"I went to Jerusalem to become acquainted (Gk. istoria) with Cephas" - Paul's words from Galatians 1:18.

Forgiveness Granted Where the Problem Isn't

Dr. Bart Barber, former adjunct professor at Southwestern Seminary and a 2009 SBC nominee to serve as trustee of the agency which paid him a salary (SWBTS), has expressed his sorrow for his "contribution to the imbroglio" over the false allegations that the Baptist General Convention of Texas eschrowed Lottie Moon funds.

Even though Bart blames "IMB administration" for his error, and even though the unnamed IMB administrator, according to Bart, never directly identified the BGCT as a Convention eshcrowing funds, and even though Bart claims he "accurately reported someone else's inaccurate information," I believe it is incumbent upon Southern Baptists to accept Bart's apology for publishing false information and not bring up Dr. Barber's error in judgment again.

However, there are a couple of things Bart wrote in his lengthy apology, unrelated to anything in his original inaccurate post about the BGCT, that should raise even more questions in the minds over anyone who is being considered as a nominee to serve as a trustee of one of our Convention's agencies.

Bart wrote the following about the BGCT:

It would be unlikely for anyone to have placed into my mouth a lower opinion than I actually hold regarding the BGCT . . . My (low) opinion about the BGCT long predates the events of the past two days . . . (My post about the BGCT) matched up precisely to the reality that I could imagine to be most likely . . . The entire situation (i.e. publishing inaccurate information about the BGCT) puts me in the bitter-tasting situation of having somewhat wronged an institution that I dislike and owing it an apology. So, to the BGCT, I apologize for not taking greater care in reporting damaging information about you. And, although I believed the story, I am glad to learn that this is merely a situation of lackadaisical inattentiveness toward Lottie Moon money on your part rather than deliberate withholding of these much-needed funds from our missionaries

I don't know about anyone else, but when I read the above, it makes me think the problem is not the inaccurate reporting of damaging information regarding the BGCT, but rather the heart of animosity toward fellow Southern Baptist believers at the BGCT. In other words, while I believe all of us should forgive Dr. Barber for his inaccurate post, it is the published expression of animosity toward brothers in Christ that seems to me to be the very problem we face in the SBC. After reading all the other things Bart says about the BGCT in the midst of his apology to them, it kind of makes me hope Bart never has to publicly apologize to me. Smile.

Until we can get to the place where we can disagree with people, loving them as part of the family of Christ while we disagree with them, we may find it very, very difficult to be the salt and light Christ has called us to be. What would be great is for the people involved, including Bart and the Finance Office at the BGCT, to get together over lunch and visit as brothers in Christ - with hearts of love for each other. The polarization that breeds animosity is precisely why the SBC is in the mess we are in.

The post in question would never have been written without the ill-will toward the BGCT in the first place. It is this ill-will, that causes some to label conservatives as "liberal" for no other reason than to justify the animosity toward brothers in Christ that is the real problem in our beloved SBC.

In His Grace,


Wade

P.S. The one question Bart should answer is this one: "Who asked you to post your article?" Bart said he posted the article about the BGCT because he "was asked to post it." The answer to the question of who asked him would be very revealing in terms of understanding the dynamics of our Convention's troubles.

70 comments:

Wally said...

wade you ask who?

The weasel who else, this is what the weasel had to say on bart barber’s blog



Wes Kenney said...
Several members of the SBC Today gang have been working on this today, and have confirmed with sources both within and without the IMB that this is, in fact, the case. Anonymous, whoever you spoke with was misinformed.

And to the other anonymous, what you say lines up with what we've found, which is that two other state conventions are doing something similar. We have no idea which ones, though we have 99% certainty on one. When we know both, they'll be added to the version of this post that is at SBC Today (http://sbctoday.com).
May 20, 2009 5:25 PM

wally

Wally said...

wade

this is what the weasel had to say on bart barber’s blog



Wes Kenney said...
Several members of the SBC Today gang have been working on this today, and have confirmed with sources both within and without the IMB that this is, in fact, the case. Anonymous, whoever you spoke with was misinformed.

And to the other anonymous, what you say lines up with what we've found, which is that two other state conventions are doing something similar. We have no idea which ones, though we have 99% certainty on one. When we know both, they'll be added to the version of this post that is at SBC Today (http://sbctoday.com).
May 20, 2009 5:25 PM

Wade as you know the weasel has inside information from his friend now living in hawaii ,who was dom in northern calif.

wally

Alan Paul said...

Not an apology - he just got busted and had to grudgingly say "sorry" because he knows he has to. Kinda like my 7 and 9 year old sons when they have to apologize...

Denn said...

Wade,

You said Bart "expressed his sorrow." Where exactly did he do that? I've looked and I keep missing that. Perhaps it is just that with all of the other shocking things he said and the extensive arrogance througout that I can't see the parts with Christian humility and sincere regret. I am so sorry that I am missing them. Please forgive me.

Thy Peace said...

The bigger story in all this is the questioning of the allocation of funds of Cooperative Program monies being disbursed. My thanks to Dr. Tom Ascol for this understanding.

Founders Ministries Blog > IMB cuts and the GCR call [MAY 21, 2009].

Founders Ministries Blog > It's time for Southern Baptists to get serious on the allocation of Cooperative Program dollars [DECEMBER 17, 2008].

Founders Ministries Blog > Cooperative Program Allocation [DECEMBER 11, 2005].
For example, in my own state the Florida Baptist Convention (FBC) keeps 60% of money [broken link] that local FBC congregations give to the CP (If you want to see the percentages of other state conventions, click here). That means that 40% makes its way to Nashville, to be disbursed by the Executive Committee according to budget allocations adopted annually by Southern Baptist messengers. The 2005-2006 allocations stipulate that 50% of all money that does finally make it to Nashville via CP gifts go to the International Mission Board. The North American Mission Board receives 22.79% Most of the remaining money (21.64%) goes to "Theological Education Ministries" (primarily, the 6 Southern Baptist Seminaries).

