Friday, January 23, 2009

The Tragic Irony of President Obama

A blight now exists on a proud moment for the United States of America. In this land our own Constitution once refused to acknowledge our black citizens as people worthy of equal protection under the law. Now, in an awe-inspiring moment, one who would not universally have been acknowledged as a person in 1792 now sits in the Oval Office as the leader of our nation. Of this, our nation can be proud.

Nevertheless, the blight on this accomplishment is revealed in President Obama's statement yesterday. Just two days into his term, President Obama has demonstrated his willingness to free one oppressed group from their oppression by shoving another oppressed group into an even worse fate. He who two centuries ago would have been relegated to slavery by those who denied his personhood will now willingly (even eagerly?) deny personhood to millions of other human beings and condemn them not to slavery but to extermination.

This is indeed a high price to pay for victory. Shame on him. Shame on us all.


R. L. Vaughn said...

Yes, very ironic and very tragic. Today the President has ended the ban on giving federal funds to international groups that perform abortions (an executive order by Bush, I believe).

Anonymous said...

Yes, R. L.,
It was an executive order by Bush. The original order was given by Reagan, renewed by the elder Bush, overturned by Clinton, and put back into effect by the younger Bush.
This is a tragic event in the history of our country.

Anonymous said...

Bart, while tragic and deeply troubling, this comes as no surprise. He is a liberal, after all. That's what America asked for. That's what thousands who claim to be conservatives sat back and allowed by their apathy and inaction.

Bart Barber said...


Here's the ugly, brutal truth of it: The "young evangelicals" have abandoned the unborn because they're "tired" of having to deal with the issue of ending murder. They are the most disgusting segment of the populace. Better to be honestly deceived into rationalizing that the unborn are not people than to acknowledge that abortion is murder but be so apathetic as to abandon the effort to end it.

Baptist Theologue (Mike Morris) said...

I agree, Bart. During the pre-election debate moderated by Rick Warren, didn't our new president say that determining when life begins was above his paygrade? That statement should have raised red flags for all evangelical Christians.

CB Scott said...

Remember back when I said Obama could be the most dangerous man in America and the Wild Geese farmer from Enid attacked me for it?I wonder what our little Okie friend will have to say now? I wonder how all those wild geese, nuts and flakes and neo-pagans who flock to his every word will respond to yet another sanction of murder of the unborn?

Bart Barber said...


It is hard to see red flags when clamping your eyes shut so ferociously.


What will he have to say? To date, he's only made one public proclamation about abortion: That unborn babies may not have souls and may not be people. I'll predict that he'll stick with that.

Tom Parker said...


You said--"Here's the ugly, brutal truth of it: The "young evangelicals" have abandoned the unborn because they're "tired" of having to deal with the issue of ending murder."

That is a mighty strong statement! Can you prove this statement? Who are these young evangelicals? What are their names? Maybe they need to be removed from the SBC.

CB Scott said...

Tom Parker,

You hypocrite.

"Have you guys ever really studied and read about the CR. Have either of you heard of Bold Mission Thrust? BMT was very important before 1979 but not after 1979. Why? Lot's of people's lives were ruined forever by PP and others in the takeover. Please think about that word--"takeover."

To question someone's actions--such as PP--is not necessarily to hate them."

That is a mighty strong statement! Can you prove this statement?

Now what do you have to say for the blood on your hands? You voted for Obama and chastised those who questioned his ungodly positions.

Now all you can do is challenge Bart for a "strong" statement.

Again I say, you hypocrite. You bloody-handed hypocrite. You make me sick. May God have mercy on your wretched soul.


Bart Barber said...

Tom Parker,

I'm talking about any young evangelical who campaigned for or voted for the guy who just pumped more of our tax dollars into the baby-murdering industry (just like he said he would do, incidentally).

CB Scott said...

Tom Parker,

One more thought. You are absolutely ignorant about the CR.

You parade around as if you have knowledge and know just enough to make such foolish statements as the one I quoted from you over at the Wild Geese Farm relating to Paige Patterson.

You know nothing of which you speak yet you make arrogant statements to appear important and knowledgeable about something of which you have no understanding.

It was in that same arrogance and ignorance you voted for a man who sanctions the murder of the unborn. Then you come over here and with that same arrogance and ignorance challenging Bart's statement.

You have no compassion for the unborn who will die innocently. Yet you travel all over Blogtown to spew your vomit desiring to appear to one and all as a noble example of a fair-minded Christian.

You are an open grave and whited wall who would cross land and sea to make one convert and then turn him into twice the son of hell as are you yourself.

Now, the above is an example of a "strong statement." Chew on that one for a while, you bloody-handed, compassionless hypocrite.

You let Bart alone. He is telling the truth here. Go on back over to the Wild Geese Farm with the rest of the Neo-pagans and graze on the well fertilized grass over there.


Anonymous said...

CB: For the record, my thoughts haven't changed.

Anonymous said...

Bart: Before you begin calling Conservative Christians names you may regret here is some reasoning thoughts. This comes as no surprise to me or anyone else, it happens every time a Democrat gets in office. Clinton did the same thing when he was in office for eight years.

