify him from finishing out his tenure. More importantly, I believe in the framework of SBC organizational leadership that vests decisions about leadership in the Trustees of the various entities.

I do not believe in leadership by Tweet.

FW Rez,

My pastor being one of them….sigh…now I am at a crossroads, again.

For what it’s worth, I offer a perspective from an old guy who has been a Southern Baptist for 60+ years. But you need to know before I post it that I may be biased because I love Jesus more than the SBC.

Over the decades, I have observed multiple theo-political wars over this and that; Southern Baptists are well know for always fighting about something. But, I stayed faithful to the denomination because most of SBC’s 45,000 churches continued to ignore skirmishes between national leaders and stayed true to a John 3:16 Gospel message for ALL people. You could walk into the average SBC church and hear a clear call to the Cross of Christ. This was the predominant default belief and practice for Southern Baptist for over 150 years … until the New Calvinist movement.

In the last 20 years, there has been a progressive Calvinization of the denomination. Most SBC entities are now lead by New Calvinists – leading seminaries, home and foreign mission agencies, publishing house, church planting program, with a growing number of “traditional” churches surrendering to the movement.

Which brings me to my humble opinion about the matter at hand. I am not a Paige Patterson fan – he has said and done some things I don’t agree with – but I truly believe that the new reformers sense that he is an injured big fish in the SBC sea and the sharks are circling. It is an opportune time for the kill. SWBTS awaits a new president – a New Calvinist leader there would add one more jewel to their crown. This is a Calvinist vs. non-Calvinist thing, pure and simple. Authoritarian patriarchal behavior is resident in both factions – each group have their own ugly examples; using that as the primary motivator here is only a mask for the real driver, which is control of the SBC by the New Calvinists. Taking down Patterson would be huge!

It would be presumptuous to speak for God on issues such as this, but His Word has some counsel for Southern Baptists in this regard:

“If you bite and devour one another [in bickering and strife], watch out that you [along with your entire fellowship] are not consumed by one another.” (Galatians 5:15)

After 60+ years, it’s sad to witness a once-great denomination come apart, with its gifting of evangelism forfeited.

Jesus wept.

FW Rez: the SBC really is an insiders club of good ol’ boys

Secrets. Masons.

Forrest:
truthseeker00 wrote:

This possible explanation makes the most sense.We know that PP had an agenda and fabricating a story to further that agenda would be a good fit.

Oh, but if you watch and listen to the video, PP is dead-dog serious when he tells that story!

This post raises questions about the motives of those who started the on-line petition against Paige Patterson. In the SBC political arena, there are currently several items at stake which this could have an impact on:
1. Will the next president of the SBC be Calvinist of not?
2. Will Paige Patterson be allowed to speak, as scheduled, at the convention in June?
3. How will the SWBTS trustees respond to the controversy surrounding their president?
4. Who will succeed Paige Patterson, whether he be removed or retire?

Regardless of the motive of those designing the petition, I have made some conclusions based on some of the names on the petition:
1. There are some well meaning people who truly want Paige Patterson removed for the reasons stated, i.e. Dr. Rachelle Burleson.
2. There are some brave people signing this, knowing there can be repercussions, i.e. current SWBTS student.
3. There are some people associated with a church with a poor track record concerning women in untenable situations, i.e. Village Church.
4. Lots of people want their voice to be heard, even if it means ignoring instructions, such as being a woman, being a Southern Baptist, etc.
5. Someone had a good sense of humor putting Dorothy Patterson’s name on there (now removed).
6. Some people are very disrespectful of others having a voice by trying to make comments in the church and city fields.
7. While one would assume that such a petition could not be ignored by the SWBTS trustees the likelihood is that they will disregard it. They are PP loyalists. That’s how they got there in the first place.

brad/futuristguy: Control over the institutions of this largest Protestant denomination/convention in the U.S. potentially means access to all three: money, power, and protection. There is always much at stake with this organization, and the potential for damage is huge … as those in and around the SBC world observed (or experienced) with the Conservative Resurgence.

Time to walk back these posers as icons. That is what is happening with Cosby, big time:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-cosby-kennedy-center-awards-revoked_us_5af18709e4b0c4f19326be95

Ken A:
Deb,

I would never suggest that anyone violate their conscience.
I do understand what you are saying. I am not going to let it get in my way.
In fairness Deb, I am going to have to brush up on just what changed between the two Baptist Faith and Message. Honestly, I attend a SB church. I don’t pay a lot of attention to the higher ups.I think I can in good conscience disagree with “lofty” statements of the SBC and still serve faithfully in my local self governed baptist church. It is my understanding that they wrote the 2000 BFM so vague as to be able to drive a semi truck through it. If I recall they brag about that. But that may have been on a different issue than woman and authority.

You are a man, so I’m sure you can blow off higher and serve. But, if you could only take a walk in a woman’s shoes, you might be singing a different tune.

I’m sure that many people have an agenda in this. Read the articles on SBCVoices (mostly Calvinsts) – they are 99% anti PP. Read SBCToday (mostly traditionalists) – they are 99% pro PP.

Bene D: Signing a website letter without sufficient information such as who/what doesn’t seem wise.

No it doesn’t. But it is a very normal response for blind following the blind.

Statement by Rick Patrick, SBCToday (In response to a commentor who believes Russ Moore should be Pres of SWBTS) : “The Board of Trustees must not terminate the Father of the Conservative Resurgence. Southern Baptists owe Dr. Patterson a great debt of gratitude. He should be allowed to determine the timing and manner of his resignation.”

Burwell,

There is also a Dr. Rachelle Burleson Emanuel Enid. Enid OK on the petition.

FW Rez: The choice to attend SWBTS was one of the most pivotal in my life. Now it is unrecognizable to me.

I wonder if it is unrecognizable to God? Has God made the decision to leave this outfit? Has God divorced them – those who do not believe in divorce? Does God even “know” them now?

from Psalm 1:
“The wicked are not so, but they are like chaff which the wind drives away.
“Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.
“For the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.”

Deb is not going to sign it because it demands an adherence to strict complementarianism and the Baptist Faith and Message.

This is very strange, how much it seems to have been limited. I can think of charitable and non-charitable reasons for this.

Isn’t an ex Baptist’s view on this of worth here? Isn’t an egalitarians? Isn’t anyone’s? Limiting these things to only men like Patterson is part of the issue in the SBC to began with.

“Angie Brock, a real estate agent from Oklahoma, said on Twitter she was the one Patterson was speaking about and that the Southern Baptist leader helped her when she was abused by calling authorities. ”

This was strange mostly because she said she *was* the woman he was speaking about…but her story bears no resemblance to what he actually said.

It could be he helped her and that would be great. I completely disagree that you can truly help abused women without accepting that divorce is a possibility, maybe even best. I don’t need to know her whole story or anything, but without it what are we supposed to think of this really.

It doesn’t ultimately matter, because the story he told is the story he told. Made up or not. This is the information he wanted to convey, go home, watch your husband get ‘more violent’ based on his advice, and maybe magically he’ll come to church and it will be all better! That’s terrible advice, no matter what ‘really’ happened.

As for the politics, I see different wings shaking out.

The Patterson wing seems to be dying, so they are going for the kill.

You have the Calvinists of course, but you also have different camps reforming.

There seems to be a wing that is interested in promoting racial equality and recognizing some of the wrongs done to women. You have Russell Moore here weirdly saying yes you can divorce for abuse, and Thabati reaching out to beth moore and beth moore reaching out on the racial equality front. There was a big MLK thing recently.

Then you still have the Piper wing, which is all about ‘separation’. These are comp guys and Calvinists. The others are too, but they seem to be doing a different thing. It’s very interesting, although like you I no longer have a dog in this fight except as a former Baptist who wishes they weren’t a total mess on women. I was talking to someone about not being Baptist anymore and the first comment was that Baptists don’t go for interracial which I thought was interesting.

Lea: That’s terrible advice, no matter what ‘really’ happened.

And instead of recognizing that in his recent statement, he dug in deeper.

Muff Potter: Whether such a woman exists or no, is not relevant (in a real sense) to Patterson’s bloviating on the subject.

Patterson ignored common decency and issued downright dangerous and irresponsible statements to scores if not hundreds of Southern Baptist women who may live with violent abusers.

Had one of them been beaten to death in the ensuing idiocy, he’d have blood on his hands.

Just another sacrificial lamb.

FW Rez,

“The events behind the original incident of the woman with two black eyes, be it Angie Brock, someone else, or a composite of her story and others’, are irrelevant to the issues at hand.

