New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
No quiet efforts to give Goligher some of Tenth’s money to help him now that he’s out of work.
what is your basis for that claim, and if you have no basis, why are you violating the ninth commandment?
Your assumption that the ninth commandment is being violated is itself a violation of the ninth commandment.
Unless the ninth commandment only applies when dealing with those ‘more important’ than us.
oh im sorry let me revise
“what is your basis for that claim, and if you have no basis, why are you saying something with no basis”
I made no such claim. Here is the text:
This is what ought to have been done, first by the Session of Tenth, then by Philadelphia Presbytery. No drama. No endless meetings and conversations. No called special meetings of the congregation to vote on this or that. No quiet efforts to give Goligher some of Tenth’s money to help him now that he’s out of work. No cancellation of congregational meetings called to tell the sheep this and that, or to get their approval for this and that.
The section begins and ends with “this or that,” clearly indicating hypotheticals. Not fact. As to whether there are quiet efforts to help Liam financially, seems about as reasonable an hypothetical as anything else I might have mentioned.
that seems disingenuous. you include in the list of things several things you’ve criticized Tenth for actually doing: cancelling meetings, calling special meetings, “drama”
What ought to have been done vs what you list as hypotheticals leads to the reasonable inference that these things are what happened.
And assuming its reasonable to pay Liam money without evidence seems needlessly uncharitable.
There are very irresponsible persons with malignant spirits online claiming Tenth “probably” paid severance with no evidence and your words here end up seeming to back that up.
I just think you should be more circumspect.
To repeat, it’s clearly hypothetical.
As to whether people at Tenth are helping Liam financially, not to mention whether he has gotten a single dollar from Tenth since abandoning his call, if we were to examine this question factually, rather than hypothetically, do you have any information to the contrary?
You seem to say it’s sinful to suggest, but it is more wrong for you to suggest not, given the historical record.
This is the Session that approved paying $250,000 to Paul Jones after throwing a celebration for him back in 2014. Tenth’s elders paid it to him shortly after his departure, while they (the Session) paid the victims of Jones and the Session’s coverup not one penny.
Please do not comment any longer in this thread without identifying yourself. It’s integral to readers weighing your contributions knowing who you are.
I’m sorry you wont let me be anonymous but your fast-and-loose regard for charitable assumptions about fellow believers means I cannot identify myself publically here.
As I suspected, when facts are stated, anonymity becomes the principle justifying evasion. As I’ve asked you once already, please do not comment without identifying yourself. You’ve already refused my request once with the above comment. Don’t do it again. Firmly,