When are people in the Southern Baptist Convention going to stand up and say enough is enough? The Southern Baptist Convention is now moving toward a time when everyone must look the same, talk the same, act the same, believe the same on the non-essentials of the faith, or else you will be removed as "not one of us." Today it is private prayer language vs. cessationists and the proper administrator of baptism vs. biblical baptism. Tomorrow it might be Calvinism vs Arminianism or dispensationalism vs. preterism. Where will it end?
The nature of independent, fundamentalist Baptists - Baptists who claim their true Landmark heritage through the ana-baptists of Europe and not the particular Baptists of England - is to separate from everyone who is not the "pure" bride of Christ. These separatists desire no cooperation, demand conformity, and are cock sure that every word they breathe is the mind of God. After a ten year personal slumber, I woke up three years ago and saw that this separatist, Landmark spirit is controlling our Convention and agency boards. I knew that if somebody didn't speak out against the narrowing of the definition of what it means to be a Southern Baptist, then those who "control" the SBC would wind up excluding, removing, and disfellowshipping anyone who didn't look like them. I spoke out for those who believe in the continuation of the gifts, but were removed from our mission field. I have spoken out on behalf of women who taught at our seminaries and were fired for being women. I have spoken out against the extraordinary efforts to turn the SBC into one giant Fundamentalist Baptist church.
This week I pointed out that the architect of the Southern Baptist Convention is now going after Calvinists. Dr. Paige Patterson has expressed his intentions to administrators and professors at SWBTS to not have anyone on faculty at Southwestern who holds to five-point Calvinism. This is not conjecture; it is fact. It is also consistent with his actions of removing anyone who doesn't believe like he. People like Sheri Klouda, who saw nothing wrong with a woman teaching a man Hebrew. People like trustee Dwight McKissic, who believe his gift of a private prayer language is from the Holy Spirit. People like certain professors who believed in the continuation of the gifts. Now Dr. Patterson has turned his eye of disunion to five-point Calvinists.
Ironically, the defenders of this purge in the Southern Baptist Convention, those who are closed-communion, Landmark, separatist Baptists, like Patterson himself, defend Dr. Patterson to the nth degree. Their ideologies line up with his. Unfortunately, the Calvinists are waking up at the time they are the ones in the cross hairs. At some point, the Calvinists who didn't believe me will come back and say, "You were right." I, however, am uninterested in being proved right. I am only interested in people removing their blindfolds and seeing what is happening in our beloved Convention.
I have no problem with Landmark, independent, closed-communion, separatist, fundamentalist Baptists participating in the Southern Baptist Convention. Their anti-women, anti-charismatic, anti-Calvinist, anti-cooperation, and "anti-everthing they are not," does sometimes give me a head ache. But, I do not want them gone.
I want them to stop removing Southern Baptists from ministry and service who aren't like them.
Patterson's Intentions Clear and Consistent
In a taped conversation with Paige Patterson last night, a young pastor who idolizes Dr. Patterson and holds to the same ideology to that of his mentor, asked Dr. Patterson about the "rumors" that he desired to remove the Calvinists from the faculty at Southwestern. The questions and answers, courtesy of the transcript provided by New BBC Forum, are as follows . . .
Interviewer: "I've been asked recently about a rumor that these economic challenges have been used as an excuse uh... to weed out certain professors at Southwestern who hold to a soteriological viewpoint with which you disagree. Is there any truth to that rumor?"
Paige Patterson: "Ummm... eh you... you know... eh uh... I certainly hope not. Uhhh... eh uh... eh... I've lived my entire life... of life in a goldfish bowl... and... as boldly as I know how to do it. Uhhh... we're not certain at all that we're going to have to eliminate any professor. We have been working very, very hard to... ummm... to cut everything else in the world so we don't have to cut professors and... uh... we don't know yet what we're gonna have to do, but we... we're hopeful that we don't have to cut any professors. If we do... ummm... I will not use a... uhhh... screen... uh... to do that with. Ummm... if if if... every decision that I make regarding faculty would be made with a view to assisting the school to be the best school it possibly can be. Ummm... we have every conceivable soteriological view on the campus... uhhh... in terms of five points of Calvinism. We have one-pointers, two-pointers, three-pointers, four-pointers, and five-pointers. Uhhh... I will say this. Uhhh... Southwestern will not build a school in the future around anybody who could not look anybody in the world in the eyes and say, "Christ died for your sins." If there is a problem there, then I believe there's a problem that Southern Baptists would not want to fund.
Interviewer: "True."
Paige Patterson: "And so uhhh... uhhh... that would be the case, but I wouldn't be hidin' behind a screen of economic matters... if I had to deal with that".
Interviewer: "Sure."
Paige Patterson: "And uhhh... uh... God willing... ummm... if He's gracious to us... God's people continue to give... maybe we won't have to lay off anybody else."
Interviewer: "That's what we're prayin' for. Yes."
The Confirmation that Calvinists are Targeted Is in the Tape
Other than the interesting fact the interviewer expresses agreement on three separate occasions in his little "interview," it strikes me that Dr. Patterson doesn't deny his agenda, but rather confirms it.
Listen to his words: Southwestern will not build a school in the future around anybody who could not look anybody in the world in the eyes and say, "Christ died for your sins."
Uh, Dr. Patterson, that is precisely what a five-point Calvinist will not do. A Calvinist will not tell just "anybody" that "Christ died for your sins." He will, however, look anybody in the eye and say, "Christ died for sinners. Do you know yourself to be a sinner and in need of a Savior? If so, Christ died for you."
Again, a five point Calvinist will never look just "anybody" in the eye and say "Christ died for you." He will not say that to the man who loves his adultery and scoffs at repentance. He will not say that to a woman who loves herself and will not bow to the Lordship of Christ. He will not say that to Adolph Hitler as Hitler takes Jews to the gas galleys. He will not say that to the sinner who has no sense of his sin. He will not say "Christ died for you" because he doesn't know if Christ did or not.
That's five point Calvinism.
The Calvinist believes that those for whom Christ died evidence Christ's death for them by their faith in the Son and their repentance of sins. God delivers, completely and eternally, only the sinners for whom He gave His Son. This is what Calvinism teaches. As Charles Spurgeon, the great Calvinist preacher of over 150 years ago, so eloquently declared about the elect and the reason God passes over them in judgment:
God will, God must, pass over us, because He spared not our glorious Substitute
The Calvinist is not a universalist. He believes that some sinners will be judged and condemned for their sins. These are those sinners for whom Christ did not die. It is the essence of five-point Calvinism, and these are the people Patterson wishes to purge from Southwestern. If Southern Baptists cannot see that the purging in the Southern Baptist Convention continues, and that anyone who doesn't agree with a particular ecclesiological, soteriological, pneumatological and eschatological ideology of those currently in charge and their vocal sychophants, then we are in a very dangerous place as a cooperating convention of autonomous churches.
There are a few Southern Baptists who do get it. Their blindfolds have been removed. Hopefully, more will follow.
In His Grace,
Wade
612 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 612 Newer› Newest»“Southwestern will not build a school in the future around anybody who could not look anybody in the world in the eyes and say, "Christ died for your sins."
–Paige Patterson, SWBTS President
(SBCToday.com / “Baptist Identity” blog)
February 5, 2009
“A consistent five-point Calvinist cannot look a congregation in the eyes or even a single sinner in the eye and say: “Christ died for you.” What they have to say to be consistent with their own theology is “Christ died for sinners.” Since Christ did not die for the non-elect, and since the five-point Calvinist does not know who the elect are, it is simply not possible in a preaching or witnessing situation to say to them directly “Christ died for you.”
-Dr. David Allen, Dean, SWBTS School of Theology
(BaptistTheology.org / SWBTS Center for Theological Research)
November 2008
Lydia,
My husband and I felt it best to correct the typos and remove the one that would confuse people. Thanks for your help. We simply desire to help our pastor.
An Anonymous But Appreciative Church Member
WHOAAA.
All hands on deck.
I have just been handed the BIG PICTURE by nobody less than big picture himself.
"Southwestern will not build a school in the future around anybody who could not look anybody in the world in the eyes and say, "Christ died for your sins."
Paige Patterson, SWBTS President, as tape recorded by SBC Today at their “Baptist Identity” blog on February 5, 2009
“A consistent five-point Calvinist cannot look a congregation in the eyes or even a single sinner in the eye and say: “Christ died for you.” What they have to say to be consistent with their own theology is “Christ died for sinners.” Since Christ did not die for the non-elect, and since the five-point Calvinist does not know who the elect are, it is simply not possible in a preaching or witnessing situation to say to them directly “Christ died for you.”
Dr. David Allen, Dean, SWBTS School of Theology at BaptistTheology.org / SWBTS Center for Theological Research, November 2008
Incredible
WAKE UP EVERYBODY!
To my church members, including Debbie, Steve, Mike, Mr. and Mrs Anonymous, Paul, and others:
Your pastor is grateful for you.
I realize that you all are now barred from SBC Today, but look at the brigt side, you have more time to make comments here!
And, I promise, I won't delete them or ban you. Neither will I ban those who consider me their enemy. Frankly, I think we are all benefited by fellowshipping with people who disagree with us.
I am off to do ministry, incuding a fundraiser for our counseling ministry "Abounding Grace." I will be back later, hopefully having personally spoken to my brothers in Christ Wes and Scott.
In His Grace,
Wade
Wow.
Those guys over at SBC Today have been exposed.
Where's Volfann? Where's Scott Gordon? Where's Wes Kenney? Where are all their commments? Anybody else notice how they are quiet as church mice?
What happened?
Sarah,
I'm not wondering where those guys are.
I'm wondering where Dr. Welty is.
Frankly, a short reprieve from the BI guys has cleared my headache.
Jack said, "Those responsible are trying to draw attention away from the larger issue at SWBTS."
By their own actions and deeds they've proved Wade to be right.
Bro. Wes is known in the Association as a go-to kind of guy for computer and internet questions. I can't believe he didn't know what he was doing was wrong when he did it. Instead of keeping his eyes on "the main thing" he let himself be seduced by the lure of heady SBC politics. He is a smart young preacher who apparently let his hate/dislike for Bro. Wade cloud his judgment.
You folks have done an excellent job uncovering the hypocrisy and fraud over at SBC Today.
Congrats for opening the eyes of many in our Convention.
Gene,
My estimation of Wes's character will now be riding on what he says when personally confronted with his hypocrisy.
As will mine Bill, as will mine.
In the sbctoday.com article about this whole affair, they closed all further commenting after someone felt the comments were distractions. Isn't this what America is about? Isn't this what we enjoy about free speech? Differences of opinions to be expressed without reprise or reprimand? They definitely fear any voice or opinions that differs from theirs. This isn't just being blind. This is being intentionally deaf as well. Unwilling to hear or listen.
I don't agree with Wade Burleson's position concerning Klouda, but I do like his openness to hear all sides of the discussion. I didn't have much respect for Wade Burleson with his support of Klouda and even supporting Waggoner for SBC presidency, but his openness to hear and listen to all voices and not shut anyone out has gained my utmost respect for him.
Thanks, Wade.
Will:
The SBC Today crowd has banned so many people from their website that it is a joke to openness. They only want one side presented--theirs.
They are showing their true colors on this one.
Dr. Phil,
I do believe you have some sick patience’s over on SBC TODAY. What are you going to do? My key word is "orinal" , would that help in their cure?
Wayne
In the timeline, I am quoted and some of my words are interpreted differently than I intended.
The timeline states:
"I was mistaken [about how long it took Wes to respond to the "request" to shut down the comment stream]. It was actually less than a minute. Someone has some explainin' to do. ;)"
What I meant to say, and tried to do so humorously, was that I was wrong before when I said it had been a whole minute before the last comment appeared on SBC Today, but humorously enough, the reality is that it was less than a minute, so I was wrong. I don't know who changed the timestamps. I do care, however, and I have an opinion which is not favorable towards SBC Today. But without proof, all I can say for sure is that my "one minute" was wrong, and "less than a minute" (according to my email records) is accurate.
Dr. David Allen truly sums up my view regarding the definite atonment of my Savior. I'm guessing if Sherri can be let go for being a woman, then David can be let go for having a CORRECT view of the atonment.
"I do believe you have some sick patience’s over on SBC TODAY. What are you going to do? My key word is 'orinal' , would that help in their cure?"
I think the good doctor might find this to be the appropriate modality to treat the "patience's" ailments.
Oh wait...my bad, after reading the quote more closely, it seems that David doesn't hold to that view, he's simply pointing out that those who do hold to it, must say so-and-so to stay consistent with their theology.
Dr Kear,
I was refering to the deleted post on Wades blog concerning you.
2. It is easy to say it was racially offensive but no one will ever know will they Dr Kear.
3.If you were not a Brother in Christ I would sue you but I attend to press on in a Biblical manner.
4. You like to convince people that I have wanted to have my post put back up but I have never asked that to be done.
Simply to remove the accusations that I am a racist which are still on there
to this very day.
"If you were not a Brother in Christ I would sue you but I attend to press on in a Biblical manner."
Oh, puhleaze.
Susie,
My comment #28 about Patterson's "I hope not" is still on at SBC Today, but no replies.
The last comment is:
cb scott
February 7th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Wes or any of the SBC TODAY guys,
It has been stated that you have mass blocked anyone from Enid, OK from SBC TODAY. is that true?
It has also stated you changed the time stamps on the last two comments in the previous post containing the Paige Patterson interview. Is that true?
cb
Wonder if he will get a reply.
A technical point:
It is possible to edit timestamps in Blogger through third party closed source and open source tools. Hollowbone is one tool.
2.You can do it through html editing in addition.
3. You might be in violation of Googles
license so not advising this for anyone.
Robert I Masters
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Anyone from Enid, OK, are you still blocked from SBC TODAY?
Wayne
Wayne,
Yes. As of this time I am still blocked.
Meanwhile as this comment stream approaches 500, the statements at the heart of this post still hang in the air:
"Southwestern will not build a school in the future around anybody who could not look anybody in the world in the eyes and say, "Christ died for your sins."
