Bott '14

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

It was directed at one minister who spoke during the day. People there knew who he was talking about.

David, If he was directing the idiot comment toward one minister, I would wonder why he would go on to say, "I wish I could get a pastor that would agree with me right now."

I find it hard to believe that he is wishing another pastor on the platform would agree that the one minister in question is an idiot. It seems he is wanting someone to agree that the Maxwell statement is idiotic.

Anyway, if he has apologized, as has been stated, which means he had to have also apologized to God as well, are we saying to God that it isn't enough?

[Sister Alvear]

Well, my two cents worth...this has caused a lot of stir...however in favor of JA...we all make blunders and say things we regret. Most of us have heard him preach and know his style. Actually I have heard some good sermons from him in the past.
Would it not be best just to go on and forgive and forget? If someone wants a preacher like him in their pulpits it is a personal choice. I don't think my pastor would ever have him but others would...we all have different likes and dislikes...
If he called another minister a name that was bad taste however that does NOT reflect what AM thinks or anyone else but him. It was a statement from him. I was not there but listened to the tape and did not quite come to the conclusion exactly what he meant.
However someone said he called the other minister so if that was what he meant or if he meant something else he did call...yes, I know the internet spreads things like wildfire and many times things are taken out of context...whether this was or not...there is not much anyone can do...but pray. Someone said he sounded burned out? Perhaps. I don't know. Anyway, he had people in his church speaking up for him so they must be accustomed to his manner of speech and are ok with it...
Speaking so crudely (if I may use the term) would not work in most places however people get used to different ways....
I have visited churches where the pastor (seemed to me) belittled his folks the whole service...however no one seemed to mind....
So.....

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

David, If he was directing the idiot comment toward one minister, I would wonder why he would go on to say, "I wish I could get a pastor that would agree with me right now." I find it hard to believe that he is wishing another pastor on the platform would agree that the one minister in question is an idiot. It seems he is wanting someone to agree that the Maxwell statement is idiotic.

You questioned earlier if JS had a comprehension problem...I'm beginning to wonder the same about you!

1) We know he twisted and took Maxwell's statement COMPLETELY out of context. The way JA described the comment is criminal. Seriously, he messed up that quote big time.

2) Maxwell's original context and quote is true and has absolutely nothing to do with the sin issues JA was talking about. Of course Maxwell and SG don't believe people's sin is the Pastor's fault. That's just absurd for JA to allege and accuse them both of saying. It's not true. JA misrepresented...lied...about the context and meaning of that quote.

3) He went fishing for applause after his straw man attack which had nothing at all to do with what Maxwell or SG said.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Anyway, if he has apologized, as has been stated, which means he had to have also apologized to God as well, are we saying to God that it isn't enough?

I'm not saying anything about his apology. If he apologized, great. Little good it does after the fact. A question was asked if it was directed to one preacher, which it was, and I answered it.

"I don't know which one of you guys said it....But whoever it is, don't get offended. That junk I heard today about, 'well if you got a bunch of hell and chaos and crisis in your church after 3 years being there, it's your fault.' You're an idiot."

Why are you still trying to whitewash this kind of ungodly behavior?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

You questioned earlier if JS had a comprehension problem...I'm beginning to wonder the same about you!

1) We know he twisted and took Maxwell's statement COMPLETELY out of context. The way JA described the comment is criminal. Seriously, he messed up that quote big time.

Do we? Maybe the minister he quoted took it out of context.

2) Maxwell's original context and quote is true and has absolutely nothing to do with the sin issues JA was talking about. Of course Maxwell and SG don't believe people who sin is the Pastor's fault. That's just absurd for JA to allege and accuse them both of saying. It's not true. JA misrepresented...lied...about what the context and meaning.

Again, we don't have the exact words the minister in question quoted, do we?

And really, it isn't hard to understand that JA, as do many others, expound more on a thought after hearing or reading something. Perhaps JA came away with a different impression of the quote. Afterall, we debate these things here all the time- "No, I took it to mean....yada yada yada...."

3) He went fishing for applause after his straw man attack which had nothing at all to do with what Maxwell or SG said.

I didn't get that impression.

I'm not saying anything about his apology. If he apologized, great. Little good it does after the fact. A question was asked if it was directed to one preacher, which it was, and I answered it.

Why are you still trying to whitewash this kind of ungodly behavior?

Well, it is starting to look more like a witch hunt. And I feel uncomfortable to continue talking about it after he has, reportedly, apologized. It feels like digging through the blood, so to speak.

