« SBC & Dortian Calvinism: The Waning of a View | Main | Anonymous Rants: The Moral Reasoning of SBC Outpost and Dr Boyd Luter »

2007.09.13

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

FOOTBALL STAR

Hey Peter,
and other sports stars!
I'll post anonymously so as not to be attacked by the left ;)
I read the comments at SBCOutpost.. It looks like a game play again.
At the moment the lefties are out of the game : they were held with the ball when their slanderous habits alienated the listening public.
They need a way back in. It looks like these "calvinists" are willing to sacrifice one of their own to bring themselves back into the game!
It seems like the huddle has a new strategy!
Read broadly the way the comments are being played!
Expect a "revelation" tomorrow at SBC Outpost
Watch the Professor put his name to the charges!
And watch him position himself as line back at the next game!
FOOTBALL STAR!

selahV

Peter: And all this information and misinformation is being published for the Glory of God, correct? I cannot fathom how the utterances we are to guard can be condoned by our Savior in this regard. To me every person who is involved in trashing another leader with such malicious "letters" should be fired and disciplined like so many pastors are calling for congregations to be disciplined. God have mercy on us. selahV

Tim Rogers

Brother Peter,

What amazes me is that SBC Outpost has violated their own policy (see #4 of their rules)

Blessings,
Tim

volfan007

peter,

thanks for exposing this for what it is. gossip and slander under the cloak of anonymity.

anonymous volfan writing behind closed doors

Joe Stewart

It's blatant sin and needs to be taken down.

Tim Rogers

Brother Peter,

Have you noticed a couple of things concerning this anonymous prof.?

First, it is a male.

http://sbcoutpost.com/2007/09/12/guest-post-an-sbc-professor-speaks-out/#comment-4000

Second, because Brother Tom disagreed with the Outpost team in publishing this, his resolution of Church Discipline seems to now be in jeopardy.

http://sbcoutpost.com/2007/09/12/guest-post-an-sbc-professor-speaks-out/#comment-3988

Third, Brother Tom has called for the right thing to be done. My only concern now is how much publicity this has generated for the good prof to now make himself known. Will his accusations be taken serious because he makes himself known?

Blessings,
Tim

peter

All,

Sorry I've been out of the 'game'. Not only have I been swamped but my DSL continues to wax & wane. Indeed I'm not even sure this comment will go through.

It does not surprise me, my Tim, that SBCO would post contra their own policy. Tabloids inevitably respond to ratings rather than rules.

Nor would it be beyond reflection that the 'Prof' will soon make himself known. It could only lend 'credence' to his attempt to be 'courageous'.

For my money, even if he makes himself known, it gives no more weight to his accusations. The charges are such that either others will have to substantiate his charges who also 'witnessed' say, Dr. Mohler's 'fits of rage' etc. or it falls back into the 'he said' category.

Honestly, I'm not hanging around this alley long. One is bound to get beaten, robbed and maybe even choked on this side of town. This stuff is poisonous chatter that makes God's Church into an internet basket case.

Mercy for all Believers...especially Southern Baptists. With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

And all this information and misinformation is being published for the Glory of God, correct?

I believe it is. If there is wrong doing it should be brought out. Peace at any price or sticking heads in the sand does not bring glory to God. Just look in scripture where God brought hidden things out in the light or when Christ did. Not only in the light but made it public. It's also in scripture for us to read thousands of years later. Yes, I believe that it is to the glory of God.

peter

Debbie,

My sister, I have patience with folk who possess differing ideas...who perceive doctrines differently than do I...who see Biblical passages in another light than what I myself can ascertain.

On the other hand, when another believer attributes to God something that is evil, for me, my patience draws a blank.

Gossip, friend, is immoral. And, for you to remotely suggest that God is thereby glorified through our evil gossip is itself morally suspect.

To defend such is priceless to our Adversary no doubt.

With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: My mouth is dropping wide open. Your last statement has taken my words so out of context and I know you are brighter than that. Anger has gripped me in that I will not answer further. Anything to make your point right Peter?

Debbie Kaufman

I will say this. You label it gossip. Do you have absolute proof of this? I do not label this as gossip. OK, I need to stop before I say something I surely will regret.

peter

Debbie,

I really do not care what you say, Debbie. Say on...I've conceded my vacuum for patience to argue with Believers whether gossip glorifies God.

And yes, you should stop for you're already making nonsensical statements. Asking me to 'prove it's not gossip' is like asking me to prove there's no gold in North Georgia.

To the contrary, Debbie, the responsibility is not mine but those making the charge which thus far is vague, baseless innuendo--immoral to the core.