Paige Patterson, SWBTS President, as tape recorded by SBC Today at their “Baptist Identity” blog on February 5, 2009
“A consistent five-point Calvinist cannot look a congregation in the eyes or even a single sinner in the eye and say: “Christ died for you.” What they have to say to be consistent with their own theology is “Christ died for sinners.” Since Christ did not die for the non-elect, and since the five-point Calvinist does not know who the elect are, it is simply not possible in a preaching or witnessing situation to say to them directly “Christ died for you.”
Dr. David Allen, Dean, SWBTS School of Theology at BaptistTheology.org / SWBTS Center for Theological Research, November 2008
Editing a comment or timestamp might be unethical if the intent is to deceive and/or mislead.
And it was changed. I saw it with my own eyes.
Why would it be changed? The only reason I can come up with is to hide the fact that one comment followed the other by less than a minute.
That minute in and of itself is not proof that John3:16 and Wes are the same poster but it sure makes one wonder. And if they weren't the same then why bother changing the time to make it appear as though they weren't?
Rex Ray,
I guess I looked at a different blog on SBC Today - I've viewed two there now - and still haven't seen your comment. I guess they have several blogs. So I'll leave it to the rest of you-all to figure out what they're doing there.
While exploring that site I found an item about churches that think the KJV is the only Bible which made me think of how the Roman Catholic church is stuck with the Latin Vulgate (also a translation) because some pope declared it as [whatever they call statements that are considered infallible]. But enough of getting off-subject.
Susie
Mike Kear,
I believe the Word of God forbids taking another brother to court. Just because you allow it does not mean that God would approve.
You still have libeled me
Robert I Masters
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Susie and Rex Ray,
This is the correct address
http://sbctoday.com/
Wayne
Now with Dr. Allen's words and Dr. Patterson's spoken intent, the best we can hope for is that Dr. Patterson will be graciously inconsistent with his own theology in the future. I have no idea if the SWBTS episode actually took place, but I listened to the video interview of Paige Patterson himself and I'm not deaf or stupid. But, I will say this, as a former Arminian myself, I think I understand what Paige Patterson means behind that statement, that no evangelism should be hindered if souls can be saved by it, and I can appreciate his concern and compassion truthfully there. However, knowing as I do now that just like Jonah 2:9 says at the end, "Salvation is of the Lord." How much of it? All of it!! And that doesn't mean we forsake evangelism. It simply means we evangelize with greater, holy confidence in the Lord, a confidence unknown to the theology of the Arminian (even though it is in his or her heart if he or she is truly saved).
Dr. Mike Kear said...
Robert I. Masters,
I don't think you're angry or bitter. I think you're childish and unwilling to own up to your own actions. I think you need Jesus
and counseling
and probably an exorcism...
Well, amen!
I had a preacher who was a Calvinist. He said "Go out and share the Gospel, and support missionaries, for, although God knows who the elect are, He works through people to bring them the word of salvation.
I had a pastor who was an Arminian. He said "Go out and share the Gospel and support missionaries to bring to people the word of salvation.
Different reasoning, but same imperative. Share the gospel, bring the word of salvation. Kind of made me realize the Calvinist vs. Arminian argument is not the end - all, and there is definitely room for both.
Dr Kear,
Your conclusions about my words are not the same as my words.
What would Wade Do?
WWWD
I think he would have left my comment up for all to see...not censured it.Let the chips fall where they may!
Now since you think that will be offensive then the peacemakers thing to do was simply remove your comments.
Instead you took the knife and stabbed me in the back while I walked out the door.
I will repeat that I have never asked to come back into to your house( I mean by this that you repost my original comment)
Robert I Masters
From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Rex Ray:
Here is the reply from Tim Rogers to CB:
"I believe what Brother Wes did was place a huge net up in order to keep the wild geese from flying into the propellers of the plane."
Notice, that TR feels the need for answer for Wes. What a bunch of nonsense.
TR please let Wes speak for himself.
My husband and I felt it best to correct the typos and remove the one that would confuse people. Thanks for your help. We simply desire to help our pastor.
An Anonymous But Appreciative Church Member
Sat Feb 07, 10:53:00 AM 2009
I hope you guys did not think I was nitpicking. It could be confusing to a new reader.
Good job on the details of the timeline!
Lydia
Dear ELISABETH,
You wrote, 'Different reasoning, but same imperative. Share the gospel, bring the word of salvation. Kind of made me realize the Calvinist vs. Arminian argument is not the end - all, and there is definitely room for both."
Great thinkiing !
Any time that people put the focus back on Christ and His Message is great thinking ! Thank you, L's
This will be my last comment on this issue.
The post in question in SBCToday, started with comment-8160, and ends with comment-8233,8234.
Missing comments are as follows:
8162, 8170, 8188, 8207, 8208, 8212, 8225 and 8232.
Now I went and checked this from other surrounding posts on the front page. My guess is, the above missing comments were deleted.
My guess is comment-8232 belongs to An Appreciative Church Member. I would be curious to know at what time they posted their comment. If the time they posted was very close to comment-8233, then deleting comment-8232 was a bad thing to do ethically.
Please note that changing date/time stamps might be easy in wordpress, but changing comment numbers is little bit harder, as they are acting as permalinks in wordpress for comments. It's like changing the gravitational constant, which has lot of side effects.
I think the SBC good ol boys are Masters of deflection.
GMOMMY said ' think the SBC good ol boys are Masters of deflection.'
Wade's bloggers are
MASTERS OF DETECTION .
Great job, folks . :)
Whether of not someone is a Calvinist has taken a back seat.
The focus is on the very basic ethical question of:
'does the end justify the means'
The people who applaud the tactics of PP et al think that it does.
The people who oppose the extremely destructive tactics of PP et al say, NO, the ends never justify the means.
So once again, those who do not hold with Calvinism and who DO have a sense of Christian ethics, CAN support Wade's defense of the Calvinist professors at SWBTS.
It's simple: PP is wrong.
He is hurting people.
For whatever purpose, it is wrong to hurt others in the way that he has done.
Christian Ethics: time to really renew commitment to it AND to focus on Jesus as the center of our faith.
LET RIGHT BE DONE.
"In the darkest darkness, love is more magnificent than ever.
In the deepest sadness, hope has the strength to create anything.
When the whole world is against you, every positive action can bring miraculous results.
When the burden of being is unbearably heavy, the spirit can fly to infinite heights.
If all is lost, there is no end to what can be gained. Completely let go of everything, and you surely do have it all.
The more confusing and noisy and complicated the world becomes, the more power there is in stillness.
When the day is filled with harshness, gentle actions grow more powerful and effective.
In a world filled with fear, truth gains new clarity.
In a time of severe discontent, the possibilities for real joy grow ever greater.
At the deepest level, goodness always prevails.
FOR TRUTH, BY ITS VERY NATURE,
WILL NOT BE DENIED."
Somehow what has happened here has brought new meaning to the plight of Dr. Klouda and the missionaries.
Into the darkness and the silence that allowed them to be harmed,
the "SBC of the BI People" was born.
But yesterday and today, some of that darkness and silence is no more. Some light has come.
And tomorrow, more light may still come.
Even if one innocent person is spared suffering at the hands of the B.I. people;
then all Wade's work will be worth it.
Wade fights an Ancient Enemy,
but he does not fight alone.
Not alone. L's
Kind of made me realize the Calvinist vs. Arminian argument is not the end - all, and there is definitely room for both.
Not to side track this five-hundred car train, but Elisabeth, I am afraid the controversy is much deeper than that.
The John 3:16ers voice is heard loud and clear that the Calvinistic doctrines are "prestidigitation" (Allen) and "doctrines of devils" (Page).
Behind this is another fundamental, inerrency, viz a viz, authority of Scripture. Either Scripture teaches one or the other, or neither, but certainly it cannot teach both or we have effectively killed inerrency by destroying authority.
From Dr. Kear's blog: "One needs to know God and what the Bible says about God. One needs to know Jesus Christ and what the Bible says about Jesus Christ. If someone is not willing to fill their mind with these real truths then they do not have real faith. Faith must be something personal. It cannot be the church’s it must be mine. It is trust that is the form (enlightening aspect) of faith. Faith is then personal knowledge and trust in the promises of God toward us. If you know a promise and trust a promise it follows that you have an assurance of that promise really being for you. To that end Calvin taught that assurance of salvation was the essence of faith. In contrast the idea of moral conjecture was that upon examination of the current works of the individual can a probability of salvation be arrived at. I can conjecture on the basis of my moral condition that I am in a state of grace. In contrast to Calvin the medieval theologians taught that anything beyond moral conjecture, any such assurance or certainty, was presumptuous, arrogant, and dangerous."
The division goes much deeper, you see. Those who have, over the past century and a half, worked to eviscerate the SBC of its Calvinistic substance have nearly succeeded, and eventhough we may share verbal agreement over the necessity of inerrency, our views of what that means are 180 degrees out from each other.
The above quote from Dr. Kear's brother is a prime example. For the Romanish doctrines have come full circle among the majoritarian faction whose conjectures concerning their actions are the basis of their salvation. So, while we might agree that the approach to evangelism is not far apart, the gospel content people are taught is quite at odds.
Sorry to all for the rail spur detour. It really has nothing to do with the SBC structure of cooperation except that it is used by the majoritarians as one of the points of departure to discriminate.
The BI guys at SBCToday are running a series on baptism and the Lord's Supper and reference the historic SBC positions but are loathe to adopt the soteriology of the fathers who held to them. Their hypocrisy reeks of myopic self-approbation and their aim, as BI's BB has indicated, is to erect their SBC walls high enough to keep any others out.
I don't agree with the SBC structure because of where it leads. But the fact that it is what it is I will defend. What these men are attempting is to rewrite the entire ethos of the cooperative effort. They well know that it is as it stands a Baptistic "ecumenical" system of accomodation. That is what Mullins intended. That is what they call liberal. But the fact is, that without Mullins' "big tent" latitudinarianism, they would not be SBC.
So while it is true, Elisabeth, that there is room for both within the SBC, it is precisely because of the openness of the SBC that the controversies rage on. It is a political, not an ecclesiastical organization, formed for the cooperative effort of evangelism among churches of like faith, not one faith. But what the BI guys are doing is attempting to change the SBC from a convention to a denomination.
At least as far as I understand the division in this thread and the division in other controversy, that is really the issue at hand. The Baptist Identifiers would, if they could, rewrite the constitution and by-laws to explicitly require doctrinal purity among the cooperating members. Thus they are insisting that only certain forms of baptism, certain authorities for it, certain communions, certain practices, and of course, universalistic doctrines be made the rule of association. That is, however, opposite the foundation of the SBC cooperative agreement.
Mike and Robert,
I am at the church checking email before I head home. We had a wonderful day helping some really good people raise a lot of money for kingdom causes. I'm just now checking up on the blog comments.
I appreciate the manner in which you have resolved the issue.
I know Mike and respect him. I do not know Robert, but am confident I would respect him as a Christian brother if I did.
I am, believing it to be best for all involved, deleting all comments related to the issue now resolved (including your's Dr. Phil).
:)
In His Grace,
Wade
"I am, believing it to be best for all involved, deleting all comments related to the issue now resolved (including your's Dr. Phil)."
What? That figures, and this is exactly why the world can't and won't believe us anymore. We can't deal with disagreement and discord, and we are embarrassed for anyone to see it, so we edit our own world to make it match what we want it to be. Isn't that what we are dealing with now?
oc.
"'I am, believing it to be best for all involved, deleting all comments related to the issue now resolved (including your's Dr. Phil).'
What? That figures, and this is exactly why the world can't and won't believe us anymore. We can't deal with disagreement and discord, and we are embarrassed for anyone to see it, so we edit our own world to make it match what we want it to be. Isn't that what we are dealing with now?
oc."
oc,
It was a side issue, not relevant to this blog, and, as far as I can tell, a personal thing that Robert was holding against Mike.
BLESSED ARE THE PEACE MAKERS ...
OC,
You have a valid point. One that almost caused me to leave the 20 or so comments up.
As I said earlier, I am impressed with the way the men came to a resolution. That is the one reason I would keep them up.
But the main reason to take them down is they have nothing to do with this post or the comments about the post. It becomes distracting to readers who have to go through 450 to 500 comments looking for things relevant to what is being discussed.
If the dispute was over what we were discussing, the comments would have remained, for they do show how Christians can resolve conflict.
My preference is, however, that blog comments stay on track with what I have posted. That is one of the basic rules of comment civility.
By the way, I have an entire chapter coming out in a new book called "Christian Civility" where we talk about Christian behavior on the internet.
I'm not perfect, and I make many mistakes, but I do try to keep comments on topic.
I hope this explains why the dispute between Mike and Robert was removed.
In His Grace,
Wade
Amen. Wade.
Thanks!
OC,
Why don't YOU go write a blog on Christian disputes and have people come on the comment stream and illustrate it for readers? This isn't your blog, and Wade has given his explanation.
special menu tonight at Pecan Manor for the B.I. gang:
crow casserole
braised tongue
bitter herb salad
shepardess pie
prune delight
P.S. They are making Wes say grace.
OC you don't get it.
The two parties involved worked it out, and that settles it.
Why would anyone want to see it keep going ?
Folks,
I have called Wes Kenney at his church, home and cell phone and left messages with my private cell number. He has not returned my calls. I have done the same with Scott Gordon. He has not returned my calls. We are still blocked from accessing SBC Today. I have done my part in trying to resolve the issue discussed in this blog stream and feel I can do no more.
So, I have come to a decision.
I am going to forget about it. I would also ask you to forget about it. I am not going to post about it, nor will I discuss it any further. I am thankful for those of you who have taken the time to research and write about this issue.