The fact is that that Paige Patterson frequently told this as a parable as to either how ministers should counsel in this situation ”
++++++++++++++++++

i expect many (to the 10th power) have been influenced by his words, and many have responded women in a similar fashion. of course they have.

i am regularly amazed at the things professional christians with a public platform rattle off. they know they have influence. (I observe them enjoying it very much).

considering the implications of the things they say, they are either incredibly careless, or else they fully intended to convey them — which makes them totally messed up morally and ethically.

christian culture has moved from embarrassing & stupid to dangerous.

Divorce Minister,

In the case of our daughter, it meant that she would be permitted to separate for a time (not more than 6 weeks) in order for them to have couples marriage counseling (which she had already endured for 9 years) and then she would be required to go back into the abusive marriage. Her ex would of course put on his “repentance act” and from the point of view of the church it would be a success story. “Allowing separation for abuse” is a misrepresentation of the reality of what happens… in the end the abused wife is forced to return. The goal is always to get them back together under the same roof. They also misrepresent the idea that God only allows divorce for adultery. In reality, if the immoral spouse “repents” then the abused wife is required to forgive and return.

Muff Potter: Whether such a woman exists or no, is not relevant (in a real sense) to Patterson’s bloviating on the subject.

Patterson ignored common decency and issued downright dangerous and irresponsible statements to scores if not hundreds of Southern Baptist women who may live with violent abusers.

Had one of them been beaten to death in the ensuing idiocy, he’d have blood on his hands.

Nancy2 (aka Kevlar): Just another sacrificial lamb.

Another egg cracked for the Perfect Omelet.
Insignificant.

Grainne: The wrong interpretations of certain passages, which patriarchialists take to prevent women from being pastors and enforce male ‘headship’ in the marriage relationship, now make me tired and unable to join a SBC church, while remaining a committed Baptist, as far as doctrine and church governance are concerned.

I left the SBC for similar reasons and now attend a Presbyterian church. So many of us are former Baptists or other churches like them, who have probably retained a lot of Baptist thinking on theology and polity.

Nancy2 (aka Kevlar),

I did not mean to down play the effect of patriarchy on women. If that was what I conveyed, I am sorry. What I meant to say was that I am a member of a local baptist church first and foremost. That is my conviction. It is self ruled. That is my conviction and what I thought is a major part of being a “baptist “. I do not look at the church’s affiliation with a denomination as major to my commitment to that local church.
I realize that I cannot understand the bad effect of patriarchy on women the way women can.

drstevej:
It could be stranger…

“TELEVANGELIST JIM BAKKER SUGGESTS THAT IF YOU WANT TO SURVIVE THE END OF DAYS, THE BEST THING YOU COULD DO IS BUY ONE OF HIS CABINS IN MISSOURI’S OZARK MOUNTAINS. AND WHILE YOU’RE AT IT, BE SURE TO PICK UP SIX 28-OUNCE “EXTREME SURVIVAL WARFARE” WATER BOTTLES FOR $150.”

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/false-teacher-jim-bakker-selling-cabins-in-the-ozark-mountains-as-safest-place-to-survive-the-apocalypse/

Though the Rapture-Ready-on-Steroids site down that link (which itself ends with an appeal for money) sounds just as extreme, linking Bakker’s scheme to some End Time Prophecy about false teachers. Why do they always have to do some Prophecy Fulfillment tie-in? Isn’t it enough that Bakker is a crook and a con man who’s found a new con?

And those Tribulation Survival Cabins in the Ozarks are near Branson, MO, i.e. “What Las Vegas would be if it were run by Ned Flanders”.

I can’t make up stuff like this…

jyjames,

FW Rez: “SWBTS…. Now it is unrecognizable to me.”

jyjames: “I wonder if it is unrecognizable to God?”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

someone paint me a picture of jesus with this facial expression and i’ll hang it on my wall. (any artists in the house?)

https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&biw=1229&bih=587&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=79XxWuHYIJeojwP4u7i4CA&q=outraged+facial+expression&oq=outraged+facial+expression&gs_l=img.3…48413.49660.0.50283.8.7.0.0.0.0.253.253.2-1.1.0….0…1c.1.64.img..7.1.253…0i7i30k1j0i7i5i30k1.0.5QdcjaDkhoo#imgrc=E43m88SvabhZaM:

Ken A,

The last part of my statement was not directed at you. I was a little vague. Sorry.
I genuinely would like help in seeing where they made those changes.

Ken A,

http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfmcomparison.asp
In this comparison, Article xviii is included in the 1963 BFM column, but note that it says in parentheses about it being a 1998 change.

I’ll just leave this here. Paige Patterson preached at Bellevue Baptist Church in both services the morning of April 15th. I don’t keep up with the goings-on at Bellevue anymore, but this post made me wonder if in light of the renewed furor over Patterson’s old comments (why now? and what motives? are very good questions!) and his partner-in-crime (the CR, not the other things) Paul Pressler’s scandals recently coming to light, if Patterson had appeared at Bellevue recently. And there he was, less than a month ago.

For those who may not know, or have forgotten, Bellevue’s Steve Gaines is the current “lame duck” not-a-Calvinist president of the SBC to whom J.D. Greear ceded the election as SBC president in 2016 when after two runoff votes the vote was too close to call. Greear withdrew his name at the last hour, thus giving the win to Gaines. It appears Greear is in the running for 2018.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVpAbdI56uI

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

Or if you want to skip to just the sermons:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMvUQjX-dwY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM8kmwAuZso

Muff Potter,
My thought exactly when someone told me it was probably not a true story. I thought so not only did he lie but he also just conveyed the message to the women listening to him that they should stay in abusive relationships. How is this better?

Mercy: I did find an interesting reason that one woman stated in the place where churches were noted, “hands of her ex husband because of views like Dr Pattersons.” That said enough. I want to believe that signers are sincere and want to see this put right, but it may be that there is confusion and/or deception.

I think most signers are sincere.

They may not see the whole picture, though.

Views like Pattersons needs to be harshly criticized and he needs to repent. That later part isn’t going to happen of course.

Mary27: In the case of our daughter, it meant that she would be permitted to separate for a time (not more than 6 weeks) in order for them to have couples marriage counseling (which she had already endured for 9 years) and then she would be required to go back into the abusive marriage. Her ex would of course put on his “repentance act” and from the point of view of the church it would be a success story. “Allowing separation for abuse” is a misrepresentation of the reality of what happens… in the end the abused wife is forced to return.

Yes. Thank you for sharing that!

If separate permanently is not an option, than you have not helped a thing. Typically rosy comp nonsense where the husband will magically get better, because they can’t deal with the consequences of reality if he doesn’t. None of them have a good answer when things go wrong. None of them!!

If separate permanently is an option, then you should just divorce.

See Dr. Sarah Lindsay’s excellent response and blog post at Christians for Biblical Equality:

https://www.cbeinternational.org/blogs/response-paige-pattersons-comments-abuse

An excerpt:
“Condemning abuse is a sadly necessary first step, and it’s good that other SBC leaders, like Thom Rainer, have strongly condemned any type of abuse. But the root of the problem lies far deeper than Paige Patterson’s view that some levels of abuse are acceptable. The root of the problem is a view of women that sees them as subordinate to men, as supporting characters to men, rather than as fully realized human beings in their own right.
And until the church as a whole is willing to acknowledge and repent of this view of women, leaders like Paige Patterson will continue to devalue women and treat them as accessories to men rather than as beloved daughters of God.”

If you walk away from a denomination, like I finally have from all Baptists as of yesterday, then why not just let them sort it out on their own, and let them rot in the fruit of their own garbage. You can’t change them or help them, really. They don’t care about your opinions, or concerns or questions either. They look at all people as nothing but a head count to go in their church and denomination, and live in ways that make no sense according to the Bible. Let it alone, and maybe it will all just die it’s own death.

Ct,

A few thoughts. It’s a reasonable idea to just let them fight it out on their own til they implode. Except for the fact that as people leave that system, wounded, they often get to a place where they’re open to processing what happened. And, the more we understand the specific dynamics of the source situation, often the better support people we can be to them.