With that, I am...

Peter

Colin McGahey

Peter,

I agree it is gossip. When we look to the Bible, we see that it does not distinguish truth versus falsehood when defining gossip.

2 Cor 12:20 20 For I fear that perhaps when I come I may find you not as I wish, and that you may find me not as you wish—that perhaps there may be quarreling, jealousy, anger, hostility, slander, gossip, conceit, and disorder.

and again

Rom 1:29-30 They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God...

Obviously gossip is distinct from slander, though both have the aim of tearing down; slander is a *false* accusation. The Bible itself is all the proof we need that this is, in fact, gossip.


Nevertheless, this letter makes sweeping, generalized accusations of moral faltering, yet like all else, no specific charges of sin. Much like the information trumpeted by many who are "bringing these things to light for the glory of God," there are no specific allegations of sin. So, then, is it ok to attack character for personalityconflict? Management style? Financial management? I would say no, it is all gossip. I am of the opinion that the correct way to air grievances has yet to be found in the blogosphere.

Colin

Debbie Kaufman

If Boyd Luter says this man is a professor and felt compelled to print it, that alone should give credibility. It's only gossip because you choose to call it this. I think you will be surprised at who will speak out. What of those who post anonymously on comments? I have yet to see a post crying about this. Why is that Peter? As I said and I stand by my words, no matter how nonsensical they may seem to you Peter.

I wish this professor would have signed his name, but I fully understand why he did not.

Colin McGahey

Debbie,

Gossip has a definition. It has nothing to do with anonymity.

What is your biblical definition of gossip?

peter

Debbie,

Who is defending anonymous commenting? I have not. Nor will I allow anonymous commenters to get away with making charges against others without hard evidence.

I can just hear your high-pitch, ear pearcing shrills, Debbie, if an anonymous letter writer wrote a diatribe against Wade Burleson suggesting he was embezzling money from your Church treasury or that he often had 'fits of rage' in committee meeting or that his lifestyle was 'selfish' or that he was a bully, etc etc.

You, Debbie, would explode like a 58 pound zit on an elephant's back.

What's Boyd Luter got to do with this? Frankly, I don't care who said such. Whoever is saying it is flat out immoral and godless. These guys are playing with people's lives, not ideas, not theology...lives. It's godless and immoral.

With that, I am...

Peter

peter

Colin,

Thanks for some moral sanity interjected into this discussion. My blood pressure rarely rises. But this stuff smells like hell's smoke. To possess the moral naiveté to argue we should condemn with no evidence people's character, based upon hearsay at best and anonymous letters at worst cooks my pulse well done.

Grace, Colin. With that, I am...

Peter

Luke

Peter,
You called me out. I have been reading and watching all of this and up until now was content to simply read. What I am going to type has been said by many but I guess it needs to be said again because some do not seem to see the sanity in obeying Scripture.

The Scriptures teach us that if we have ought against our brother, we are to go to them one on one first, then bring another and finally, if no repentance is made, before the body. I do not see where Mr. Anonymous has followed the Scriptural mandate. That mandate was not only for church setting but ANYWHERE there is disharmony between two professing Christians.

Secondly, as has been pointed out by many. We cannot let finances govern our willingness to proclaim the truth. A professor in a Seminary is no different than a pastor in this realm. Some say he could lose his job. And what, pastors do not and have not? We are not PROFESSIONALS, professors or pastors. We have CALLILNGS.

Peter, you are point on.

Now I will say this. If said professor had given specific details with the Biblical 2 or more witnesses, I would be compelled to stand with him should the Scriptures have been violated. But as it stands, that has not been done and this whole issue just reeks of Biblical impropriety. I have done my best and trust that nothing I have said is personal against anyone in particular. But I contend that the Scriptures are clear on this issue and that if it convicts and condemns such actions of anyone, it is not personal with me, but rather, it is a personal issue they have with God.

Peter, HOLD FAST.

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: I see a world of difference between this and gossip. The difference also is that Boyd Luter is credible, I trust him and if he printed this he has a good reason. There also is a world of difference between the scenario you have painted above and this situation. I don't expect you to see it. I would take you more seriously in this matter if you were to defend more people who are being excluded due to differences rather than constantly wishing to defend those who do the excluding.

Debbie Kaufman

The point is that there are problems in the SBC and no amount of denial is going to change that. Bringing those problems out and dealing with them is to the glory of God. It's called corporate sanctification.

Debbie Kaufman

From Paul Littleton on SBCOutpost concerning the letter.