The Bible says "love covers a multitude of offenses" and though I felt offended when I found out what had been done, I thought about it and have decided I love Scott Gordon and Wes Kenney. I also love David Volfann (I've met him once), Peter Lumpkins (likewise, met him once) and Bart Barber (I've sat on the platform at a conference with him), Tim Guthrie and others who feel I am a danger to the SBC. It is best if I simply continue pastoring my church, writing what I believe needs to be said to help our Convention maintain a spirit of complete cooperation, and not take any personal offenses at any one, or all, of these men.
A person I have grown to respect over these past three years is Bob Cleveland. While I was at the charity auction today I received and email from Bob on my blackberry. He wrote:
"Perhaps in the Grand Scheme of things, God is, in effect, sending Pharoah's army after you, and you're at the Red Sea. God's promise "I will fight for you while you keep silent" rings louder than ever."
Wise words, Bob.
I shall simply be silent, and I do have a spirit of forgiveness - genuinely.
In His Grace,
Wade Burleson
OC,
I do agree with you, really, I do. And had the blog been about racial reconciliation - or racism - or blacks in the Southern Baptist Convention, all the comments would have remained to show precisely what I believe you genuinely want others to know.
Christians are not perfect. Believe me, I know because of my own imperfections, which are many.
We are simply forgiven, and given time, the Holy Spirit helps us reconcile. I appreciate you desiring others to see this.
So do I. My prayer is that something similar could happen during a comment stream of a subject on which I write.
In His Grace,
Wade
I am sorry, but family matters call. I will be unable to respond to any questions or comments until very late this evening.
Have a great day!!
Wade
Dear WADE,
Take your wonderful wife out for dinner to thank her for the way she came to bat for you.
That was wonderful to see.
Flowers and candy would be nice, too.
Celebrate life !
The light is getting brighter. :)
"Forgiveness is freeing up and putting to better use the energy once consumed by holding grudges, harboring resentments, and nursing unhealed wounds.
It is rediscovering the strengths we always had and relocating our limitless capacity to understand and accept other people and ourselves.”
Dr. Sydney Simon
God smiles on acts of grace that open doors for reconciliation.
Thanks, Pastor Wade. I've taken the liberty of deleting one of my comments that you missed. I appreciate your heart.
Blessings,
Mike
Hey oc,
Maybe if Robert and Dr. Kear could agree to be civil;
and maybe if Wade could forgive in imitation of Christ;
then maybe you can understand that singin' Kumbayah is not the sin you think it is.
oc, in the black community, they would call you a 'pot stirrer':
some would say you play this game:
"hey, let's you and him go fight".
(you and him being Robby and Dr.K)
but oc, in all honesty, this week is a week of reconciliation where
something festering in the B.I. SBC has opened up and will begin to heal in the light of Wade's forgiveness.
oc, don't you 'understand' ?
Maybe ypu can't.
If anyone in Enid wants to send a comment to SBdCeivers Today, post it here and I will run it on over for you.
I know they don't have Europe blocked.
Yet.
:)
This truly is an incredible set of circumstances.
I am so thankful that I lack the kind of "character" one must have to get into a situation like this.
Mainly because I lack the kind of "character" needed to figure out how to get out of a situation like this.
SL1M
Hey oc, here is something you might need to read. The, you will DEFINITELY 'get it'. :)
"THE CHRISTMAS TRUCE
On Christmas Day, 1914, in the first year of World War I, German, British, and French soldiers disobeyed their superiors and fraternized with "the enemy" along two-thirds of the Western Front. German troops held Christmas trees up out of the trenches with signs, "Merry Christmas." "You no shoot, we no shoot." Thousands of troops streamed across a no-man's land strewn with rotting corpses. They sang Christmas carols, exchanged photographs of loved ones back
home,shared rations, played football, even roasted some pigs. Soldiers embraced
men they had been trying to kill a few short hours before. They agreed to warn each other if the top brass forced them to fire their weapons, and to aim high.
A shudder ran through the high command on either side. Here was disaster in the making: soldiers declaring their brotherhood with each other and refusing to fight. Generals on both sides declared this spontaneous peacemaking to be treasonous and subject to court martial. By March, 1915 the fraternization movement had been eradicated and the killing machine put back in full operation. By the time of the armistice in 1918, fifteen million would be slaughtered.
Not many people have heard the story of the Christmas Truce. Military leaders have not gone out of their way to publicize it. On Christmas Day, 1988, a story in the Boston Globe mentioned that a local FM radio host played "Christmas in the Trenches," a ballad about the Christmas Truce, several times and was startled by the effect. The song became the most requested recording during the holidays in Boston on several FM stations. "Even more startling than the number of requests I get is the reaction to the ballad afterward by callers who hadn't heard it
before," said the radio host. "They telephone me deeply moved, sometimes in tears, asking, `What the hell did I just hear?'"
I think I know why the callers were in tears. The Christmas Truce story goes against most of what we have been taught about people. It gives us a glimpse of the world as we wish it could be and says, "This really happened once." It reminds us of those thoughts we keep hidden away, out of range of the TV and newspaper stories that tell us how trivial and mean human life is. It is like hearing that our deepest wishes really are true: the world really could be different."
Excerpted from David G. Stratman,
Hello,
From SBC Today, Wes answers C.B. questions:
Wes Kenney Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
C.B.,
In answer to your first question, yes. though it was intended to be more precise than that. I’m not as smart as I wish I was.
As to your second question, yes. Absolutely. Repeatedly.
[Reply]
32
Big Daddy Weave
February 7th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Lots of Drama going on in the Southern Baptist blogosphere….
Anyone know why your colleague Petey Lumpkins has closed his blog?
[Reply]
Byroniac
February 7th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Big Daddy Weave,
Peter is laboring under two writing deadlines as I understand it. I think one of them is for a published Bible Study, and the other is a manuscript of a book. I think the closing is temporary, to allow him time to not be distracted or have to police comments on his blog.
[Reply]
Tim Rogers Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Brother Byron,
You are correct as to his closing. He has a huge deadline to meet.
Blessings,
Tim
[Reply]
34
Dave Miller
February 7th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Gentlemen, please hear me on this one. SBC Today’s credibility is being called into question is a direct way. The people doing this are laying out evidence in a very direct (if hostile) way.
I hope you will answer the charges directly, fully, and openly. If there is an explanation of the time stamp thing, I would love to hear it.
If you made mistakes, own them and repent. If you did not, please give the other side of this.
I am not accusing, I am asking. I do not understand what is going on, but it is getting nasty out there.
BTW, I am perfectly okay with my comment being deleted. I am making a personal appeal to you. Once you have read it and heard me, do as pleases you.
Hoping for the best…
oc, there are some things more powerful than violence
An open letter to Dr. David Allen, Dean, School of Theology, SWBTS:
Dr. Allen,
I would like to commend you for your understanding of the "consistent Calvinist." Many, even within the Reformed Tradition fail to see the practical theology associated with Calvin's 5-points. I however am one such pastor who could/will notnever stand in the pulpit (or anywhwere)and tell the lost that Christ died for "YOU." Why? Because that terminology is not found anywhere in Holy Scripture. I would ask you however that if you have indeed come across such phrasing by our Lord or His Holy Prophets, Apostles, or other writers that you please, in the interest my deep desire for correct knowledge, email me and give me the passages.
The question then remains: for whom did Christ die? I give you 2 answers.
1. He died for the glory of the Father by His obedience to Him and to fulfill the Covenant of Redemption.
2. He died for the antecedent of nearly every pronoun in John chapter 17.
So, Dr. Allen, you and Dr. Patterson can argue the 5 points all day long. At the end of the day you might even get by with firing all Calvinists. But sir, what you and Dr. Patterson are saying, is that those professors who teach the Bible accurately by adhering to the fact that Christ never made a claim to dying specifically for every soul ever born is to me imposing your own brand of evangelistic teaching on the faculty of SWBTS—indeed imposing it on the text as well. By this you are implying that Calvinists withhold the Gospel from some. You know this not true. Because you understand the nature of "consistent Calvinism."
I would encourage you and Dr. Patterson to rethink your present path and to remember that you are only present stewards of something with a treasured and checkered past.
Lastly, you should know that Dr. Patterson is not in the same position that Dr. Mohler was in the early 90's at Southern. Southern's Arminianists of the day were also blatant liberals of the most very liberal kind. I am not here to critique his handling of the takeover of Southern. That can be decided by history and by those closer and more affected. I AM however here to say that Southern is a jewel in the crown of the SBC. SWBTS is currently a disgrace. The SBC has some of the best Seminary training in the world. Each seminary has its strong points. Southern is renowned for its Reformed theology. Midwestern is quickly making a name for itself through the Spurgeon library, its study of Qumran literature and biblical archaeology, and its unique neutral position on the present soteriological debate. GGBTS is a great conservative voice of the west for the SBC and Dr. Akin has positioned Southeastern the as the great "bridge building" Seminary and likely the next frontier of the SBC. Where will SWBTS fall into all this? Presently it is headed for death. But I submit that no one in the SBC has an issue with Patterson taking SWBTS to a center for Landmark and radically-reformed teachings. Wade Burleson has even admitted that he can cooperate with Landmarkists. But you cannot do this by firing the Calvinists. EVER. NEVER. Not that way! I hear that Southwestern has some great conservative professors. Let them flourish. Lift them up. You and Patterson can have your pet projects through institutes within the greater institute.
So, you have 4-5 years before I start to look for a Seminary to begin a Ph.D. (if the Lord allows). Give me a reason to consider Southwestern.
Dipped in His blood,
Kevin M. Crowder
Pastor, Delhi Baptist Church
Cuba, Missouri
PS: I know for certain that Christ dies for ME. Not because anyone told me, nor because I read it in Scripture, but because His atonement effectively affected me to the point that can shout from the rooftops that “MY Redeemer Lives!”
for oc:
"For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given...
and his name will be called,
'Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace [sa shalom]'" (Is. 9.6)
The Christian church confesses in faith that the prophecy was realized with the coming of Jesus Christ, the Lord. What does it mean, then, that Jesus Christ is the "prince of Peace" biblically and for us today?
To answer this question we shall first turn our attention to the meaning of peace in the biblical sense.
The most common word in the Bible translated into "peace" is a Hebrew word "shalom".
The logical starting point of our study should be an examination of the word, shalom.
First, the verbal form, shalem, means "to make whole" and derivatively "to bring to completion", "to complete", "to restore" and "to compensate".
SOMETHINGS ARE STRONGER THAN VIOLENCE.
Forgiveness is healing.
It heals the one who was hurt.
It heals the one who did the hurting.
It heals all who witness the miracle that is the GRACE to forgive another in Christ's Holy Name.
Forgiveness is healing.
Pastor Wade, your example is a wonderful encouragement to me and my family. We are new missionaries and read your blog faithfully. Thanks for being such an example of grace under fire.
Your M's in the Pac Rim area
Dear Lord,
I am convicted, this day, for my callousness toward Wes Kidney, Scott Boredom, Peter Bumpkin, and Tim Gutme. Pastor Burleson's heartwarming expression of love for these asse- er - men has caused me to reconsider how I respond to the slime they sling. But my weary soul sank, O Lord, as I read today on Scott Boredom's blog --
"Any attempts made by representatives of the Wade Burleson Network to contact our management team and owner will be met with consistent silence."
What? Pastor Boredom refuses to speak to Pastor Burleson? Lord, please, tell me it is not so!
But if it be, please do for Mr. Boredom what you did to Balaam's ass. Make him talk to the prophet. But if in your mercies You choose not to let fly the weasel's tongue, would you then at least keep his blog readership to the current level of zero?
Father, my heart sunk to even lower depths as I read Pastor Bumpkin's comment today on Bart "Get a New" Barber's blog. Peter Bumpkin continued to call Pastor Burleson a liar, a deceiver, and yeah, even the devil himself! Will you do to Mr. Bumpkin what you did to the men of Baal who mocked Elijah? Send some bears to the Bumpkin patch. Have them eat his tongue. But do spare his life, O Lord. Just please ensure his fingers go missing as well, so that when no more evil can spring from his keyboard, he can't do sign language either.
Lord is this too much to ask? It's for their good, and the good of the SBC. I, your humble servant, ask another thing of Thee.
Would you please turn back all the fresh date time stamps on all the groceries in Wes Kenney's household? You took from the Egyptians their wealth, surely you can spoil Wes's food? I only ask, O Lord, because Wes seems to have such a peculiar fascination with time stamps. He could never drink his milk, eat his meat, or open the T.V. dinner without checking the time stamp. When he realizes everthing important to him is spoiled when someone tampers with time stamps, I believe he will publicly repent of his sin and answer C.B. Snott's question #26 on SBCTODAY.
And, Lord, when Wes Kidney comes to repentance, will you please let the good citizens of Enid know by purging the IP addresses of the good folks in Enid? It seems their IP addresses have been blocked by the BM people - that is, the Baptist Movement people, formerly known as the Baptist Identity people. BM's are familiar with blockages. Lord, we need a spiritual enema. Cleanse the BM's within us.
Finally, Lord, I have an unspoken request. I have a burden for another BM man who is similar to Wes Kidney, Peter Bumpkin, Scott Boredom, and the others. I shall not give his name, but Lord, You know Him. My prayer is that you will strike some sense into him and as you prevented Pharoah from sinning against Moses, prevent this BM brother from starting another BM blog. We have enough @#$# we have to wade through.
Thank you Lord for your patience. I trust it is deeper and wider than Pastor Burleson's has been with me. The poor pastor is way too nice. These BM pastors cut his throat while he prays for them and tells them he loves them.
Well, Lord, the good pastor may be silent in his response to these men, but I, the good doctor, will pray fervently and effectually until I see you answer my petitions. I trust my prayers have been in accordance with your inspired, inerrant, infallible, indefatigable, industrious, inescapable, immeasurable, intentional, indescribable, insatiable, and incredible Word.
Your Devoted Northwest Psychiatrist to the Southern Baptist Convention,
Dr. Phil
Dr. Phil,
I confess to laughing at your brilliant satire. Would you consider running for SBC President? Or, how about President of SWBTS? Wade, please go easy on Dr. Phil. Since the BI crowd scattered when the light began to shine, he's the only comic relief I'm getting.