Plus if the SBC were an isolated entity it also might do to just let them implode. But they are interwoven with all kinds of other associations and ministries and mission structures, and people whose paradigms have similar tenets. So, what we learn from their situation can travel …

The signatures on the “Letter to SWBTS Board of Trustees” letter which calls for Patterson’s ouster are somewhat curious. Several are non-Baptist churches such as Assembly of God. The usual Calvinist churches are on there such as Capitol Hill Baptist (Mark Dever’s church), Church of Brook Hills (David Platt’s pre-IMB church), the Village Church (Matt Chandler’s church), The Summitt Church (J. D. Grear’s church), First Baptist Church, Sapulpa, OK (TWW blogged about them May 8, 2017,) and other predominantly Calvinist churches.

Another curious aspect of these signatures is that several are CBF churches. These churches include Community North Baptist, McKinney, TX, and others. I’m not sure why CBF churches would care about what the SBC is doing, but their signatures may imply remaining resentment over their ouster from SBC leadership by Patterson and others during the Conservative Resurgence.

To be fair, the signatures on the letters, both for and against, represent individual signatures of church members. One member signing a letter does not necessarily mean that the entire church supports that members’ position.

As far as I can see, we have two major letters to SWBTS trustees: those for Patterson (https://tinyurl.com/y8o9qmoz) and those against Patterson (http://swbtsletter.com). One dominated by non-Calvinists and one dominated by Calvinists. As this post by the Debs pointed out, in addition to the outrage against abuse, the division of Calvinists and non-Calvinists are probably playing a major part of the call for Patterson’s removal.

As for me, I will not sign either letter. As a pastor for 21 years, I have seen horrific abuse and in every case I have counseled the abused to leave the home. I have taken many women to shelters that are designed to protect them from their abusers. I have pastored in communities where the abuser murdered the abused. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough shelters for the abused in many cities. In many cities, there aren’t any abuse shelters. If we are serious about helping to protect the abused from abusers, more shelters need to be started. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if SBC churches led the way in starting new abuse shelters? That’s what I call ministry.

Ct:
If you walk away from a denomination, like I finally have from all Baptists as of yesterday, then why not just let them sort it out on their own, and let them rot in the fruit of their own garbage.You can’t change them or help them, really.

There’s many reasons. You can warn unaware people about not getting involved with them, because this groups is often very deceptive. Not only do they pretend to be something different to visitors, they will do force takeovers of churches and take all their resources. This group is also looking to infiltrate other denominations, both directly and via The Gospel Coalition website and their book sales. The Assemblies of God church here where I live is New Calvinist. And last, there are good-hearted people who go to these churches, who don’t know that they can leave because the church has made their covenant out to be a legal contract. These churches lie to them and threaten them and even bribe husbands to stay with promises of leadership if they force their families to remain.

ishy,
I would also say that knowing about these things, even in hindsight, can explain things for people like me who left already, about why it didn’t feel right.

Wonder who told Mac Brunson it was time to move on? To a much smaller church! This doesn’t happen every day. And Heath Lambert replaces Brunson. Lots of things changing in Middle-Earth. My guess is that Mohler is calling all the shots now. And why not? Hasn’t he been called the smartest human on the planet? So glad I’m GONE from the SBC after being in it for more than half a century.

Just two different stories from my family on how the church can handle abuse and help the woman:

My aunt was being badly abused. Her pastor counselled her on how to safely leave and offered her family refuge behind his shotgun with him and his family. She took it. She did not divorce her husband, he divorced her when her pastor counselled her never to return home to the abuse. She remained single, and moved into her own place. Her church supported her financially from the 1930’s until her death (70’s or 80’s).

When our daughter was being verbally abused, the pastor that married them tried to counsel them. Finally he told daughter he could not help son in law, and to do what she needed to be safe. We supported her divorce and remarriage. All that loss (home, job, wife, child, pets, friends) was part of what brought that man to salvation.

Neither pastor supported divorce and remarriage. Two very different outcomes.

But what I have never understood is why, if you are being abused and believe it is no sin to divorce or divorce and remarry, would you stay in a church that taught otherwise and try to change IT. Why not just worship elsewhere?

Oh yeah. Choreographed right down to Patterson’s replacement this summer. The funny thing is that you probably couldn’t find ten people at FBC Jax who could tell you what century John Calvin lived. With the SBC it’s never theological. It’s always about control. Especially control of the purse strings. Brunson moving down the ladder speaks volumes.

ishy: I had a front-row seat to some of this stuff and I thought they had lost their minds, but everyone seemed to just go along with it.

That would have been so surreal!

It still blows my mind that i was attending Devers church regularly/sometime intermittently for 3-4 years. But I was preoccupied with (non religious) school and not paying attention to backroom stuff.

Max: I suspect a young Al Mohler was watching their methods very closely during the Conservative Resurgence. He essentially mimicked what they did to Calvinize the SBC by planting New Calvinist leaders in key entities …

Just like the Kims of North Korea watched the methods of their mentor Stalin very closely.

dee:
emily honey,

I agree. And I am getting closer to the source of this letter every hour. Could it be that this wasn’t a letter drafted purely by women? Something smells.

I can’t imagine drafting a letter to call out a man for bad behavior towards women and adding a bunch of comp nonsense in there!

I’m not sure what to make of that. Of course, I’m not steeped in this world. Maybe they thought they needed to say that to be heard but that is the actual problem!!! You have to agree on everything to even be heard. If you were looking to promote groupthink and bad decision making you couldn’t do a better job than to set up a system like that.

You’re mistaken if you think that Patterson has just now fumbled the ball and is an embarrassment to the SBC. He hasn’t changed; ever. He’s had his day as king and kingmaker. It’s just a regime change. Politics. 100%. And if you think he and his generation of kings have been bad just wait and see what the new regime is like.

Lea: That would have been so surreal!

It still blows my mind that i was attending Devers church regularly/sometime intermittently for 3-4 years. But I was preoccupied with (non religious) school and not paying attention to backroom stuff.

Maybe not surreal. I mean, there’s always been ignorant people in the church who either wanted to get ahead or believed stupid things.

I knew the Conservative Resurgence was coordinated, but where I lived, there just weren’t many options outside of the SBC. And it wasn’t until after Akin took over SEBTS that anyone treated me poorly because I was a female. Patterson told me himself that he supported female missionaries. I wasn’t disappointed to not be a pastor; I was more disappointed that more men didn’t want to be missionaries.

It wasn’t until I found TWW that I realized how deep the rabbit hole with Mohler and Akin went.

I need to confess…when I first heard Paige Patterson’s name years ago I thought he was she. I had never heard the name Paige for a man.

Now, I hope he fades quietly into the background!

Amy Smith: Where is the outrage about John Piper who gave the same advice as Patterson? Piper said a woman should endure abuse for a season and getting smacked around for a night. That advice could be deadly.

Amy, you made me go to Desiring God. Anyway,not defending John Piper, but he was kinda sorta forced to back down from that position in the video back in 2012:

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/clarifying-words-on-wife-abuse

He admits there’s a role for the civil authorities but really the church should be involved at every step. It’s still lousy, horrible advice by a guy with no rlecperience in the area. People would do better to call (in the US) the National Domestic Violence Hotline. Those people are trained and have resources.

Steve: The funny thing is that you probably couldn’t find ten people at FBC Jax who could tell you what century John Calvin lived.

If they are like most Southern Baptists, they don’t really give a big whoop about things like theology. But if you suggest canceling their potluck dinners, you will have a war on your hands!

Steve: Heath Lambert replaces Brunson … My guess is that Mohler is calling all the shots now

He has for the last 20 years … a brilliant strategist … the most powerful man in the SBC … untouchable.

Burwell: Is this common knowledge or do you attend/have friends who attend FBC Jax? I have not heard or seen that he was going to a smaller (comparatively) church.

Someone sent me this (from Twitter?) the other day.

May 20th schedule at @ValleydaleSBC:

Sunday, May 20 @ 10 AM
Breakfast in the Lobby
Sunday, May 20 @ 10:45 AM
One Service with Mac Brunson preaching, followed by vote

Now when you go to that church’s website the part about Brunson has been omitted, but the person sent me a screen shot and the unedited version was still visible in Google’s cache. It may not be now. I don’t know if they didn’t want the cat out of the bag yet or if they’ve “uncalled” Brunson. I suppose May 20th everyone will know.

ishy: They were directly a part of it, but I think Patterson and Pressler believed blindly that they weren’t that ambitious. Many of the New Calvinist leaders were already in place in the takeover, but had not fully revealed their Calvinist beliefs or affiliation with Mohler.

