Saddleback Apology: I Was Way Wrong!

[righteousdude2]

I watched the entire debate, and I will be the first person to say that my initial response to RW using his church to host the forum was way wrong. :tonofbricks: I made several comments about why this Civil Forum should have been held anywhere but at a church, and I am about to do a political flip-flop. I WAS WRONG...Warren did a great job. His questions were well thought out, and they reflected the Bible and Jesus. Also, holding it in the church allowed the Holy Spirit to be there in His fullest glory to control the environment.

It was great. The use of the church was great, and I really developed more insight into both candidates, and I developed a deeper respect for RW too!:thumbsup:

Count me APOLOGETIC for earlier negative arguments about holding this thing at Saddleback, or, any church.

Warren may be unto something, and I hope he has the insight to do one of these forums each election year.

I humbly applaud RW, and ask for forgiveness from those who's feet I may have stepped on in expressing my one-sided opinion the last few weeks.

Pastor Paul:type:

 

[Jimmy Clifton]

Your post is a fine and classic example of true courage. I applaud you, brother.

 

[LeBuick]

Your post is a fine and classic example of true courage. I applaud you, brother.

I second this accolade... :thumbsup: :godisgood:

 

[Joe]

I am guilty too, I first thought it was a lousy idea. But R.W did a fantastic job :thumbs:

A friend/acquaintance (Wynonna) from Fresh Air Media taped it. She and my wife meet for a girls night out every few months or so. She also said R.W did a great job.

 

[tinytim]

I watched the entire debate, and I will be the first person to say that my initial response to RW using his church to host the forum was way wrong. :tonofbricks: I made several comments about why this Civil Forum should have been held anywhere but at a church, and I am about to do a political flip-flop. I WAS WRONG...Warren did a great job. His questions were well thought out, and they reflected the Bible and Jesus. Also, holding it in the church allowed the Holy Spirit to be there in His fullest glory to control the environment.

It was great. The use of the church was great, and I really developed more insight into both candidates, and I developed a deeper respect for RW too!:thumbsup:

Count me APOLOGETIC for earlier negative arguments about holding this thing at Saddleback, or, any church.

Warren may be unto something, and I hope he has the insight to do one of these forums each election year.

I humbly applaud RW, and ask for forgiveness from those who's feet I may have stepped on in expressing my one-sided opinion the last few weeks.



Pastor Paul:type:

WHAT!!!!

Do you think you are doing?
Do you realize the precedent you are setting here on BB?

Next thing you know, people will be apologizing all over the forums!!

Geesh! Thanks alot!

That took courage..
:flower:

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

A Little Balance..or Better....GRAVITY

In an effort to practice a bit of baptist GRAVITY let me say that I still think PDL is a terrible and unscriptural mess(That is my opinion) BUT...I will give RW credit for doing something few other preachers are willing to do these days...engage the politicians in a worthwhile and civilized conversation and LET THEM SPEAK in an environment that at least SUPPORTS things of a spiritual nature. That said though,I do think Warren should have included at least a few of the more viable 3rd party candidates like Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr. I don't think either of the two candidates that appeared have our values or the best interests of this country (our Constitutional Republic) at heart . My vote still goes to Dr. Baldwin. (It might have gone to Dr.Ron Paul if the Repugs and the Media hadn't marginalized him). JMHO

Greg Perry Sr.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[SaggyWoman]

Thank you, Righteous Dude. I appreciate your comments.

 

[Gold Dragon]

props to righteousdude2 :thumbsup:

 

[just-want-peace]

That said though,I do think Warren should have included at least a few of the more viable 3rd party candidates like Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr.

Were they intentionally EXCLUDED, as opposed to being invited and REFUSING??

Just asking as I have no idea, and your point, if valid, is well taken.

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

Good Question

Were they intentionally EXCLUDED, as opposed to being invited and REFUSING??

Just asking as I have no idea, and your point, if valid, is well taken.