Dr Phil,
If you're really a psychiatrist, I'd imagine you'd know the effect of purposely mis-stating someone's name, particularly in a derogatory way. Even the people you seem to dislike are made in God's image, and are due at least the respect of not purposely twisting their names in an attempt at humor.
And judging by the results I've gotten by following the link in your name, I have reason to doubt your stated credentials at all.
Byroniac, I have a question for you.
Wes Kenney has now answered C.B.'s question of whether or not he changed the time stamps of the last two comments in question. Wes's answer:Yes. Absolutely. Repeatedly. Then he put a smiley face.
Byroniac, you suggested earlier that maybe someone "hacked" into the system. Then you said maybe someone other then "Wes" changed the time stamps. Now, Wes says he did so, and has done so "repeatedly." Would you answer me this question. Why would Wes Kenney change the time stamps? I can only think of one reason.
Wes was deceitfully, blatantly and intentionally covering up the fact that he was posing as another person to destroy the character of Wade Burleson, and he was attmempting to anonymously impugne the integrity of this blog without having to answer for his words.
What really chaps me is that Wes, Scott and Peter continue to leave up blogs calling WADE a liar, BOLDLY asserting WADE changed time stamps (now proven impossible on Blogger.com) and REFUSE to take ownership for their hypocrisy.
Wade may forgive these men, but frankly, I am leaning toward Dr. Phil. I think these guys need to be held accountable.
Irish Prayer
May those who love us, love us.
And those who do not love us,
May God turn their hearts.
And if He doesn't turn their hearts,
May He turn their ankles,
So we'll know them by their limping.
Amen.
Bob,
It's satire.
Dr Phil,
On the lighter side we all need a little humor. I say AMEN AMEN
Wayne
To the blogger who goes by "Dr. Phil,"
I am not impressed by your joking around whilst appearing to be praying to a righteous and holy God who is already at best disgusted by the present wranglings. You continue to call names while Wade has asked the issue to be dropped. I get offended when prayer is used in condescension. Maybe this is your brand of "Christian Psychiatry."
Probably the reason I am firmly convinced such a profession is not called for in a Scripture which is sufficient for all things.
RevKev
Wes is caught. He knows it.
He is humiliated.
But guys like Wes and his BI friends cover their humiliation with further attacks - and smiley faces.
I am very sorry for some of the unChristlike comments I have made, and the war-like attitude I have exhibited here.
I pray your forgiveness, even though I realize that I don't deserve it and
I have no excuse.
oc.
Kevin,
Somehow I see a HUGE difference between what Dr Phil has done and what Wes Kenney and Scott Gordon have done. The latter boldly declare a brother in Christ a "liar" for changing time stamps (which Pastor Burleson cannot on Blogger.com), and then go and do the same thing themselves (which they both can on WordPress.com).
Dr. Phil's sin is cruel satire in the name of humor. Wes and Scott's sin is stunning hypocrisy in the name of Christ.
I am angered by the latter. I am debating my next step to confront Wes and Scott now that they have admitted to doing that which they falsely accused Wade of doing, and then called him a "liar" when he denied it.
That's sick my brother. Those men need a doctor, and I agree, not Dr. Phil. They need the Great Physician
Steve
Steve,
I am not comparing "sins." I did not even call Phil's impropriety a sin--at least not against me. I pointed out the inappropriateness of mixing a jestful comment (something I am completely sympathetic with) with praying to God.
As for the folks at SBCToday...they mean little to me at this point. I viewed on of the posts calling Wade a liar sometime back. I have not been back. Once the timestamp discussion began, I completely ignored the entire conversation.
SBCToday is getting press time when it is Patterson, et al who need to hear from us. If you do not goto SBCToday then SBCToday does not exist. Likewise if we ignore SWBTS, then one day SWBTS will not exist. Wade gets irritated when folks add to the BFM. I get angry when folks add to Scripture. I am at the point where I would expect this from Dr. Patterson. But Dr. Allen is the Dean of the School of Theology. The teachings of the Seminary in regard to its theological implications is HIS job. He clearly is adding to Scripture. I want a response from him to my open letter. This is the debate. SBCToday will die the death of SBCOutpost. That which brings shame on our Lord is ussually "cut off." May SBCToday be devoured by the "cutting, swarming, hopping, and destroying locust."
"Awake, you drunkards and weep!"
RevKev
Off Topic:
From APOD archive:
Comet Lulin Tails
Space Station in the Moon
Lenticular Clouds Above Washington
The Milky Way Over Mauna Kea
Simeis 147: Supernova Remnant
Martian Sunset
In the Shadow of Saturn
Far in the distance, at the left, just above the bright main rings, is the almost ignorable pale blue dot of Earth.
Feb. 12th:
Lincoln's Birthday
Abraham Lincoln
Charles Darwin
Darwin200
Darwin Day Celebration
KEVIN, you've been reading Jeremiah again. It shows.
Charles Darwin
Darwin200
Darwin Day Celebration
Oooh, you're gonna hear about that one!
THY PEACE,
don't worry, the Darwinian Theory is just a theory, and Baptists study it as a theory in high school, and at university.
Baptists are not stupid. They know what a theory is. (I hope.) :)
From the morphing blog (or shall we say the "Charles Darwin blog" since it seems to be evolving):
volfan007
February 7th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Dave, Big Daddy, Byroniac, and anyone else,
In answer to your questions about why SBC Today and others have fallen silent about the whole sad ordeal where accusations were leveled by Enid once again.
Read Titus 3:10-11
David
I'm more inclined to think it's because you're still busy cleaning the egg off your faces.
Kevin,
Well said to Dr. Allen and to phil.
Recently, your posts have started shining with insight.
All the Best,
Bill
"I've learned one thing:
you only really get to know a person after a fight.
Only then can you judge
their true character! "
From the Diary of Anne Frank(September 28, 1942)
Wade,
Thanks for your spirit.
Dr. Phil,
You crack me up.
Wade,
It appears that SBC Today, in accordance with Titus 3:10-11, has officially broken fellowship with the city of Enid. Are you feeling sifted by Satan yet?
Volfann is calling those questioning the duplicity and hypocrisy of the Baptist Identity movement - heretics.
Sheeesh.
Dr. Phil?
What about Wolfman calling people in Enid heretics?
TO ALL THE B.I. GROUPIES:
REMEMBER:
'Your life may be the only Bible some people read.'
~Author Unknown
Anon,
The locust reference actually comes from Joel 1:4. Verse 5a, one of 2 tag lines to my emails is: "Awake, you drunkards and weep." I am preaching an overview sermon of Joel tomorrow, so being eaten by locust is fresh on my mind. *squirms*
ReKev
Can see why you were upset,Mr. Burleson and censored the entry. I came across this article tonight concerning how you were treated...http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1166&Itemid=119
Seminary student from Roberts.No heresay here:)
http://www.bornagainamerican.org/
They really need retrack much of the blackballing that they did to you and have open forums. If they they don't, it will only fester into greater distrust, Mr. Burleson and hurt ministries. Confidential agreements should not be this binding.
Retract...that is.
Richard, I have tried to be careful not to make any accusation without proof. I do not know Wes Kenney all that well. I do not know what his motives are. And I was wondering if that response to CB Scott was indeed an admission of guilt (because it looked like it to me). I can think of no other reason than the one you have given, but that does not mean it is the right one or only one. One thing I do know is this: Christ is the Judge, He knows the heart and all its motives (whether Jer 17:9 applies, or Psalm 139:23, or something in between), and He is no respecter of persons. That is not to say that right should not be sought and wrongs should not be righted if at all possible in this life.
As I see it, several people disbelieve Wade Burleson and his integrity, and I see no resolution to this matter for these people until proof provided in new, incontrovertible evidence is found. On the other side of this issue, if Wade Burleson's conscience is clear and he is at peace with God over it, it needs no resolution in this life unless Christ wills it. But for me, this matter is over now. I hope and pray for Christ's grace and mercy on all.
Wes Kenney: You want answers?
Wayne Smith: I think I'm entitled to them.
Wes Kenney: You want answers?
Wayne Smith: I want the truth!
Wes Kenney: You can't handle the truth!
Son, we serve a seminary that has walls.
And those walls have to be guarded by men with blogs.
Who's gonna do it? You? You, Byroniac?
I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom.
You weep for Calvinists and you curse Pecan Manor.
You have that luxury.
You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that the fake post, closed comment stream, and altered time-stamps, while clumsy, probably pleased Paige.
And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, pleases Paige.
You don't want the truth.
Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at deacon's meetings, you want me on that wall.
You need me on that wall!
We use words like liberal, liar, heresy...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent labeling people.
You use 'em as a punchline.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the doctrinal essentials we decide, then questions the manner in which we decide them!
I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way.
Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a keyboard and write a fake post.
Either way, I don't care what you think you're entitled to!
Wayne Smith: Did you change the comment-stream time stamps?
Wes Kenney: (quietly) I did the job Paige Patterson sent me to do.
Wayne Smith: Did you change the comment-stream time stamps?
Wes Kenney: Yes. Absolutely. Repeatedly. :)
Record number of postings in a single thread at this blogsite?
Congrats, everyone.
David ;`]
Issues arise today that were not intensely debated in decades past as they are today. So people have to make decisions on which side of the debate they will stand and what they will support or oppose.
Calvinism is a growing movement in recent years among Southern Baptists and that puts it on the table for debate more fervently than it was previously.
I know, I know, it has been around for decades, but whether its due to our being in the technological information age or that there are just more like Wade around that promote it, it’s more on the front page than ever before. I personally have not seen as many in Southern Baptist leadership flocking to endorse Calvinism as I do now. There is indeed a trend that is moving this as more of an influence in Southern Baptist life than before.
In decades past, women in the Southern Baptist pulpits were not an issue like it is today. The Methodist moved in that direction and lo and behold, here we Southern Baptists are ranting and raving about it too. It is controversial and of course, like Calvinism, people will be hashing out what side of the issue they will support. I personally would not want a woman pastor, but if a church wants one and votes for it, that's their affair. (Call me a name if you like, but I don't like those lady commentators on the sidelines during the football games either. I always hit the "mute" button when they come on.)
For sure, we do need to diligently guard the Southern Baptist principle that the church is autonomous and speak out when we see that under attack. But because one leader in the Convention that has great influence speaks out in opposition to Calvinism doesn’t necessarily mean that the Convention’s going down the garbage disposal due to some hi-jacking it. The same could be said that those with influence who promote Calvinism are trying to hi-jack the Convention.
I certainly don't disagree with all that Page Paterson does and says. But I am relieved to know that he is taking a strong position in opposition to that taken and strongly promoted at Southern Seminary with Al Mohler and with Wade’s position on this issue too. You go Page boy! (I bet he doesn’t like those lady announcers on the football field either!)
Comment troll! -Don't take the bait!
-Gracie
If anyone listened to Al Mohler's Feb 4, 2009 radio program, at 33 minutes and 10 seconds into the program, Al Mohler tells how he presents the Gospel:
"What I’m going to present when I talk about the Gospel is the Good News of the fact that Christ died for sinners. And if you come to faith in Christ, you will be forgiven of your sins and you will find salvation in Christ. And I can say that to everyone."
Amen!
On a humorous Note,
I loved your take on Patterson/ Wes Kenney: ‘Son, we serve a seminary that has walls’.
I understand Wayne Smith gave several reports of CBC Today, but there’s no record of him ever making a comment on CBC Today. Neither has he stated he has nor complained of any comment of his being removed.
So why did you use his name in your funny comment?
For the record; SBC Today does not have a number for the ‘reply’.
It only has numbers for the original comment which in this case is made by C B Scott which is #30 and the comments below are under his #30.
30
cb scott
February 7th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Wes or any of the SBC TODAY guys,
It has been stated that you have mass blocked anyone from Enid, OK from SBC TODAY. is that true?
It has also stated you changed the time stamps on the last two comments in the previous post containing the Paige Patterson interview. Is that true?
cb
[Reply]
Tim Rogers Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Brother CB,
I believe what Brother Wes did was place a huge net up in order to keep the wild geese from flying into the propellers of the plane.
Blessings,
Tim
[Reply]
cb scott Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Tim,
What about the time stamps?
cb
[Reply]
Byroniac Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
In addition to the time stamps, the originating IP addresses of the two comments differ only in the last number, signifying that the persons are on the same network (ISP?), and could even be the same person if a new IP address was assigned from the DHCP server to a modem in that time period. And if I remember correctly, there are only 50 seconds in time difference (about the time it takes to reboot a cable modem?). I have no idea, but I would love to hear an explanation from Wes Kenney, whom I consider a brother in Christ.
[Reply]
Byroniac Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I retract that statement concerning the IP addresses due to my uncertainty in correctly interpreting the message sources.
[Reply]
Wes Kenney Reply:
February 7th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
C.B.,
In answer to your first question, yes. though it was intended to be more precise than that. I’m not as smart as I wish I was.
As to your second question, yes. Absolutely. Repeatedly.
[Reply]
Humorous Note,
It looks to me like you could have used Byroniac but more likely Scott for challenging Wes Kenney.
BTW Scott’s comment used to be #31 but was moved back to #30 since my #28 has been removed without a trace or a reason.
Can you believe that? I guess my comment has been elevated to the ‘martyrs’.
It stated:
Scott Gordon, Peter, Wes (John 3:16?), and all doubters of Wade’s Christian integrity:
Let’s supposed there is a rumor that you suck raw eggs.
You are asked: “Is there any truth to that rumor?
Would you answer?
1. Yes
2. No
3. I hope not.
I realize if you chose number 3, you would be making a joke out of the ridiculous question.
But Patterson knew the question was sincere, and he answered sincerely.
If the rumor was false, Patterson, not being a timid person, would have yelled: ‘No! There’s no truth in it’!
Up to that point, Patterson’s replies were smooth as silk, but in using 285 words to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’, his six “ummm”, four “eh”, five “uh”, and eight “uhhh” reveals his brain was stalling for time trying to think of an answer that wasn’t there.
Regardless of all his stalling and wiggling, his weak denial of “hope not” was not only an untruth but Patterson knew it was untrue.
On a humorous Note,
With your permission (is that necessary?) I’d like to put your “Note” on SBC Today with C. B. Scott as the defense lawyer.
Your truth of humor may penetrate far beyond serious words. The longer I think of your satire, the better I like it.
Could you give some reference name?
Wade said, "I have nothing to lose, nor nothing to gain.
Therefore, nobody controls my pen but God."
That would be nice if debate like this was so simple. In fact, you do have something to lose and gain: the argument.
Let's be totally honest. We all invest emotionally into whatever position we take and then we generally rally the wagons around our position and defend or promote it. We want to win.
When our opinion on issues is shirked off and ignored it's disturbing to us. So it may be true that we don't gain an official position or earn money but we do gain positions of influence when we win our position.
So you do have something to win and lose. Yes, we all want to simply glorify God, but if that was our only incentive we probably wouldn't be writing on blogs.
I am posting this comment using an internet anonymizer. The links provided below are for users in enid, ok who are being blocked by sbctoday. Please note that only http and https connections are anonymized. But all scripts are disabled (javasript ...). So you may not use all the cool features of a web page, but the operators of the web sites will have difficulty of tracing your ip address. This tracing of ip address is compromised if you enable scripting.
Please note that the first time, the program starts up, it's slow to very slow. After a while, it does speed up.
It's difficult to post comments in sbctoday using this, for you have to enable scripting.
But you can post comments in Pastor Wade's blog, without your ip address being traced.
OperaTor - Opera + Tor. Surf anonymously
digestIT2004: MD5 hash checker
Wiki: Anonymizer
PS: There have been reports that most anonymizers have been compromized by the US Govt. Also given that most traffic that goes through internet providers is being monitored within US by NSA servers, I would not advice anyone to use this tool without caution. Of course this only if you are using it for subversive purposes.
Correction: It does look like you can post comments on sbctoday using the operaTor.
Of course, in this case, why bother commenting on sbctoday?
Good luck.
I did a copy paste on SBC Today. Here it is on comment 38. Wonder how long it will stay?
38
Rex Ray
February 8th, 2009 at 9:27 am
A humorous note portrays the actions of SWBTS
Wes Kenney: You want answers?
C.B. Scott: I think I’m entitled to them.
Wes Kenney: You want answers?
C.B. Scott: I want the truth!
Wes Kenney: You can’t handle the truth! Son, we serve a seminary that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with blogs. Who’s gonna do it? You?
I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Calvinists and you curse Pecan Manor. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that the fake post, closed comment stream, and altered time-stamps, while clumsy, probably pleased Paige. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, pleases Paige.
You don’t want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don’t talk about at deacon’s meetings, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall!
We use words like liberal, liar, heresy…we use these words as the backbone to a life spent labeling people. You use ‘em as a punch line.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the doctrinal essentials we decide, then questions the manner in which we decide them!
I’d rather you just said ‘thank you’ and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a keyboard and write a fake post. Either way, I don’t care what you think you’re entitled to!
C.B. Scott: Did you change the comment-stream time stamps?
Wes Kenney: I did the job Paige Patterson sent me to do.
C.B. Scott: Did you change the comment-stream time stamps?
Wes Kenney: Yes. Absolutely. Repeatedly.
Sat Feb 07, 11:40:00 PM 2009 on Burleson’s blog
[Reply]
Rex,
It just disappeared.
They don't want 'their readers' to know the truth.
Heck, they didn't want 'us' to know the truth.
They think they can hide it?
NOPE
If Wes is a minister, is there any kind of formal 'code of ethics' that ministers sign on to ?
Most professions have a very strictly spelled out 'code of ethics', which, if violated, can lead to expulsion from that profession.
Was Wes bound by a code of honor?
Rex Ray:
I saw your comment over there. And no surprise, it's gone. I tried to reply to CB Scott (and it violated none of their commenting rules that I know of), but I saw it was awaiting comment moderation, then it simply seems to have disappeared as well (perhaps it is yet to be approved, but it does not seem that my comments required moderation approval before either). And I am subscribed to the comment stream and saw the email for your comment but not for mine (or the last two or three of mine even it seems). It figures. Have you received email from the administrators yet (if ever)?
Latest time stamps on the two comments:
February 6th, 2009 at 1:52 am
Originally 12:16 a.m., then 11:16 p.m., then 11:09 p.m.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:03 am
Originally 12:17 a.m., then 9:17 a.m.
Cute. Wonder how long they intend to play this little game.
New BBC Open Forum,
As far as I am concerned, they can play that little game as long as they want. I no longer care. They march under the delusion that everyone on the outside of their exclusive club will beat the doors down to get in, or constantly pay rapt attention to every microscopic detail of events that happen in their little corner of the universe. Sorry, guys, but Christianity is much larger than you are. Or at least, it is not blind or confined to a box. ;)
Here is another good example of why transparency in councils is needed. In examining the element of applying tithing towards a ministry project a couple of years ago, I came across a dissertation by a Dr. Russell Kelly on tithing. In some correspondance with him and reading the notes, he has convinced me that tithing is indeed of a past dispensation and that giving is grace oriented. Dealing with several in fam. mem. being sick this weekend and hearing the preacher talk on tithing, I have a concerned that this too is not being talked about enough. Is there a blackballing on Dr. Kelly as well? Tithing never was instituted in the churches until 777AD. I have a concern that Malachi based tithing may infact be a straying from the faith.
Matt 17:24-27 - After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax came to Peter and asked, "Doesn't your teacher pay the temple tax ?" "Yes, he does," he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. "What do you think, Simon?" he asked. "From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes--from their own sons or from others?" "From others," Peter answered. "Then the sons are exempt," Jesus said to him. "But so that we may not offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours."
Matt 23:23 - "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
Luke 11:42 - "Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.
Matt. 10:10 - take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.
Gal 6:6 - Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.
Acts 2:44 - All the believers were together and had everything in common.
2 Cor 8:1-3 - And now, brothers, we want you to know about the grace that God has given the Macedonian churches. Out of the most severe trial, their overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity. For I testify that they gave as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability. Entirely on their own,
1 Cor 16:2 - On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made.
Prov 3:9 - Honor the Lord with your wealth, with the firstfruits of all your crops;
2 Cor 9:7 - man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
2 Cor 5:14 - 14For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.
Matt 7:9-13 - "Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. The Narrow and Wide Gates "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.
Rom 12:1 - Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God--this is your spiritual act of worship.
2 Cor 3:6 - He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant--not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
Mal 3:14 - "You have said, 'It is futile to serve God. What did we gain by carrying out his requirements and going about like mourners before the Lord Almighty?
Luke 18:12 - fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'
Matt 12:43-45 - "When an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, 'I will return to the house I left.' When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean and put in order. Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation."
John 14:13 - And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father.
Luke 21:4 - All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on."
Luke 19:8 - But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, "Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount."
Anonymous, if you go to www.tithing-russkelly.com I believe you can read his entire book online. I have already ordered it and it is in my "Read This Pronto" stack. The little I have read online I already agree with. However, let me warn you, this is a deeply entrenched issue, and not just in the SBC world, which in my opinion is blind on this issue as well (as I was). You might find this to be an uncomfortable and inconvenient truth.
Luke 19:8 - But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, "Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount."
CAN YOU IMAGINE PP SAYING THIS TO DR. KLOUDA ?
Another simple way to access sbctoday.com site, is by this:
AnonyMouse - AnonWWW
Please type in the website in the box for enter website address ...
Please note you need to do this before:
Is it absolutely anonymous?
There is no absolute security! Technologies like Radio-Active-X, Java, Javascript, etc. can endanger your anonymity. Especially Active-X and Java should be deactivated therefore.
Annoying aspect of this, you get some pop-up ads. Please also note that this traffic is not encrypted. So any one in the middle can easily find out what you are doing. Also, even if it's encrypted, my suspicion is NSA can easily crack most encryptions (128-bit security, mostly used online).
Wiki: Transport Layer Security
Thy Peace,
Somehow I don't think the NSA is interested in SBC Today. :-)
Byroniac,
I'm with you on that. I'd never even heard of that site until y'all began discussing it here three days ago. It's really boring. What gets me is they address each other as "Brother" and end most of their comments with "Blessings"... and rip Wade and the other "libruls" (e.g. David Rogers) to shreds in between.
SBC Today is boring, but the name of it is interesting: it does imply that it is an official site of the SBC, rather than just a commentary.
Anyone wanting to know more about the SBC might see that title and assume that implication.
Does anyone else agree ?
When Wes said "Absolutely. Repeatedly.", I honestly read that as a joke, not an admission of guilt.
If Wes changed things, he should not have. But I am also interested in how Wade changed his original post from a specific meeting to a series of meetings. He changed other details too. I presume to clarify things, NOT to cover up anything. But that bothers few here.
Deans and assistant deans, some of them Calvinist, deny such things are happening at SWBTS. Because they only deny it once, instead of over and over, many here do not believe them. Actually, if they denied it over and over, they still would not be believed.
Kind of comes down to many here believe Wade, without any evidence pro or con, and the same people do not have the same confidence in others they do not like as well.
My goodness, is there anything worse than being one of them there BI people?
My personal viewpoint tends toward the idea that Wade really was told it by someone he trusts, but that he should trust his source less in the future.
NBBCOF,
You forgot another favorite word that's used around there when they can't explain and defend their positions....
"absurd".
A more limp-wristed word I can't even come up with.
oc.
New BBC Open Forum,
If Wade Burleson and David Rogers are liberals, then I want to be one too. ;) I can think of far worse groups to be associated by, with members like them. I cannot help but think that maybe, just maybe, if the fine folks at SBC Today ever get to the point where they have only themselves to entertain, and themselves as entertainers, they might open up a little to the rest of the world and be more friendly. It's just a thought. One can always hope.
Ladies and Gentlemen (on both sides),
I have not enjoyed reading various SBC-related blogs this past week. I hope and pray that many of you feel the same way. We should not enjoy attacks on individuals, whether we feel like those people deserve it or not.
The blogosphere is a wonderful place to discuss issues if we can maintain civility. We can learn from each other during civil debates on substantive issues. I think that sometimes we believe that if we embarrass someone on the other side, our side wins. Even if we succeed in embarrassing someone, however, the idea that we oppose is not necessarily defeated. The issues with which we are concerned on SBC-related blogs should be related to the exegesis of Scripture. When we leave exegesis behind, we enter an arena that is not our strength. We should exegete Scriptural issues, not other Christians. I am not innocent in this regard; I’ve made my share of mistakes. If we reach the point where we can no longer have a civil discussion with those people with whom we disagree, then we are indeed to be pitied.
To BAPTIST THEOLOGUE:
What happened this week was an attack on Wade by the SBC Today people and a cover-up by the SBC Today people.
The evidence is clear.
What did you want ?
Did you want the evidence not discovered?
Or not exposed?
Civil discourse is always desirable.
Exposing corruption helps keep everyone 'more civil' in the sense that lies become more difficult to use as tools against innocent parties.
I applaud all who engaged in the exposure of the deceit at SBC Today because they have STRENGTHENED the ability of people to see through some of the pitiful goings-on of PP and his buddies.
My goodness, is there anything worse than being one of them there BI people?
Yep, a librul!
"The issues with which we are concerned on SBC-related blogs should be related to the exegesis of Scripture. When we leave exegesis behind, we enter an arena that is not our strength. We should exegete Scriptural issues, not other Christians. "
This is not only an issue of doctrine but behavior. I get a bit nervous when preachers of the Word say such things as above because they seem to want to take 'behavior' off the table.
'LIBRULS':
In the Persian Empire, citizens of all religions and ethnic groups were given the same rights and had the same freedom of religion, women had the same rights as men, and slavery was abolished. All the palaces of the kings of Persia were built by paid workers in an era where slaves typically did such work. [3]
In the Maurya Empire of ancient India, citizens of all religions and ethnic groups had rights to freedom, tolerance, and equality. The need for tolerance on an egalitarian basis can be found in the Edicts of Ashoka the Great, which emphasize the importance of tolerance in public policy by the government. The slaughter or capture of prisoners of war was also condemned by Ashoka.[4] Slavery was also non-existent in ancient India.[5]
Roman law also embraced certain limited forms of liberty, even under the rule of the Roman Emperors. However, these liberties were accorded only to Roman citizens. Still, the Roman citizen enjoyed a combination of positive liberty (the right to freely enter contracts, the right to a legal marriage) and negative liberty (the right to a trial, a right to appeal and the right to not be tortured). Many of the liberties enjoyed under Roman law endured through the Middle Ages, but were enjoyed solely by the nobility, never by the common man. The idea of unalienable and universal liberties had to wait until the Age of Enlightenment.
In Chinese, freedom is written 自由(ziyou). Zi is the character for self, and You means follow, with an additional connotation of reason. Liberty thus implies a necessary connection between individualism and a rational duty.
COMMENT: societies which have in the past engaged in slavery would be less in support of liberty and more in support of torture of detainee prisoners. Many of those in America's southern states fit the bill perfectly as 'liberal-hating' 'conservative Republican Christians'. It's in the blood.
Wow! What a lot of comments. Never thought that this post would take off like this.
Lots of people think that I know and keep up with SBC blogs and issues, but compared to most people, I am barely involved.
Here are my closing thoughts on this:
1. Wade has a source at SWBTS that told him what he originally printed or very close to that. It never made sense that the things Wade said were made up completely.
2. No way to know whether the source at SWBTS has accurate info. Don't know who he is, how well placed and how much of what he may have told Wade is extrapolating what he truly knows to what he suspects or predicts will happen.
3. Some at SWBTS deny what the source told Wade. We do know who they are. No way to know how much they know either.
4. Apparently, no real action has been taken to fire "Cavlinists" from SWBTS so far.
5. Dr.P's statement is capable of being interpreted as a statement of evangelistic imperative or as being a statement that the seminary will not be built on people who believe in limited atonement. I believe the best interpretation is the former.