This is because as I have said over and over again, laws don't change a thing. Christ does. The gospel is the answer, not cultural warring. Cultural wars are great for those who love to get their guns out. Which is a lot of Christians with a Hannity/Rush Limbaugh mindset. We must stand against abortion. That I agree with, but don't begin a war of Christians. You are shooting your own who simply have a different, and I would say better, more Biblical, Christ related solution.

Anonymous said...

In scripture abortions and infant killings were occurring. Christians did not war against the culture or government. Instead they set an example. They adopted abandoned babies, they did not abort their own children, they lived out what the believed. MMM...that's a radical thought isn't it?

Tom Parker said...


Just so you can save yourself some time and energy. I will not read anything you have to say to me on any Blog.

CB Scott said...


I did not expect your thoughts to have changed. Nor do I expect them to ever be very deep or biblically sound.

Tom Parker,

Wether you read what I say about you does not change the fact that you are a bloody-handed, compassionless toward the unborn, shallowed-minded, liberal, theological dwarf.


Bart Barber said...


You've really shown me the light this time. We ought to take this obviously-superior, obviously-more-biblical approach and apply it across the board!

1. Let's support the repeal of all laws against murder. They are obviously ineffective. The only hope is to bring the gospel to people and then they won't murder other people.

2. No more drug laws. Let's legalize it all and just let Jesus give people the strength to resist drugs.

3. No more tax laws. People truly touched by the Spirit will give voluntarily.

4. No more financial regulations. The Bernie Madoffs of this world just need Jesus. That's the biblical thing to do.

Clearly, anarchy is the biblical solution to the world's problems. Thanks for bringing me to this epiphany.

Anonymous said...

CB, Bart: Your rather interesting take on my comment would make me laugh if it weren't so tragic. You keep saying that you are getting back to the Bible, yet I see no warring of culture in the NT. In fact, we are in an age of grace according to dispensationalists. says to help those who are in need.

I am going according to scripture, and to say differently would be very, very wrong.

Am I saying you are going against scripture. To be honest, you bet I am. That would include your comments.

volfan007 said...


Are you seriously saying that laws made by our God ordained govt. are unBiblical? That it's wrong to have laws?


Bart Barber said...


What's tragic is when someone gets on the high horse of declaring how scriptural they are without bothering actually to cite any scripture.

Should this comment bring conviction to your heart and prompt you to crack open the Book, I would recommend for your consideration Romans 13:1-7, as well as 1 Peter 2:13-17. Both of those passages point out to us that you are speaking error and contradicting the Word of God when you argue the irrelevance of laws ("laws don't change a thing"). Debbie says that laws don't change a thing. God's Word says that government and laws are a "minister of God" employed by God to change some very important things: To minister God's vengeance and wrath upon those who do evil, and to minister good and praise to those who do good.

Thus, what Debbie says is precisely the opposite of what God's Word says.

Passing laws will never get anyone to Heaven, and seeing people be saved is more important than preventing abortion. Nevertheless, people like you do falsely and greatly err by separating the two. Our efforts to proclaim the gospel today are hampered by our failure a century ago to war against our culture over the issue of slavery. Today, faced again with people who deny personhood to those whom they wish to use for their own convenience, committing the same error will not help us to win the world for Christ, but will damage our witness in the long run. Such is always the price of abandoning God's truth.

Anyone who believes that abortion is the murder of an innocent human life, knows that our current president is a supporter of and advocate for that abominable practice, and yet campaigned for him and voted for him: That disgusts me.

CB Scott said...

I have played with you long enough. The truth is you do not even know what a "warring of culture in the NT" would be if it hit you in the face.

Nor do you know what dispensationalism is and your comments about Calvinism are mostly absurd.

You have become as arrogantly wrong as is your pastor and that is a sad thing indeed.

It would do you well to read the Book of Jude, especially verse 4. It fits your theological position to a perfect match.

I still pity you as always, but it is time for someone to tell you the truth; Your theological positions are,for the most part, biblically astray. A good study of 2 Timothy would also help you. Concentrate on chapter 3. Actually you need to camp out there for several days.


Anonymous said...

CB: I was raised on cultural wars. I was taught your mindset. I was your mindset, until I learned I was hurting People more than changing anything. It didn't work. It's not working now.

I know more than you care to admit. It might do well to listen. Cultural wars do nothing but bring about the type of anger you now display. This has never brought about converts to Christ, in fact it's done the opposite. You believe that the world is angry at you because you stand for Christ. I say they are angry because you do not stand for Christ, although that is your sincere intention. I'm angry and it's not because of your stance, but your demeanor and refusal to listen. This has also driven more Christians from the church wounded, and that includes many Conservative, as in the CR. Tom is right. You won't admit that either. If you think I'm playing, you are very mistaken.

david: Of course I'm not saying that laws are not necessary. Reread my first comment. That is why my last comment. But let me ask this. Have we won the "war" on drugs? Well, we have more millionaires due to drugs in this country. How many drug users and sellers are gone because of the life changing power of Christ? I would say many more.

Bart: Read my response to CB.

Anonymous said...

I meant, read the response to david.

Anonymous said...

Bart: In conversations such as this I rarely give scripture, even though I easily could. It saves you from telling me that this is not what the scripture is saying. It's faster if we skip that step.

