This is a topic for discussions that are distracting, don’t deserve their own topic, but that we don’t want to delete. It is an unlisted topic so it won’t show up in your email or in the list of recent topics, although it is publicly available by direct link.
Thanks, Tim.
I understand the desire to avoid others labelling you with an epithet and inaccurate concept. Nate Alberson points out you frequently use the term positively frequently, and here you (with qualification) seem to be OK with the term.
I remembered seeing some kind of an exchange with Joe McDurmon at American Vision. At the time, you took him to task for describing you as being a patriarchalist. So much so that you gave the impression you had never positively used the term in connection with your beliefs. So I’m kind of scratching my head.
Sincerely,
Peter
And to be clear, I’m not averse to the term but if using it tactically, it’s important to not mince words and let yes be yes and no be no.
It has never been my label or word choice, but when others ask me, I don’t flinch at defending it. Sorry this confuses you.
From 2015: The Church is responsible for Obergefell v. Hodges, and now we must get it right... | BaylyBlog
You speak from both sides of your mouth, sir. We have both sides of it in front of us whether you like it or not.
If you’ve trained Joseph to embrace similar levels of duplicity, I’m sure this comment will be deleted as he did my comment referencing your desire to use patriarchy back in your CBMW days.
Sorry Joseph, the lack of your father’s truthfulness is apparent.
It seems to me if Tim wants to take McDurmon to task, claim he never uses the term patriarchy, then maybe he should wipe the last 2 decades of his writing before contradicting himself and chastising others for not knowing which side of the mouth says what he really means.
As everybody can see, I told Peter to stop with the gotchas, and he refused. He is now suspended, after having made a fool of himself.
McDurmon tried to use the negative connotations of “patriarchy” as a smear job on my father, calling him a self-proclaimed patriarchalist. When confronted with the reality that my father doesn’t call himself a patriarchalist, he got even nastier, saying he aspires to be one.
Now, here we have Peter accusing my father of speaking out of both sides of his mouth because… what? He agreed with somebody who said that complementarian is a bad word and patriarchy is better? Because he used the word in its technical sense? Because he used it without qualifying it with a rejection as a label?
Not true. What he said was that he hadn’t used the word to describe himself. Everybody can see what he wrote and how dishonest your characterization is.
Again with the lies about my father. What you’ve claimed is nothing like what he said. You should be ashamed of yourself.
If it bothers you that my father has not in the past chosen to label himself as a patriarchalist, there’s a lot better way of proposing that he now do so than by lying about him as you have done.
On a final note, Peter, often controversy online can be best deescalated by taking things private, as I attempted to do with you. For you to refuse, and instead turn around and screenshot it and post it publicly is just dumb. It doesn’t win you any points or trust from anybody. Secret camera exposés are for when somebody’s behavior needs to be exposed. I’m not at all ashamed of what I wrote to you. But since you insist on making this public, so be it.
3 Likes
It’s sad to see someone so willing to distort and misconstrue the words of others because they (evidently) have an axe to grind. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of that going around these days.
Can someone explain what the deal with McDurmon was? My first exposure to him was years ago when I stumbled upon his stuff after confusing him for Jeff Durbin. He seemed like an overeager theonomist, but otherwise someone I would have called a compatriot.
Now he’s not with American Vision any longer, has apparently changed churches at least once or twice, and thought being accused of patriarchy (or “patriarchalism”) is a bad thing - I don’t want to drive this off the rails, but is there a link someone can point me to, or a rundown of what happened - either his change or heart or the root of my misunderstanding about him?
Thank you.
1 Like
Years ago, he once came to town to visit Stephen Baker, I think, and we met and had a fine lunch at the Bakers. I’d not known of him before that day when we met. At the Bakers over lunch, good food and fellowship. Other than that I know nothing about him or why he’s taken a dislike to us. Love,
1 Like
Yes, he came over to our house when he was in Indiana visiting family. I had met him once before in Atlanta.
He definitely went off the deep end, due largely I think to his friendship with that Bulgarian.
Very sad.