George Glass Sr/Response- "Mystery Solved" Thread

timlan2057 · #1 09-02-2008, 02:24 PM

Pianoman may be backing down from this but I'm not.

I felt obligated to respond to Pianoman's thread speculating of George Glass Sr.'s soteriological views since I started the "George Glass Sr. Was PCI" thread on NFCF. That thread of course is beneath the waves with the rest of NFCF.

I don't want to try to recreate that thread here but since some misinformed folks think they've slammed the door on any evidence that GGSR may have been "PCI" in his thinking, I must repeat some material.

That was a great thread; some 1500 posts long filled with much valuable information and civil discourse. Ferd, who was close to GGSR, might not have agreed with all of my conclusions but still contributed much valuable information and acknowledged the substance of my theory.

I never said my conclusions drawn on that thread were anything but a very plausible theory.

However Pastor G responds in typical "ole time pentecostal" fashion when confronted with material he doesn't personally like or doesn't quite conform with his worldview: he ratchets up the emotion and accuses Pianoman and others of being character assassins and/or the infantile assertion that "one-steppers" are trying to claim GGSR as one of their own as if this will bolster their position.

You were GGSR's nephew, Pastor G?

Fine. I respect that.

Not that it makes any difference but I was family too and sat in many living room gatherings with Papa George.

Now, you blow your own first argument to smithereens in that you have a monopoly and exclusive insight into GGSR's mind and heart since you were hs nephew.

Now, if your argument has any merit at all, then logically we should believe you because you were close blood kin.

Fine. Then that means we should put more credence into the words of his own son, shouldn't we? And yes, I've had a couple long talks on this subject with George L (George Lafayette Glass, Jr., to the uninitiated.)

Now if not ... why not? I assure you, he feels a bit differently on the subject than you do.

You also claim you have some of Papa George's sermon notes. I don't doubt that you do and that's a wonderful treasure. That fact led a couple of your little cheerleaders to crow: "case closed!" on the "Mystery Solved" thread.

I tell you what, Pastor G ... I eagerly awaited for you to elaborate on just EXACTLY what those notes said. You never did.

Do you have some of Papa George's sermon notes that said: "I believe anyone who doesn't speak in tongues is going to hell"?

Tell you what ... why don't you scan those notes and then post them up here where we can judge for ourselves what you are drawing your conclusions on?

Pastor G, you don't have ALL of GGSR's preaching notes. Nor do you have the only Bible he preached out of; if you have any at all.

I'll refer SPECIFICALLY to some more of his notes that you do NOT have at the end of this post. I assure you, they are quite relevant to this discussion.

You said the actions of Renda and Pianoman on the "Mystery Solved" thread were "deplorable."

Hmm ... sounds like RRFord when he gets flustered and frustrated - only he uses the word "asinine" as a blanket-catchall when he can't back up his views or assertions with substance.

But I digress.

I'm going to tell you frankly, sir. There were people who posted on that thread who loved Papa George and were close to him and have not only every right but also have substance to back up how they may feel about what he believed.

I respect that you are his nephew but you have no exclusive monopoly on Papa George's heart and mind and what I find "deplorable" is your accusations that well meaning and goodhearted posters on that thread are character assassins trying to smear a man dead for 18 years.

Now ... let's get to some substance as to why I posted my original theory that George Glass Sr. was PCI in his soteriological views.

Much of the prime of GGSR's ministry was spent in Hohenwald, Tennessee, a bastion of PCI thought. There is no evidence that Papa George saw himself as a missionary to those "weak on the message" and as one who preached in many churches in northeast Mississippi and southwest Tennessee I can tell you the radicals were quick to point out those like Cecil Bennett and A. D. Gurley whom they labeled "weak on the message."

GGSR did more than merely tolerate Greer, Gurley, Hansford, Hardwick and other PCI stalwarts; he was a fully cooperating member of the Tennessee
District and was a favorite campmeeting and conference speaker. He did more than just fellowship PCI men over a cup of coffee in a restaurant.

Papa George always fit more the pattern and profile of the "kind old gentlemen of grace" in the PCI tradition and heritage of the UPC; men like C. H. Yadon, Peter Shebley and Howard Goss.

He brought much balance during the early eighties in the Louisiana District when the "fad" was to see who could be the most hardshell and the young bucks like Tommy Tenney and Mike Chance were trying to "outholy" one another. While balance, grace and charity were a fad to some, they were a lifestyle to Papa George.

(Continued in Next Post)

timlan2057 · #2 09-02-2008, 02:24 PM

(Continued From Previous Post)

While some "historians" would lump GGSR in with other radicals, he was NEVER considered right-wing or even mainline Louisiana UPC in the same sense that some of his peers like A. L. O'Brian and even G. A. Mangun were.

