Bott '14

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

PO you're spinning it like a top.

The fact is JA attacked Gleason. Everyone knew it.

It was crass, arrogant, uncalled for, and out of place.

Jason, the point we are arguing now is that David is accusing JA of lying. It has moved past the idiot remark, which I have stated is problematic in any context.

[Sweet Pea]

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.

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.

After reading this thread, I think we all wish you had gone so that we would have first-hand information and not video clips and innuendos from different people.

However, after watching the clip several times, it is my opinion that regardless of whether JA didn't like what Maxwell says or not - he was not referring to Maxwell when he said "you are an idiot"; had that been the case, he would have said, "he is an idiot" or "the author of that book is an idiot." We get in trouble at my house for saying "idiot" and "stupid" when referring to any human being - regardless of the context.

Again.... JMHO

[Sweet Pea]

WOW! It must be nice to know that you are always right ....

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Jason, the point we are arguing now is that David is accusing JA of lying. It has moved past the idiot remark, which I have stated is problematic in any context.

PO, please post the quote where I accused JA of lying. I'll help with a hint, I haven't. But please, by all means, prove where I have actually accused JA of lying.

Once more, and for the record, I posted: IF SG did not say what JA accused him of saying, that would be a lie.

There is a difference.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm not playing your little cat and mouse game, David. You know exactly what I said and how I view it. You know that my point was the "take away".

It's not a game, and I don't know what you're saying because (as I proved with your previous posts) you keep changing.

Let's review the flip flops

About Maxwell, first it was:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I personally feel he was addressing Maxwell's quote and not the minister who quoted him."

After I pointed out that JA waved towards the group of ministers and said "I don't know which one of you guys said it...but whoever it is don't get offended....you're an idiot."

Unless John Maxwell was sitting there, JA was not talking about him. Then you became confused whether JA was referring to SG or the quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

My point is that I am not certain that he is speaking directly to the minister or the quote by the minister.

I wrote that JA couldn't have been directing "you're an idiot" at a quote...key part being "you're" and not "it" or "the quote." After I stated maybe the quote became flesh and was sitting on the platform, you flip back to Maxwell!

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm still not clear as to whether he was referencing Maxwell as being the idiot."

In the same post, you say:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

It doesn't matter what Maxwell said really.

Next post I point out your flip flop flip from Maxwell to the quote back to Maxwell as who JA was referring to. I also point out that at first you were interested in what Maxwell said, but now "it doesn't really matter."

Is your head spinning yet? It's hard to keep track with what story you're going with.

JA's referring to Maxwell...
JA may be referring to the quote...
JA's referring to Maxwell...
Well, it doesn't really matter what Maxwell said...



And it doesn't stop...

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.

After I posted that I tried calling White Steeple to order the DVDs (was going to anyway before this junk came out.), you post:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Yes, please order the DVDs. It won't matter what it says.

If anyone is playing a game, it's you. You keep changing your statements, moving the goalposts. Then when I ask a very simple question, you refuse to answer it. Why?

I'll ask again...not using this mess as an example...just in general...

If a person came to you and told you someone else said something they did not actually say, is that a lie? Yes or no?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Jason, the point we are arguing now is that David is accusing JA of lying. It has moved past the idiot remark, which I have stated is problematic in any context.

And it was like pulling teeth to get you to finally admit that!

[CC1]

I wish I had the time and energy to read this thread but what little I did read seems like Middle School kids arguing!

I must say this thread touches on one ofthe things that I do not miss about being in the UPC and that is occasionally having to hear one preacher bash another. I am sure it happens sometime somewhere in the independent world but not in the churches or with the pastor's that I have sat under. Thankfully I am confident that the vast majority of UPC folks can also say the same thing.

As far as JA goes his schtick was kind of cool and refreshing back in the 70's and early 80's when he was much young and I was a teen or in my early 20's. However by the time you are in your 60's it is kind of hard to act like you are still "rough around the edges". You would think with age would come wisdom.

I think the truth is that he is not "rough around the edges" any more but he speaks that way because it is what he is famous for and his crudeness always gets a big response from UPC audiences who love "red meat" thrown their way whether it is Jesus name or "holiness" hot buttons or crudeness in the guise of "unvarnished truth" or being a "rough around the edges" "city boy".

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Jason, the point we are arguing now is that David is accusing JA of lying. It has moved past the idiot remark, which I have stated is problematic in any context.

Interesting the word choice used: "problematic." Not that it was wrong, just that it's problematic.

[n david]

Due to the cell phone video clips of JA on the net, I imagine next year there will be an announcement made that any recording devices are prohibited during services.

Easier to keep things like this from being revealed. This way, only POA will have video which it can scrub of any offending or controversial statements.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by n david

Due to the cell phone video clips of JA on the net, I imagine next year there will be an announcement made that any recording devices are prohibited during services.

Easier to keep things like this from being revealed. This way, only POA will have video which it can scrub of any offending or controversial statements.

So, you are saying the church will likely be moving towards a "police" state mentality as well... lol