And I don't know why you keep saying I am trying to whitewash what he said. My point is that I am not certain that he is speaking directly to the minister or the quote by the minister. And I haven't been a huge fan of his colorful use of language, but I do see some value in the many things he preaches by experience, so I am not willing to throw him under a bus.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Do we? Maybe the minister he quoted took it out of context. Again, we don't have the exact words the minister in question quoted, do we?

Ok. If SG's reference to the Maxwell quote was similar to what Triumphant1 posted, and not how JA described them to be (about sin), would you then agree that JA was wrong both in his attack on SG and his comment on the quote?

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

And really, it isn't hard to understand that JA, as do many others, expound more on a thought after hearing or reading something. Perhaps JA came away with a different impression of the quote.

It wasn't that he just expounded on a thought. If Maxwell's quote is what SG used, and what JA was referring to, he completely misrepresented and twisted it by accusing Maxwell and SG of blaming him for people sinning. That's not what Maxwell was talking about!

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

And I don't know why you keep saying I am trying to whitewash what he said. My point is that I am not certain that he is speaking directly to the minister or the quote by the minister.

PO, you're smarter than this.

"I don't know which one of you guys said it....But whoever it is, don't get offended. That junk I heard today about, 'well if you got a bunch of hell and chaos and crisis in your church after 3 years being there, it's your fault.' You're an idiot."

Can't be much clearer than that. Doesn't take an English Professor to decipher who is the subject and reference of "You're an idiot." He said "YOU'RE" an idiot. He did not say the quote is an idiot. Makes no sense that he would use "you're" to reference the quote.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Well, it is starting to look more like a witch hunt. And I feel uncomfortable to continue talking about it after he has, reportedly, apologized. It feels like digging through the blood, so to speak.

You're right. He apologized. Nothing to see here.

Moral of this story: You can attack a fellow minister at a conference attended by thousands, and viewed by thousands more, by calling the minister juvenile names (you're an idiot) and suggesting he has mental issues (you need brain surgery), while twisting and misrepresenting what they say...just as long as you apologize (in private) afterwards.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

Ok. If SG's reference to the Maxwell quote was similar to what Triumphant1 posted, and not how JA described them to be (about sin), would you then agree that JA was wrong both in his attack on SG and his comment on the quote?


It wasn't that he just expounded on a thought. If Maxwell's quote is what SG used, and what JA was referring to, he completely misrepresented and twisted it by accusing Maxwell and SG of blaming him for people sinning. That's not what Maxwell was talking about!


PO, you're smarter than this.

I'm not going to respond to "IFs" any more, David.

Can't be much clearer than that. Doesn't take an English Professor to decipher who is the subject and reference of "You're an idiot." He said "YOU'RE" an idiot. He did not say the quote is an idiot. Makes no sense that he would use "you're" to reference the quote.

I'm still not clear as to whether he was referencing Maxwell as being the idiot. Mainly, because I don't know why he would say he wished he could get a minister to agree with him.

Why don't you respond to Sis.Alvear. She said the same thing -

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

I was not there but listened to the tape and did not quite come to the conclusion exactly what he meant.
.

You're right. He apologized. Nothing to see here.

Moral of this story: You can attack a fellow minister at a conference attended by thousands, and viewed by thousands more, by calling the minister juvenile names (you're an idiot) and suggesting he has mental issues (you need brain surgery), while twisting and misrepresenting what they say...just as long as you apologize (in private) afterwards.

Witch hunt, dude. Calm down. You act like you wish someone would shoot him in the derriere and then you'd feel better.

We aren't going to get to the bottom of it unless we hear, and I don't mean a transcript, of the minister's words JA is referring to. It doesn't matter what Maxwell said really. What matters, at this point, is exactly how the minister JA is referring to quoted Maxwell. Because, however the minister quoted Maxwell, it apparently riled up JA's righteous indignation.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm still not clear as to whether he was referencing Maxwell as being the idiot. Mainly, because I don't know why he would say he wished he could get a minister to agree with him.

Just a second ago you said you weren't sure if JA was addressing the minister or the quote. Now after I show that couldn't be true, because he used "you're," you change to Maxwell.

He went fishing for applause and approval of what he was saying about sin and that he as a Pastor shouldn't be blamed for people's sin. I would agree with that 100%. But that's not what Maxwell's context was.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Witch hunt, dude. Calm down. You act like you wish someone would shoot him in the derriere and then you'd feel better.

Not a witch hunt. Just stating facts. And no, I don't wish violence against him, that's absurd. I'm saying it's terrible that ministers are given a pass for abusive comments they make during a message, as long as they apologize afterward.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

We aren't going to get to the bottom of it unless we hear, and I don't mean a transcript, of the minister's words JA is referring to. It doesn't matter what Maxwell said really. What matters, at this point, is exactly how the minister JA is referring to quoted Maxwell. Because, however the minister quoted Maxwell, it apparently riled up JA's righteous indignation.

So now it doesn't matter what Maxwell said. You're talking like a Democrat now, PO. You keep moving the goalposts and changing your points.

[n david]

FTR - I don't think JA is a bad guy. He's preached a few messages that ministered to me. I think that JA may feel he has to continue with the crude words and innuendo he uses because the crowd has come to expect it. It has become his schtick, his gimmick.

I love his passion about grace. He is one of the few UPC ministers I heard who isn't afraid to preach about grace. He does better when he sticks to the word and doesn't go off the cliff berating certain groups of people.

I hope he did make it right with SG and apologize for the remarks and accusation he made in front of thousands. Fortunately, SG's reputation is such that I imagine most in the audience didn't believe what JA was accusing him of. And I hope that should JA speak next year at BOTT that he remember the wildfires a comment can make. I hope he never attacks another minister like that again.

And I hope to be attending BOTT '15! I was close to going this year, but was unable to because of a last-minute change at my job.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

Just a second ago you said you weren't sure if JA was addressing the minister or the quote. Now after I show that couldn't be true, because he used "you're," you change to Maxwell.

David, I haven't changed how I felt from the beginning. You can present your case. It doesn't mean I have to go along or agree with it.

Like I said, I don't know why JA would say, "I wish I could get a minister to agree with me", if he was speaking to the minister and not the quote. Why would he want a bunch of ministers on the platform to gang up on the minster in question? That just doesn't make sense to me - at a minister's/leadership conference to boot. I just don't see that as viable.

Fleshing out our comments here, as we often do, I know that I have referenced Maxwell's quote, because JA references it. Logically, without broadening my thoughts, it only stands to reason that we would need to know the exact wording of the minister in question. We can't react to Maxwell before understanding fully the minister's actual wording.

I think you said something yesterday about wanting to know the minister's exact wording. I agree with that, as he may have expanded or misquoted Maxwell.

He went fishing for applause and approval of what he was saying about sin and that he as a Pastor shouldn't be blamed for people's sin. I would agree with that 100%. But that's not what Maxwell's context was.

It is just your opinion as to whether he was fishing for applause or not. My impression is that the audience was very well aware that people can be idiots and it isn't always the minister or the churches fault. They did appear to agree with that.

Again, we need to reach past Maxwell's context and see if the minister in question quoted him as written. And THEN, we certainly cannot overlook, as often is the case, a listener coming away with another take on the quote referenced. IOW, if the context was correct, JA has every right to glean something else from it and comment how he felt upon hearing it.

Not a witch hunt. Just stating facts. And no, I don't wish violence against him, that's absurd. I'm saying it's terrible that ministers are given a pass for abusive comments they make during a message, as long as they apologize afterward.

You are hell bent on me taking your view. I don't care if you take my view, I am just presenting what I am seeing.

So now it doesn't matter what Maxwell said. You're talking like a Democrat now, PO. You keep moving the goalposts and changing your points.

Again, let's look at the logic. JA references Maxwell's quote because the minister in question says it is Maxwell's quote. The question is whether the Maxwell quote was accurate OR is it just how JA received the quote?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

FTR - I don't think JA is a bad guy. He's preached a few messages that ministered to me. I think that JA may feel he has to continue with the crude words and innuendo he uses because the crowd has come to expect it. It has become his schtick, his gimmick.

Speculation on your part. You don't emphatically know that is his frame of mind.

I love his passion about grace. He is one of the few UPC ministers I heard who isn't afraid to preach about grace. He does better when he sticks to the word and doesn't go off the cliff berating certain groups of people.

I hope he did make it right with SG and apologize for the remarks and accusation he made in front of thousands. Fortunately, SG's reputation is such that I imagine most in the audience didn't believe what JA was accusing him of. And I hope that should JA speak next year at BOTT that he remember the wildfires a comment can make. I hope he never attacks another minister like that again.

And I hope to be attending BOTT '15! I was close to going this year, but was unable to because of a last-minute change at my job.

He has also said that we need to present more than Acts 2:38, because there is more to the Gospel. And he has also said we need to stop saying we have all truth because we don't, no one does.