A 'rebuke' to readers of stuff fundies like.

Boomer said:
I have known Ryan Hayden for several years, and I think I can safely say that he is an honest, well-balanced man. I thought his article was well written, and though it was a "judgment" of the posters on SFL, it was a fair judgment.

I read Ryan's blog often. He is a talented writer who takes on many issues that our generation (30-40 year old) of fundamentalists have struggled with for many years without being nasty about it. He not only points out problems, but also offers many good ideas for solutions.

I encourage you guys to check out several of the series of posts on his blog. I especially liked one series called "Crickets: Five (I think it was five) sins IFB preachers rarely preach against."
Click to expand...

I don't know the young man, but see no reason to disagree with your assessment from his writing. He says his post was misconstrued and misrepresented on sfl....which is par for their course....not always being intellectually honest....hey rsc2a...you want to jump in here....
 
[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]You can take it to mean grass isn't green or that the Germans won WWII, but that doesn't make it true.
I gave you what I considered examples of the the intellectual dishonesty of sfl, including a blogger who came to the same conclusion and listed his reasons....a blogger who was not biased going in....but you ignore, disagree with or twist the meaning and remain obtuse...or dumb and 'move on'....[/quote]

I honestly have to wonder:

Do you not know the difference in evidence of an argument and evidence of someone believing that argument? (They aren't even remotely the same thing.)

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]But when I posted the words intellectual honesty on this thread, I knew you would respond.....thanks for being predictable.[/quote]

I do my part.

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]And, it seems the blogger in this OP also found sfl was somewhat intellectually dishonest......go figure.[/quote]

Yes. I also know people who believe the thirteen bloodlines are pulling the world's strings through the Illuminati, and every major event in history has been orchestrated by them since Constantine. That doesn't make what they believe to be true. (Evidence of an argument vs evidence of someone believing and argument....)

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]Yore the forum's resident nit picker and in the process usually miss the point....either by being dumb or obtuse. I don't believe you to be dumb...but I have been wrong before.  ;)
[/quote]

If by "nit pick", you mean I expect that people actually mean what they type, then yes. If the problem is that people don't actually type what they mean (or say two different things *cough, cough*), then the problem really isn't with me, is it?
 
[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]I don't know the young man, but see no reason to disagree with your assessment from his writing. He says his post was misconstrued and misrepresented on sfl....which is par for their course....not always being intellectually honest....hey rsc2a...you want to jump in here....[/quote]

I've read the post in question (that he says was misconstrued). I don't think he was being pope-ish in it. (Even if I think he was wrong. ;) )

It's largely irrelevant though when judging SFL. I don't judge the quality of a website by the quality of the commentators unless the site is specifically for commentary (e.g. a forum).
 
rsc2a said:
[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]You can take it to mean grass isn't green or that the Germans won WWII, but that doesn't make it true.
I gave you what I considered examples of the the intellectual dishonesty of sfl, including a blogger who came to the same conclusion and listed his reasons....a blogger who was not biased going in....but you ignore, disagree with or twist the meaning and remain obtuse...or dumb and 'move on'....
Click to expand...

I honestly have to wonder:

Do you not know the difference in evidence of an argument and evidence of someone believing that argument? (They aren't even remotely the same thing.)

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]But when I posted the words intellectual honesty on this thread, I knew you would respond.....thanks for being predictable.[/quote]

I do my part.

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]And, it seems the blogger in this OP also found sfl was somewhat intellectually dishonest......go figure.[/quote]

Yes. I also know people who believe the thirteen bloodlines are pulling the world's strings through the Illuminati, and every major event in history has been orchestrated by them since Constantine. That doesn't make what they believe to be true. (Evidence of an argument vs evidence of someone believing and argument....)

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]Yore the forum's resident nit picker and in the process usually miss the point....either by being dumb or obtuse. I don't believe you to be dumb...but I have been wrong before.  ;)
[/quote]

If by "nit pick", you mean I expect that people actually mean what they type, then yes. If the problem is that people don't actually type what they mean (or say two different things *cough, cough*), then the problem really isn't with me, is it?
[/quote]

You illustrate the meaning of obtuse....
You give new meaning to he term 'baffle them with bull'....congratulations on both counts!

 
pastorryanhayden said:

As far as a code of conduct for IFBs.  I'm actually working on just that, I've bought a domain name and am working on starting a social media effort to get IFB pastors to take an open stand against abuse of scripture, preacher worship and proud factionalism.  While I don't think those are the only problems in our movement, they are foundational to them and they are all clearly rebuked in scripture.  I don't know how successful it will be and I know it will make me some enemies, but I think it's a worthy cause that I'm willing to chain myself to.

Good luck with that. I mean it sincerely.  Those "foundational" issues are indeed the three primary reasons that I could not, in all good conscience, hitch my wagon to IFB-dom.

Based on Boomer's recommendation, I think I'm going to start perusing your blog, as well.
 
pastorryanhayden said:
Hey guys,
It was not my intent to judge the blog, but the regular commenters and readers. There is NO moderation on that site, and it is like a team of vultures.  They really don't seem to care if what they are ridiculing is true, they are just hungry for more blood.  It was not my intention to stop the blog, so much as send a wake up call to the casual Christian readers of the site.  I've had a lot of positive feedback from SFL readers and several of them defended me, so I feel I've achieved my goal.
As far as a code of conduct for IFBs.  I'm actually working on just that, I've bought a domain name and am working on starting a social media effort to get IFB pastors to take an open stand against abuse of scripture, preacher worship and proud factionalism.  While I don't think those are the only problems in our movement, they are foundational to them and they are all clearly rebuked in scripture.  I don't know how successful it will be and I know it will make me some enemies, but I think it's a worthy cause that I'm willing to chain myself to.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize who you were at first, I'm old and slow.... :)
I appreciate your effort and the spirit behind it.
I pray God uses you to be a voice in what is often an IFB wilderness.
I also think your message needs to resonate with some of the smaller SBC churches in the south.