The letter from the professor that was posted here yesterday was tragic in so many ways. If what he wrote is true, and some of it we already know is,

Colin McGahey

Debbie,

Again, how about a biblical definition of gossip? How is it related to falsehood?

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: One last point and I am done. You may or may not allow anonymous comments here, but you have never told those who post anonymously what you have said here. When you guys are consistent I may listen. As of now I see a huge lack in this area.

peter

Debbie,

Did you, Debbie, so much as even read what I wrote?

You, my sister, are defending godless gossip and should stop your godless chatter about it. Period...Now...Not three posts later...Now.

And, for the record, Dr. Luter is a co-conspirator in promoting godless chatter.

With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

How would you define gossip Colin? Because with this definition, which I would disagree with, all of you definitely owe some people an apology and some repentance. Something I haven't seen done, even by those yelling foul the loudest.

peter

Debbie,

For the record: I care not a knat's breath whether you think I am consistent. My point is you are defending godless chatter. Stop it, sister, in Jesus' name. Stop it.

Mercy. With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: You are crossing the line here and I think you know this, even on your blog. You can beat some people, but don't go beating me, period. You are the one who opened the can of worms, not I. I disagree that this is gossip, so to tell me that I am defending it is ridiculous.

As I said, by your definition, even you have some apologizing to do, and that is something I have yet to see. So how can you even speak to this issue?

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: If you can't take the heat.........

Colin McGahey

Debbie,

You have made the assertion that you "see a world of difference between this and gossip." How so? What does the Bible say about it that leads you to make this confident assertion?

Further, you have made the accusation that I am guilty of sin and in need of repentance. Certainly in light of your recent support of the letter you will be willing to provide me with the relevant details? I implore you to show me lest I need to fear God's judgement in this matter.

peter

Debbie,

The line for me is gossip. I'm saying Scripture is clear. Gossip is ungodly. You, on the other hand, are defending Dr. Luter, Outpost and Mr. Anonymous' courage to be gossips. If that is crossing the line. I will continue my journey.

And, I will say it again: stop your godless chatter in defending godless chatter.

With that, I am...

Peter

volfan007

"You, Debbie, would explode like a 58 pound zit on an elephant's back." peter! what a vivid illustration. you absolutely blew my mind with that one! lol. goodness gracious, that was pea pickin' good.


this prof. anonymous sounded like someone who may have had some sour grapes...you know what i mean? unless we know who he is, and unless he backs up all of his innuendos and flat out accusations, then how could anyone take him seriously? and, debbie, a lot of us do not know boyd luter from the convenient store clerk in bell buckle, tn. you may know him, but we dont. so, why should we take his word for anything? i dont know him.

hang in there, peter. we love ya.

a 58 lb zit on an elephants back.....ha ha ha ha ha....wuuuuuuweeeee.

david

peter

David,

It would be interesting if Debbie would tell us how she knows Dr. Luter and if she knows him personally.

I'm quite sure Dr. Luter would not appreciate someone posting an alternate view of why he is no longer teaching at either one of our schools or now, precisely, why he's gone from Liberty.

Last June, Marty Duren cooked a guy on his site who logged on 'anonymously' as one of his church members. The mystery guy chided Marty for 'killing' their church since attnedance was down, etc.

Marty immediately blew a circuit and banned the guy asap. So much for Outpost's principle for whistle-blowing.

And as I said, Debbie would explode--yes, like a 58 lb zit on a elephant's back :^)--if Wade were anonymously attacked.

All on this thread know precisely how I dissent strongly from Dr. Mohler's Calvinism. But to attack his character based on vague innuendo and godless chatter is morally bankrupt.

Grace, David. With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

All: Yes, Peter does that when he is flustered. I feel that way about Peter and his comments to on occasion so I do understand. I will probably be banned any minute now, but let's look at what all of you are saying logically. SBC colleges are open to all SB churches or people. I believe the professor was expressing concerns. I wish strongly that he would have signed his/her name but understand why they did not.

We have a right to know what is going on in our institutions whose salaries the people of the SBC pay. I have read what Herschel York said, but it wasn't an act of bravery on his part. He lost nothing by signing his name. His job is pretty secure right now. I have said that I do wish the professor would have signed his name, but to call it gossip, which it is not, because Seminaries nor presidents should never be hidden behind closed doors, so if it is construed as an intimate nature, it shouldn't be. Professors should be able to speak freely, but they are not. Look at the price Sheri Klouda paid, in fact you guys were as rough on her as you are now. So it's rather a lose, lose situation. To want to shut me up however, because I see inconstancy on your part just isn't going to happen, because by your standards you are guilty of the very thing you are decrying. Show me in scripture the definition and name for that.The letter from the professor that was posted here yesterday was tragic in so many ways. We do know that a lot of what he wrote is true.