Bart Barber said...


Thanks for letting us know why the side with the BIble squarely and completely on her side has no Bible to quite. Now, here's a question for you: Have we won the war on murder?

Joe Blackmon said...

I am grieved beyond words after the results of the election. I ask two questions about candidates when I decide how I'm going to vote--where do they stand on abortion and gay marriage. I would not vote for a pro-choice candidate and have no capacity for understanding how a person who calls themselves a Christian could. That having been said:

1-The bible does say that toward the end there would be a faling away. Could that be what we're seeing?

2-Since nothing can be done about the election now, I'm going to spend time telling people about Jesus. Shoot, I'm going to exposit scripture too while I'm at it.

In the end, we can choose to worry about things we can't do anything about or we can do what we can do. I choose the latter and I pray the next election will hurry up and get here so we can hopefully vote prochoice anti-homosexual rights candidates into office.

Anonymous said...

Bart: Don't say I didn't warn you. Let the "this is not" begin.

Let's start with 2 Corinthians 5. In particular verses 17-20.

In short, I do not believe cultural morality to be our calling as Christians. Modeling it, yes. But history shows demanding it is not the solution. Well....maybe for 4-8 years a pop it is.

Anonymous said...

'deny personhood and condemn them to extermination'

Please explain. Bart. Not persons? Exterminated?

Or did you mean to write, 'make it easier for more mothers to take the earthly lives of their unborn children', and just got carried away with the politics?

CB Scott said...


One question. How has your game plan worked for you personally?


Groseys messages said...

Abortion... I guess it really Is a Matter Of Love
Romans 13:9-10 The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
It’s all about love . . .
If I really love God and my neighbor, will I endorse a procedure which kills one human being, and poses serious physical and emotional risks to the mother?
And who could be more of a neighbor than a pre-born child?
We protect and defend those weaker than us
And who could be weaker and more defenseless than a pre-born child?
I guess the Church fathers were wrong to have published attacks against abortion?
"You shall love your neighbor more than your own life. You shall not slay a child by abortion. You shall not kill that which has already been generated." (Epistle of Barnabas 19.5; second century)
"Do not murder a child by abortion or kill a new-born infant." (The Didache 2.2; second century catechism for young Christian converts)
"The fetus in the womb is a living being and therefore the object of God's care" (Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians, 35.6; 177 A.D.)
"It does not matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. In both instances, the destruction is murder." (Tertullian, Apology, 9.4; second century)
"Those who give abortifacients for the destruction of a child conceived in the womb are murderers themselves, along with those receiving the poisons." (Basil the Great, Canons, 188.2; fourth century)

Jerome called abortion "the murder of an unborn child" (Letter to Eustochium, 22.13; fourth century). Augustine used the same phrase, warning against the terrible crime of "the murder of an unborn child" (On Marriage, 1.17.15; fourth century).
The early church fathers Origen, Cyprian and Chrysostom likewise condemned abortion as the killing of a child.
"The fetus, though enclosed in the womb of its mother, is already a human being and it is a most monstrous crime to rob it of the life which it has not yet begun to enjoy. If it seems more horrible to kill a man in his own house than in a field, because a man's house is his place of most secure refuge, it ought surely to be deemed more atrocious to destroy a fetus in the womb before it has come to light." John Calvin (sixteenth century reformer)

I am sorry that some purported Christians support abortion, when they wont speak out against such an unloving act.

Bart Barber said...


Gorby, JD. "The right to an abortion, the scope of Fourteenth amendment personhood, and the Supreme Court's birth requirement." Southern Illinois University Law Journal: 1979, 1-37.

The legal "right" to abortion is predicated upon the ruling that a human being is not a person, and therefore is not entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection, until born.

Bart Barber said...


As much as I know that I'm going to regret doing so, I have to ask you how on earth you see that passage as something that forbids us to take a stand in defense of the extermination of the vulnerable.

Bart Barber said...


I'm with you and agree with you, with two caveats (and even in those, I'm not so much disagreeing with you as adding additional thoughts that you did not add):

1. It is possible to preach Jesus and take a stand for the vulnerable at the same time.

2. We err when we see our elections as a one-day event that occurs quadrennially. The 2012 elections have already begun. The 2008 elections left us with no palatable choices by the end. If we want to have better options available to us in 2012, we don't have to obsess about it (indeed, it would be wrong to do so), but we're wise to start making our voices heard (and especially our pocketbooks) as soon as possible.

Anonymous said...


I am glad that you brought this up. This needs to be brought up. The political context is important, but secondary.

Pastors and Christian teachers need to speak the truth to all about this.

Mother Teresa was a great example in this area. She always held a high regard for the unborn, she spoke publicly, she was dignified when she spoke and she was clear. She always spoke in such a way as to garner respect. She wasn't capable of being "rolled" on this issue, and she did not let policians use her (and she did not use them). And her life exemplified love for the vulnerable, so she had some authority when she spoke.

This issue is a no-brainer for Christians.

I am gratified to see that no Christian on this blog is actually suggesting that abortion is not the taking of innocent life or that we should return to the days of the CLC of the SBC when Dr. Valentine could not see that abortion was an evil that should be spoken against just as much as racism. Instead, the SBC under Dr. Valentine was a founder of the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights.

