Dr. Danny Akin & Mark Driscoll: Responding to Raised Concerns

   Dr. Akin responded to recent concerns raised about his unpopular liaison with Mark Driscoll.  You can hear it here.  Also, his manuscript is available as well-- Download Akin Manuscript. 

With that, I am...

Peter

Comments

[Todd Burus]

Peter,
Since you haven't opened comments to your post against JD Greear I'll ask it here: on what grounds are you basing calling JD Greear a "Founders Calvinist"? Since in your vocabulary that amounts to a smear, what justification do you have for accusing JD of this?

[Todd Burus]

So, after listening to what Dr. Akin said in that message, my question for you, Peter, and those who have expressed the same opinions as you on these things, is, Do you agree with him?

[peter lumpkins]

Todd,

Thanks for the questions. First, since you've already the answer forged securely in your own mind concerning my words on Greear, I'll leave you to depend upon them . Secondly, I may or may not comment upon Dr. Akin's chapel address.

With that, I am...

Peter

[Todd Burus]

Peter,
Don't pull that junk. If JD Greear is a Founders Calvinist then show it or else admit that you have overstepped. It was you who accused Founders of "one of those 'Oopsies' all writers hope no one notices when we overstate our case." All I'm asking is that you either give a reason for this label on Greear or admit that you are guilty of doing the same. Don't keep propagating such a ridiculous double standard.

[John Daly]

He said the early preachers had only subject--Jesus. Although it seems today, some would say, we have a whole host of subjects that we should be discussing. I wonder if we focused more on what the early preachers did, there wouldn't be so much need to discuss the other stuff.

And for the record, that's fine that he doesn't care what I think because I don't care that he doesn't care what I think :)

[peter lumpkins]

Todd,

Here is your answer: "Since in [my] vocabulary that amounts to a smear..." As I said, I have no intention whatsoever wasting time tit/tatting, Todd, with one who's infatuated with insults, not content. If you don't like the potatoes, get out of the garden.

With that, I am...

Peter

[Benji Ramsaur]

I appreciate where I think Akin's heart is. While I may disagree with him on this or that, I do believe he sincerely desires to do the best with the "lot" God has granted him.

It's easy to play armchair quarterback and it is probably easy to play armchair president as well.

I intend to bow the knee in prayer today that God would be glorified through the spread of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Benji

P.S. J.D. would desire to cooperate with but is not a Founders Calvinist. I have a good friend who worked on staff at the church he pastor's who was a five-pointer. They disagreed, but cooperated.

Now it is true that J.D. is a fantastic dancer. That leg move he was doing at Campbell's BSU that night was amazing.

[peter lumpkins]

Todd,

Unfortunately, your comment I just unpublished. It's incessant commenters such as yourself that give Baptist blogging such a horrible reputation, Todd. Those who've frequented this site for 2-3 years know I am not stingy in carrying on a conversation with others, especially those who do not agree with the propositions I post.

I have many times written long rebuttals to your innocuous criticisms only for you to avoid them and bring up yet another "objection" through which most high school kids could peer,

You know no limits to insult. The last time (and final time, by the way) I logged onto your site, offering a sincere comment to your post, I was met with this:

Keith: "Todd, Engaging with Peter Lumpkins is a mistake. he is not fair or charitable or teachable. he is a partisan with all the one sided spinning that such a label entails. Praying for God to change his heart would be more profitable."

Todd: Keith, Thank you for your words. I know it is a symptom of my youth that I get easily led into foolish arguments. I’m trying to get better about it, but I allowed myself to slip into it again here. Thanks again."

Afterward, you possessed the disingenuous audacity to write this as the opening line of your post:

"Peter Lumpkins has also weighed in now, on the opposed to Driscoll side of course, and you can read that here. One would wonder if Peter is simply ignoring the charge made to him on this blog to define repentance..."

Ignoring? After you and "Keith" determined it was a "mistake" to engage me because I am "not fair or charitable or teachable" but only "partisan with all the one sided spinning that such a label entails"--the exchanges which you described as "foolish arguments" into which you carelessly slipped--and you accuse me of ignoring questions put to me on your comment thread after it was made clear you did not want me there?

It's this sort of dishonest rhetoric, Todd, from which I am distancing myself. If that's all you want to do, do it elsewhere. No longer will SBC Tomorrow be a dumping hole for such nonsense. I've purged out the anons and contentless emotionally-driven time-bombs who tit/tat with no real point are next on my list.

I'm all for intellectually driven counter-points. But such as I've described just doesn't churn my butter, brother. Sorry.

With that, I am...
Peter

[peter lumpkins]

Benji,

Thanks for the clarification on Greear and I will note such. A couple of things. My connection with Greear as a "Founders Calvinist" was more apparent than real. In other words, the coziness between Founders & BtT cannot be overlooked. One day T. Brister is pouring it on thick and the next day, T. Ascol is, about how great the posts are coming from BtT. Other things come to mind as well.

Couple that with Greear formally becoming a part of BtT, and such drew a spark from me. That's all.

Grace. With that, I am...
Peter