Here is what that means: if Bob puts $100 in the offering plate at Happy Southern Baptist Church (HSBC) in Punta Gorda, Florida and if HSBC has allocated 10% of their undesignated receipts for the "Cooperative Program missions," then 10 of Bob's dollars gets sent to the Florida Baptist Convention offices in Jacksonville. Of that, $6 of his money stays in the state for various concerns like those mentioned above and $4 gets sent to Nashville, Tennessee. Once there, $2 gets allocated to the International Mission Board for overseas mission work. A little less than $1 goes to mission work in North America and a little less than that goes to support theological education. In other words, of every dollar that Bob gives, about $.o2 goes to overseas missions (assuming HSBC has no other avenue for contributions to missions efforts)
.

Thy Peace said...

Wow!

I have read all the posts and comments related to this story ... and it's similar to other stories in SBC.

It reminds me of Jujutsu.

jujutsu (柔術 jūjutsu?), literally meaning the "art of softness," or "way of yielding" is a collective name for Japanese martial art styles including unarmed and armed techniques. Jujutsu evolved among the samurai of feudal Japan as a method for defeating an armed and armored opponent without weapons. Due to the ineffectiveness of striking against an armored opponent, the most efficient methods for neutralizing an enemy took the form of pins, joint locks, and throws. These techniques were developed around the principle of using an attacker's energy against him, rather than directly opposing it.[1]
...
In jujutsu, there are five main sectors ("arts") of training. The first, the Art of Blocking, is used to defend against attacks. The second, the Art of the Fulcrum Throw, is employed in modern judo. The third, the Art of the Non-fulcrum Throw is employed through throws that involve little or no contact with the opponent. The fourth, the Art of Escaping (Hakko-Dori), is very crucial in many styles of Jujutsu. The fifth, the Art of Striking (Atemi-Waza), is used more by modern jujutsuka (jujutsu practitioners) who do not employ body armor.

Wade Burleson said...

Wally,

The point I am making about "who" asked Bart to post the original inaccurate article is that it is not just one man who is leading the charge against others (Bart), but there are a number of men (and a few women) who seem to have unhealthy and unproductive animosity and possible infatuation with the Baptist General Convention of Texas. If they respond "We do! But we must! Because the BGCT is dangerous!" then the Baptist Identity folks must be made aware that they are quickly marginalizing themselves the way their so called "liberals" were marginalized by them in the 1980's - radical, dangerous and unhealthy to our Convention.

But if they can see the error of their ways, gently lay down their swords, seek forgiveness for their animosity, then I believe genuine revival can occur in the SBC.

Wade

Debbie Kaufman said...

Wade: I noticed the same words and attitude when I read the second post Bart wrote, and I was equally disturbed. It comes to no surprise to anyone that I agree 100%. There isn't just no room for hatred or animosity of any sort in the SBC but in Christianity, at least according to the way I interpret the words of the Bible, and because of who we are in Christ, and what He has done for us.

Christiane said...

GOOD SABBATH EVERYONE

I was hunting around the Gospels for instructions on ways to reconcile and came across this:

From out of St. Matthew 12 verse 34
comes this phrase:

'For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.'
(These are the Words of the Lord, Thanks Be To God.)

So hearts need a little TLC:
The Love of Christ
and then, the dialogue will change toward reconciliation.

A story:
not so long ago, I taught children at a school in a poor inner city district. I worked with parents who were under great stress and had very poor support systems.
A child I taught had stopped working and notes were sent to mom but she could not come in: she was the sole support of her family.

The child received a 'fail' in spite of all I did, for the subject I taught him.

Mom called.

She was IRATE. How could "I" fail her child? She was going to take me before the school board and get me fired yata-yata-yata.

I let her 'vent'.

I recognized something in her outburst: something that was MORE than the problem she addressed with me.

When she finished her outburst, I asked her simply, 'Are you okay? It's something else wrong isn't it. Do you want to talk about it?"

She began to cry. The story was this: her boss was hitting on her for sexual favors. She needed her job with its medical benefits. Her husband was gravely ill. This woman was in great pain. She was totally trapped in a terrible situation. She wanted to tell story and I listened. She so needed someone to hear her, she just didn't have anyone to turn to, and her pain had bubbled up in her attack on me.

What did I learn here?

To listen to the 'heart' from which the words flow.

And that a ' verbal attack' can really be a 'cry for help from the heart' to anyone who is trusted enough to listen.

Wade is right. The problem that arose with Bart comes from a much deeper place: that 'animosity' that festers and has now has turned inward. It seeks relief in attacks on others. But it needs nealing at its hearts' core.

Only Christ can do this.
We need to pray.

We need to ask Bart,
'Are you okay?
It's something else, isn't it?
Do you need to talk? "

Wade, you are a very wise man, by the grace of the Holy Spirit.
The men who are peace-makers are to called the 'Children of God.'

You would forgive Bart. You would have him come 'to the table' and talk. You would not close the door on him or give up on him.
You would seek healing and reconciliation among all parties involved, in the Way of the Lord.


Peaceful Sabbath Has Come.
Love, L's

THE ARROGANCE OF INERRANT RIGHTNESS said...

THE WORD OF THE LORD:

John 13:35 By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
------------------------

Where does this shameful fiasco in Texas fit into those people's view of our Creator and Judge

Thy Peace said...

About Praisegod Barebone:

Wiki > Praise-God Barebone.

priasegodbarebones blog > So What's With the Name of This Blog?.

Bryan Riley said...

1As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

It's hard to understand how Dr. Barber's writing comports with the above or any of the other passages that discuss having zeal for the unity of the Body of Christ.

Lydia said...

Can someone give an example of the horrors of the BGCT? What on earth did they do to warrant Barbers 'low opinion' to this day?

My concern is that Barber is to be an SWBTS Trustee. We are getting a very public example of the tactics and attitudes of Trustees. What has caused Barber's ire? Did the BGCT ruin an innocent woman's life just because she was a Hebrew professor? Did they ignore the pleas of victims of sexual molestation and continue to promote a sexaul pervert in the pulpit?

What are their crimes?

Christiane said...

Hi LYDIA,

It's me, L's

You asked what was the 'crime' of the BGCT that might have raised the ire of Bart, who admits he doesn't like them.

I don't really know exactly if an incident occured, but there is this to think about that was shared with me yesterday from Robert. This is what Robert wrote:

"L,s

Its pretty common knowledge that the BGCT is theologically and politically on the left. Thats why the Conservative convention started in Texas.