6. Only time will tell what direction SWBTS will move. Nothing to do now, but watch and wait.
7. I don't know much about the SBC Today website. I have been there a couple of times months ago. Don't know any of the people who run that site. Apparently that site has taken steps to limit people to their site and blocked others. SBC Today has apparently monkeyed around with their site. If that's all true, that is kind of cheesy. Censorship on these sites and regarding these issues is not a good practice, and actually runs counter to what these sites are supposed to be about.
8. One blogger, Mike Kear, has said something unkind about Robert based on something Robert has written. Mr. Kear has taken what Robert posted off the blog, but left his characterization of it on the blog. That does seem unfair. It would make sense to leave up a comment if it is the basis of a criticism (e.g. "you are a blasphemer for your last comment, but I won't leave the comment posted so people can read it and judge for themselves. I hope and trust that this gets worked out.
9. No one lied here. Not sure if everyting written is accurate. No one fired yet at SWBTS. Will have to wait on that, I suppose.
10. I am worn out and tired. Too many laps in the pool and too many miles run on the road this weekend in preparation for the next marathon. Need some sleep.
Louis
Since Wes has blocked everyone in the great city of Enid from reading SBC Today. As a public service to you poor people, here is Wes' side of the story about what he did...
I’ve received several kind emails asking about the circumstances surrounding the closing of comments on the post containing my interview with Dr. Patterson. Apparently, my actions have inadvertently touched off a bit of controversy, so I thought it would be good to make the facts of the incident available to all. My wife is undergoing major back surgery this week, and I’ll essentially be “moving” to a hotel in Oklahoma City tomorrow and remaining there through at least Saturday, so I won’t be able to interact here very much. Therefore, comments are not enabled for this post. I welcome your emails, and will respond to them as I have opportunity. Click here to contact me by email.
Middle of the day on Thursday, I began to realize that the comments on the interview post needed closing, but I didn’t ever get around to it, as I was trying to get ahead in light of next week. As I got ready to go to bed Thursday night, a friend called and asked if I would, as a personal favor, close the comments. I agreed, and asked my friend for suggestions on what to say in a comment explaining the closure. The friend asked if they could think on it for a bit, and I agreed. I then immediately closed the comments and turned my attention to the television.
Something like an hour later, I received an email from the friend, asking if I would post a comment for them (as they could not post, since I’d already closed it) under their chosen pseudonym. The text of their desired comment was in the email. I returned to the site, logged myself out, posted my friend’s text as coming from “John 3:16,” then logged back in and replied to the comment’s request with the one-word response, “Granted.”
I thought no more about it, as Friday was also a busy day, but mid-afternoon, I began to wonder if someone might not be tempted to think that “John 3:16″ was my own pseudonym because the two comments were so close in time. So I logged in to the site and moved the “John 3:16″ comment back an hour, roughly reflective of the time of their phone call.
Later that afternoon, temptation got the better of me, and I wandered over to Wade Burleson’s blog, where I discovered that the commenters, apparently having little else to do, had elevated this edit of timestamps to a conspiracy akin to the Kennedy assassination, with myself in the role of the grassy knoll rifleman. Well, my mischievous (sinful?) side then got the better of me, and I decided to enjoy myself a bit, randomly adjusting the timestamp on those two comments several times over the course of the evening. I was enjoying myself a bit too much.
For my part, I’ve sworn off any contact with or acknowledgement of Wade Burleson and what he is doing. We’ve installed a plugin that allows us to block IP addresses, and I’ve set it up to block the range of IP addresses Wade Burleson has used to comment on our site in the past. And, with God’s help, I’ll do my best never to visit Grace and Truth to You again. I’ll do as I’ve done in the past, trying my best to write and facilitate blog posts that will serve the preservation of our biblical Baptist distinctives, but I’ll not be drawn in to this kind of silly controversy again.
In answer to Rex Ray's question, I substituted Wayne Smith's name in place of Lt. Caffie's dialogue because he appeared to be the first person in the comment stream here to point out the time stamps on the SBCToday blogs were being manipulated.
If Wayne does not want to be Tom Cruise's stand-in... I apologize. :)
Lin, you said,
“This is not only an issue of doctrine but behavior. I get a bit nervous when preachers of the Word say such things as above because they seem to want to take 'behavior' off the table.”
Lin, I agree with you that behavior is an important issue, but I respectfully disagree with you about SBC-related blogs being the place to discuss the alleged character flaws of fellow Southern Baptists. Your point relates back to Scripture exegesis. Is the Scripture sufficient, even in regard to the blogosphere? If you feel that a particular minister has seriously misbehaved, are Jesus Christ’s instructions for discipline sufficient, or do you want to go beyond those instructions? Remember that Jesus said to first approach the person privately, then take one or two witnesses, and then tell it to the church (Matthew 18:15-17). The object is to restore the person in love. Is the blogosphere the correct place to deal with character flaws of fellow Southern Baptists?
Since Wes has blocked everyone in the great city of Enid from reading SBC Today. As a public service to you poor people, here is Wes' side of the story about what he did...
In tha words of Abe Lincoln, "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."
Is the blogosphere the correct place to deal with character flaws of fellow Southern Baptists?
When they call thairselves "leaders" and persist in puttin' thair character flaws on public display...yep.
Louis: "Apparently that site has taken steps to limit people to their site and blocked others. SBC Today has apparently monkeyed around with their site. If that's all true, that is kind of cheesy."
Oh, just a little cheesy< Louis.
But the cheese was 'pastor-ized',
don't ya know. From the stench on the internet, I'd be guessin that it's limberger. Whoooowheeee !
If Wes confesses what we already know to be true,
it would be no surprise.
If Wes denies what we know to be true, he brands himself as a liar about being a liar.
If Wes keeps his mouth shut, he knows that anything he eventually does say about anything is going to be taken with a grain of salt.
The man has trashed his reputation.
He has also taken down his buddies.
PP is so far down in the hole because of the way he's treated people, he makes Wes look good.
Well, not that good.
Well I tried to send an email to Wes that his wife will be in our prayers but it bounced saying messages to his account are not being accepted.
So in case he does stop by here or someone can relay it to him, Wes, you and your wife will be in our prayers as she has surgery this week.
Wes: "Well, my mischievous (sinful?) side then got the better of me, and I decided to enjoy myself a bit, randomly adjusting the timestamp on those two comments several times over the course of the evening."
Reply: This was still going on yesterday so it was longer than "the course of the evening." That was enjoyable? Wow. Is this guy a pastor?
"I believe that unarmed truth
and unconditional love
will have the final word
in reality.
This is why right,
temporarily defeated,
is stronger than evil triumphant."
MLK
Surely, Mrs. Wes deserves prayer at this time.
Surely, Wes does too.
I'm not sure which one need prayer the most. May God have mercy.
Wes in 'in denial', trying to put the best face on what he did, calling it 'mischievous' and avoiding behavior has begun in an attempt to remain 'detached' from questions and criticism.
Not able to blog at a major hotel in the city, these days?
Most decent hotels have complimentary internet service in their lobbies.
Avoiding Wade and his site?
Makes sense, under the circumstances, but not very brave, open and up-standing.
Wes is withdrawing from the wrong people.
Anyone whose wife is facing major surgery gets cut all the slack in the world, from where I sit.
From my chair, it's over.
AND ... as if a sign .. from somewhere ... the security world is "UNLIST".
Amen.
"Mischievous"
Absurd.
Bob Cleveland,
God Bless You.
"As I got ready to go to bed Thursday night, a friend called and asked if I would, as a personal favor, close the comments. I agreed, and asked my friend for suggestions on what to say in a comment explaining the closure. The friend asked if they could think on it for a bit, and I agreed. I then immediately closed the comments and turned my attention to the television."
What's the name of your friend?
LETTING GO
+Do good to those who hate you and pray for those who spitefully persecute you+
Matt 5:44
"A person who suffers bitterly when slighted or insulted should recognize from this that he still harbors the ancient serpent in his breast.
If he quietly endures the insult or responds with great humility, he weakens the serpent and lessens its hold.
But if he replies acrimoniously or brazenly, he gives it strength to pour its venom into his heart and to feed mercilessly on his inward parts.
In this way the serpent becomes increasingly powerful; it destroys his soul's strength and his attempts to set himself right, compelling him to live for sin and to be completely dead to righteousness."
Symeon
I guess the part that amazes me the most about this whole deal is that after these guys have been completely exposed in their deceitful schemes, after they have called my pastor all kinds of untrue names, they (and apparently their congregations) still feel that they are qualified to be pastors.
I find it very sad. Is that the picture the SBC wants to portray of itself?
My opinion is that not only should these men apologize, but they should also step down from their ministerial positions until they can go through a time of repentance and restoration. Is what they've done any less sinful or tragic than any other moral failure?
I know that Pastor Wade has completely forgiven them, and yet their sin rages on. Shouldn't there be some kind of accountability?
PRAY FOR WES' WIFE FACING SURGERY THIS WEEK
"Jesus told us in (Matthew 5:44-47 NKJV) "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,
45 "that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
{46} "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
{47} "And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?
If we don't love people who curse us, hate us, use us, and persecute us then we are no better than any non-Christian; if we hate or dislike anyone can we really claim to be children of God?
God brings these people into our lives for our spiritual benefit and growth, and if we obey God it will be for the benefit of our enemies also.
The Lord tells us how to love our enemies we are to bless them, which is speaking good things to them, we are to do good to them, and most important we are to pray for them.
Doing these things will turn our hate into love and then God can send His compassion through us to them; touching them with the most powerful force in the universe, LOVE. Love always conquers hate as light conquers darkness."
WE CAN STOP COMMENTS ABOUT WES.
WE CAN PRAY FOR HIS WIFE
If you say, 'no' , then I can say to you, as a Christian, YOU ARE BETTER THAN THAT.
You are a Child of the Most High God. Act accordingly. :)
We are here to stop the hate, to absorb it, to replace it with love received from Christ, and so to make one another whole again.
Caring for Wes' wife through our prayers will do more good than all the criticism or comments we can make about what's been done.
Accept that it is right to forgive Wes, to embrace him, and to surround his wife with prayer.
This will change his heart.
mike, you are leaning toward the "control" side of things...let them go. they and thier churches deserve each other. let's move on
Pastors and leaders are all ordinary men and women. They are no different from us, the sheep. They are sheep too. We are all one in the Body of Christ. No one is above, no one is below. Only one is the head, and it is Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Someone does something bad.
We react.
We stop.
We find out that a family member of that person needs our prayers.
Now, we CAN act. (the need for
re-action has vanished in the new need to reach out and to comfort).
What's more important than praying for Wes' wife ?
Something is troubling me.
When I have made bad mistakes in my life, they were made many times when I was under great strain and with many worries.
Is it possible, even a little bit, that Wes' behavior was influenced by the strain he is under because of what his wife is facing ?
I am not EXCUSING what was done.
I am saying that , there may be some REAL REASON that Wes' judgment was not as clear as it needed to be, due to much worry about his wife's health.
Something tells me this may be so.
When people are not under great strain, they can make more clear-headed decisions.
L's
Wes Kenney appears to be doing EXACTLY what he should be -- taking care of his wife.
May we all pray for her, and for Wes as he cares for her. So get off his back (no pun intended)!!
Our gracious host seems to have forgiven any and all offenses (real or perceived). Should we not do the same - in Christ's name?
Charles Brazeale
Neosho, MO
Karen in OK,
If anyone has followed what this Wes Guy and his friend Dr. Jerry Corbaley, that are suppose to be a Pastors have done to Back Stab Wade Burleson with the IMB. I think it is terrible that they Shun Wade when it is they that should be Defrocked. God has a way of exposing the acts of those that practice deceitfulness.
What some people call "character flaws", the Bible calls "sin".
O Lord our God,
Who by a word alone did heal all diseases,
Who did cure the kinswoman of Peter,
You Who chastise with pity and heal according to Your goodness; Who are able to put aside every sickness and infirmity,
do You Yourself, the same Lord, grant aid to Your servant and cure her of every sickness of which she is grieved; and send down upon her Your great mercy, and if it be Your will,
give to her health and a complete recovery;
for You are the Physician of our souls and bodies,
and to You do we send up Glory:
to the Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit, Both now and forever, and to the ages of ages. Amen.
Jesus taught that the Greatest Commandments were loving God with all our heart, soul, and might AND loving our neighbor as we love ourselves.
He also prayed for unity among those who seek to follow him -- shortly before he left this earth.
Let us follow Christ's commandments and his prayer by forgiving Wes and praying for his wife.
They are our Brother and Sister and through God's grace we'll spend eternity together someday.
In His Service,
-jack-
Karen, OC & all:
I suggest we practice what we teach and turn the other cheek.
Remember, from the Pulpit to the pews we are ALL sinners-- saved by grace.
The best message we can send those on the "other" blogs and those outside Christ who might happen to stop by would be to change the conversation about Wes to a large outpouring of prayer for him, his wife, and their church.
If you are not blocked from his blogs I would encourage you to do the same there as well.
Blessings,
-jack-
Comment from a former attendee of the FBC Jacksonville Pastor's Conference: There is only so much "the Southern Baptist Convention is awesome and all of us speaking are too, now here's my joke about the guy who just spoke, ha ha ha isn't that funny" I could take.
oc,
we are ALL sinners here.
PRAYER for Mrs. Kenney,
May the One who blessed our ancestors --
Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
Matriarchs Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah --
bless and heal the one who is ill.
May the Holy Blessed One
overflow with compassion upon her,
to restore her,
to heal her,
to strengthen her,
to enliven her.
The One will send her, speedily,
a complete healing --
healing of the soul and healing of the body --
along with all the ill,
among the people of Israel and all humankind,
soon,
speedily,
without delay,
and let us all say: Amen!
"Lin, I agree with you that behavior is an important issue, but I respectfully disagree with you about SBC-related blogs being the place to discuss the alleged character flaws of fellow Southern Baptists."