So go ahead and work yourselves into a self-righteous frenzy. But I won't be paying much attention.

Debbie Kaufman

And as I said, Debbie would explode--yes, like a 58 lb zit on a elephant's back :^)--if Wade were anonymously attacked.

You are right Peter. And I could be wrong here, but as of now I saw the professor saying this, that Dr. Mohler is keeping professors from speaking out against policies. He is doing the same thing that the IMB is attempting to do to Wade. Where is there gossip and it should be looked into. It's wrong. That is my point.

Debbie Kaufman

I do owe you an apology I feel however Peter. I wore my heart on my sleeve as I am so tired of secrecy and those who promote it that makes people feel that those such as this professor must post under anonymity.

peter

Debbie,

As I said, to defend godless chatter is itself a form of godless chatter.

The moral response is to stop, check your spirit and repent.

With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: Two questions. First of all why to continue to accuse me of something I am not doing? And 2. Why is it when you get put in a corner all of your meanness and command centers(trying to bully me) comes out? I will never repent of something I have no need to repent for.

Debbie Kaufman

In fact that is my question to all of you. Don't worry, I don't expect an answer. :)

Colin McGahey

Debbie,

Do you want an answer from me? 1)You take a position on gossip NOT scriptural, then refuse to provide a scriptural basis. 2)I have accused you of nothing, yet you accuse me of sin in need of repentance. Who's meanness is coming out?

It doesn't matter if it is in a church, seminary, secular job, wherever, this letter is gossip. What do Southern Baptists need to hear? That someone hurt my feelings and I don't get along with his management style? Do you think it is ok to post an open letter to your church on your pastor's "character flaws"? How about we hold to the biblical mandate of speaking against sin.

peter

Debbie,

Accuse me of meanness all you care. I don't. To defend godless chatter is itself morally suspect. It's that simple.

And continue to post. I rarely delete comments. You've come close to making yourself look theologically foolish before and now you're doing a pretty darn good job making yourself look morally foolish. I predict you'll be sorry you wrote this thread.

Be my guest, sister.

With that, I am...

Peter

Debbie Kaufman

Peter: The incident with Marty was ages ago and the anonymous person was in fact proven not to be a church member, someone claiming to be which is why they were banned. You didn't tell the whole story. That's a little worse than gossip.

As for Dr. Luter, I had the privilege of being at the Holy Spirit conference last October in Arlington where he spoke that weekend. I have also read his writings .

Now Peter are you not breaking the very thing you are yelling about? I have no problem with that but am just wondering. When you can get some consistency, call me, otherwise it just falls on my deaf ears.

peter

Debbie,

June is not ages ago. Marty banned him within a few comments. You're saying it's *proven* he wasn't a Church member? Who proved it? How?

That's the very issue Debbie. Your bucket is just about two pints low when measuring evidence.

Stop the godless chatter. With that, I am...

Peter

selahV

And again I say, How does gossip bring glory to God? It doesn't. Nor does defending gossip bring glory to God. "A prudent man is reluctant to display his knowledge, but the heart of self-confident fools proclaims their folly." Prov. 12:22

A prudent man is one who has knowledge, and knows when to keep his mouth shut about the knowledge if it does not bring glory to God, but causes division, strife and confustion--such as an anonymous letter writer and a blog host who publishes it.

"he who troubles his own house shall inherit the wind"--such as anonymous letter writers who trash a Christian's character.

I KNOW many things about many people, and those things are true things, but to share those things--even with another on the telephone--is gossip, talebearing AND SIN. Even if this were true, it doesn't make the bearing of the tale any less sinful. selahV

peter

SelahV,

Thank you for the words. From my view I sense much moral unity here. Except, of course, for a lone defender of godless chatter.

Our Lord gets no glory from this. I'll run to catch about any ball hit from any direction in this park. I'll play. But when people begin to sling bats, it's time shut down the game.

Maranatha. With that, I am...

Peter

selahV

I do recognize the moral unity. It saddens me to see this blatant transgression from the Word of God so defended. It seems to me, that this anonymous person (who says he is a professor) should have sent his grievances to the trustees not posted them on a controversial website that's been known to draw secular media attention and has recently been admonished by leadership in the Convention. It was wrong of them to publish such tales. selahV

Debbie Kaufman

It's one thing to disagree, it's another thing to call it a sin or the person doing it a sinner. My how we throw this word around amongst Christians. Especially lately. It shows why we need a house cleaning however. He/she wasn't telling intimate details, but things that should be out in the open and not done behind closed doors. If people are being told they cannot disagree or speak against something, that may be the greater sin. On that I am undecided.