From the Southern Baptist Convention
Robert I Masters"


Lydia, perhaps this gives some insight into the problem. To this day, I see the word 'liberal' used like something dirtier than the word 'Nazi', but I cannot sort out what the meaning is that 'liberal' conjugates up for those who throw this label at others.

Do you know what is meant by 'liberal' when the term is used by the B.I. group?

And why are they so hate-filled towards those who are conservatives but they are labeled 'moderates' by the B.I.

What is the B.I. playing at?
Just from where I am at, it looks like they are seeking to carve deep divisions within the Baptist community by 'defining' who they are (Baptist Identity) and labeling in a disparaging way anyone else who does not agree with their persecution of innocent people. That's what I see.
Am I wrong? Love, L's

Kevin M. Crowder said...

Lydia,

The BGCT unapologetically aligns itself with the CBF. This is there crime, according to Barber and others (I am putting words in their mouths, but am confident I am correct.) Dr. Barber, imho, is an excellent choice for trustee of SWBTS for he lines up with a majority of the present Board and with the vision of Dr. Patterson. Additionally, these views are sufficiently help within the SBC as to warrant the status quo in terms of their theology and the ensuing methodology. For the purpose of this comment I am not prepared to say whether said theologies/methodologies are right or wrong only that we as people in the pews cannot dictate the directions of our seminaries beyond electing qualified trustees. The system works if a Board and President can in part perpetuate like-mindedness through their recommendations to the committee. All that being said, the issue Wade raises is the character of a man who would openly denigrate the largest Southern Baptist State Convention which by default includes her churches and her people. That is the issue. But, what Dr. Barber has said publically is a view shared by Patterson, a majority of the SWBTS board, the fine folks of the SBTC, and many other who would not dream of making their true views known. In short they are angry at the BGCT for not joining in the CR. my point however will be, is Dr. Barber's public comments any more effectual in creating a spirit of dissent than the private views of the thousands who will end up supporting him?

While I disagree with Dr. Barber, and indeed find his comments unhelpful to the Kingdom, I support his right to make them and support his nomination.

He has apologized, and he has been openly honest about his views--this something Wade, et al cannot be against.

The fundamentalists and Landmarkist must never be told to keep quiet, but they must be asked kindly not to tell others how to do what their convictions dictate.

Our Convention can be the wider tent for which Wade hopes and dreams. But our entities need to reflect the people.

Sadly, and I emphasize, sadly, SWBTS does. To that I simply say that God will always provide otehr choices. He has for me and he will for many today and in the future.

Peacefully,

Kevin

Lydia said...

"The system works if a Board and President can in part perpetuate like-mindedness through their recommendations to the committee."

We have been told over and over the SBC entities are accountable to their Trustees. It turns out the Trustees are of like mind and perpetuate the bad behavior by protecting the leaders.

The system is broken because it lacks intergrity in the persons running it.

" But our entities need to reflect the people.Sadly, and I emphasize, sadly, SWBTS does. To that I simply say that God will always provide otehr choices. He has for me and he will for many today and in the future.
"

The people only know what they are told and taught. And they have been trained to react to the word 'liberal' like a Pavlov dog, never questioning. They have also been trained to forget the Holy Priesthood and obey leaders as their earthly priests. They have been taught that they are not smart enough to understand scripture without their leaders interpreting for them instead of the Holy Spirit.

To question, dissent or even bring up negatives truths has been taught to be sin paving the way for our convention to have a professional "Christian" clergy class of people. Not a historial baptist belief at all.

The fact that Patterson remains after years and years of dodging the ax (even from conservatives), his treatment of Klouda and protection of Gilyard says quite about us as a Convention.

We do not value people. We value politics and winning.

THE ARROGANCE OF INERRANT RIGHTNESS said...

I once knew a godly man. He was my main example for most of my life. He wass what I believe a godly man in the SBC should be.

www.salvationwithoutdoctrine.blogspot.com

THE ARROGANCE OF INERRANT RIGHTNESS said...

Sorry, I left out something in the last post. He was also the kind of man I wish were leading our state and national conventions. The knid of man who I wish was leading our state and national newspapers. etc.

By the way, as a side note, he had no higher education. I believed he accomplished so much because he honored God in all things.

(I have got to learn how to do this computer thing better)

thanks for listening to me
Wtreat

Frank Gantz said...

Genuine repentance and offering an apology should not be coupled with reasons for the error which point toward the offended.

He should have apologized and left it at that. If he wanted to post something else later about his differences with the Texans, then that would have been more palatable.

Wally, I'm not sure that calling somebody a weasel is the best way to go.

www.pulpit2pew.com

John Fariss said...

Frank,

You wrote, "He should have apologized and left it at that. If he wanted to post something else later about his differences with the Texans, then that would have been more palatable." I completely agree, and said that to Dr. Barber on his blogsite. His response was, "What I am trying to do rather delicately is take responsibility and apologize for the mistakes that I actually made without taking responsibility for the actions of others. The 'but' after the apology is simply a factual reminder to people that some of you are shooting at the messenger."

I am unconvinced.

John

jasonk said...

Here is how a genuine expression of sorry and contrition should go:
"I messed up. I am truly sorry." Not writing twenty paragraphs in defense of what you did. Bart's apology was the true definition of what an apology is--a defense. And a defense of why one does what they do is of no comfort to the ones who were wronged. Bart is not being a very good example of what a Christian ought to be.

But this is what happens when amatuers try to be journalists. If a real jouralist did what Bart did, he would be fired.

Also, if Bart is truly repentent, why does his post remain on his blog? The implication is there in the headline. He should take it down.

Suppose some benefactor has left a fortune in his will to the work of God through the BGCT. He reads that headline and then changes his will to send his money to Joel Osteen or Kenneth Copeland or Pat Sajak or whomever. The cause of Christ is damaged, because one man has an agenda, and does not mind hurting others to see it through.

kehrsam said...

"The 'but' after the apology is simply a factual reminder to people that some of you are shooting at the messenger."

Well, no. Not just messenger. Dr. Barber is the one who ascribed a motive to the alleged behavior, and then went on to note that it was part of an alleged pattern of non-cooperation with the SBC going back 20 years. He was the one who noted in the original post that he couldn't be troubled to check if the story were true.

Further, Dr. Barber has not apologized in the least for taking a slander that was apparently making the rounds at the IMB Trustee meeting and turning it into a published libel for all the world to see. It seems the BGCT forced his hand by not properly submittig a form. That's it, it's THEIR fault.