I was referring to the 1970s when PP & PP had their little “Cafe du Monde” meeting and started the CR ball rolling. Mohler was only a teenager then. But I’m sure you’re correct there were Calvinists in the flock back then. In fact, am I dreaming or didn’t the SBC used to have more of a Calvinist flavor? I’m talking about 60-70 years ago. I remember my “very Southern Baptist” grandparents using the RSV which, if I’m not mistaken, is “calvinistic” in origin. Correct me if I’m wrong.

notastepfordsheep,

Thank you NSS. The church is in Birmingham, AL, which is where David Platt was for a while, and where Briarwood Presbyterian is located as well. If it’s small, it’s probably not poor, based on the website and the number of staff.

dee: Reasons for posting:

These posts are very therapeutic to those who have been disenfranchised by CR in the SBC. We saw a political takeover of our denomination. Institutions that were supposed to be safe, i.e SWBTS, became pawns in the power play of Patterson and Pressler.

FW Rez: These posts are very therapeutic to those who have been disenfranchised by CR in the SBC. We saw a political takeover of our denomination. Institutions that were supposed to be safe, i.e SWBTS, became pawns in the power play of Patterson and Pressler.

Yes, and Patterson and Pressler’s chickens are coming home to roost at long last. Karma is no respecter of persons OR preachers.

I just now read that petition. They lost me with the first sentence: “We are concerned Southern Baptist women who affirm the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, including its statements on the roles of men and women in the family and in the church.”

I still hold to basic Baptist beliefs, but one of my disqualifications for joining another Baptist church is if they “affirm the BF&M 2000.” The 1963 version was just fine, TYVM.

FW Rez: Institutions that were supposed to be safe, i.e SWBTS, became pawns in the power play of Patterson and Pressler.

Russel Dilday, former SWBTS President, was terminated in an un-Christian manner IMO.

Headless Unicorn Guy: i.e. Jesus was returning them to the original source documents, ha-Torah.
Giving a Reality Check to all the accreted Rabbinical rulings.

Not that these rulings were originally bad things; as guardians and interpreters of ha-Torah, the Rabbis had to make specific interpretations as new situations arose. (Think of Supreme Court decisions in this country — someone had to make a ruling.)

The danger in that is that such interpretations (and interpretations of those interpretations) can accumulate and bend things beyond recognition or original/actual intent. The danger is when the accumulated edifice of Law becomes a pen-twirling abstract game and the Man the Sabbath was made for gets thrown under its bus.

Thank you HUG for this comment. It is really helpful to me.

ishy: I think it’s been very therapeutic for me. I had a front-row seat to some of this stuff and I thought they had lost their minds, but everyone seemed to just go along with it. It’s nice to know I wasn’t the only one who thought they were absolutely not Biblical or following Christ despite all their claims to the contrary.

I agree that it has been a relief to learn that others have had some of the same concerns. I had just a little peek behind the curtain and could never feel ok in an SBC church afterwards. But with so many of my friends, neighbors, and extended family (including some clergy) so dedicated to this denomination, I’ve had plenty of days of wondering whether I’m the problem.

Muslin, fka Deana Holmes: Really? I always thought of the AoG as being the epitome of Arminianism. How do they reconcile TULIP with the Sunday altar call? *boggles*

I can’t figure it out either. They seem like completely incompatible theologies to me. But I’ve known the pastor of that church for 20 years, and he’s sold out to TGC and Piper. I think it’s all the propaganda they put out.

On Valleydale’s website under the page called “In view of a call schedule” they have a link to a community profile with lots of statistics about the church and area. Very interesting. They say they run about 1800 in weekly attendance, but looking closer it seems this is every soul that sets foot on the main campus, plus the downtown spin-off, at any time during the week. Actual Sunday service attendance at the suburban campus appears to be a fairly modest <800.
I’m familiar with the area, having gone to school there 30ish years ago and having a daughter living there now. It used to be considered way out in the sticks, but most of the growth has headed that direction for years and the eastern and northeastern suburbs are booming and flush.

emily honey: The whole Patterson drama in general is what I was referring to when I said it looks and smells like opportunism, not really a pure concern for women and abuse victims.

“Humans are very seldom either totally sincere or totally hypocritical. Their moods change, their motives are mixed, and they are often themselves quite mistaken as to what their motives are.” (C.S. Lewis)

ishy,

“I can’t figure it out either. They seem like completely incompatible theologies to me. But I’ve known the pastor of that church for 20 years, and he’s sold out to TGC and Piper. I think it’s all the propaganda they put out.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

my former AOG pastor said 2 things one right after the other that stick in my mind:

“John Piper, and all-round really good guy….”

“…says that there comes a point where you just have to take the bible on faith.”

and with that, my former AOG pastor has opened himself to easily embracing anything else that John Piper rattles off. as well as the TGC crowd.

he preaches square circles with smiling conviction, even if they are stupid, unreasonable, ludicrous, unjust, dangerous, and harm people.

John Piper said it was biblical. That’s enough.

Max: If they are like most Southern Baptists, they don’t really give a big whoop about things like theology. But if you suggest canceling their potluck dinners, you will have a war on your hands!

We’ve spoken of this before Max. The Neo-Cals are like the Carpetbaggers of old during Reconstruction in the South, with one crucial difference; the Neo-Cal takeover is not backed up with Federal troops.
As an outsider, I see the problem as one of voluntary-head-in-the-sand-it’ll-be-okay complacency.
In Southern Baptist life it’s a shame there aren’t more men like you Max, men who’ll stand up to these Scallywags.

If Mohler could select the next SWBTS President, who would it be?

Max: I have observed three types of church folks

“The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that THE BIRDS OF THE AIR come and NEST IN ITS BRANCHES.” – Matt. 13:31-32

An overgrown tree full of birds (of the air, airwaves) creates a loud boisterous racket that only draws attention to itself. Later, these same loud birds eat the Good Seed put out by the Good Sower. Beware of bad birds nesting:

“Birds of every kind will nest in it; they will find shelter in the shade of its branches. All the trees of the forest will know that I the Lord bring down the tall tree and make the low tree grow tall.” Ezekiel 17:23-4

Muff Potter: men who’ll stand up to these Scallywags

The Scallywags have us out-numbered. But God …

Augustine:
Bene D,

The list also seems to me a target… Or in the words of Mark Dever “an easy target for church discipline.” Here’s Patterson and Dever scheming together about “easy targets.”They’re practically giddish about it… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=22IfJ3OzRbY Dangerousand Scheming characters – both of them.When the dust settles the 9marks crickets will come out with a 1, 2, 3 get ‘em plan for church pastors for every unsuspecting soul all while they gleefully go ringing their hands together and saying, “Aaaaah, the plan worked perfectl

From the YouTube clip:
Patterson: “More and more are realizing that you can’t have a meaningless church membership and expect to have an impact on the world”

Later, Dever: ” we don’t need to spend this time talking about the abuses of church discipline. Boy, we understand they’re there, but they’re nowhere near that’s the main problem in most of our main churches (sic). It’s not personal vindictiveness, it’s so many things it’s not…”

The discussion then gets to easy targets, which is recommended by Patterson over someone caught in some “heinous iniquity because you’re going to have sympathy problems there.”
(Paul seems to have a different recommendation to a church in 1 Corinthians 5, without any mention of sympathy problems).

Rather, its recommended to target those who hasn’t been in church attendance in five years — because we know that church rolls are updated vigorously, right?
Of them, Patterson says, “they’re not intending to come, and we owe them – – if we love them – – a confrontation.”

Well, then, that’s what we’re,offering him — a confrontation and invitation to repentance where called for.

okrapod,

okrapod: Ummm? Really? God condones the ‘casting off (of) faithful spouses’ just as long as the one doing the casting off gets the paperwork straight?

It is not a matter of paperwork, or following the rules. It is a matter of abuse.

Jesus was not promoting divorce. Neither do I. Yet in a world of hard hearts, it is inevitable. After Jesus stated that God’s design was for marriage to be a lifelong covenant, the Pharisees demanded to know why the Law – written by God – allowed for divorce. What was implied in the answer of ‘hard hearts’: selfishness, pettiness, addictions, extreme narcissism, abuse, and so on. God is too good and gracious to confine people without hope of escape to what sometimes turns out to be impossible situations.

Where Jesus drew the line was at he casual, improperly applied practice of ‘putting away’ without going through the same sort of official steps as originated the covenant. Putting away a woman without papers left her essentially branded with the letter ‘A’, whether she deserved it or not, and made her unable to lawfully remarry. The men knew this, but did not want to pay back the dowry and bride price that were part of properly ending a marriage. So they just walked away, leaving the wife, and their children, essentially penniless and unable to provide for themselves. In those days, a woman could not go out and get a job at Walmart.

So, no, I am not saying that God is a tyrant for methodology; rather, he is a fortress for the abused and oppressed which the cruel perversion of ‘putting away’ happened to produce.

God is all goodness, all lovingkindness, all grace and mercy. He is patient with our sin, and makes exceptions for our inability to perform as we ought. Sadly, the ability to nullify a contract is essential to justice in a world of imperfect people.

notastepfordsheep,

I give up too on everything and I love your username.

I hope someday we can all find one another at the new non-hierarchical, non-institutional unchurch. I have a feeling I may end up a Unitarian. Sure, you can worship your puppy if you want, but at least there is no one forcing their official orthodoxy down your throat or threatening to discipline you for not wearing the right clothes, doing the right things or believing the right things.

As long as we love God and others, and do not harm anyone, does it really matter if we have the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ interpretation of ‘atonement’, ‘justification’ and ‘perfect’? Just done with arrogant, legalistic fundamentalists who despise everyone who does not believe, think and look just like them.

I still don’t see the big difference between the BFM 1963 and 2000, “Comp” wise any way.
Any help?

Ken A,

http://www.centerforbaptiststudies.org/pamphlets/freedom/women.htm

Ken A,

Actually, if you Google “baptist faith and message comparison”, it puts the 1925, 1963, and 2000 versions in parallel form. It’s very helpful in seeing the subtle changes.

*cease, not see’s. The woes of voice to text.

Augustine,

I mean thank you Nancy2.

Nancy2 (aka Kevlar),

So basically it is the 1963 with the Amendment of 1998 that is the same as 2000?
The BFM didn’t have an Article XVIII?
I think I see now. Thanks

I just want to say thank you to the Deebs for creating this forum where collective thoughts and research can be brought together to sort through the quagmire (could have used a different word here) and examine historical events and find biblical truth. This power structures are abominable.

Augustine: I used to think that to be egalitatian you were a liberal, card caring, flag waving, man-despising feminist.

I think this has been propaganda basically. Used as a tool to keep women and men in line with all the ‘real’ christians. Its’ rubbish.

There are a ton of men at my egal church and they are not despised, and neither am I. That’s the way it should be.

Ken A: I still don’t see the big difference between the BFM 1963 and 2000

Here is an analysis by Russell Dilday, former President of SWBTS.

http://www.centerforbaptiststudies.org/hotissues/dildayfm2000.htm

Augustine: I used to think that to be egalitatian you were a liberal, card caring, flag waving, man-despising feminist.

That’s because that is what you were taught by men like Patterson, Mohler and the Neo-Cals. That is the one agenda these men shared – besides power, praise and money. But now the more militant wing is taking charge. Scary.

Ken A:
Nancy2 (aka Kevlar),

So basically it is the 1963 with the Amendment of 1998 that is the same as 2000?
The BFM didn’t have an Article XVIII?
I think I see now. Thanks

Right. And they were not at all forthcoming about what they were doing with the born-and-bred baptists, either!

FW Rez: My guess is that the SWBTS current trustees and this year’s nominees have been prescreened to agree to whoever Patterson has hand picked to be his successor before he ever allowed them on his board.

Perhaps, but the SBC landscape is quickly changing. Enrollment continues to drop at SWBTS as seminary candidates desire to ride the New Calvinist wave. I suspect some of the trustees will compromise or bail out and when that happens the vote may swing in favor of Mohler’s camp … PP loyalties may shift in the heat of the battle.

ishy: There’s a fairly clear indicator to his strategy. Mohler himself was chosen because he was a finance guy. Akin had similar talents. I doubt Mohler will choose from theologians and go for those who’ve proven themselves at either fundraising or student recruitment.

“The Cash Must Flow.”

Wow. Still reading through the three BFM’s, but if read carefully, one sees that Calvinism was already worked in with the subtle redefining of salvation. It’s all about ‘Regeneration’, which is tellingly placed before faith. Haven’t even gotten to the comp stuff. I’m not a Baptist, but y’all’s goose was cooked a long time ago.

Augustine,

Kevin Giles is one of the great exponents of the truth of egalitarianism.

Wow. They wiped out nearly the entire explanation of salvation by faith, and any mention whatsoever of sanctification. If you are a Baptist, you need to read this. Unless you are a Calvinist, you need to find a new church. Good luck with that one.

Max: If they are like most Southern Baptists, they don’t really give a big whoop about things like theology.But if you suggest canceling their potluck dinners, you will have a war on your hands!

Doesn’t ha-Torah relate an incident of “selling your birthright for a mess of pottage”?

Lea: just saying if you get out of the ‘evangelical conservative’ box you might find yourself pleasantly surprised

Amen!

Lea: just saying if you get out of the ‘evangelical conservative’ box you might find yourself pleasantly surprised

This is the cleverly constructed ‘box’ or pasture into which so-called modern day christians have been shephereded by The Church. It is all tied up with politics and power, hence its umbilical cord attached to the Republican Party. It is all about power, money and control of the thoughts, hearts, minds and bodies of the people.

It has been stated that one cannot talk politics on these threads. However, to ignore the motives and methods of politics is to ignore the root of the problem of the abusive, authoritarian Church.

If the #metoo movement has shown us anything, it is that abuse – particularly sexual abuse – is the method of control by which men in power keep others in their power. It is traumatizing, demoralizing and renders the person nearly incapable of healthy, normal living. In other words, it creates the needy sheep that false shepherds need.

Max: the YRR were extremely excited about the BFM2000

P.S. Al Mohler was on the revision team of the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message.

Max,

Max, you have perfectly described what is going on. The main problem, as I see it, is the people in the pew don’t care.

truthseeker00,

I can’t find a non-baptist church that isn’t charismatic or baptizes infants. Unfortunately, that makes the SBC the only game in town for Baptists.

Max: Southern Baptists have been too trusting of their national leaders for several years.

Guilty as charged. There have been several trends in the SBC that have gone unnoticed by a good number of us. Calvinization, Politicalization, Authoritarianization, Fundanmentalization, Falwellinization, “Bibilical ” Counselingization, etc. have been going on for years without much notice.

One of the trends that I am becoming more and more aware of is how inferior the level of education is at the seminaries than it was a generation ago. The institutions lack breadth in the faculties as they tend to hire their own. Some high-level academics have some of the weakest credentials. Limiting their faculties to only one soteriological view rather than providing a breadth of perspectives is, to me a limiting factor. SWBTS coined the term “Text Driven” and then build a school around it. Not to mention that much of what they practice looks more like indoctrination than education.

Amy Smith:
Where is the outrage about John Piper who gavethe same advice as Patterson? Piper said a woman should endure abuse for a season and getting smacked around for a night. That advice could be deadly. https://youtu.be/3OkUPc2NLrM

That’s one of the quotes I refer to when talking with Piperites. They can never seem to believe me. I’m glad there’s a video to refer them to.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/05/it-couldnt-happen-to-a-nicer-guy.php
#metoo movement official going after Weinstein.
truthseeker00,

Max: There is very little that could be referred to as Christlike in the methodology being used by leaders of the new reformation.

Once Christlike goes out the window, it is no longer church.

FW Rez: One of the trends that I am becoming more and more aware of is how inferior the level of education is at the seminaries than it was a generation ago.

A well-rounded theological education is being replaced by targeted indoctrination at most SBC seminaries. Seminary students have little exposure to Truth and the various expressions of it in the American church. Instead, they are fed half-truth and mis-truth where text is taken out of context to support the theology of the moment … which is currently Calvinism. When students enroll at some SBC seminaries, they check critical thinking at the door as group-think floods their souls with error.

As someone noted above, the Patterson wing of the SBC is dying out. They are literally dying out because many of its members are now elderly. I’m not sure that the big players like Mohler or Moore would want to go in for the kill right here because they don’t need to.

Rather, I think some of this is partly good ole fashioned vengeance on the part of younger men who had family and friends get the axe over the re-baptism and private prayer language controversy twelve years ago. The older generation of the YRR can’t stop it, so they are riding it out. They hope if they minimally cooperate their own culpability will be overlooked by the younger guys.

Leslie Puryear: I can’t find a non-baptist church that isn’t charismatic or baptizes infants. Unfortunately, that makes the SBC the only game in town for Baptists.