John Wilkins said "George Glass Sr. was a pillar of the old Glass/Caughron liberal wing of the Louisiana District." Now, Wilkins said this in the context of saying that T. F. Tenney, who GGSR mentored, was a "liberal."

Wilkins was pompous and frankly I think a bit unbalanced since his plane crash but he was astute and observant as far as knowing where the bodies were buried in the Louisiana District and here I think he was quite accurate.

Now ... let's look at how some of his peers viewed GGSR's soteriological views. These run the gamut from ultraliberal to archconservative.

I am referring here to "Christianity Without The Cross" - page 166. Thomas Fudge's many interviews with first and second generation UPC history makers and shapers are invaluable.

Here is the most pertinent statement on this thread and in this discussion.

Fudge says:

Howard Goss did not preach the UPC distinctives. He did not stress Acts 2: 38. Other well known Oneness figures likewise may not have held to this idea but their literary legacy leaves few clues and their disciples present conflicting evidence."

CWTC p. 106

This is footnoted as follows: (any bold in green is mine)

************************************************** ********

Examples would be George Glass, Sr., long-time Louisiana pastor. According to T. F. Tenney, Glass was strong on the Acts 2: 38 message, adopting a view closer to that of the PAJC than the stereotypical PCI position. T. F. Tenney interview, 20 April 1999, Tioga, La.

Others state that Glass did not admit any association between John 3.5 and Acts 2.38 but saw no point in contending for his views. Roy Gerald interview, 23 April 1999, St. Louis Missouri.

Tenney confirmed this, noting he and Glass did not agree.

So ... even Tom Fred Tenney admits that GGSR did NOT equate the "birth of water" in John 3.5 with water baptism in Acts 2.38. Now that is significant but that alone would not a plausible theory make. More to come though ...

A. D. Van Hoose recalls preaching against an equation between Acts 2.38 and the new birth in the 1940s in Port Arthur, Texas and being congratulated by Howard Goss and George Glass. A. D. Van Hoose interview, 31 August, 2000, Evansville, Indiana.

"George Glass was more liberal than conservative on the new birth." - Murray Burr interview, 13 January 2001. Junction, Texas.

Now Burr was the king of the archconservative intellectuals. He had a mind like a steel trap and believe me, just like the radicals in northern Mississippi and even more so - the radicals in Louisiana and Texas, Burr chief among them, could smell out a preacher who didn't conform to their views on salvation or "standards" like a prize-winning Catahoula cur on a fresh trail.

(H. L. Bennett of DeQuincy was another labeled as "weak on the message" and like Papa George, he also had a Tennessee and PCI connection. He was not the prominent preacher GGSR was so was more vulnerable to the salvoes.)

But I believe that Burr was right on in his views of GGSR's views on salvation.

"I know T. F. Tenney privately holds PCI philosophy as did his mentor, George Glass, Sr. whom I also knew. Correspondence from Loren Yadon, 28 April 2000.

I knew Loren Yadon well and those acquainted with him know that no one worked more closely with TFT for a period of years. While this material may disturb some and some may not agree, these are definite statements from credible sources from liberal to arch-conservative and they can NOT just be swept under the rug or dismissed with empty assertions.

William E. Gamblin told David F. Gray that Glass was not very strong on the new birth - David S. Gray interview, 7 January 2001.

Uh ... no Pastor G. I assure you that Reformed Dave doesn't belong in the "cheap seats" like you asserted.

************************************************** ********

Now to conclude this; back to Papa George's sermon notes.

I don't doubt Pastor G has some and that's a great treasure.

However, George Glass Sr.'s Bible is in the George Glass Sr. Memorial cabin in Tioga, La.

I've seen it and I'm sure many others have.

His Bible is open to Acts 2-4 and near the text of Acts 2: 38 is the marginal note: "the plan of salvation."

Papa George had noted sermons preached by ministers on Acts 2 and 3.

What's pertinent to my theory?

The preachers he notes are men like W. M. Greer - L. H. Benson and M. H. Hansford.

AND .... these men are undoubtedly from the PCI tradition that believed salvation was at repentance and gave the UPC a link with mainline Christianity from the very beginning.

So ... I believe the theory I espoused (and I emphasize only theory) is a sound one that cannot just be flippantly dismissed as Pastor G attempted on the "Mystery Solved" thread.

While some may feel they have "backslid", I feel that George L. Jr. and George Lee are simply preaching and espousing their heritage - and in preaching a message of grace without extrabiblical legalism they are simply logically progressing from what their father and grandfather - one of the finest men who ever walked the earth - believed in his heart of hearts.