There is a pretty good lawsuit, if the aggrieved parties wish to pursue it. I don't encourage that, but that is where this whole movement is leading us. There will be no SBC in 20 years at this rate. Pity, I was coming to like it.

Christiane said...

TAKING RESPONSIBILITY

I nearly failed my first quarter in eighth grade algebra.
In MY Family, that was unacceptable. It was unacceptable even to me. I knew I had to 'face up to it' and I knew I would be able to, no matter how hard.

When I took the report card home, I wanted to say, 'Pop, I didn't understand the teacher, she confused me. The class went too fast and I couldn't keep up. Math is 'not my thing'.
I wanted to say all those things.

But I didn't.

My father looked at the report card, which told everything he needed to know.
He never yelled, or berated me in any way. He just looked at me and said, 'Fix it.'

After spending endless hours 'taking the algebra book apart' and putting it back together, and trying and trying again, sometimes using as many as five sheets of paper to re-work a problem until I got it,
I suceeded: I "fixed it".
Next quarter an "A". I earned it.

I'm glad I didn't give excuses to my father. Even to this day, I'm glad.

It would have been beneath his dignity to listen to any excuses from me: he, who worked three jobs, cooked us all a hot breakfast every morning, grew an organic garden, and took us to Mass every Sunday morning. He, who denied himself, for the sake of our family and our future education. He, whose dignity was born of honoring his conscience, hard work, faith and family.

No. I would never have insulted that good man by giving any excuses.

I respected him too much for that.
He had raised me to respect myself by his own example.

Everyone should have had such a father.

But some people didn't.

I know that it's not their fault if they don't understand certain things.
For them, maybe not taking responsibility is not the same as 'making excuses'.
Maybe, for them, the reality is that there was no one there for them when they were young; at least no one like my Pop.

I miss Pop, now that he is gone. Love, L's

Wade Burleson said...

Wally,

I would agree with Frank Gantz. You have some keen insights and the SBC needs your penetrating analysis, but it seems to me you do an ultimate disservice by calling Wes Kenney a weasel.

I oppose Wes Kenney's changing of timestamps, his prevarications when confronted by the blog world, his false accusations of the BGCT eshcrowing funds and his tendency to cut the character of the people who expose his antics, but it serves no good purpose to call him a weasel.

Please, I would ask you to expose the inappropriate conduct of our brothers and sisters in Christ, but refrain from name calling.

In His Grace,

Wade

Rex Ray said...

Wade,
The Baptist Standard has an article on what Barber did.

Peter put in his two cents on the comment section.

I replied to him:

With an apology like Bart Barber’s, who wants one?
Peter,
You said Bart Barber did NOT bear false witness, but would you agree he passed untrue information without checking because he delighted in BGCT looking bad?

You said Barber apologized, but I would call it an ‘ATTACK’. He wrote: (I quoted him from your post.)

Barber is a former adjunct professor at Southwestern Seminary and a 2009 SBC nominee to serve as trustee of SWBTS.

His ‘wiggle-wiggle’ apology above should help him fit right in with those that fire professors because they are women.

Wally said...

Wade maybe there is a hint in this comment for advice in getting out of a situation from someone who got bart into his situation. Copied from bart’s comment stream.

wally

Anonymous said...
So Bart, you did not get to sink the BGCT this time.

So they will move you aboard a bigger boat with bigger guns:
a post as a 'trustee' at, guess where?, of course, Patterson's
SWBTS. (sold yer soul didja?)

Now yer gonna 'get um' :
Trustee Barber: really important, very respected
BIGGER GUNS

Watch out you don't shoot off something more than your mouth.

Justa little friendly advice.
May 24, 2009 2:16 PM
Bart Barber said...
Anonymous,

I find very little friendliness in your "advice." I do find a great deal of disdain and a good bit of conspiracy theory.

I also find an incredible irony. Let me explain.

My only conversation with Dr. Patterson about this entire matter took place yesterday. I contacted him, having learned of these developments and this controversy, and asked him for advice as to the right thing to do.

He said (and I quote him without permission here...I hope he doesn't mind):

"You know as well as I or better, but my approach would be something like, 'My sources were not correct. However the fault is really mine for not checking the report out before I passed it along. I hope that I have learned a good lesson and that the folks at the BGCT and anyone else affected adversely by this will forgive me.'"

So, the only involvement that Dr. Patterson had in this whole episode was to tell me that I had wronged the BGCT and to encourage me to make a full, unqualified apology and ask for forgiveness.

I did not take his advice. I apologized, but at greater length and with some level of qualification. And now you have (from your comfortable and cowardly little perch of anonymity) accused of being behind it all the man who most forcefully encouraged me to apologize and had nothing else whatsoever to do with it.

I didn't meet Paige Patterson until a few years ago. Here's one reason why I love him so much—for two decades I heard him demonized by people like you spewing forth your garbage. And then I met him and found him to be nothing of the sort of a man that his detractors make him out to be. And because he is the kind of man who would contritely and tersely apologize in this situation—a better man than I am—your snide comments make me love him all the more.

Come back when you have the spine to put your name under your words.
May 24, 2009 2:26 PM

Ron said...