I am certainly not in your theological league but this sort of reply confuses me. Much of the actions of the other party have been public. I know Paul did not have a blog but he did confront Peter publicly on purpose because of his bad "behavior" which in effect was teaching wrong doctrine. Then he put it in a letter for all to read about for 2000 or so years. Same with Diotrephes.
" Your point relates back to Scripture exegesis. Is the Scripture sufficient, even in regard to the blogosphere? If you feel that a particular minister has seriously misbehaved, are Jesus Christ’s instructions for discipline sufficient, or do you want to go beyond those instructions?"
I do not think Wade has gone beyond ALL the instructions laid out in scripture.
" Remember that Jesus said to first approach the person privately, then take one or two witnesses, and then tell it to the church (Matthew 18:15-17). The object is to restore the person in love. Is the blogosphere the correct place to deal with character flaws of fellow Southern Baptists?"
How does Matthew 18 work when one refuses to return calls? How does it work when the offense has been public and involves bad behavior by elders/pastors?
Matthew 18 seems to work very well for everyone but preachers who think they are above being confronted for anything. Or who think their bad behavior is somehow 'scriptural' and condoned because they have 'correct doctrine'.
One of the biggest problems in the SBC is the 'hidden' sin that is finally getting some light. You may well argue that the 'laity' are not sufficiently qualified to discuss such things. But then, I would disagree.
Wrong behavior and secret strategies by elders/pastors/leaders need to be disinfected by the light of day.
Have you ever wondered why Paul wrote most of the Epistles to the whole church and not just the elders?
Dear LIN,
We can't make a person repent by shaming them.
They must be convicted from within by the power of the Holy Spirit.
I am reprinting Jack's comment here. It's very apt.
Jack said...
Wade & others:
The manipulation of the comment stream on SBCToday is now well-documented as is the ham-handed blocking of internet users from Enid.
Those responsible are trying to draw attention away from the larger issue at SWBTS.
Don't let them.
Focus on the "main thing" and do not feed the comment trolls.
Paige and his ilk hope to discredit this blog just as they did SBCoutpost.
After poisoning its comment stream by deliberately provoking its community they then used the angry comments in response to paint Paige and Dorothy Patterson as innocent victims "under attack."
You can expect Pope Patterson will attempt to prod others within "The Great Commission Council" and elsewhere in SBC leadership to come to his public defense so that these nasty bloggers don't attack them next.
Don't let it get personal. Don't be provoked to angry posts.
Stay Christlike in demeanor and focus.
Their own words and actions reveal them for who and what they are.
Argue for The Gospel and speak as Christ would speak for those at SWBTS who dare not speak for themselves.
In His Service,
-jack-
Sat Feb 07, 09:58:00 AM 2009
People need to be in and walking in the Spirit for the Spirit to convict them
Also this:
Jack said...
Jesus taught that the Greatest Commandments were loving God with all our heart, soul, and might AND loving our neighbor as we love ourselves.
He also prayed for unity among those who seek to follow him -- shortly before he left this earth.
Let us follow Christ's commandments and his prayer by forgiving Wes and praying for his wife.
They are our Brother and Sister and through God's grace we'll spend eternity together someday.
In His Service,
-jack-
Sun Feb 08, 08:59:00 PM 2009
Jack said...
Karen, OC & all:
I suggest we practice what we teach and turn the other cheek.
Remember, from the Pulpit to the pews we are ALL sinners-- saved by grace.
The best message we can send those on the "other" blogs and those outside Christ who might happen to stop by would be to change the conversation about Wes to a large outpouring of prayer for him, his wife, and their church.
If you are not blocked from his blogs I would encourage you to do the same there as well.
Blessings,
-jack-
Sun Feb 08, 09:09:00 PM 2009
Which one is Wes ?
Oh, he's the one under that great big pile of stones.
How did that happen?
Well, he lied about someone and then he tried to cover it up.
So, people stoned him.
Did you throw any stones?
Sure.
Why?
Well, everyone was doing it. We all did it together. Except for Wade, that is.
Is this stoning going to make Wes behave better?
I don't know. But stoning is all we know how to do.
Has it always been like this?
Yes. Except once, a long time ago, someone very wise taught differently about stoning, but no one has seen him in a long time and so we forgot about him.
Maybe he'll come back some day.
He promised. I guess in the meantime, we'll just go on stoning each other. Here, you want to have a go at it?
No. If this guy Wade wouldn't do it, I guess we don't have to throw stones unless we choose to.
Suit yourself.
Lin, you said,
“I know Paul did not have a blog but he did confront Peter publicly on purpose because of his bad ‘behavior’ which in effect was teaching wrong doctrine. Then he put it in a letter for all to read about for 2000 or so years. Same with Diotrephes.”
I believe that Paul did what he did in the context of local church discipline. Notice what Timothy George said about the incident in Galatians 2:11-14 that you mentioned:
“It seems likely that Paul had first remonstrated with Peter privately in accordance with Jesus’ instruction on church discipline in Matt 18:15-20. If so, we may assume that this personal appeal was to no avail.”
Timothy George, “Galatians,” vol. 30 in The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 179.
Diotrephes was going to be dealt with in the context of the local church: “For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us with wicked words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren, either, and he forbids those who desire to do so and puts them out of the church.” (3 John 1:10, NASB) Notice what Danny Akin of SEBTS said about the verse: “The word ‘gossiping’ occurs only here in the New Testament and is in the present tense. Diotrephes was making evil accusations, unjustified charges.”
Daniel Akin, “1, 2, 3 John,” vol. 38 in the New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 248..
You also said,
“How does Matthew 18 work when one refuses to return calls? How does it work when the offense has been public and involves bad behavior by elders/pastors? Matthew 18 seems to work very well for everyone but preachers who think they are above being confronted for anything. Or who think their bad behavior is somehow 'scriptural' and condoned because they have 'correct doctrine'.”
Congregational rule is implied in the NT (Acts 15:22, Acts 6:5). The 2000 BF&M says each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. Some Baptist churches have elder rule rather than congregational rule, but I respectfully disagree with elder rule. I don’t see how church discipline could work in the case of corrupt leadership without congregational rule. There would be no way for the congregation to vote to remove corrupt leaders from their positions unless a congregational vote is possible.
Finally, you said,
“One of the biggest problems in the SBC is the 'hidden' sin that is finally getting some light. You may well argue that the 'laity' are not sufficiently qualified to discuss such things. But then, I would disagree. Wrong behavior and secret strategies by elders/pastors/leaders need to be disinfected by the light of day.”
I do feel that the laity is qualified to discuss hidden sin. I also feel, however, that hidden sin should be dealt with in a biblical way. Local church discipline is the biblical way. If a particular Southern Baptist elder/pastor/leader is guilty of hidden sin that should be disciplined, and if his local church knows about it but refuses to discipline him, then both he and his church are at fault. If that person holds a position of leadership in an association, state convention, or the national convention, then the messengers of that particular entity can vote to remove him or elect trustees who will remove him. The associations, state conventions, and the national conventions are also democratic and autonomous bodies, and they can vote not to cooperate with the errant local church that refuses to perform biblical church discipline. They cannot force a local church to do anything, but they can choose not to cooperate with that church until the church repents of its sins of omission or commission.
In case no one has noticed, I've been told by reliable sources that access by those in the Enid area, to SBC Today, has been unblocked.
It may have already been commented on already but I am 70, and I may not have enough years left to read ALL the comments.
Pecksniffian pontificators.
My morning sermon was an overview of The Book of Joel. Here are 5 words that, imho, summarize Joel's Prophetic message to the nation of Israel and to the Israel of God:
"Beware! The Locust are Coming!"
May we all focus on this a bit more.
-RevKev
PS: Pray for your wife Wes. My father is home recovering from the same surgery. I will pray for you as well. Being a help mate will soon take on a whole new meaning for you. God's abundant goodness be yours and your wife's these next few weeks.
wes
Praying for your Wife and Family
Amen
Baptist Theologue:
I am going to submit to you that "Congregational Rule" is unbiblical and that the verses which you quote no more prove the point than does Homer's 'The Iliad.'
What seemed “good” in verse 22 of Acts 15 seemed good not only to the whole church, but also to the Apostles and Elders. What was that? You mean they had elders? Surly the Jerusalem church did not have elders. Additionally, I do not know about you, but if I were to ever sit in a Baptist Business Meeting with any number of the original Apostles AND Paul, that I would not dare EVER cast a vote contrary to theirs or to the Board of Elders. But I might be inclined to agree with these Holy Men of old. Congregational rule thus is NOT implied in this verse. Congregational Input is presumed but that is it.
Now to chapter 6. We are not told how the congregation chose the 7. We only know that they knew the men better than the 12 and so they chose--but the Apostles appointed them and prayed for them and set them apart for this task. This time, congregational input is declared. Besides, the "full number of the disciples" cannot presumed as a church business meeting. You see, in these days the SBC, nor the BMAA, nor the ABA, nor the ABC, nor the NBC nor the GBC, nor the CIA, nor the KGB had ever been dreamed of. None of them desired Baptistic Congregational RULE!!! Nor did Elders Lord over the sheep. Nor did a single elder assume control. Nor did a bunch of old ladies gossip and fix fried preacher for lunch each Sunday.
But Paul did tell Titus to appoint elders in all the cities.
Absolute Congregational Rule is the downfall of most SBC churches. Infact, anyone group or personage who feels the need to "rule" has not died to self and put on Christ.
Let me tell you this: When mortification is part of the process of sanctification, and when congregants daily weep over their sins, and when a deep and passionate love for God gushes forth obedience and humility, then the congregation will have no desire to "rule" anything. But they will follow the teaching of Scripture and image forth the God who has made them new creatures. The elders will do what they have been called to do. The deacons will do what they have been called to do, and the people will flourish as they seek their God on their knees and as their leaders proclaim the Word of God with painful diligence.
As to the question of who rules the church? The Sunday School answer is the most deeply theological answer and the only one which is correct.
Jesus.
-RevKev
PS: "Active voting member" is not listed in Eph 4:11; 1 Cor. 12; nor Rm 12:6-8.
For Mrs. Kenney
Psalm 61:1-4
"1 Hear my cry, O God;
attend unto my prayer.
2 From the end of the ear
will I cry unto thee,
when my heart is overwhelmed.
Lead me to the rock 'that is higher than I;
3 for thou hast been a shelter for me,
and a strong tower from the enemy.
4 I will abide in thy tabernacle for ever:
I will trust in the covert of thy wings. "
" Notice what Timothy George said about the incident in Galatians 2:11-14 that you mentioned:
“It seems likely that Paul had first remonstrated with Peter privately in accordance with Jesus’ instruction on church discipline in Matt 18:15-20. If so, we may assume that this personal appeal was to no avail.”"
I am sorry, but I can only go by what is written there. This is simply conjecture. Even if it is done with many 'D's behind the name. Another reason why I find this one hard to swallow is that Matthew 18 says if your brother offends YOU. It is more personal from what I can tell. A situation with an elder's public bad behavior seems to be of a different nature as we see by the qualificatoins in 1 Tim 3 and all the other passages about wolves, hirlings, etc.
And, we have of course, what a Christian looks like in Matthew 5. Perhaps we do not pay close enough attention to Matthew 7? It was definitly a wake up passage for me. Does Jesus know ME even if I say I know Him?
I have a blog post about practicing Matthew 18 in a mega church :
http://coffeetradernews.blogspot.com/2007/09/adventures-of-matthew-18-in-mega.html
"Diotrephes was going to be dealt with in the context of the local church:"
I think you might be missing my point. It was written in a letter to someone and it was obviously passed around and ended up being read by millions. Besides, John said IF...I come.
"Congregational rule is implied in the NT (Acts 15:22, Acts 6:5). The 2000 BF&M says each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes."
I am a bit shocked you are quoting the BF&M on this. I am also a bit weary of all the commentaries.
" Some Baptist churches have elder rule rather than congregational rule, but I respectfully disagree with elder rule. I don’t see how church discipline could work in the case of corrupt leadership without congregational rule. There would be no way for the congregation to vote to remove corrupt leaders from their positions unless a congregational vote is possible."
We agree here on congregational polity. I do not believe that elders 'rule' at all. I don't believe that Christians 'rule' other adult Christians in the Body. My take on elders is a bit different. They are the spiritually mature and 'oversee' as such...most recognize them as being so. (We have tended to make them the Board of Directors). These are folks you would trust with your life and are extremely humble and serve others.
" do feel that the laity is qualified to discuss hidden sin. I also feel, however, that hidden sin should be dealt with in a biblical way."
There is no laity in NT scripture. We are all in the Holy Priesthood. All true believers have anointing. (1 John)
"ocal church discipline is the biblical way. If a particular Southern Baptist elder/pastor/leader is guilty of hidden sin that should be disciplined, and if his local church knows about it but refuses to discipline him, then both he and his church are at fault. If that person holds a position of leadership in an association, state convention, or the national convention, then the messengers of that particular entity can vote to remove him or elect trustees who will remove him. The associations, state conventions, and the national conventions are also democratic and autonomous bodies, and they can vote not to cooperate with the errant local church that refuses to perform biblical church discipline. They cannot force a local church to do anything, but they can choose not to cooperate with that church until the church repents of its sins of omission or commission."
But first, they have to know about it because they are not there to know.
So many layers with which to hide in. So many ways to surround ouselves with yes men. So many jobs to give out, etc. The problem is that the local church (even in the SBC) has become a business organization.
WARNING!!!!!!!!!!
This comment is not for the weak minded, bent kneed, pussyfooted Southern Baptists who excuse hypocrisy. Jesus beat the hell out of the Pharisees with a whip. I will be beating the hell of out Pastor Wes Kidney with my words.
Dr. Phil from Seattle here. My Master's in Psychology, Doctorate in Psychiatry, and multiple National Certifications in behavioral genetic dispositions certify my ability to interpret for ignorant Southern Baptists Pastor Wes Kidney's absurd statement justifying the time stamp changes on his blog.