I seriously think it is time for a new game.

truthseeker00: Who profits from making God out to be a sexist, misogynistic, controlling tyrant? You guessed it.

Exactly, who is behind the shenanigans? Those who profit.

And prophets have always been the exact opposite of profiteers.

truthseeker00: If the #metoo movement has shown us anything, it is that abuse – particularly sexual abuse – is the method of control by which men in power keep others in their power.

I’m not sure how that dynamic plays out. I can see how abusers quest for power to enable their misdeeds, yet they have a high risk balancing act that those same misdeeds will put their power at risk. The NY prosecutor referenced by Lydia’s article is a case in point. I’ll need a little help to understand how abuse is the tool to advance their power.

truthseeker00: Many of the pastors of these churches are so confused, you can tell they do not know how to think – they are merely spouting what has been drilled into their brains.

The products of indoctrination. They tune in each day to Twitter for Piper Points, Mohler Moments, Dever Drivel, and Mahaney Malarkey. They have no sermons of their own … lost and undone, without God or His Son.

truthseeker00: I seriously think it is time for a new game.

Me, too, the other MeToo, that is.

jyjames: keeping one’s own head on straight

“Dear friends, do not believe everyone who claims to speak by the Spirit. You must test them to see if the spirit they have comes from God. For there are many false prophets in the world.” (1 John 4:1)

Max,

Thank you, Max. Seals the deal.

Max: The SBC is a non-prophet organization.

LOL. This is a great way to put it, sadly.

Hey! Haven’t been around much, but just stopped by to see what was up and saw this post. Thanks for asking these questions because I’ve been bothered by the same thing regarding the letter (why does it not mention the black eye thing???)

Lea,

They can sound so reasonable if you’re not already suspicious and paying close attention. I think they capitalize on people’s busyness. Like my near and dear was listening to a recorded Christmas sermon someone had sent him by Doug Wilson, long after we’d left patriarchy for soft comp (though he still attends the soft comp church with some of our family, I had to stop going because of mentions of Wilson and Piper, for starters, and the elders nodding wisely at me when I mentioned my concerns), and he talked about how biblical and encouraging the message was…

elastigirl,

Tom Hanks looked pretty sinister in that recent social media movie. He might be a contender. Perhaps Hugh Grant or Colin Firth for an affable villain.

Thersites: I’m not sure how that dynamic plays out. I can see how abusers quest for power to enable their misdeeds, yet they have a high risk balancing act that those same misdeeds will put their power at risk. The NY prosecutor referenced by Lydia’s article is a case in point. I’ll need a little help to understand how abuse is the tool to advance their power.

(Quote) (Reply)

It’s called ‘trauma-based mind control’, and there is a good deal of research on the topic. Some would assert this gets into tinfoil hat territory, yet there is a good deal of documentation on government research into such ‘mind control’. With the recent exposure of Ailes, Weinstein, Nassar, and so, so many more, perhaps those who have been written off as crazy conspiracists will finally get a hearing. The issue has been much longer recognized in England and Europe, involving private boarding schools, orphanages, leading politicians and local police districts. It is my personal opinion that behind much of the sexual abuse and pedophilia in Hollywood, sports, the media, politics and, yes, the church is an attempt to traumatize and control people for various nefarious purposes. Many are asking ‘Why is this so pervasive?’ but few are willing to entertain answers that make all of us uncomfortable, that it is more about power than perversion. It is, IMO, more of a stretch to believe that a bunch of perverts just so happened to land in all of the positions of power in every arena of culture. But everyone has a right to their own beliefs.

Leslie Puryear: What might that look like?

If you mean ‘a new game’, I honestly do not know. I just know that I have lost all faith in the corrupt institution known as The Church, and perhaps even in that which is known as ‘Christianity’. Don’t get me wrong, they both contain a great element of truth; but it is always corrupt and corrupting.

Personally, I will never give up on God, on goodness, justice, mercy and trying to learn to love my neighbor more and self less. I’m just not looking to The Church anymore for answers.

truthseeker00: Some of the ‘old guys’ who are being reformed, are also deeply confused, citing Grudem, Piper and Sproul, yet firmly believing they are not Calvinist. This is not limited to Baptist churches; they have since perfected their process and moved on to every other denomination.

Your comment is absolutely true. But, if you really want to have your mind blown, think about this for a minute: the FREEWILL baptist church in our town is now a 9-Marx, Neo-Cal church (even including getting rid of their invitations/altar calls)! Theologically, I’d like to see just what kind of back flips they have to do to make that all work!
Fortunately, the little baptist church I attend (which is SBC) still preaches that Jesus died for everyone, and that He will save anyone who calls on Him! We had a time where that was challenged, but that pastor left us rather abruptly when we exposed his plans to “Calvinize” us! For some reason, they don’t like their deeds being exposed for all to see. And if that’s the case, then maybe they shouldn’t be trying to sneak in and take over churches!

Nancy2 (aka Kevlar):
Ken A,

IN the 1963 version, there is no Article XVIII, nothing saying that the husband is the servant-leader and that the wife must graciously submit.

That makes sense, considering the timing of the rise of comp theology I’ve read about. Something about a 70s-era reaction against the feminist “equal treatment” secular social movement.

I still don’t get how a woman receiving significantly less pay for doing the same job a man might do can possibly be construed as a good thing, for one example.

truthseeker00,

I understand your frustration but I pray you will not stop going to a bible-believing church. We need each other to grow in Christ and serve Him together. We’re also told not to “forsake the assembling of ourselves together as is the manner of some.” (Heb. 10:25). I believe there are many good non-denominational churches around. I would encourage you to keep looking and ask the Lord to lead you to the church where He wants to work through you.

refugee: So if someone started a social movement grounded on potlucks (say, using the Meetup app), it sounds like a lot of folks wouldn’t need churches at all!

I know Max likes to make cracks at the potlucks, but I think that’s a good chunk of what church *should* be. Fellowship, breaking bread…that’s built into the cake. If you take that away you are taking away something that matters.

Leslie Puryear:
truthseeker00,

I understand your frustration but I pray you will not stop going to a bible-believing church. We need each other to grow in Christ and serve Him together. We’re also told not to “forsake the assembling of ourselves together as is the manner of some.” (Heb. 10:25). I believe there are many good non-denominational churches around. I would encourage you to keep looking and ask the Lord to lead you to the church where He wants to work through you.

Happily, the assembling you mentioned does not have to take place inside the walls of a church. There is that little verse that says “for wherever two or more are gathered…”

Maybe I’m taking it out of context. Please let me know if I did. I still have trouble opening a Bible these days. Churchianity has left a terrible taste in my mouth.

However, I memorized swaths of scripture in my time there. It has been interesting to read other interpretations than what I was taught/indoctrinated to believe about women/culture/gender/etc.

But I still feel like throwing up at the thought of opening my Bible, even to check how the verses and context line up with the various interpretations.

Our previous hyper-cal church would likely explain it away as me not being among the elect. (What’s that doctrine that explains committed churchgoers who are not elect even though they think they are?)

The soft-comp church with neo-cal leanings (adulation of Piper and Ware and CS Lewis) would be more charitable, I expect, and merely call me backslidden.

truthseeker00: If you mean ‘a new game’, I honestly do not know. I just know that I have lost all faith in the corrupt institution known as The Church, and perhaps even in that which is known as ‘Christianity’. Don’t get me wrong, they both contain a great element of truth; but it is always corrupt and corrupting.

Personally, I will never give up on God, on goodness, justice, mercy and trying to learn to love my neighbor more and self less. I’m just not looking to The Church anymore for answers.

I have heard stories of and from increasing numbers of Dones who are working out their faith outside the walls of an institution.

God is so much bigger than the boxes men build to keep him in.

Mary27:
Divorce Minister,

In the case of our daughter, it meant that she would be permitted to separate for a time (not more than 6 weeks) in order for them to have couples marriage counseling (which she had already endured for 9 years) and then she would be required to go back into the abusive marriage. Her ex would of course put on his “repentance act” and from the point of view of the church it would be a success story. “Allowing separation for abuse” is a misrepresentation of the reality of what happens… in the end the abused wife is forced to return. The goal is always to get them back together under the same roof. They also misrepresent the idea that God only allows divorce for adultery. In reality, if the immoral spouse “repents” then the abused wife is required to forgive and return.

The thought I’m going back to someone who slapped me around, punched me with his fists, causing me to live in fear on a daily basis is unconscionable. Anyone who counsels in such a manner should have to endure being slapped and punched just to experience what it feels like. And these complementarians always want to talk about marriage being a reflection of Christ and the church. So when, pray tell, does Jesus slap around and punch the church? I’m so glad I’m not a part of these Christian circles. It’s all so repulsive to me.

