Albert Mohler: "We should not be surprised that the secular world confuses sinners and sociopaths, prison and hell"

Greg - I’ve got to admit, you have a point there. But I do hope you took a look at the other stuff that is pretty compelling. There are just far too many stories, not just tens, but scores and scores of stories of leaders turning the other way with sex abuse to think this is just a fabrication. Why would any attorney be wiling to take such a case without this kind of evidence.

~Julie Anne

9 Marks literature(eclesiology) is influenced heavily by Federal Vision theology. I think that is what Julie is concerned about most. And it is a valid point to make.

Christian: Wow, that’s a new one for me. Where are you seeing that in my comments?

Here’s a clue about me: you won’t find hidden messages in my comments. I’m straight up.

Julie, I appreciate your willingness to do research and support your statements. I think that your engaging in the discussion reflects better for your position than others who have presented ideas on this thread.

I’ll admit to not having enough information to challenge your assertions. I think that your statements could be true, though I certainly hope that they are not. I hope the best of good men, but I cannot defend their thoughts, intentions, or motives.

I will concur that CJ and SGM have not given the appearance of philosophical consistency in these matters. The alleged offenses are serious and I would have preferred a more diligent response. I struggle to fault Dever for acted pastorally and as a friend. If he lauded CJ as a hero, it was an unwise decision based upon the allegations. But as I have mentioned above, it is our nature to be loyal to friends and believe the best of them.

Our interaction on this topic has given me a lot of information about the Mahaney/SGM situation that I was not aware of. I now view it in a much more seriously light than I had based on the limited knowledge I had before. Thank you for persisting with your line of argument and courteously engaging in conversation.

Sorry, Julie. I misread your comments.

[Julie Anne]

Greg - I’ve got to admit, you have a point there. But I do hope you took a look at the other stuff that is pretty compelling. There are just far too many stories, not just tens, but scores and scores of stories of leaders turning the other way with sex abuse to think this is just a fabrication. Why would any attorney be wiling to take such a case without this kind of evidence.

~Julie Anne

Todd and Greg -

Thank you both for your kind words. I’ve been commenting on this issue here for some time and have sensed that more are now taking a closer look and I appreciate that. I do try my best to provide as much factual information as possible. The truth is that I was not there. However, after studying systems of abuse, reading the scores and scores of stories, the patterns are evident. I want to post a comment sent in by someone (moniker “Eagle”) well-connected with SGM and Dever and group of churches/church leaders closely associated with SGM. I think he gives compelling points. It’s long, but worthy of reading. I believe there is a system failure here that is allowing abuse to continue. Here is Eagle’s comment in its entirety:

I find it both interesting and disturbing how the evidence is weighed. It’s viewed as “opinion” where they need “fact”…even with the documentation and hypocrisy. Makes me wonder…what else do they need to see to believe?

1. Did the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor? How do they know? Did they actually see it? Do they need an admission by the Japanese to show that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor? Do they need a confession from Emperor Hirohito today where he admits it?

2. What about the Holocaust? Were 6 million Jews actually killed? How can you say they were killed? Did the Nazi’s admit they killed 6 million Jews? Do they need to sit across the table from Adolf Hitler and say that he ordered “The Final Solution?”

3. Did Richard Nixon authorize the break in into the Democratic National Committee on June 17, 1972? How do we know? Yes there are White House tapes but they could have been altered or misinterpreted. John Dean could have just had an agenda and personal hatred against Nixon and exaggerate the claims? How do we absolutely know Nixon orchestrated the cover up? Did Richard Nixon sign a statement saying, “I Richard Nixon ordered the coverup of the Watergate break in. I admit it. I’m guilty.”

I could use other historical examples but you get my point.

Julie Ann this type of thinking is what drives Mormonism. Its the reason why Mormons still look up to Joseph Smith as prophet despite legal paperwork in Vermont (?) showing a court conviction for fraud. Its why they blow off the fact that Smith ordered the destruction of the Navoo Expositior newspaper in Illinois. He was just silencing criticism…it wasn’t that bad! Its the reason why Mormons overlook Joseph Smith’s use and consumption of alcohol despite teaching that Mormons should not consume alcohol. I suppose if Joseph Smith wrote a book called “Humility” and spoke at T4G many in the Neo-Cal crowd would line up and buy tickets.

The biggest scandal on evangelicalism today is this….. There is no discernment by Christians or discernment is done against selected evidence. In other words its called cognitive dissonance. You can’t admit that CJ Mahaney is a fraud because everything else…9 Marks, Mark Dever, Matt Chandler, Ligon Duncan, TGC, etc… all come crashing down, if you admit that Mahaney is a fraud. Its like Mormonism….in the LDS faith everything rises or falls on whether Joseph Smith is a prophet or not. If he is not…then the entire LDS faith becomes a House of Cards. Well…CJ Mahaney is the Neo-Cal equivalent to Joseph Smith. You can’t admit that he’s a fraud or that he openly teaching hypocrisy…because if you do it all comes crashing down. Mark Dever, 9 Marks, T4G, SGM, etc…

That is the mistake that many Neo-Cals have made by pinning their faith to Mahaney…they have to live in dential otherwise they will go down with the ship. Meanwhile they are handing an Ace to the Richard Dawkins, Hemet Mehtas (Friendly Atheist Blogger) of the world by allowing them to write, teach, and boldly proclaim that Christianity is a fraud. Why atheists haven’t jumped all over this is beyond me. Maybe I should sent off a few emails to them to explore this topic.

[Julie Anne] Here is Eagle’s comment in its entirety

Sorry … completely unimpressed with his comments. Such as:

• “The biggest scandal on evangelicalism today is this….. There is no discernment by Christians …”
• “9 Marks, Mark Dever, Matt Chandler, Ligon Duncan, TGC, etc… all come crashing down, if you admit that Mahaney is a fraud”
• “Neo-Cals have … pinn[ed] their faith to Mahaney

Rubbish!

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2013/05/14/regional/duluth…

Image source in link above

That’s your opinion, Jim. I don’t know what you are basing your info on or how much time you have invested in looking at this case, but at a glance, your response seems to be an emotional reaction, not based on evidence.

Maybe you’ll prove me wrong.

[Julie Anne]

That’s your opinion, Jim. I don’t know what you are basing your info on or how much time you have invested in looking at this case, but at a glance, your response seems to be an emotional reaction, not based on evidence.

Maybe you’ll prove me wrong.

Caveat: My comment was not on whole Mahaney case but “The Eagle’s” comments

I agree with Jim. I fail to see how Mahaney’s failure causes all the other ministries listed above to come “crashing down.” Did John Mark or Demas’s defection bring down the ministry of Paul?

If Mahaney is a fraud, many will be saddened. Truthfully, all God’s people should be saddened. But why will that bring other sound ministries down?

Isn’t there a measure of hyperbole here? Does dramatic exaggeration and guilt by association strengthen or weaken the case of those who are endeavoring to expose Mahaney?