In Case You Missed It ... Best Quote Of Feb 2012
From Mary on the SBC Tomorrow blog:Isn't it funny the number of people who wail and gnash teeth over "antiCalvinists" who allegedly want to get rid of all Calvinists in the SBC, but they are silent over a ministry who for thirty years has worked toward getting rid of all the nonCalvinists in the SBC?Amen, Mary. Amen. I can understand Al Mohler since he is one of them. What I can't understand is why self-professed nonCalvinists such as Danny Akin, Alvin Reid and others give a church-splitting conspiracy such as Founders Ministries the time of day.
Not only have The Flounders "worked toward" their goal by splitting churches all over the Convention, they openly state their agenda on their website!
The Bible says, "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned" (Titus 3:10-11) (I'm quoting from the ESV since it apparently is the only Bible the extreme Calvinists understand).
Do Danny, Alvin, and the rest believe the Bible or not? In SBC churches, Tom Ascol and his followers have stirred up more division in the last twenty years than anyone. Godly Southern Baptists should follow the scriptures and stay away from Ascol and his "ministry."
Charles
posted by Charles @ 3:19 PM
4 Comments:
"Charles," it is interesting that in this posting you give the first and last names of 4 persons: Al Mohler, Danny Akin, Alvin Reid, and Tom Ascol. It makes me wonder, "Charles," why you keep your own identity hidden. You should come out of the closet, "Charles," and tell us who you are, what church you attend, and what ministry you have.
Bruce,
I don't know Charles' reasons for remaining anonymous. You act like this is a bad thing. He mentioned before about preaching overseas so maybe he is a missionary or something? In that case his safety might be compromised.
I don't know who Charles is but I work for IMB and I can tell you it can be very dangerous for us to put our information "out there" on the internet.
Anonymous speech is very important for many reasons, not just bad reasons. Did you know the Federalist Papers were originally anonymous?
What does it matter who Charles is if what he is saying is true? Is it true or not? By focusing on his identity, you commit an ad hominem logical fallacy, a red herring which might distract from his argument but does nothing to refute it.
Steven
Stephen, you make a valid point. But my issue is not with what "Charles" is getting at. He could remain anonymous and still explain himself. W/o doing so he makes himself look like a crank and a coward, mostly do to the manner in which he writes.
Who Charles is and where he goes to church has no logical bearing on the validity of his arguments.
Bruce chooses to reveal his identity; good for him.
Charles chooses not to; good for him.
Build a bridge and get over it, Brucey.
Post a Comment
<< Home