Darlene: And these complementarians always want to talk about marriage being a reflection of Christ and the church. So when, pray tell, does Jesus slap around and punch the church?

It is absolute lunacy.

Lea: I know Max likes to make cracks at the potlucks, but I think that’s a good chunk of what church *should* be. Fellowship, breaking bread…that’s built into the cake. If you take that away you are taking away something that matters.

Having those pot lucks at church also takes a number of women out of church services. I know. I was kitchen team leader for several years. Our team missed a lot of services because we were busy in the church kitchen.

Max: The SBC is a non-prophet organization.

When the SBC replaced “Priesthood of the Believer” to “Priesthood of Believers”, this was the result.

Very clever wording. 🙂

Leslie Puryear: At some point, he will attempt to replace deacons with elders, eliminate congregationalism, and stop altar calls. Once elders are in place, there is no need for a democratic polity because the elders will make all of the decisions. Once this happens, the church will finally wake up to what has happened. The usual result is a huge church fight. That is happening in many small churches in North Carolina.

Ok…but how does the pastor gain so much power to begin with? He’s paid by the church, he was selected by committee, the deacons could vote him out….something is not adding up.

This can only be happening because a majority in the denomination want it to happen.

Maybe it’s not a Calvinist takeover, maybe the grassroots church has been co-opted long before this. They’ve been fed a steady diet of separation from the world, how evil the world is, how you are a persecuted minority, how special you are and the only reason everyone isn’t a Christian like you is that they are hopelessly lost.

Keep in mind, being Christian isn’t enough, you have to be the same type of Christian.

I don’t know about Baptists but that’s the Assembly of God church my wife attends.

Whoa, my first comment in a while.

After seeing the interesting tweet from the WHOIS results, I studied the signatories of the swbtsletter.com page. There are 65 signatures from The Village Church including Lore Ferguson Wilbert and Lauren Chandler and 60 from The Summit. And it’s not because they’re big, I see single-digits results for NewSpring, Lake Pointe, Woodlands, Elevation, etc. So now I’m convinced it’s political.

Deb: When the SBC replaced “Priesthood of the Believer” to “Priesthood of Believers”, this was the result.

Very clever wording.

The Collective, Comrades.
Individual cells in the hive mind are utterly expendable.

truthseeker00: Many are asking ‘Why is this so pervasive?’ but few are willing to entertain answers that make all of us uncomfortable, that it is more about power than perversion. It is, IMO, more of a stretch to believe that a bunch of perverts just so happened to land in all of the positions of power in every arena of culture.

I’m more inclined to go with abusers have an additional motivation to accumulate power, many seem single minded in their quest for positions that enable them to abuse. That said, I’m interested in your reference to “trauma-based mind control” for further research. I’ve run into my share of nutcases and the more understanding the better.

truthseeker00: Now that the cat is out of the bag, and women can no longer be isolated from ‘unwelcome’ ideas, it is time to ramp up the P.R. machine. Gotta make all the old, controlling ideas sound reasonable.

Once more, it all comes down to “Who Gets to Hold the Whip?”

Leslie Puryear:
Max,

Max, you have perfectly described what is going on. The main problem, as I see it, is the people in the pew don’t care.

As long as they’re getting ENTERTAINED.

Amy Smith:
Where is the outrage about John Piper who gavethe same advice as Patterson? Piper said a woman should endure abuse for a season and getting smacked around for a night. That advice could be deadly. https://youtu.be/3OkUPc2NLrM

Piper gets a free ride. YouTube is full of his outlandish teaching. He’s much more influential and dangerous than Paige Patterson but he’s never called out for any of it. Just don’t hold your breath waiting for criticism to be directed toward John Piper.

JDV,

There’s more biblical evidence to preach without any remuneration than to even have a “church roll” to start with. I would deem it a high honor to be removed from any roll with Patterson or Dever’s name attached to it.

I think it’s hilarious to hear these guys talk about kicking people off their church rolls but abused wives are supposed to stay and take their punches.

Stan: There are 65 signatures from The Village Church including Lore Ferguson Wilbert and Lauren Chandler

Matt Chandler calls VC female members “our girls.” I bet he’s mighty proud of his girls banding together to take the great white hunter down.

Wade Burleson,

Hmmm. My comment above should have gone to Wade, not Divorce Minister. Are these Quote and Reply links working OK?

Article from 2006 about the SBC, missions, and tongues—as a followup to Wade’s post that I mentioned above:
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1876&dat=20060325&id=_SgnAAAAIBAJ&sjid=59AEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6996,2437917&hl=en

ishy: I’m afraid in the churches I’ve seen, it’s even more sinister than that. The bigger churches seed the congregation with sudden “transfers” to “replant” the church. They get enough people to swing the vote.

The old “knock-and-drag the Projects on Election Day”.

Also tried by the Rajneeshes when they tried to take over Antelope, Oregon some years ago. My informant from Redding, CA (350mi/550km south of Antelope) said that the Rajneeshees sent buses down that far to scoop up the local homeless, take them back to Rajneeshpuram/Antelope, and get them on the voter rolls.

Max,

And I thought Matt Chandler was against anonymous critics, the narcissistic zeroes. I guess that’s only for anonymous critics of Calvinists.

“Former First Baptist Church Charlotte pastor Mark Harris defeated Rep. Robert Pittenger in Tuesday’s primary in North Carolina’s 9th District.”

I had no idea there were so many rednecks in and around Charlotte. The SBC machine is powerful. At least it is in the south.

Lea: I know Max likes to make cracks at the potlucks, but I think that’s a good chunk of what church *should* be. Fellowship, breaking bread…that’s built into the cake. If you take that away you are taking away something that matters.

I agree!

https://mobile.twitter.com/macbrunson/status/994206254288564224

Never thought of it in those terms. Anyway, why must the SBC do everything so secretly? The elders have already decided. What a joke these guys are.

Max,

Have you ever bought a church cookbook? I have cookbooks from 4 different churches.

Here’s the link to the petition. Scroll down to the bottom and click on “signatures” to read who has signed it. There are several “anonymous” on the list.
https://www.gopetition.com/petitions/the-right-thing-for-the-southern-baptist-convention-and-paige-patterson.html

Steve,

“Anyway, why must the SBC do everything so secretly?”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

because being driven by money and power is totally the wrong image.

Nancy2 (aka Kevlar): church cookbook?

Yes, we have collected a bunch of them over the years. There are prize recipes in them!

Headless Unicorn Guy: The Collective, Comrades.
Individual cells in the hive mind are utterly expendable.

Ah…HUG, you got it! And now I get it!

Darlene: Deb: When the SBC replaced “Priesthood of the Believer” to “Priesthood of Believers”, this was the result.

Very clever wording.

Please jog my memory. What does the sleight of hand change? What does the pluralization of believer and the removal of the article the mean?

Russell Dilday provides a good analysis of that in the section “The diminishing of soul competency and the priesthood of the believer” at: http://pastarticles.christianethicstoday.com/CETArt/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.main&ArtID=582

Deb,

That is more than clever, that is down right diabolical… Only a thoughtful read of that change, which most people will not catch, will “get it”…. that is a HUGH change… especially when you look at their overall change…

Jeffrey Chalmers:
Darlene,

It allows the leaders to define who the “believers” are. When it is singular, you just need to say, “I am a believer” and you are a priest….Now, the leaders get tosay who the “believers” are…if you do not do such and such, like sign a church covenant, you are not really a “believer”…..

Ah, so those who hold the keys are in control.

Leslie Puryear: To me, the bottom line is the education of pastor search committees.

The power of the pastor search committee, yes, in being clear about theology (teaching: Piper, Wilson, Patterson) as well as practice (relationships: Pressler, Hybels, Savage). Because one can’t be too careful in the selection of leadership when it comes to track record, motive, history.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-male-allies-abuse-women_us_5af35072e4b04d3b2c903373

Jojo: Who are the trustees at SWBTS? Is there a list online somewhere?

Here:

http://www.sbc.net/pdf/trustees/2017SouthWestern.pdf

9Marxist apparatchik Jonathan Leeman is a trustee!

Jeffrey Chalmers: a core concept of the reformation is that we do not need a preist to interact with G$d…. we do not need a “confessional” that only “works” when a preist is sitting on the other side….. .. that simple change in wording begs the question… who “are” the believers, and not one person, but the “collective” is now the preist that comunicates with G$d….