I am having a hard time understanding the logic of Bart’s apology. He starts off with the title of his blog stating, “International Mission Board No Longer Maintains that BGCT Is Escrowing Lottie Moon Christmas Offering Funds.” In other words it is not his fault it is the IMB’s fault. He goes on to say in his blog that the IMB never stated the BGCT was escrowing funds but that they said 3 conventions were. He is the one that put the BGCT name up. He also gives no proof that a staff person of the IMB made that statement and did not say who his source was. If it was a trustee then it must have been at least a second hand source since he claims IMB personnel made this claim in an open meeting.
He later states he put the post up because someone else asked him to do it. It sounds to me like he is doing a Flip Wilson imitation and saying, “the devil made me do it.” His whole post is an attempt to pass off blame after a lame attempt at an apology stating he should have checked it out before he posted it. He had no choice but to offer that apology since he had so clearly been wrong and called out on it.
He then has the audacity to state this scenario seemed to me to be precisely the sort of thing that the BGCT would do. In other words even if they didn’t do it, it is the sort of thing they would do so they are guilty anyway. First of all, that is not true. They would not and have not withheld LMCO funds. Does this sound like a true apology to you?
Then he attempts to say the whole thing is really the fault of the BGCT anyway when he says, “I am glad to learn that this is merely a situation of lackadaisical inattentiveness toward Lottie Moon money on your part rather than deliberate withholding of these much-needed funds from our missionaries.” They were not lackadaisical. They sent the money to the EC when they were supposed to. Again does this sound like an apology?
Then to top everything off he cannot resist using his so called apology to throw in these comments.
“It would be unlikely for anyone to have placed into my mouth a lower opinion than I actually hold regarding the BGCT. The entire situation puts me in the bitter-tasting situation of having somewhat wronged an institution that I dislike and owing it an apology. So, to the BGCT, I apologize for not taking greater care in reporting damaging information about you.”
If this is an example of his style of apologizing, I hope he never has to apologize to me.
Now we see that he is being appointed a trustee for Southwestern. Does anyone think he would ever hold Paige Patterson, his mentor and the person he asked what to do in this situation, accountable for any action he takes in leading Southwestern. Johnny Hunt is asking the BGCT to support with their CP funds the expenses for this person who has slandered them and stated his dislike for them. They will be helping pay his expenses to the annual meeting and other activities with respect to SWBTS trustee responsibilities.

Christiane said...

Good Morning,
It's me L's

May I share something that might help a little in this matter, for people to think about what is at the core of their hearts, that might have caused some problems between the BGCT and the IMB and several commentators?




EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE

Eighth Commandment
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Have I...

*Lied?
*Knowingly and willfully deceived another?
*Perjured myself under oath?

*Gossiped?
*Committed detraction? (Destroying a person's reputation by telling others about his faults for no good reason.)

*Committed slander or calumny? (Telling lies about another person in order to destroy his reputation.)

*Committed libel? (Writing lies about another person in order to destroy his reputation.)

*Been guilty of rash judgment? (Assuming the worst of another person based on circumstantial evidence.)

*Failed to make reparation for a lie I told, or for harm done to a person's reputation?

*Failed to speak out in defense of another person?

*Betrayed another's confidence through speech?




Well, that's it. Just for ONE of the Commandments. You should see the list for the OTHERS ! :)

With the help of my prayers to the Holy Spirit, I'm usually in reflection over this preparation for a long, long time, as those of you who know me from this blog can imagine. :)

A little reflection is needed now, I think, and some confessing to the Father, through Jesus Christ Our Lord, and then some healing and forgiveness comes.

People must make peace,
within themselves,
with their brothers,
and with their God,
if the Southern Baptist faith can be fully renewed to serve the Great Commission, which can only be done in the spirit of the Great Commandment of Christ: to love one another as He has loved us.

I mean no harm or disrespect here. Uust offering 'food for thought'.
Please take this sharing in that spirit. You know I care deeply and do not wish to see so much self-destruction among Christian brothers.
Much love, L's

Thy Peace said...

Lost in the current debate is the independence of trustees selected/[elected] for the boards. If you select like minded trustees to oversee an organization, you get short-term benefits but lot of negative for the long term.

I understand CR took this short-term approach, but there is a price to pay for this and is being paid. Ultimately the soundness and resilience of an organization depends on the independence of trustees who are willing to question the "management" about its direction and operations.

When this independence is lost, it breeds Oligarchies. And this is not good for end users.

The biggest example of the breeding of oligarchies is the recent financial meltdown. This problem needs to be resolved for the long-term health of an organization, country or the world. I posit it applies for SBC too.

I think this explains, Pastor Wade's questioning.

The below are not directly related to trustees and their independence, but similar to organizations when people are appointed to positions based on like-mindedness and the results thereof, which created the biggest mess in economics since the great depression.

I have provided previous links here, and here.

theAtlantic > The Quiet Coup by Simon Johnson.
The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time.

The Baseline Scenario > Bankers Will Be Boys.
Let’s say you could provide reasonably convincing evidence that you would get better long-term results by using a team that had an even balance of men and women. Could you get away with an affirmative action policy that instituted a quota for female traders? According to the Supreme Court’s extremely mushy and frustrating “intermediate scrutiny” standard for gender discrimination, you would have to show that the policy is “substantially related” to the achievement of “important governmental objectives.” (I assume that there’s enough of a state-action component here, since we’re dealing with major, federally-regulated financial institutions.) Reducing systemic risk sounds like an important objective to me.

VOX > Why did the bankers behave so badly?.
Greedy bankers are getting most of the blame for the current financial crisis. This column explains bankers did behave badly for mainly three reasons. They committed cognitive errors involving biases towards their own prior beliefs; too many male bankers high on testosterone took too much risk, and a flawed compensation structure rewarded perceived short-term competency rather than long-run results.

Thy Peace said...

This from the above Vox article:
Humans are prone to cognitive errors

The first explanation is that humans are prone to cognitive errors involving biases towards their own prior beliefs. A vast empirical psychology literature documents that people fail to put sufficient weight on evidence that contradicts their initial hypotheses, that they are overconfident in their own ideas and have a tendency to avoid searching for evidence that would their disprove their own theories. Psychologists attribute these cognitive errors, collectively known as confirmation bias, to several factors. These include emotional reasons, such as embarrassment, stubbornness and hope, and cultural reasons, such as superstition and tradition. There may also be physiological explanations; the evolutionary development of the human brain may have facilitated the ability to use heuristics which provide good judgements rapidly, but which can also lead to systematic biases. In addition, recent research supports the theory that the human brain arrives at outcomes – such as confirming one’s own beliefs – that promote positive and minimise negative emotional responses
.

Is this what happened with Dr. Bart Barber?

Thy Peace said...

All the below links are from Pastor Wade's blog.

Reasons Why We Will Give More To Lottie Moon [DECEMBER 05, 2007].

I Support Lottie Moon, the IMB and the SBC [NOVEMBER 07, 2007].
Sometimes in the course of Southern Baptist life disagreements arise that can often be misunderstood by the world in general and by Southern Baptists in particular. I hesitate to write of the action of the trustees of the International Mission Board last night as a majority voted in the Executive (closed door) Session to censure me. The action was approved by voice vote (no vote count available) and reported in this morning's public session. I sincerely hesitate to write about this censure for two reasons:...