2. Trying to discredit the messenger does not discredit the message.

3. He/she was not telling tales out of school, in fact most of the letter was concerning views of other professors. It is one thing to be discreet out of common respect for someone. I don't think we need to know a moment of indiscretion for we all sin, we all could be told something about themselves. In fact I am certain of many times I have failed. I saw nothing wrong with the things this professor(and it has been established that he/she is a professor by those who reproduced the letter).

I sincerely hope that he/she decides to come forward with their name but I also understand due to job security why they would not. I also predict that more will come forward as God is cleaning house and the time of silence is ending. That's not a prophetic prediction, but I do hope it happens. That my friends is courage. Not a sin. If you want to label it godless talk, then so be it. But it will not change what it truly is.

I do not desire a change of leadership. I do desire that we get the muck out of the way and that hearts be changed to unite together even though we will not always agree. And by unite I do not mean doctrinal purity or that we all act, dress, speak or think alike. In fact that is what makes Christianity so different. Freedom in many areas.

Luke

Peter,
One of my favorite verses to guide my ministry comes from Proverbs: "He who is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his neighbor comes and searches him out." It is beyond me, concerning this situation, how that verse can be done when people write anonymously. AND, I am asked to take this seriously because someone named Boyd Luter believes it to be true. And I'm supposed to believe Boyd Luter because someone named Debbie has met him and read his books.

Even if it turned out that even just one of his accusations were true, the ends still does not justify the means. Having said that, may God give us wisdom and strength to practice the Scripture rather than the culture. Having said that reminds me of Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.

Thank you, Peter, for the encouragement through your stand.

Grace and blessings to you.

selahV

defending gossip does not make it truth. attributing blame to a brother or sister in Christ by using multiple people--who remain nameless but who supposedly see things as the anonymous claimant sees them is still gossiping and talebearing.

I do not call it sin, God does. selahV

Debbie Kaufman

One last word, if we cannot speak of the problems in the SBC we are doomed. That is much different than gossip, which is been yahooed and amened by some in this very group. You say I may regret what I have said? I doubt that is going to be the case. I'm sorry for being so vocal but all of this has been inside of me for awhile. So if anything I feel better.

I would also suggest reading Dr. Luter's post for today. It may put things that I feel have been distorted back into it's proper light. Also it is helpful to use scripture in it's proper context.

peter

First, "Debbie", I am faintly familiar with what's known as redaction criticism. I suggest you think about that when you post here. Your present post wreaks of it.

Second, the very suggestion that "he/she wasn't sharing details" is entirely beside the point. If someone suggested "Wade Burleson had an affair with a married woman," could you please inform us precisely how a lack of details is supposed to make that charge moot? Morally ridiculous.

The moral indictment, minus the evidence, was that Dr. Mohler was filled with out-of-control rage and selfishness among other things. What does `details have to do with it? The indictment still stands.

As for "people being told they cannot disagree or speak against something" possibly being "the greater sin" I suggest you annie up with Scripture, not assertion, "Debbie"

Pertaining to "Trying to discredit the messenger" I fear you simply don't get it: the messenger has discredited himself through his unethical, immoral behavior.

consequently, even if a bearer of partial truth, as Luke has stated, the end (message) is definitively not justified by the means (malicious gossiping).

"He/she was not telling tales out of school, in fact most of the letter was concerning views of other professors." Hearsay. Gossip and slanderous hearsay that cannot be checked. That's immoral, "Debbie." And, to defend immorality is itself immoral.

And I care not a donkey's breath if you "don't see" anything wrong. What's done is slanderous and immoral.

"If you want to label it godless talk, then so be it." Sorry, "Debbie" Scripture labels it godless talk and for you to defend such stands morally outrageous.

The fact is "Debbie" these are desperate moves by men who see themselves losing ground.

Outpost spun out of control due mostly to its obsession in taking down Dr. Patterson at SWBTS. This is more of the same smoke being blown by a coalition led by a few dissenters in the SBC. God is Judge.

Scripture assigns all liars to burn in hell. And, I will forever distance myself from immoral, despicable ethical idiots who shame the Name of our Lord and deny the Christ who bought them.

Stop your godless chatter, "Debbie". With that, I am...

Peter

The comments to this entry are closed.