However, I am so concerned that evangelicals are into
"what works", such that when an issue is no longer getting the righ buzz or makes more enemies than friends, they run away from it.

Obviously, there is a delicate judgment that must be used in some of these matters. We are to be as "wise as serpents".

In my state, many Baptists have spent way too much time on issues that are way lower on the priority list, and in my book are not actually things that are forbidden. We have had pastors (especially moderate pastors, for some reason) who have worked tirelessly to try to prevent the sale of beer at the public arena, have tried to stop a state lottery (and we have had it now for years, and none of the horribles predicted have come true), and actually stopped the development of a horse racing track because of the gambling issue. (Interestingly, the same guys would not go a mile or 2 to the Baptist College campus in our town to see that the religion department had professors who believe the Bible was the word of God. But when the County proposed selling beer at the arena -well they had to try and shut that down).

So, I think some younger evangelicals and some of the commenters on this blog are right to be wary of some Baptist political engagement and the way it is done.

But on this issue, one that is so important, we should speak and we should speak clearly - even if we are the last ones speaking at the end of the day.

Finally, it is correct to note that real change happens in a culture when the values of the people of that culture change first. Then the laws reflect that change. That is what the first, second and third century Christians learned and practiced.

However, they did not live in a democracry where each citizen and groups are allowed to lobby and press for laws that make the society more just.

I think that the Civil Rights laws may be the best example of what I am talking about. Many people in the South and the SBC opposed Civil Rights legislation for years both on the grounds that the races were separate and should be that way, or on the ground that this should not be forced on people who did not agree.

I say that the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights law was a good thing, even though it made lots of people mad.

We should be known for standing on the side of right, and we should be gracious to all.


Anonymous said...

We should be known for standing on the side of right, and we should be gracious to all.

Louis: You have said it very well. Good points. I agree.

CB: How is it working for me personally? I told you a personal story on this blog concerning a friend of mine. The baby that was to be aborted is around ten years old this year. She has two other siblings. Mom and dad have been married for the same number of years minus a few months and are very proud. It's working. I should say God is working.

Joe Blackmon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe Blackmon said...


I agree with #1 and #2. I have just felt so much like throwing up my hands and saying "What's the point?"

CB Scott said...

Debbie,You did not agree with Louis on the points he made. You say you agree because it was Louis who made the points. Frankly, you do not understand what Louis has stated. Louis has made no new revelation here. Some of us have been saying exactly the same thing for years.Debbie, make the Bible studies I have suggested. You really need to do that.

On the other hand, Debbie, just forget it. I guess it is true that "ignorance is bliss."

You simply do not know much related to that of which you speak in such volume.

In your case it is easy to understand the interpretation many give to 1 Timothy 2:11-15 and 1 Corinthians 14:33-35.

Anonymous said...

CB: Hear this. Remember the listening part? I DO agree with Louis. I disagree with you.

There is a big difference between standing up for what is right while treating people graciously and warring as I feel you are doing. Just read your comments to see what all that would entail..

CB Scott said...


Thank you for answering my one question. And thank you for your last response.

Your answer and your response confirm what has been evident to many for almost three years of reading your comments.

Also, forgive me for what most of us have done. We have basically overlooked or had pity on you for much of what you say simply because we know your really do not know any better. I am not going to do that here.

Your comments here:
"I was raised on cultural wars. I was taught your mindset. I was your mindset, until I learned I was hurting People more than changing anything. It didn't work. It's not working now."

And again here:
"How is it working for me personally? I told you a personal story on this blog concerning a friend of mine. The baby that was to be aborted is around ten years old this year. She has two other siblings. Mom and dad have been married for the same number of years minus a few months and are very proud. It's working. I should say God is working."

Prove what those of us who actually know better have witnessed and overlooked for so long.

Most all of your theological positions and comments are based solely upon your personal experiences and your emotions and rarely ever on an understanding of Scripture or orthodox theology.

Now before you accuse me of being a woman hater that is not the case. Men like Tom Parker do exactly the same thing. As do most all of the wild geese, flakes, nuts and neo-pagans who live in Blogtown.

You also accuse me of being angry. Debbie, I am not angry. I am simply being truthful with you. That is so foreign to you that you mistake it to be anger.

You live in a world where untruth is the rule of the day. When you hear truth it is so radical and revolutionary it is revolting to you.

Also, you, and others like you will say I am being unkind. That is because to you the highest virtue and theological principle is tolerance.

I am speaking of secular tolerance and not tolerance in a biblical concept.

You hold to the idea of being tolerant at all cost. You think we should give everyone their right to believe anything they please and accept them lovingly into the fold.

That is not biblical tolerance. Biblical tolerance is to recognize you have the right to believe what you want, but I have the same right to tell you you are wrong when it is evident from Scripture that you are. I do not have to approve of you being wrong. Nor do I have to join you in being wrong.

My accountability is to live according to the plain teaching of the Scripture. I am not accountable to accept your every thought and statement as true simply because you say it is what you believe.