It's Best to Never to Bite the Hand that Feeds Us [DECEMBER 12, 2008].
The Woman's Missionary Union has always been the backbone of missions both globally and domestically in Southern Baptist life. It is a little known fact that the WMU legally owns the name and the right to use both the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering and the Annie Armstrong Easter Offering, but WMU never sees a dollar of the money collected through Southern Baptists who give to our Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong Offerings. The monies collected through these offerings are always sent directly to either the International Mission Board or the North American Mission Board. These two organizations thrive because the Woman's Missionary Union leads the way in the promotion of their respective missions offerings. Historically, the WMU has never backed away from their passion to see Southern Baptists involved in missions both through the prayer and financial support, and through mission mobilization.

Kerygma said...

Bart exhibits the same qualities many did in junior high school. However, most adults outgrew those tendencies.

Robert said...

Wade,
Why do you tolerate all the liberal and even encourage groups like the BGCT. They are not at all evangelical...just look at the websites.
I think you have gone way off the deep end. I propose you cut your them off and kill them. I am not talking physically!
Otherwise you have become the mouthpiece for these men who want to destroy the convention.

Dont be evil

From tthe Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters

Chris Ryan said...

One always wonders when fantastical stories such as these appear just how true they may be (and the same was true when Wade posted that all the TULIP's were going to be fired from SWBTS). Of course, sometimes the fantastic is true. Other times, what we hope to be false is just that: false.

In the later, we can each hope we have the grace to admit we have made a mistake. Few of us truly do. It may seem juvenile, but each of us is willing to pass the buck if the buck can be passed.

I don't think that Barber is justified in passing the buck here. He made unnecessary assumptions based upon preexistent biases (implicating him). He did not check facts (absolving the IMB). He sought advice (received good advise from Patterson, by the sound of things) and did not heed it. He accuses the BGCT of uncooperation, yet in terms of funding they give a great deal of money and funnel funds for the MO convention that wants to support the SBC but to whom the SBC will return the check if it comes on its own (absolving the BGCT). There is nobody to pass the buck on to.

But as insincere as this apology seems to be, you must give Barber some credit for admitting that somewhere he did mess up (it wasn't entirely his fault, so he says, but he did mess up). He did better than a lot of people. He didn't do the most Christian thing, but he came closer than others would have. Unlike some of SBCToday have done in the past, he admitted that there was a foul, he didn't simply cover it up and close comment streams.

Denn said...

Ron,

You left out one of my "favorite" lines from Bart. He said in a comment, "I'm happy that the BGCT is not PRESANTLY escrowing LMCO funds." (caps mine)

The implication is not good.

Steve said...

Perhaps Dr. Barber first asked the famous question, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

Christiane said...

Hi ROBERT,

It's me, L's

May I disagree with you respectfully? I believe that in the Christian Community we call the Ekklesia: the Body of Christ,
"even the despicable and the despised should be honored, because each person is important
and all are necessary."

Someday, you will understand all this, Robert, maybe you are not ready just yet.
'Be not afraid.' Do not reject your Christian brothers. You need them. All are necessary.
I say this in His Name. Love, L's




I have quoted from Jean Vanier.
Here is the full text:

"The Call to Wholeness in the Body of Christ: by Jean Vanier

He came to transform fear into trust,
so that the walls separating people into enemies
would disappear,
and we could join together in a covenant of love,

‘So shall we fully grow up into Christ,
who is the head,
and by whom the whole body
is bonded and knit together,
every joint adding its own strength
for each individual part to work according to its
function,

so the whole body grows until it has built itself up in
love.’

Yes, this is the vision of Jesus for our world

announced by St Paul:

one body –
with the poorest and weakest among us at the heart,

those that we judge the most despicable, honoured;
where each person is important
because all are necessary.

His body, to which we all belong
joined in love,
filled with the Spirit.
This is the kingdom."

Jeff said...

Finally an apology from someone/s at SBC Today. We also discovered that Wes K. and Tim R are the reason the false article continue to run after it was evident that the story was false.

Robert said...

L,s
Not really sure they are Christian brothers.....they seem to hold to a worldview that contradicts His Word.

From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters

Thy Peace said...

SBC Today > A Word from Our Heart - Posted by SBC Today.
To all of our readers: We do apologize that we went against the advice received from some of you. We were told to take this down and even among ourselves we could not agree. The majority of our team was not resolute that this article remain after the facts from BGCT became public. This article remained in place at the insistence of Wes Kenney and Tim Rogers. We take the responsibility, but in a joint blog adventure, these decisions reflect on everyone. Therefore from the heart of those of us who operate SBC Today, we offer our sincere apologies and ask your forgiveness.

Christiane said...

But ROBERT,
you still must care for them, even if you are in disagreement, they are His Children also, and you have a responsibility to hold your hand out to them, for His Sake. I know this seems strange to you, but think about it a little bit. Love you dearly, L's

Bennett Willis said...

I did a computer lookup for "eschrowing." This was the result: 'We did not find results for: define eshcrowing. Try the suggestions below or type a new query above.
Suggestions: Check your spelling.'

Why have we been using this awful spelling that seems to be incorrect?

Bennett Willis

Robert said...

l,s.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
I suspect you and I disagree on our understanding of what it means to be a child of the king.
I do not believe people are His children
until they are redeemed....before that Scripture says we are enemies of God.

It seems to me we have a problem with goats in our churches.

From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters

Bennett Willis said...

My view of the SBC position on the BGCT--The BGCT refused to be controlled by the SBC and enough votes could not be assembled to change this. As a response to this, a number of things happened. When the "other" convention formed in Texas, this took a significant amount of funds from the BGCT. Since the BGCT has a considerable overhead (colleges, orphan homes, state missions, staff, etc) this reduced the amount (and fraction of the total received) of money that was available to be sent to the SBC.

I have expected the SBC to refuse to take money from the BGCT as soon as the income that is processed through the BGCT to the SBC reaches an affordable level. It may be that the SBC will decide that the money is worth taking for a while longer.

The response that I perceive that I have repeatedly seen from the "control freaks within" the SBC is to first try to control everything they have anything to do with. Then if that does not work, they cry "LIBERAL" and do their best to destroy. This has seemed to be predictable in at least several rather significant cases. This recent "error" seems to be just more of the same.

