20/20 response

[Mexdeaf]

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5416470/Fallacies%20of%20Logic%20-%20An%20Analysis%20of%20ABC’s%20“20-20”%20

Exactly what I expected- shoot the messenger instead of dealing with the message.

Your comments?

 

[TCassidy]

He's right. The 20/20 presentation was a hit piece. Unbalanced and unfair. Broad brushing was evident. That does not minimize the crimes committed against the victims nor does it excuse the perpetrators of those crimes. But to conclude that IFB churches are destructive cults is moronic.

 

[Mexdeaf]

So we shoot the messenger instead of listening to the message?

 

[TCassidy]

So we shoot the messenger instead of listening to the message?

Did you even read what I wrote?

 

[Mexdeaf]

Did you even read what I wrote?

Yes, sir, I did.

If the purpose of his article was to inform us about logic, he failed miserably, as his article was a case of "special pleading" in itself.

 

[Don]

Yes, sir, I did.

If the purpose of his article was to inform us about logic, he failed miserably, as his article was a case of "special pleading" in itself.

What was the point of the original 20/20 episode? To identify someone who was victimized, and help correct the wrong? Or to highlight the church that did the person wrong, and smear the entire denomination? What, exactly, was 20/20 trying to accomplish?

So yeah, shoot the messenger, since the message got muddled.

 

[TCassidy]

Yes, sir, I did.

Then why in the world would you ask me, "So we shoot the messenger instead of listening to the message?"

If the purpose of his article was to inform us about logic, he failed miserably, as his article was a case of "special pleading" in itself.

He pointed out the indisputable fact that the piece was one sided. It broad brushed all IFBs and concluded that IFBs were cults. NOT JUST the IFB churches where the crimes were committed, but ALL IFBs. If you can't see that as an attack on Christ and His churches, then you are not only deaf, you are also blind!

Since when did you start trusting every word the liberal media says?

 

[Fred's Wife]

The link in the OP does not work...at least for me it doesn't

 

[menageriekeeper]

Fred's Wife, the link opens a pdf file. You'll need acrobat reader or something of the sort to read it.

Okay, so the IFB defense against the alleged abuses reported on is that the report itself was onesided? What sort of logic is that?

I'd been more impressed if he'd contacted ABC and Elizabeth Vargus and asked why she used such a broad paintbrush and why she colored an entire denomination by the conduct of one. (though I can tell you why: experience. The RC was over run with child sex abuses though they claimed for years that such incidents were isolated anomolies)

 

[Fred's Wife]

Fred's Wife, the link opens a pdf file. You'll need acrobat reader or something of the sort to read it.

I have the latest version of Adobe Acrobat Reader...I get a tab that reads "Fallacies" on my Firefox and the page is totally blank. Something tries to load, but nothing happens. I'll try again....thanks.

I finally got it to open.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Then why in the world would you ask me, "So we shoot the messenger instead of listening to the message?"
He pointed out the indisputable fact that the piece was one sided. It broad brushed all IFBs and concluded that IFBs were cults. NOT JUST the IFB churches where the crimes were committed, but ALL IFBs. If you can't see that as an attack on Christ and His churches, then you are not only deaf, you are also blind!

Since when did you start trusting every word the liberal media says?

You're so kind.

Jesus said the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church but we get all up in arms because of a TV show??

Certainly the presentation was not 'fair and balanced'. But if it gets us as pastors and church members to focus upon the problem, clean up our ministries and protect the children then it is worth it IMO.

 

[TCassidy]

You're so kind.

Thank you. I try to be.

Jesus said the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church but we get all up in arms because of a TV show??

Who is up in arms?

Certainly the presentation was not 'fair and balanced'.

Thank you for finally seeing that!

But if it gets us as pastors and church members to focus upon the problem, clean up our ministries and protect the children then it is worth it IMO.

If you have not already been focused on the safety and security of the people you minister to, you are part of the problem! Shame on you for ignoring the safety and security of those who cannot defend themselves until the problem becomes a public debacle!

 

[Oma]

You're so kind.

Jesus said the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church but we get all up in arms because of a TV show??

Certainly the presentation was not 'fair and balanced'. But if it gets us as pastors and church members to focus upon the problem, clean up our ministries and protect the children then it is worth it IMO.

So the end justifies the means?

 

[Mexdeaf]

So the end justifies the means?

I'm stubborn and obstinate on some things so IMO, it was a good thing, not a bad thing- Doc Cassidy notwithstanding.

We weren't being persecuted for righteousness' sake here so no need to scream and holler.

 

[dcorbett]

http://www.paulchappell.com/2011/04/27/a-clean-name-or-a-new-name/

 

[Jerome]

Thank you for that Debbie. Dr. Chappell is uniquely qualified to speak to this issue, given how his own father's and brother's scandals besmirched the Chappell name.

From Dr. Chappell's book Guided By Grace:

"There is something both sad and ugly about a man who cannot admit when he was wrong. David fell into this prideful trap and planned a heroic demise for the husband of Bathsheba. Finbally, God sent Nathan to accuse David of his hypocrisy. Following this, God taught David a lesson. God will do the same to leaders who ill use their positions today. God is patient, but He is also just. The Lord is the Good Shepherd, and He will protect His sheep from abusive undershepherds."

 

[dcorbett]

Thank you for that Debbie. Dr. Chappell is uniquely qualified to speak to this issue, given how his own father's and brother's scandals besmirched the Chappell name.

His Father was my Pastor until 3 years ago, and I knew of no scandal with him or any of his 3 sons who are all Pastors.

Debbie Mc

 

[Mexdeaf]

His Father was my Pastor until 3 years ago, and I knew of no scandal with him or any of his 3 sons who are all Pastors.

Debbie Mc

I am not surprised. We are particularly adept at covering up, excusing and hiding our IFB or SBC sins while shouting about the sins of other groups from the housetops- which Pastor Chappell mentioned in his article.

Some of the comments following the article were quite interesting, especially (to me) the one that spoke of 'living by grace being dangerous' or similar words. If living by grace be dangerous, may I be in danger daily.

 

[Berean]

He's right. The 20/20 presentation was a hit piece. Unbalanced and unfair. Broad brushing was evident. That does not minimize the crimes committed against the victims nor does it excuse the perpetrators of those crimes. But to conclude that IFB churches are destructive cults is moronic.

I am not familiar with the IFB. Please point out what was unfair. Realizing that fair is a preception.

 

[Don]

I am not familiar with the IFB. Please point out what was unfair. Realizing that fair is a preception.

Identifying all IFB churches as a cult, based on the actions of one. Does that seem fair to you?