Most bloggers in Blogtown do not have a biblical worldview. You are among that group. Your theology is based upon a secular worldview of tolerance being the highest virtue. It is true that love is the most excellent way. But the love you preach is not biblical.

Your concept of biblical love is much like the old Burt Bacharach song; "WHAT THE WORLD NEEDS NOW IS LOVE."

Do you remember the first line? "What the world needs now is love sweet love. Its the only thing there is just too little of...."

That is such a sweet little song. But it is not biblical. And it does not portray biblical, self-sacrificing love. What the world needs now is the gospel. And I mean the biblical gospel.

The world needs to hear the whole counsel of God. The world needs the prophetic voice of truth.

This warm fuzzy stuff you and so many are preaching today will do nothing but send people to hell feeling good, loved, tolerated and accepted by you and others like you.

But you go on and live like you please, Debbie. You have the God given right to do so. On the other hand you do not have the right to expect me and those like me to accept your weak theology and poor methods of evangelism as the gospel truth.

You drew first blood with me on this thread Debbie and then you expect me to say you are right and accept your vain babbling as a revealed truth.

Get into the Scripture, Debbie and stop trying to present yourself as what you are not. You are not a theologian nor a church historian. But you could be biblically sound if you would get into the Scripture and ask the Spirit to help you.

Stop basing your theology on your personal experiences and your emotions.

So long Debbie. I have been your friend. I have told you the truth. Lay down your secular sword and shield. Put on the armor of God. Develop a biblical world view. And pray with me that the president repents of his wicked ways and cleanses his bloody hands for the sake of the unborn.


Tim G said...

YOu sir are spot on!

Great post. For any Christian to defend the "backing off" of the war on babies is beyond my ability to comprehend. Your question to Debbie is the "Deal Breaker" for that type of thought. They argue it for abortion, but when applied to outright murder, they go silent.

We need men and women to stand and say "Thus saith the Lord" and give the whole counsel of God.

I still cannot believe that I am reading what some writing - where are the Preacher of the Word!

Tim G said...

Welcome back! You have been missed!

Anonymous said...

They need Christ sweet Christ CB, which produces love. He does what laws cannot do and were not designed to do.

Thinking about it, you will have 4-8 years of some good political ranting and raving I'm sure. It might just keep you busy enough that the SBC may have time to heal. :)

Anonymous said...

So, I guess Debbie has given up the culture war in the world against heinous sins like abortion, and prefers Kingdom wars with the likes of Bart & C.B.

Apparently she believes in doing battle, but finds it safer and possibly more effective amongst her own???

Tom Bryant said...

When the Supreme Court was deciding on Roe vs. Wade, they also had a case which they ultimately decided against the death penalty. According to Woodwards book, "The Brethren", they were trying to separate the 2 decisions because they didn't want to be seen as deciding to allow the death of the unborn and forbidding the death of murderers.

And now our President has decided to relax the rules concerning abortion and at the same time deciding to limit the war on terror. He is living by the same principle: death to the unborn and life to those who deserve death.

Bart Barber said...


I agree with every point that you've made. Every one. I could have written it myself.

Anonymous said...

Bart, Louis, and CB. Amen! Obama might just as well have said he is not running in 2012 when he signed his latest orders.

And the fact is that many will be deafened by his rhetoric, but their eyes will be opened to the result of his policies as they play out in the stage of everyday increases in abortion, gay marriages, and in-your-face policies that the majority of Americans are against but were too blind to see because of the fear they had over the economic crisis.

Folks are falling away from the Gospel. And you are right Bart, they do need the Gospel. And the Gospel is Christ. And we live in a country that allows us to say so today. Tomorrow may bring something else. Laws of the land existed years ago without abortions being legal. There may have been some who died because they broke that law and used coat-hangers, but the law still kept the abortion rate lower. Legalized abortion condones it as acceptable behavior. It is not, nor will it ever be.

With Obama's pen comes the rescinding of laws that will ensure that parents of a 11-year-old be informed if she tries to get an abortion. With Obama's fancy signature comes the opening door of government intrusion to make the human papilloma virus vacination mandatory for little girls. It's sickening. He's sickening. What good he may accomplish (if he does anything good) will be canceled out completely by his depraved indifference to morality. selahV

R. L. Vaughn said...

Brother Joe, many will understand you when you write, "I have just felt so much like throwing up my hands and saying 'What's the point?'"

May we be as Isaiah when death ended Uzziah's 52 year reign in Judah. Let us look up, see God on His throne high and lifted, and join the angels in singing "Holy, Holy, Holy."

Tim Rogers said...

Brother Bart,

Sister Selah V has raised some great points that I believe we all need to consider. She said; With Obama's pen comes the rescinding of laws that will ensure that parents of a 11-year-old be informed if she tries to get an abortion. With Obama's fancy signature comes the opening door of government intrusion to make the human papilloma virus vacination mandatory for little girls.

It is more than just abortion, which is bad enough. But, to tell me that my daughter is now mandated by government to receive a vaccination she does not need.


Anonymous said...

Debbie, Bart and SelahV:


I am looking forward to giving the new Pres a pat on the back when he does something good. I am opposed to what he's done in this area.

I pray that our commitment on this issue and the way we express it will transcend politics. That's what we are shooting for as Christians, I think. The greatest moral leaders have always been able to pull that off, even if they did not get the political changes they wanted to see.