The nice thing about having comments is that you can catch errors really quickly. :)

Bennett Willis
Lake Jackson, Texas

Christiane said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Christiane said...

Hi ROBERT,

You are so right.
WE have got a few goats of our own!
I'm sure OUR goats are MUCH worse than YOUR goats. We just are NOT allowed to call each other 'goats' in my church. :)

As for 'God's Children', I think you may be right.
In my faith, all Creation is His and all in it is His.

I suppose we believe that not only did Christ come to reconcile us to Our Father, but also to reconcile us to each other.

We have this hymn from over a thousand years ago that says,
'No race nor creed can love exclude
if honored be God's Name
Our brotherhood embraces all
Whose Father is the Same."

Robert, tell me more about your beliefs regarding God's Children. I will sincerely try to understand you better. I know I have not always done that.
Love, L's

THE ARROGANCE OF INERRANT RIGHTNESS said...

L's

I truly appreciate your heart and am lifted up each time I read your thoughts.

I think that the rabid right cannot see anyone redeemed who does not walk in lockstep with them, yet, they cannot or will not see the terribly liberal application of scripture they apply.

I was raised in a church where women could not speak in the sanctuary, shave or wear makeup. Actually those girls in our little town who wore makeup or slacks or shorts were considered scum. It was a church of the extreems of landmarkism.

I know the man who led Jeffery Dahmer (mass murderer/cannible) to the Lord and baptized him in prison just weeks before he was killed.

I believe the arrogance of the innerantly right radicals prevents them from seeing the mercy of God in most things.

Each time I see them attacking someone, or some organization, who dares to view things different than them, I ask myself "at what point do I want God to give up on me."

If God waited on us to be "good enough" before he had mercy on us or saved us, we would never get anything from Him.

Keep up the great thoughts and writings.

wtreat

Lydia said...

Robert, why would the SBC take their liberal tainted money?

And how do you propose to "non physically" kill them?

Robert said...

Lydia,
By separating from them through association.Making them an association not in friendly cooperation!
On a local church level I would reccomend not giving through that association at all.many churches have done that here in Tenn.

From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters

Christiane said...

Hi W TREAT,

It's me, L's

I am in repentance for not making more of an effort to try to understand others who are different from me. So I made a vow to 'listen' and 'try to understand' as a priority.
It's not quite working yet, but I hope the Pentecost vigil will encourage me to do better.

How far our Christian brothers and sisters have wandered from each other. I believe He will call us back together some day.
Only He can do this.
Love, L's

RKSOKC66 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RKSOKC66 said...

I deleted a prior version of this comment that had errors. Here is the revised version:

Bennett:

I believe that your comment about the BGCT and "overhead" addresses a very delicate subject.

It is a subject which, I think, if not carefully managed, is going to serve as a catylist for significant stress at all levels in the SBC: nationally, the state conventions, the associations and the local congregations.

Ground zero for this problem, in my opinion, is going to be the "children's homes" which you mentioned.

Many, typified by younger pastors, are fed-up with so much money being diverted by the state conventions for "overhead". They want to implement the Great Commission which is evangelism and discipleship.

I believe the Great Commission is a super important mandate. Also, the Great Commandment -- loving God and loving others -- is an important mandate.

How about helping the poor and homeless? That's where some of the "overhead" comes in that certain state conventions are spending. Could the state conventions operate with a leaner profile -- yes. Should they dump the children's homes -- no, at least not unless some other way is found to support them.

The state conventions are between a rock and a hard place since -- to the extent that churches just don't funnel CP funds via their conduit -- then good stuff like the children's homes will suffer because of real or imagined "bloated bureaucracies". The state conventions have to be proactive and show that they are good stewards. Leaders in local churches have to acknowledge that there is more going on with CP giving than the Great Commission.

Bottom line there are two important mandates: the Great Commission and the Great Commandment. Let's not maximize one at the expense of the other.

Roger K. Simpson
Oklahoma City OK

Lydia said...

"By separating from them through association.Making them an association not in friendly cooperation!
On a local church level I would reccomend not giving through that association at all.many churches have done that here in Tenn."


But Robert, why does the SBC take their liberal money?

And how come some of our more 'zealous against them' entity leaders not resign rather than take their tainted liberal money?

Robert said...

Lydia,
The money is ammoral....neither good or evil. The issue is the world-view of those who are leading and the agenda they implement.
Oliver North was not wrong for using the Iranian money for missiles. In other words the money was not good or evil. He was convicted because he went against congress wishes for that money.

From the Southern Baptist Geneva
Robert I Masters

John Fariss said...

Bennett Willis,

I think you're right on brother. That is how I see it too.

L's,

With every comment you make, I admire you more and more. For quite a few years, I have said that the most spiritual person I knew was an adjunct professor I had at Drew University, a sociologist whose husband was a retired canon in the Episcopal Church (conmsequently, she was Episcopal too). But you are "running" her a close second (and I don't mean that in the sense that I think you and she are actually in competition, it's just a "southernism" I am stuck with).

Robert and my other more conservative brothers,

I'd appreciate some information from you--and I am being sincere here, I am trying to learn rather than assume something, and I am not trying to set you or anyone else up for anything. Would you define for me what is necessary to be a "conservative" in your eyes? What does one have to believe, subscribe to, etc.? And by like token, even if one ascribes to part of that, what does it take to make that person a liberal?

Thanks,

John

Stephen Pruett said...

Robert,

I am not sure why we should accept your opinion the BGCT world view doesn't match the Bible. Aren't you the person who stated that the Bible does NOT indicate that God loves us unconditionally? If you can be that wrong about something that important, I personally don't think your opinion as to what is right or wrong or liberal or conservative means very much. The problems is that you are representative of a crowd who are destroying the SBC much faster and with more certainty than the dangerous creeping liberalism you lose sleep about.

Isn't it interesting that in the "liberal" days before the CR, baptisms were increasing every year and there was excitement about Bold Mission Thrust. Take a look around now that we are safely in conservative hands. The folks in power, who you seem to support so strongly, need to accept responsibility and try to get a few more people into our churches rather than finding more and more ways to get rid of them.

THE ARROGANCE OF INERRANT RIGHTNESS said...

L's

I am humbled. God has His hand on you

wtreat

John Fariss said...