I’m pretty sure God made this clear in scripture, way before the Reformation.

Jeffrey Chalmers: a core concept of the reformation is that we do not need a priest to interact with G$d…

Reformed = direct access to God through Jesus, and furthermore, indwelt and gifted by God’s Holy Spirit. Like in the Good Ole’ Days of Acts.

A church labeling itself, “Reformed” – is a bit confusing. What does that particular church mean by calling itself “Reformed”?

Even more confusing, we have a friend that calls himself “Dutch Reformed” though he is local here in the US, (windmills? clogs? Gouda cheese? split the bill? bicycling? tulips?).

Top notch religion writer Sarah Pulliam Bailey teamed up with another top notch religion writer Michelle Boorstein, and Julie Zauzmer in her article published in The Chicago Tribune/ Washington Post May 7th.
Her article seems to indicate she may know wrote the letter,(directly or indirectly) and that fear of reprisal was motivation for one organizer of the effort to stay hidden.

“The women who wrote the open letter say they tried first to speak to seminary trustees, but felt they had to make their concerns public to be taken seriously, said one woman who works for a high-ranking leader in a Southern Baptist organization and spoke on the condition of anonymity because she feared her participation in organizing the letter could jeopardize her job.”

So now what? If the SBC doesn’t take this effort seriously and Patterson gets a slap on the wrist or skates, how does this petition translate into action for the writers, organizers and those who signed it?

On another note, Wade Burleson has Part One of Dr. Sheri Klouda’s story up on his blog.
Even the commenters at his blog are scared.

Headless Unicorn Guy,

Unless one comes to realize how useless the equally yoked teaching is. Once one ditches that, it opens up a whole new world of genuinely moral, kind Non-Christian men that single women can date and marry.

Mary27,

Mary27: In the case of our daughter, it meant that she would be permitted to separate for a time (not more than 6 weeks) in order for them to have couples marriage counseling (which she had already endured for 9 years) and then she would be required to go back into the abusive marriage. Her ex would of course put on his “repentance act” and from the point of view of the church it would be a success story. “Allowing separation for abuse” is a misrepresentation of the reality of what happens… in the end the abused wife is forced to return. The goal is always to get them back together under the same roof. They also misrepresent the idea that God only allows divorce for adultery. In reality, if the immoral spouse “repents” then the abused wife is required to forgive and return.

I just thought this bore repeating.
It is so sick what some Christians do to other people – expecting abused women to stay in an abusive marriage no matter what, so warped.

Muslin, fka Deana Holmes,

Didn’t Piper offer that slight walk back only after many months (or years) and/or input from lots of people who told him how awful his first set of comments were? If that is so, I don’t want to acknowledge his second set of comments.

His true views are reflected in the “you must endure abuse for a season” commentary. That’s what he really thinks, until he got blow back from everyone and their grandma.

Daisy,

Exactly. I am also conservative and certainly do not hate men! I can never understand why people lump ideas together. This is one of the ways comps attack egalitarians.I have always been an egalitarian while at the same time espousing conservative views theologically and in other respects.

Darlene: What????? Was this one of his crazy tweets?Or him pontificating at Desiring God?

Pretty sure there was a whole article but I didn’t read it.

Daisy: I now realize that rejecting complementarianism does not necessitate becoming a liberal or a man-hating feminist who never shaves her legs.

ARMPITS if you’re a REAL X-Treme Feminist.

Ever wish you could strand every factions’ Lunatic Fringe onto a desert island where they could Righteously kill each other off and leave all the rest of use to just Live Our Lives?

jyjames: Reformed = direct access to God through Jesus, and furthermore, indwelt and gifted by God’s Holy Spirit. Like in the Good Ole’ Days of Acts.

A church labeling itself, “Reformed” – is a bit confusing. What does that particular church mean by calling itself “Reformed”?

That They’re the Only Genuine Christians, of course.
“I THANK THEE, LOOORD, THAT WE ARE NOTHING LIKE THOSE FILTHY ROMISH PAPISTS OVER THERE…”

Treaty of Wesphalia ended the Reformation Wars in 1648, and some STILL haven’t gotten the news.

Even more confusing, we have a friend that calls himself “Dutch Reformed” though he is local here in the US, (windmills? clogs? Gouda cheese? split the bill? bicycling? tulips?).

TULIPs, definitely.

Daisy:
FW Rez,

That is my position as well. Patterson was telling this story, even if it may have varied in details any time he told it, to coach and indoctrinate women into thinking they had no choice but to stay in an abusive marriage.

It was a pedagogical tool to brain wash Christian women, so whether or not the story itself was based on an actual event, or was embellished, is beside the point.

Exactly, Daisy! The story, true or not, reveals the deep-seated, aberrant theology that Patterson believes and teaches. And I believe it is the same aberrant theology that many who are calling for his removal still believe.

Daisy: I’d also add on-going or consistent verbal and emotional abuse.

In many ways, verbal/emotional abuse is worse. There is NO physical evidence, maximizing Plausible Deniability and ease of grooming third-party allies/faithful minions.

Having to live with someone who repeatedly abuses you in that manner can be very harmful as well, and you have to put distance between yourself and that person.

There’s a reason my last known contact with my brother was when the first LOTR movie came out…

sandyc: Leslie Puryear,
it could be that when a church refuses the gifts of the Holy Spirit (because of outlandish misuse by some charismatics) the result is a church that digs in deeper to works and rules and regulations even to the point of not caring when women and children are harmed as long as the men are following the rules.

Both equally out-of-balance in opposite directions.
On the surface, mortal enemies always at each others’ throats.
Underneath, Identical in Attitude and Righteousness.

Darlene: Ah, so those who hold the keys are in control.

“There is no Right, there is no Wrong, there is only POWER.”
— Lord Voldemort

Lea: Lea on Thu May 10, 2018 at 08:59 AM said:
Darlene: What????? Was this one of his crazy tweets?Or him pontificating at Desiring God?

Pretty sure there was a whole article but I didn’t read it.

See this: https://relevantmagazine.com/god/shouldnt-hate-body-even-john-piper-tells/

Max,

Max, excellently stated. These aggressive Neo-Cals have been salivating over the take-over of the SBC for years. It’s about to happen. We attend a large traditional Baptist Church in Raleigh and I can tell you probably most members have no idea about this upcoming complete take-over. I have asked the senior pastor if he could have a series of meetings explaining Calvinism with a Q&A. Reply: absolutely not. “Keep quiet and keep tithing” seems to be all leaders really want. BTW, I attended a wedding a few years ago where J D Greear was officiating. The mother of the bride was divorced. He, without prior knowledge of the marriage couple, put into the vows that they would never, under any circumstances, get divorced. Many of us were not happy to hear this.

Finegold: I attended a wedding a few years ago where J D Greear was officiating … put into the vows that they would never, under any circumstances, get divorced.

I don’t think that “worse” in the vows “for better or for worse” includes domestic abuse. Married folks can go through a variety of bad times together, times when it just doesn’t seem like it could get any worse, but love prevails. A man who abuses his wife does not love her.

Ken F (aka Tweed): See this: https://relevantmagazine.com/god/shouldnt-hate-body-even-john-piper-tells/

Wow, what a response to Piper regarding his harmful advice to someone suffering from a poor body image. This professional, educated woman’s response nailed it. But I doubt Piper will take notice because after all, a woman has no right to instruct him.

Darlene: Wow, what a response to Piper regarding his harmful advice to someone suffering from a poor body image. This professional, educated woman’s response nailed it. But I doubt Piper will take notice because after all, a woman has no right to instruct him.

Does anybody seriously think that Piper will maintain any lasting traction even amongst his former pew serfs?

Remember, the internet is the new movable type printing press (Gutenberg), and the available information through it is removing the stranglehold of ecclesiastical tyranny everywhere.

Muff Potter: Remember, the internet is the new movable type printing press (Gutenberg), and the available information through it is removing the stranglehold of ecclesiastical tyranny everywhere.

Regarding the comparison between Gutenberg’s press and the Internet, I remember this anecdote:

Gutenberg himself refused to print anything except The Bible and Only The Bible; to him, his invention had no other purpose.

But the boss had to go home sometime; and when he did, his apprentices stayed on and ran off porn on Gutenberg’s “Bible Only” invention.

Max: Mohler is very clever.

Semantics worthy of Our Father Below, My Dear Wormwood.