Joe Blackmon said...


The thing that is most discouraging is not that Obamaa is pro-abortion or that there are pro-abortion people outside of the church. Obama is lost so it makes perfect sense for him to take the position a lost persont would take. What grieves my spirit beyond words is that there are people who name the name of Christ who not only voted for Obama but campaigned for him. We have enough problems with people outside the church who want to thumb their noses at God's word. We shouldn't have to worry about that sort of garbage coming from inside of the church.

Anonymous said...

Joe, but we have many inside the church who are just as lost as Obama. Faith in Christ is visible to those in Christ. And so those outside of Christ are as visible to those in Christ. The sad thing is the "Deceiver" is here and rules this world with his lies, and propaganda and many buy into it--even the sanctified. Oh, to be as vigilant as Christ called us to be. Oh to be wearing the whole armor of God so as not to be vulnerable to the arrows of satan. selahV

Anonymous said...

Louis...I liked that Obama is insisting on American-made steel for reconstruction and construction that we tax-payers will be paying for.

Anonymous said...

Selah: Are you saying that you believe those Christians, and there were some, who voted for Obama are not saved? I would disagree. There is only one way to salvation and that is through Christ alone. Not our voting record. If that were the case we Republicans would be without salvation as well.

Joe: Your honesty is refreshing.

Joe Blackmon said...


I know. It's a blessing and a curse. Good thing for me I'm so pretty.

Anonymous said...

Wayne Smith said...

I received this e-mail and wanted to share it and maybe Debbie will understand what you and Brother CB Scott are trying to tell her. Thing get a little Cloudy when one is use to so many Wild Geese and Anonymous Commentators on a Blog.

Dear Wayne and Irene Smith,
He is not wasting any time.

With one stroke of his pen, President Barack Obama acted Friday to fund organizations that do abortions overseas. His action means tax dollars will now go to groups which promote and use abortion as a means of population control in underdeveloped nations.

President Obama’s executive order will increase the number of unborn children killed overseas by abortion as federal grants totaling $441 million start flowing to groups like the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

President Obama’s order rescinds the “Mexico City” policy, first established by President Ronald Reagan in 1984. The policy, in effect during both Bush administrations but revoked under President Clinton, limited federal “population assistance” program dollars to groups that agreed not to "perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning."

As a candidate, Obama said he was interested in seeking “common ground” on the abortion issue and finding ways to “reduce the number of abortions.” His executive order does the opposite and is only the first in a series of attacks on the unborn child.

The President wants to force taxpayers to pay for abortions by repealing the “Hyde Amendment,” a measure in force since 1976. The National Right to Life Committee estimates that more than one million Americans have been spared from abortion as a result of this law, which is now targeted for repeal.

The president also wants to mandate abortion as one of the “services” required to be insured under a new federal standard of health care. And he has loudly announced his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, legislation that will invalidate all state and federal limitations on abortion. FOCA will increase the number of children who die from abortion annually by about 125,000, according to one estimate.

You can respectfully tell the President what you think about his executive order and his pro-abortion agenda with a letter, email, or phone call. For contact information, please click here.

Coral Ridge Ministries has produced a powerful new documentary about the threat posed by the Freedom of Choice Act. Freedom to Kill: Unlimited Abortion at Your Expense explains why this bill is a clear and present danger to America's unborn children--and your wallet.

And to learn more about the abortion issue, request Ten Truths About Abortion, a book and DVD set that delivers insightful, factual, and compelling information about the unborn child, abortion, and its devastating impact on women

Wayne Smith

Dave Miller said...

I have seldom agreed with Debbie about anything. And I have serious disagreements with Tom Parker on a number of issues as well.

I agree with Bart's post whole-heartedly.

Having said all that, I am shocked at two things.

1) That a Christian man could write the things that were said about Tom and Debbie in public.

2) That so many others expressed agreement with and support for the derogation and personal attacks.

It grieves me that not one person confronted those angry, personal words.

Again, this comes from someone who agrees with the point of the post.

CB Scott said...


I have never been angry at Debbie. I just simply determined to tell her the truth.

You think and say what you will.

I have defended Debbie many times. That can be testified to by several who have commented here.

The problem is that Debbie is slipping farther and farther away from orthodox theology. Actually, the situation has intensified greatly in recent months.

You say you disagree with her. Then why not tell her the truth?

Could it be that you really don't care enough to tell her the truth?

From where you sit it no problem to you personally, right?

Well, it is not that way with me. I care. I care enough to challenge her position.

In general, Dave, you seem OK. But reading you at times reminds me of the kind of people who would consider the professional soldier as nothing more than barbarian trash until the day kidnappers and extortioners take your child. Then you will spend every dime you have and auction your house to hire the best and most "efficient" of those barbarians to do whatever it takes to get your child back.

I have a lot of flaws, Dave and very few virtues. One virtue I have never quite developed that I see in many of my preacher brethern is hypocrisy. I know a lot of preachers enjoy that virtue, but I just can't seem to get the hang of it.

I wish you would explain it to me from your personal perspective. Then, maybe I will give it another shot. Maybe I will then be able to let the Debbies and the Toms of this world go on in their self-destructive ways and never challenge them one bit. Maybe I can then let the bloody-handed politicians and preachers continue to condone the murder of babies and say nothing. Maybe then I can become politically correct and no one will accuse me of being angry.

It seems to me that all the guys who practice that virtue so well live really peaceful lives and never get their hands dirty. So tell me Dave, what do you think about it?


Ron Phillips, Sr. said...


I am curious how you feel about Jesus rebuke of the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23? His rebuke was quite public and personally offensive to those to whom He directed it. From derogation and personal attacks He called them a number of names, none of which were gentlemanly, nor kind. He was confronting those that should know the truth, yet did not practice it. He was not confronting anyone who had not heard of God, they were teachers of the Word of God.

Though you may not like the tone, that is clearly what has been done here. I am grateful that you agree with Bart's post and heartily commend you for it. Yet, when a brother in Christ confronts those who claim the name of Christ, who should know right from wrong, who should be able to rightly divide the Word of God, but end up contributing to the needless massacre of babies, you said: It grieves me that not one person confronted those angry, personal words. I think your grief would be better served for the babies that will die because “Christians” have sinned and did not do enough to prevent their massacre. I think your grief would be better served for those “Christians” who will have to give an account to God for their sin after being warned and rebuked by fellow believers.

Unlike the 1st Century, we Christians in America are responsible, because we get a voice in who will lead our government. Far too many “Christians” voted for a man who with a quick signature of his pen has condemned millions more to death. We need to confront those “Christians” whose hands are now covered with innocent blood, and we need to do it like Christ did.

In Christ,

Ron P.

Dave Miller said...


First of all, anyone who knows me knows that one of my faults is being opinionated and dogmatic. I have a t-shirt that says, "I'm not opinionated, I'm just always right." I am not someone who is soft in convictions.

However, I also believe that we are not to use worldly weapons of warfare - anger, slander, cruel and unkind words to do the work of God.

If you look through history (or ask Debbie for that matter) you will see severe conflicts where I called Debbie on her attitudes and her words.

Galatians 5 differentiates the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. The flesh produces, "enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissension." The Spirit in us produces, "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control."

Is it too much to ask that we who are supposed to be leaders in the church exhibit love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness and self-control as we disagree with each other.

Our disagreements can sharpen us as iron sharpens iron.

What really bothers me is that we will justify all kinds of evil, all kinds of fleshly behavior as long as the person AGREES with our position.

In my view, credibility demands that I require those who agree with me to be just as (or more) upright than those who disagree.

Can you explain to me how the comments you made here about Wade, or to Tom or Debbie exhibit the fruit of the Spirit?

Dave Miller said...


Jesus had the advantage of perfect insight into the human soul. I have always like CB, but I do not believe he has the same insight.

Do you really want to lay claim to having the same discernment of motives and intent of the heart as Jesus had?

Dave Miller said...

And Ron,

how on earth can anything Tom or Debbie said be described as contributing to the "needless massacre of babies?"

Nothing Tom or Debbie said here indicates that they are pro-choice, as best I can tell.

Ron Phillips, Sr. said...


Jesus used much harsher words and personal attacks than what was used here. That is clearly the point I was trying to make with your "grief". It was also to subtly point out that I think your "grief" is misplaced.

I never stated nor implied that anyone has Christ's discernment. That would be absurd. We do have His written Word, and it is not unclear on this. Let me also add that I do not need to see or discern the heart of President Obama (or anyone else) to know that if they support or aid abortion in any way, that they are in sin (whether by commission or omission).

Tom's comment to Bart clearly attacks the point young evangelicals are in sin for not helping to stop abortion. That seems to me to be at a minimum agreement with "omission" by not doing what is right. His snide comment about removing them from the SBC also clearly was an attack on the CR and Paige Patterson (which he relentlessly rants on the blog that CB referred). Where is your grief against those attacks?

Debbie clearly does not believe that we need to change the laws of our land to save unborn children. We just need to let the gospel change the hearts of those who support abortion. Bart very ably answered that so I will not here. Again, this is at least "omission" because she is not concerned about changing our laws. As I stated in my first comment, we in America ARE responsible for choosing the leaders who make laws, appoint judges and make policy. If Christians abdicate their rights and responsibilities to choose godly leaders, then they have sinned! Debbie seems to think that we should not be concerned with those things.

Because Christians have relinquished their responsibility to elect godly leaders, we have seen a proliferation of ungodliness. And we dare wonder why. I can not help but think that those millions of babies who have been murdered must also wonder why. It is they that deserve to be grieved.

In Christ,

Ron P.

Dave Miller said...


Yes, Tom is not a supporter of the SBC CR. I have looked on his site to find his email to carry on a private conversation with him abou that. I would like to try to convince him that with all its faults, the CR was the best thing that happened to the SBC. I think he is completely misguided on this.

I would like to carry on a direct, no-holds-barred discussion about that. But I think we could do that without the invective and insult.

Wouldn't that be the better way?

As far as Debbie goes (sorry, Debbie, if you read this) - it is often hard to figure out exactly what she is saying or thinking. But if I understand her right here, she is just saying that the way to change things is not to fight abortion as much as to proclaim the gospel which changes hearts.