Before I interpret Pastor Wes Kidney's words, evaluating his mental health in the process, I make known my prayer for his wife. She needs God's mercy for her physical problem as much as Wes Kidney is in need of it for his spiritual problem.
But need I remind my fellow Southern Baptists that Mrs. Kidney's backsurgery has nothing to do with Pastor Kidney's backstabbing. Even the radical leftwing Americans for Disabilities Act (ADA) differentiates between a plaintiff's disability and the conduct resulting from that disability. Those seeking to let Pastor Kidney off the hook because of his wife are more liberal than the ADA, which won't let someone off for his own disabilities. People, quit talking about his wife in the same sentence. Christians excusing Pastor Kidney's horrible and intentional sin because of his wife's back is like a Christian man blaming his sin of adultery on his wife's boobs.
Enough said.
Now to the psycho-analysis. Pastor Kidney's words would be in yellow, for their bile if there were colors on blogger, but bold black shall represent their defilement. My expert translation of what Pastor Kidney's words mean follows --
(Time Stamp, SBC Today, 3:15 p.m. Central Time)
Uh huh. Right.
I’ve received several kind emails asking about the circumstances surrounding the closing of comments on the post containing my interview with Dr. Patterson.
Translation: Southern Baptists are spanking my butt for being an incredible hypocrite.
"Apparently, my actions have inadvertently touched off a bit of controversy,"
Translation: I never thought I'd be caught lying and backstabbing, much less caught trying to cover it up.
so I thought it would be good to make the facts of the incident available to all.
Translation: I am going to lie again to cover up my lies earlier.
My wife is undergoing major back surgery this week, and I’ll essentially be “moving” to a hotel in Oklahoma City tomorrow and remaining there through at least Saturday, so I won’t be able to interact here very much.
Translation: I don't want any questions. Heck, I got exposed by their questions the first time. What can I do to shut down dialogue? Got it! I'll use my wife!
Therefore, comments are not enabled for this post.
Translation: I sure hope they enough compassion to ignore the fact I won't take their questions.
I welcome your emails, and will respond to them as I have opportunity. Click here to contact me by email.
Translation: There ain't a snow ball's chance in hell I'm responding to anybody who doesn't believe me and please, dear Jesus, don't let anybody from Enid be able to read this post.
Middle of the day on Thursday, I began to realize that the comments on the interview post needed closing,
Translation: Heck, I never dreamed people would begin to question why Dr. Patterson would stumble all over himself trying to answer my question about terminating Calvinists.
but I didn’t ever get around to it, as I was trying to get ahead in light of next week.
Translation: Surely another mention of my wife will garner their sympathy.
As I got ready to go to bed Thursday night, a friend called and asked if I would, as a personal favor, close the comments.
Translation: Geez, I hope they don't realize my best friend is one of my multiple personalities.
I agreed, and asked my friend for suggestions on what to say in a comment explaining the closure.
Translation: Man, this is lame. But shoot, they'll believe anything.
The friend asked if they could think on it for a bit, and I agreed. I then immediately closed the comments and turned my attention to the television.
Translation: Dang, I forgot I just said I got ready to go to bed. Sheesh. "Hey, Wes, this is Reed, your favorite personality. You think the readers will catch the 'friend' is 'they?'
Something like an hour later, I received an email from the friend,
Translation: Oh criminy, here it goes . . . . I hope this works!!!!
asking if I would post a comment for them (as they could not post, since I’d already closed it) under their chosen pseudonym. The text of their desired comment was in the email. I returned to the site, logged myself out, posted my friend’s text as coming from “John 3:16,” then logged back in and replied to the comment’s request with the one-word response, “Granted.”
Translation: Sheesh. That really looks lame. Well, Southern Baptists are gullible. Please Lord, help me out.
I thought no more about it, as Friday was also a busy day, but mid-afternoon, I began to wonder if someone might not be tempted to think that “John 3:16″ was my own pseudonym because the two comments were so close in time.
Translation: I can't tell anyone I was actually reading the blog comments at Grace and Truth to You and discovered how stupid I was in trying to pose as John 3:16.
So I logged in to the site and moved the “John 3:16″ comment back an hour, roughly reflective of the time of their phone call.
Translation: That dang Byroniac. I could have given a much more believable explanation if he hadn't had the computer savvy to trace both comments to my personal computer
Later that afternoon, temptation got the better of me, and I wandered over to Wade Burleson’s blog,
Translation: I sure hope they catch that I'm using the word temptation to let everyone know Wade Burleson's blog is evil. Heck, I tried to say that in John 3:16's comment more directly but never dreamed they'd discover it was me.
where I discovered that the commenters, apparently having little else to do,
Translation: Those stupid idiots. They caught me. I'm going to try to blame them for what I did.
They had elevated this edit of timestamps to a conspiracy akin to the Kennedy assassination, with myself in the role of the grassy knoll rifleman.
Translation: How silly of them, it's only changing time stamps.
Well, my mischievous (sinful?) side then got the better of me, and I decided to enjoy myself a bit, randomly adjusting the timestamp on those two comments several times over the course of the evening.I was enjoying myself a bit too much.
Translation:I can't dare admit I was intentionally trying to confuse the heck out of everybody to think there was a problem with the server so I could get away scott free.
For my part, I’ve sworn off any contact with or acknowledgement of Wade Burleson and what he is doing.
Translation: That evil, no good, devil Wade Burleson.
We’ve installed a plugin that allows us to block IP addresses, and I’ve set it up to block the range of IP addresses Wade Burleson has used to comment on our site in the past.
Translation: That devil has an answer for everything. Worse, those Enid people hold me accountable when I attack their pastor's character. I can't answer their questions if I just block them from asking.
And, with God’s help, I’ll do my best never to visit Grace and Truth to You again.
Translation: God hates Wade Burleson. He loves me. Oh, God, save me from the devil himself!
I’ll do as I’ve done in the past, trying my best to write
Translation: Except an hour before bedtime. Sheesh. I hope they don't remember that little lie.
and facilitate blog posts that will serve the preservation of our biblical Baptist distinctives, but I’ll not be drawn in to this kind of silly controversy again.
Translation: Don't you dare question my character, that's silly. Just join my Baptist Identity circle of friends and all you have to do is believe the gospel. You don't have to live it like everybody else.
The End of the Lies
Dr. Phil's diagnosis.
Pastor Wes Kidney's illness is that of the worst kind. He has accused Pastor Burleson of changing time stamps. Pastor Kidney and Pastor Scott Boredom then falsely charged Pastor Burleson of lying when he denied the false charges. It twas then explained to the two moron pastors by other bloggers that you can't change time stamps on blogger.com site like you can on Kidney's and Boredom's Wordpress blog sites. However, there has been no apology for their false accusations. Their blatant lies against Pastor Burleson are still posted on the internet.
Now, Pastor Kidney is caught doing the very thing he falsely condemned another for doing. And instead of confessing his sin and rectifying his error, he justifies it. Some of you weak minded, bent kneed, pussyfooted Southern Baptists may forgive Pastor Kidney and Pastor Boredom, as it seems Pastor Burleson has done, but Dr. Phil learned a long time ago you don't bestow forgiveness until there is a confession of guilt.
Counter to what Mr. Kidney hopes you might think, the guilt hanging over his head like Damocles sword is not the guilt due to the silly little thing of changing time stamps. It is the very serious guilt of hypocrisy. Jesus used a whip to beat it out of the Pharisees. Dr. Phil uses his words.
Dr. Phil
Seattle, Washington
"The problem is that the local church (even in the SBC) has become a business organization."
I honest to goodness can't believe I'm going to say this but---I agree with what Lin said here.
Ok, I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
Dr. Phil,
Please leave Wes' wife out of this.
If you won't pray for her.
Just leave her be.
All the church legalese won't help Wes. What he did is between him and the Good Lord. Wade has forgiven him.
This is a matter for Wes' conscience to sort out.
His conscience won't let him off the hook.
Kevin, you said,
“You mean they had elders? Surly the Jerusalem church did not have elders.”
Episkopos (overseer), presbuteros (elder), and poimen (pastor) all refer to the same office. All three words are described in the Bible as offices involving the ability to teach sound doctrine and refute false doctrine (1 Tim. 3:2, Titus 1:9, Ephesians 4:11). (Kenneth Wuest and Ralph Martin applied the Granville Sharp rule and believed that the terms “pastors” and “teachers” referred to the same office in Ephesians 4:11. John Calvin, A. T. Robertson, H. A. W. Meyer, and R. C. H. Lenski believed that the terms “pastors” and “teachers” referred to one person in verse eleven; however, they also believed that pastors were always teachers while teachers were not always pastors. Thus, an interpreter could view the pastors as a subset of the teachers.) In a comment on Acts 14:23, A. T. Robertson stated the following: “Elder (presbuteros) was the Jewish name and bishop (episkopos) the Greek name for the same office. ‘Those who are called elders in speaking of Jewish communities are called bishops in speaking of Gentile communities’ (Hackett).” In a comment on Philippians 1:1, Robertson explained the origin of the word and stated that it is equivalent with the word for elder: “See note on Acts 20:17 and note on Acts 20: 28 for the use of this most interesting word as equivalent to presbuteros (elder). It is an old word from episkeptoma, to look upon or after, to inspect, so the overseer or superintendent.” Marvin Vincent said that episkopos and presbuteros are synonymous. Barnes said the two terms are synonymous. We see the noun forms (elder and overseer) and the verb form (pastoring, feeding; “poimaino”) in Acts 20:17, 28 referring to the same office. We see elder in Titus 1:5 and overseer/bishop in Titus 1:7 referring to the same office. We see the noun form (elder) in 1 Peter 5:1 and the two verb forms (overseeing and feeding/pastoring/tending) in 1 Peter 5: 2.
In regard to Acts 15:22, the “whole church/assembly” (holos ekklesia) was in agreement with the decision that was made. In regard to Acts 6:5, John Polhill of Southern Seminary commented,
“It is important to note that the congregation made the selection. The apostles assumed the leadership in making the proposal, but they left final approval of the plan and selection of the seven to congregational decision.”
Polhill, “Acts,” vol. 26 in The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 181.
You said,
“But Paul did tell Titus to appoint elders in all the cities.”
Paul instructed Titus to complete the unfinished work in Crete and appoint elders in every city (Titus 1:5). Groups of Christians such as families (Titus 1:11) were in the Cretan cities, but the groups were not yet fully organized into churches. Some Jewish Cretans had heard the gospel on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:11), and one can assume that qualified candidates for the office of elder/pastor/overseer were living on the island. Churches are autonomous and should elect their own officers, but pre-church missions/Bible studies are normally not fully democratic and autonomous until they become official churches.
You said,
“Absolute Congregational Rule is the downfall of most SBC churches. . . . As to the question of who rules the church? The Sunday School answer is the most deeply theological answer and the only one which is correct. Jesus.”
I agree with you that Jesus is the ultimate ruler of the church. But how does each local church determine what Jesus wants the church to do in regard to major decisions? If the elders rule, how does the congregation remove corrupt elders from office? The congregation can delegate certain decisions to particular members, but the congregation has the biblical right to remove such delegated authority to particular members.
Dr Phil:
Be sure you are following in the footsteps of Jesus and not Chuck Norris. :)
Christ made a whip to drive out those who were defiling the temple.
'My house will be called a house of prayer,' but you are making it a 'den of robbers.," they heard him say as they fled for their lives.
I suggest we follow his call to prayer and leave vengeance to The Lord.
Blessings,
-jack-
"His conscience won't let him off the hook."
Hope so but I suspect not. So far everything points to a pretty hard heart. The only remorse I detected in his recent post was that he got caught. Doesn't bode well for any repentance.
But, be that as it may, he does need our prayers. His wife needs our prayers. His church and congregation needs our prayers. Our convention needs our prayers.
Maybe that's part of the problem. There's too much blogging and not enough praying.
Some people can’t READ!!!
Anonymous said...
Dr. Phil,
Please leave Wes' wife out of this.
If you won't pray for her.
Just leave her be.
Mon Feb 09, 12:06:00 AM 2009
Dr, Phil said:
Before I interpret Pastor Wes Kidney's words, evaluating his mental health in the process, I make known my prayer for his wife. She needs God's mercy for her physical problem as much as Wes Kidney is in need of it for his spiritual problem.
Wayne
Wayne,
I thought precisely the same thing. Dr. Phil WAS leaving Wes's wife out. He was asking others to leave her out as well.
The only unfortunate thing about Dr. Phil's comment is his choice of words and the way he turns a few unpalatable phrases.
Otherwise, the Doctor seems dead on in his analysis.
Frankly, it's refreshing for me to read someone who can cut through the sugar syrup that often passes for Christianity to identify the meat of a very real problem.
This from Dr. Pill:
"Heck, I got exposed by their questions the first time. What can I do to shut down dialogue? Got it! I'll use my wife!
Therefore, comments are not enabled for this post.
Translation: I sure hope they enough compassion to ignore the fact I won't take their questions."
Is that showing respect for Mrs. Kenney ? For all we know it might be true. BUT IF YOUR WRONG, DR. PILL, YOU HAVE NOT LEFT MRS. KENNY OUT OF THIS.
Dr. Phil,
Mrs. Kenney need 'prayer'
not 'preyer'.
Oops, I just realized my own stupidity.
It was Wes who brought his wife into the conversatin, not Dr. Phil.
Sorry.
I love Dr. Phil.
I wonder what he would say if Wes Kenney would actually repent of his hypocrisy?
I'd love to be able to find out.
600 hundred comments.
Wow.
Beware! The Locust are Coming!
That's all I could thank of. Ah jes' wanted to be #601.
Is it jes' one locust that's comin'?
Dr. Phil, ya definitly have a gift fer hittin' tha nail on tha head. I had ta look it up but "Pecksniffian" is a purty good discripshun of some of ya guys in here tanight. I'm needin' insoolin.
Post a Comment