Like yourself,I have no way of knowing either but having some knowledge of Dr.Baldwin and the stands he takes I hardly think he would refuse an invitation (particularly in a church) if it was extended. As for Bob Barr I don't really know. RW is fast becoming a "media darling",particularly with the $$$$ success of his publications and things like his P.E.A.C.E. initiative. Although I'll freely admit that what I'm about to say is pure conjecture,it would not surprise me if he was told by the attendant media(in this case CNN) that coverage would only be extended if ONLY McCain and Obama were invited. I just have NO trust of the mainstream media and it is obvious that they are ALL in collusion in regards to WHO and WHAT organizations,parties,platforms,and candidates they will grant fair coverage too. They have an agenda. I feel it is safe to say that RW got "sucked up into it" and took part in it(whether he knows it ...or NOT). The MEDIA WILL NOT cover this election fairly. They do NOT want a TRUE CONSERVATIVE to have even one iota of a chance at the White House or any other important office. I wish someone could and would prove me WRONG. The future of our country is on the line.

:tonofbricks: :tear: Greg Perry Sr.

 

[Goldie]

Is this the Purpose-Driven Empire which sounds an awful lot like the Left Behind Empire?

 

[just-want-peace]

I just have NO trust of the mainstream media and it is obvious that they are ALL in collusion in regards to WHO and WHAT organizations,parties,platforms,and candidates they will grant fair coverage too. They have an agenda. ----- The MEDIA WILL NOT cover this election fairly. They do NOT want a TRUE CONSERVATIVE to have even one iota of a chance at the White House or any other important office. I wish someone could and would prove me WRONG. The future of our country is on the line.

With this opinion, GP, I totally agree!!!

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

With sadness

With this opinion, GP, I totally agree!!!

J-W-P...I would have preferred that someone could prove me wrong:tear: .....and yes Goldie... they are probably cut from the same bolt of cloth. Personally,I would prefer the Kingdom of God rather than ANYTHING of THIS world.

:godisgood: Greg Perry Sr.

 

[LadyEagle]

Kudos to RD. Thanks for your thread! :thumbs:

 

[Marcia]

......Count me APOLOGETIC for earlier negative arguments about holding this thing at Saddleback, or, any church.

Warren may be unto something, and I hope he has the insight to do one of these forums each election year.

I humbly applaud RW, and ask for forgiveness from those who's feet I may have stepped on in expressing my one-sided opinion the last few weeks.

Pastor Paul:type:

So because he did a good job it was okay for a pastor to do this in a church? It would only have been wrong if he had done a bad job?

 

[righteousdude2]

No, No, and Yes!

So because he did a good job it was okay for a pastor to do this in a church? It would only have been wrong if he had done a bad job?

Initially, I did not like the idea of using a church for this kind of program, however, after watching the "Shootout" I was convinced that RW has a unique idea, and it would be my hope that he do this for any and all major elections be it the state or the nation.

You need to know that I watched the "Shootout" with the hope that I could pick it apart, but, God convicted me, and I observed that while I may not have agreed with this initially, the program had true value, and it was a home-run for the church, as Christian and non-Christians alike, gained good insight into the heart and mind of both candidates.

If God can use Warren to use the church building to allow the public to come together and see the true spirit in the candidates, than it was a great move. Warren was not like those media hacks that sponsor debates, and never once allow the questions to touch on Christian values, concerns, issues and topics. Both men were in a place where they could not debate the question. All they could do was answer, and I know that the type of questions asked by RW would never have been used on the network debates.

For the first time, that I can remember, the nation was able to look directly into the souls of the candidates, and not be the victims of political spin. I can honestly say, that I felt the presence of God in that place, and it was the kind of forum that the church could be proud to be a part of, and something that should be done for state and federal elections. And RW was a gracious host, as he just asked the questions, and did not try to get them to respond in any way other than the way that they were meant to answer: and that is truthfully.

It was a new way to introduce the candidates to America, and it set the table for the remainder of the debates. It will be very difficult for the two candidates to spin and flip-flop their way out of any future responses to similar questions asked during debates. America will have the "Shootout" to fall back on, and use to measure future answers to questions about issues and ideals.

I hope that answers your questions, Marcia?

Pastor Paul:thumbsup: