Saturday, March 04, 2006

Too hot for The Founders

Most Calvinists are not fond of open debate. They live for control. I recently found this out first hand when I tried to enter some comments on The Founders blog. On the topic "Whither Southern Baptists," I mentioned that James P. Boyce referred to himself as an "ultra pro-slavery man" and that it might not have been a good idea for Southern Seminary president Al Mohler to name his new undergraduate school after the self-described "ultra pro-slavery man." Apparently, discussion of a founder, James P. Boyce, was not welcomed by The Founders. My comments were deleted along with my response below to a guy named Garvis.

Charles said...
Garvis, hello!
is a prima fascia absurdity to disdain a person's entire contribution to Christian thought for the mere fact that he lived in a culture supporting a practice

Garvis, did I say we should disdain everything? I said we should not hold them up as model theologians if we want to reach people of color. You do want to reach people of color, don't you, Garvis? Much of the theological support for slavery came from Boyce, Mell, Furman and the rest. They not only accepted it, they promoted it. Thousands of Baptist young men in the civil war died thinking they were doing God's will thanks to preaching they heard in Baptist churches in the south which followed Boyce's and Mell's theology. The topic of this blog is "Whither Southern Baptists?" If we want to reach people of color it would be best not to promote an "ultra pro-slavery man." There is nothing red herring about it.

I appreciate your zeal for Bailey Smith's ministry

My what? This blog runs down Bailey Smith like he was a dog. As a former president of the SBC, isn't he deserving of respect? I've had my comments about Mark Dever deleted for saying nothing of the level than has been said about Bailey Smith. It
is acceptable to run down Bailey Smith but let someone ask valid questions about James White's academic credentials or the promotion of a self-described "ultra pro-slavery man" and out comes the delete button.

Another deleted comment had to do with the heavy censorship on the Founders Blog.

Charles said...
Tom or whoever at Founders blog:

Why are you censoring and deleting my posts? You deleted my posts regarding Mark Dever but you allow the responses to my posts by others to remain. Why? You have proven your worth as a Calvinist. John Calvin could not stand vigorous debate either and had his rivals killed. You guys don't kill you just hit the delete button. If you won't allow anyone to be critical of Mark Dever then quit using this blog to take cheap shots at godly men like Johnny Hunt and Bailey Smith. You remember your blogs on Smith, don't you? Either allow free debate or repent of allowing critical remarks about godly men like Hunt and Smith!

The Founders: Color them censors.


At Friday, March 17, 2006 8:55:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Charles said...
"Tom or whoever at Founders blog:

Why are you censoring and deleting my posts?"


I don't remember if I told you, Charles, but it was in connection with your post on the Founders blog that I became acquainted with your blog.

I think it was somebody who replied to you who made some deprecating remarks about me, and I complained to Tom Ascol, as follows, on 2/23/06:

Dear Brother Ascol:

I have located the comment on your blog. I seriously doubt you will "win friends and influence people" publishing ad hominem deprecations such as this:

Please stop your incessant self-promotion and attacks on Dr. White. From what I read, Dr. White is not debating Bob Ross because Bob Ross has proven himself to be a self-promoting goof-ball not really worthy of being taken seriously. Kinda reminds me of a taxi-cab driver I had once that had invented something called "Loveology". Such things are not really worth responding to - like Bob Ross.

Later on, I went to the Founders' blog and it seems that the post had been removed by Brother Ascol.

About that time, Brother Scott Morgan called me and and wanted to know if I was "Charles," and Scott said he had posted on the Flyswatter blog -- so I decided to try to find your blog and see what was going on there.

The rest is history. And if Scott and the Founders don't appreciate my posts on the Flyswatter, then they can chastise themselves, for I would never be here had they not involved me on the Founders' blog.

Their publishing the degrading post about me has strangely led to my posting these articles here, revealing the true Calvinistic position on regeneration. Is that Providence at work, or what? -- Bob L. Ross

At Saturday, April 08, 2006 11:52:00 AM, Blogger Charles said...

Scott said, "does Bailey Smith mention so many times that he has had so many Pastors and wives and deacons and wives saved through his ministry ?"

After all the complaining about unregenerate church members, now you're complaining that the unregenerate are getting saved? Incredible!



Post a Comment

<< Home