I just read SBC Today's apology. I don't know which of them was responsible for it, if it was a collaborative effort, or what, but THAT is an apology! If SBC Today allowed comments, I would have said that there, so instead I have e-mailed each of them and complimented them on it. It is short, concise, to the point, and addressed to each entity involved; it does not beat around the bush, no namby-pamby, no shifting of blame, no "I'm sorry but," just a straight-forward Christian apology. I urge everyone to likewise thank them, accept the applogy, and give forgiveness.

John

Wade Burleson said...

John Farris,

Our minds must think alike. I had just posted a new post on the same subject when I came back and read your comment.

I agree wholeheartedly.


Wade

Thy Peace said...

Steps for Anon users to get a google/blogger account.

Christiane said...

Hi JOHN FARISS,

Thank you, but I must tell you the truth. If I seem a little different in the way I see things, there is this reason:

I am the mother of a wonderful Down Syndrome son. He has taught me more about the love of God than I ever deserved to know. And my Patrick has never spoken a word.
Spiritual connection? I think so.
God is good. His Ways are far above ours.

John, point always towards Christ the Lord. We poor humans aren't always the best role models.
Some are, though, like my Patrick, and I wished I had his gentle ways.

Some blessings come to us in ways we don't always recognize at first, and such was my Patrick.
Thanks Be To God. Love, L's

Lydia said...

"The money is ammoral....neither good or evil. The issue is the world-view of those who are leading and the agenda they implement.

Robert, Accepting the money affirms them as being part of the SBC. Have not other churches been kicked out for their 'worldview", considered unworthy of us?

Is this another case of situtational ethics in the SBC?

Bennett Willis said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bennett Willis said...

Robert,
If money is amoral, then why did the SBC refuse to accept money from the BGCM? (Which resulted in the contributions being laundered through the BGCT. ;-))

I find it ironic that the MBC appears to be proposing to use cooperative program gifts to fund their continuing legal battles--based on some reading I did a few days ago in Word and Way. [http://www.wordandway.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=945&Itemid=53 ] I have not verified the content but have provided a link to my source.


RKSOK,
My church is one of those who decided a few years ago that they did not want to support "colleges." So we specify that our money goes to the SBC directly (rather than be divided by the BGCT). [Note: I missed that meeting or we would at least have had some discussion.] This lets us say, "Our money supports missionaries." Of course more of someone else's money is going to support "colleges" (and children's homes) because the amount spent in Texas is no more than needed to run the programs in a cut back mode.

The "other" convention brags about how much of "their" money goes to the SBC. Of course it does--their overhead is mostly the staff that was added when they formed.

I suspect that if you put a sharp pencil to it that you would find that the result of the "other" convention's formation is less money going to the SBC than would be going without it.

Bennett Willis

Rex Ray said...

Bennett Willis,
You hit the nail on the head when you told why the New Convention of Texas started.

I called the SBC phone number and asked why they started, and whoever answered the phone said they started because the BGCT wasn’t giving the proper amount of money to the SBC.

But the president, Miles Seaborn, of the ‘New Convention’ (Southern Baptist of Texas Convention--SBTC) stated their reason: (Baptist Standard 11-18-98)

“Every one of us is a warrior to preserve God’s inerrant word and he would not give another nickel of his tithe to anywhere he thought was ungodly.”

Seaborn was ‘awarded’ by being put on the trustee board at SWBTS.

Their Executive Director, Jim Richards, (same reference) said:

“Theological agreement will be the first foundation of the new convention. Those who depart theologically will be identified and called to repent. To the foes of the SBTC, we say we’re not in competition with you, but we’ve been called to contrast you.”

Could we conclude that Richards has been ‘rewarded’ by being elected as Vice President of the SBC?

Now it seems that Bart Barber is to be ‘rewarded’ by being a trustee at SWBTS.

I believe being a “warrior’ and having “foes’ is not an example of loving each other, but is the type of ‘Christian thinking’ that burned other Christians at the stake.

It’s been said that the ‘worse hatred’ in the world is religious hatred. Maybe that’s why Jesus said, ‘Beware of the teachers and experts of religion.’ (Mark 12:38 and Luke 20:46 Living)

When ‘doctrine’ becomes more important than ‘loving’, there’s something wrong with the doctrine.

Christiane said...

Hi REX RAY,

You wrote these wise words:
"When ‘doctrine’ becomes more important than ‘loving’, there’s something wrong with the doctrine."

And should we all say 'Amen'.

How unusual that Christ came with a message that we should love one another as He has loved us, and yet people search the Bible for isolated passages that give 'excuses' for avoidance of this Great Commandment.

You are a wise man, REX.
Love, L's

Chris Ryan said...

Bennett Willis,

You are correct that the MBC is attempting to get approval for the use of cooperative program funds to fuel their legal battles. For years now they have battled with five institutions that chose to elect trustees that would best lead the institution rather than best follow the directives of Jefferson City leadership. The Word and Way has published articles on this new development in an already sad state of affairs. The Pathway (the official MBC newspaper) has also had an editorial by Tolliver asking MO Baptists to jump behind this misuse of funds. I hope that MO Baptists wisen up and vote against this. There are far better things to spend this money on than "retrieving breakaway institutions" that never would have stopped serving MO Baptists.

Thy Peace said...

Baptist Life Forums > SBC News and Trends > A Posted Correction for the Official Record by Wade Burleson.

Baptist Life Forums > SBC News and Trends > What Good Reason Is There for Closing Comment Sections? by Wade Burleson.

SBC Tomorrow > Enid, OK Pastor Wade Burleson: Does He Stir Up Division? by Peter Lumpkins.

SBC Tomorrow > Dr. Bart Barber: Did He Bear False Witness? by Peter Lumpkins.

I do not know about you, but after perusing some of these posts, I needed to clear my head by listening to a good sermon and good Christian music and singing.

Lydia said...

Peter Lumpkins writes:

"For the record, to my recall I've never deleted your or anyone elses comments. Rather I unpublished them."

This sums up why it is fruitless to have a conversation with these folks. They make their own rules about what is truth and what isn't. and he who makes the rules, wins.

Rex Ray said...

L’s,
Thanks for your kind words, but I’m not noted for being wise.

I showed your words to my wife, and she asked, “Should I be jealous?”

I assured her you gave your love to everyone and that you’re the best example of being a Christian of those that made comments on Wade’s post. :)