Tim Rogers and SBC Today

[William Thornton]

I cannot pass up such a softball as TimR2, Tim Rogers, has served up on the Burleson threat. Tim, whom I have always liked and with whom I have had numerous cordial exchanges along with a disagreement or two, has put on display below something that is, well, not so attractive. Maybe he is having a bad day or a bad month or a bad year. I don't know.

Tim is one of the collaborators in the blog, a blog that I like and that I regularly check. SBC Today has a tag line "Restoring Unity Through Biblical Discipleship and Baptist Identity." Well...uh...sure...but maybe the SBCT brain trust oughta read Tim's stuff here and have a workout session.

SBC Today's latest blog article, not by Tim, is ...well...uh...I dunno, Tim, why don't you take a shot at answering that question?

If Tim is having a bad millenium, it's quite easy to delete or edit your own posts and start over. Try it.

[Tom Parker]

TR and David Worley have recently turned the SBC Today into something that is nothing like restoring unity. Maybe for these two contributors to SBC Today have a different meaning for unity than most of us do.

[Haruo]

Restoring unity through showing disrespect to everyone who refuses to be in unity with us on anything?

It has been an interesting exchange to read from the sidelines. Personally I don't think if a person attacked in a private anonymous letter makes that letter public that there is any reason to jump to the conclusion that the letter is correct in its attacks. I don't know whether Wade's kids are okay with his publicizing their misfortunes. If they are, fine; the truth shall set you free (as I was taught in the Bible), and we're only as sick as our secrets (as I was taught in AA). If they're not okay with it, then Wade may have a job ahead of him. I'm fairly sure Tim Rogers doesn't know which is the case.

[William Thornton]

[Chris]

[Stephen Fox]

http://www.dennyburk.com/review-of-%E2% ... %E2%80%9D/

Turned up the interesting review above; just a few clicks away from Tim Roger's home page.

interesting exercise; More grace from the reviewer than one could've imagined from Bill Powell, Eldridge Miller and the SBC ADvocate just thirty years ago.

[Haruo]

[Sandy]

There's a difference between unity and conformity that seems to trouble those who have enough connections to think of themselves as insiders when it comes to SBC leadership. Wade Burleson was certainly part of the unity, when it came to theological and spiritual matters in the denomination. But he, and others, who have spoken up out of their own convictions against things they saw as inconsitent with that unity of purpose, they became enemies, rabble-rousers, and "liberals," and no longer part of the inner circle.

As the churches collectively age, slip behind the growth curve in terms of their ability to do evangelistic outreach in the culture at large, and the statistics have inevitably slipped as well, the leadership core seems compelled to shoot itself in the foot by thinking that if they just "do the right thing" in their own mind, and come up with the right programs and advice to push from the denominational level, it will have some kind of an impact. In their mind, conformity is the necessary ingredient to revive and restore the SBC.

Wade, as a result of what happened to him as an IMB trustee, has become a sort of whistle-blower in other areas, hence the Ergun Caner issue, though Wade was not the only one who exposed the problem and the evidence presented has turned out to be accurate. I think the SBC leadership needs to take a long look at how this kind of thing, among others, is perceived among the "grass roots" for the answers as to why CP giving is falling faster than attendance, and why messenger participation at the convention has reached lows not seen since World War II.

[Chris]

[William Thornton]

[TimR2]

[Sandy]

http://sbctoday.com/2010/04/16/how-lost-people-see-us/

I don't think that apologetic for bad behavior among evangelical Christians is what Peter had in mind when he penned I Peter 3:13-17.

[Wade Burleson]

[Haruo]

Wade, what evidence do you have that Mr. Rogers has been fabricating these lies. Obviously they are lies, but where is the evidence that he originated them? For all I know, they may have originated in the secularistic Turkish military, or by some anti-SBC Landmark type like Moz. Or fed to him by the Methodists, or by al-Qaeda, for all I know. Again I must ask, show me one shred of evidence that TimR2 actually came up with his own lies.

(tic)

[Wade Burleson]

[Stephen Fox]

Wade:
Hope you will give careful consideration to www.booktv.org panel last night with Packer, George PAcker, Muslim Scholar Tariq and others for further discussion you may have with the Caner Brothers.
And do tell us the latest on Ben Cole, if you could indulge an aside here.
Thanks

Sfox

[Wade Burleson]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[William Thornton]

Tim, facts want to be your friend, bro. Try and find some. They are helpful.

[Chris]

William, you are getting close to going "over the line" with this.

[scottaerwin]

I liked it better before.

Scott

[Stephen Fox]

Wade:
Interesting news about Ben Cole. thanks for passing it on. If you have email exchange with him do send the Booktv link; something he should have working conversational knowledge about giving his evolving influence on Capitol Hill.
Some ; but no kidding as well.

Scott: The Ft Payne Cracker Barrell cabal is trying to get in touch with you. We have some promising leads.
Do Check in soon as you can; and forgive me for the public notice; I misplaced your email and appparentley you don't check PM's here which I find frustrating as well.

[William Thornton]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Regarding point one, there is a difference between calling someone a "bitter old man" and saying "he appears as a bitter old man" or "he seems to be a bitter old man" or "he comes across as a bitter old man"

Not too long ago, I used similar language to express uncertainty. Those words were taken from BL.com, plastered on blog and my expression of uncertainty was completely lost in the mix which put me in a negative light (the blogger's original intent of course).

As to the second point, it's too bad we're not using Jonathan's logic in the John Lewis /N-word thread. By that logic, one would have to conclude that Burleson manufactured the email unless of course Burleson or Friend or Burleson were to provide proof via YouTube clip of course. After all, if it didn't happen in YouTube, it didn't happen at all...

[Haruo]

Pssst ... William ... why should he provide an apology or explanation to you, a self-described moderate, of all people?

Of course you're a self-described moderate! TimR2 himself so described you!