And, welcome to the forum, hope you'll join us regularly.
 
pastorryanhayden said:
"resonate with some of the smaller churches in the south"
Do you have any ideas about that?
Click to expand...

Here in the south, there are many mostly smaller SBC churches that have 'foundational' issues as well. As to how to make them listen and respond, your guess would be as good as mine.  :)

Your blog and message has gained a broader hearing, which is a start.
 
Ryan -

I was surfing your blog and there is a lot of good information. That leads me to ask...why in the world are you KJVO?
 
rsc2a said:
Ryan -

I was surfing your blog and there is a lot of good information. That leads me to ask...why in the world are you KJVO?
Click to expand...

NVM...I also see you're for long hair on women, no pants on women, anti-CCM, and flirt with Landmark-ism (although, I'll grant you don't fully embrace it).
 
> "NVM...I also see you're for long hair on women, no pants on women, anti-CCM, and flirt with Landmark-ism (although, I'll grant you don't fully embrace it)."

Where in the world did you get those ideas?  I'm not a stickler for long hair on women (my wife wears her hair quite short.) I'm not a stickler for pants on women (my wife wears pants, although not often in public and most of the women in my church wear pants and I've never said a word about it.) I am anti CCM, but not all of it, we sing Stuart Townsend and Keith Getty songs in our church, and I have absolutely nothing to do with landmark-ism.  Nothing. I fellowship with several non-Baptist churches.
 
pastorryanhayden said:
rsc2a
Thanks.  That question is WAY beyond the topic of this thread.  Suffice to say I just find it hard to believe that the known world had an incomplete Bible for over 1,000 years of Christian history and that it took a group of liberal scholars to fix it.  You can read more of my views on the subject here:
http://ryan-hayden.com/reasons-i-could-never-be-mainstream-the-king-james-issue/
Click to expand...

I did read that post. That's where I discovered you were KJVO.

pastorryanhayden said:
> "NVM...I also see you're for long hair on women, no pants on women, anti-CCM, and flirt with Landmark-ism (although, I'll grant you don't fully embrace it)."

Where in the world did you get those ideas?  I'm not a stickler for long hair on women (my wife wears her hair quite short.) I'm not a stickler for pants on women (my wife wears pants, although not often in public and most of the women in my church wear pants and I've never said a word about it.) I am anti CCM, but not all of it, we sing Stuart Townsend and Keith Getty songs in our church, and I have absolutely nothing to do with landmark-ism.  Nothing. I fellowship with several non-Baptist churches.
Click to expand...

I picked our current church hymnal (Rejoice Hymns from Majesty Music) mainly because it included songs like that (as well as modern hymns by people like Keith Getty and Chris Anderson). So I’m not going to blanketly blast contemporary music. Regardless of this, I do believe strongly that pop music is inappropriate for church.

Generally, in the conversations I’ve had with most outside of fundamentalism about these admittedly controversial and counter-cultural passages [on long hair for women], they’ve either 1) explained them away or 2) said that they only applied to New Testament culture. I’m not really comfortable explaining away any scripture. To those who would say it was only applicable in that culture, “I’d say, don’t you risk invalidating and defanging all of scripture when you start interpreting it that way?”

I think there is a clear case to be made from the New Testament for for people to dress in a gender distinctive way and for people to dress in a way that does not draw attention to the sexual zones of their bodies.

We could argue all day about when the Baptists came to be. I’m of the opinion that there have always been people who believed like the Baptists. But I don’t subscribe to Baptist continuity. You can trace our strain of Baptists back to the 1600’s, and they really came to fruition in the years around the Great Awakening.
 
Personally, I don't think the KJV is an exclusive Bible, I think it is far and away the best translation of the preserved text for English speaking people. 
 
pastorryanhayden said:
You have to make quite a jump to get from those quotes to what you said.
Click to expand...

Yes, he does that with regularity.  Don't pay too much attention to rsc2a.  Just swat him away like you have to do the occasional fly at the picnic.


And for what it's worth, though I haven't read your blog yet, from what I've read of your beliefs so far on the FFF, it's good to have a balanced conservative IFB join our little world......so count yourself welcomed. :)
 
pastorryanhayden said:
You have to make quite a jump to get from those quotes to what you said.
Click to expand...

Let's make it simple:

Did you or did you not say that those who would argue that the long-hair passages are cultural risk invalidating all of Scripture when they interpret it that way?

Did you or did you not say that there have always been people who believed like Baptists?
 
[quote author=admin]I appreciate your issues with the fundamentalist movement. You have moved quite a distance. However, this text issue is one of their biggest issues.

Fundies have a hard time identifying the gospel and God's word.[/quote]

^^ This.

Instead, they'd rather focus on music and clothes and "separation".
 
pastorryanhayden said:
You have to make quite a jump to get from those quotes to what you said.
Click to expand...

rsc2a has a gold medal in jumping to conclusions....and telling you what you think and believe.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
pastorryanhayden said:
You have to make quite a jump to get from those quotes to what you said.
Click to expand...

rsc2a has a gold medal in jumping to conclusions....and telling you what you think and believe.
Click to expand...

Ooooo like a Psychic? I wanna have my doctrinal reading too!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top