I do not think that she is saying either that she supports abortion or that we shouldn't care about the presence of abortion.

Here's the thing. I don't think you and I are far apart on this issue. I am unwaveringly pro-life.

But because I didn't think his attacks on her and Tom were appropriate, he challenged my commitment to truth, my patriotism, everything.

If I don't agree with his attacks, I must not have the same passion for truth that he has.

That kind of personal attack is so common in certain blog circles. My point is that you can have a passion for truth and argue it without personal attacks.

CB Scott said...

When did I slander anyone here? Slander does not describe what I have said because I have simply told the hard truth and nothing more. I have told you I am not angry with Debbie. One can rebuke another without anger. Well, anyway, I can. Maybe you can't. I am not angry with you.

I think you would do well to ask Tom Parker his position on Obama's abortion stance.

As far as I know Debbie does not support abortion personally. Yet, she does not take a strong stand on the issue and attacks those who do with this looney "culture warrior" motif of hers.

Dave, if you read the whole comment thread you will see she did exactly that. I simply challenged her attack. I decided not to be restrained with her this time. Most everybody in Blogtown who holds to a biblical theology tries to be reserved with her. I have seen it over and over.

This time I decided to be perfectly and frankly honest with her once and for all. I can do no more. I owe her at least that in respecting her as a sister.

And, Dave, you have said as much and more to Wade as have and than have I. Debbie is always hammering away with this culture warrior thing, yet she blindly follows the biggest culture "junkie" in all of Blogtown.

As far as Tom Parker is concerned, well, he is simply a liberal and all I described him to be in this comment thread. Have you read the things the guy says?

Dave the truth is that far too many of us have embraced the doctrine of tolerance as the highest virtue without realizing it.

Look around Blogtown. Read the posts and comment threads of Baptist preachers. Listen to some of the speakers at various conferences. Read some of the books that are currently popular.

The world will never defeat us. We are the children of God. If we are dying it is because of internal rot, not the environment in which we have been assigned to serve.

Why do you think Jesus wrote letters to seven churches in Asia? He did not tell them to beware of or flee from or refrain from confronting the big, bad Roman government. He warned them, cautioned them and rebuked them relating to internal rot among them.

Is that not right? Dave, as I said earlier, you can say and think what you want. I have simply told the truth to Debbie and Tom. And also as I said earlier. They at least deserve that from me as a brother.


CB Scott said...


This statement is simply not true.

"But because I didn't think his attacks on her and Tom were appropriate, he challenged my commitment to truth, my patriotism, everything."

You show me the fact of my guilt
in doing what you state I have or at least explain to me how I am missing your point. Otherwise you have taken a license here that actually does border on slander.


Dave Miller said...


How am I misinterpreting your statements?

You said,

"Could it be that you really don't care enough to tell her the truth?"

"But reading you at times reminds me of the kind of people who would consider the professional soldier as nothing more than barbarian trash until the day kidnappers and extortioners take your child. Then you will spend every dime you have and auction your house to hire the best and most "efficient" of those barbarians to do whatever it takes to get your child back.

What did I say that would make you think I regard our soldiers as "barbarian trash, CB?

You accused me of sitting back in peace and "never get their hands dirty."

Honestly, I don't care that much. I know who I am (warts and all) and who I am in Christ. I will survive your disapproval of me and my character.

You seem absolutely convinced that you are perfect in your judgment therefore justified in your condemnation of Tom, Debbie, and now me.

I guess that is between you and your Lord.

Dave Miller said...

I guess I've had my say here. This is Bart's blog. I assume by his silence that he approves of CB's mode of cummunication here.

I don't wish to hijack his comment line any longer with my expression of disapproval.

I am available at for anyone who would like to continue this conversation in private.

Dave Miller said...

One closing note, Bart.

This statement - "He who two centuries ago would have been relegated to slavery by those who denied his personhood will now willingly (even eagerly?) deny personhood to millions of other human beings and condemn them not to slavery but to extermination." - was BRILLIANT!

CB Scott said...


I was talking about "professional soldiers" not the US military.

I am sorry. I used a sub-culture illustration that I took for granted you would understand.

I did not say you did not have a commitment to truth. I asked you if you cared about Debbie to tell "her" the truth.

Obviously, you did not read very well what I said to you.

Dave, I really think you are just far too willing to ignore the cancer, rather than to fight it. It just does not go away like that, Dave. It just gets bigger.


Anonymous said... said, "the truth is that far too many of us have embraced the doctrine of tolerance as the highest virtue without realizing it." We've seemed to be the proverbial frog in a slow heating pot of water.

I still believe the young evangelicals that Bart spoke of are only a part of the problem. We who claim to believe in "life" are having are hard time showing it with our apathy towards our government's disregard of human life.

I will give Obama another kudo today. He has told the Democrats to remove from the new (uh-hmmn) Stimulus Bill, the 825 million designated for family planning that would pad the Planned Parenthood coffers in advising women to have abortions as birth-control, and the distribution of more condoms. So he gave us some cookies there. Praise God for small miracles. Now if he'll just hear the voice of God in the abomination he is participating in by supporting "choice", we will have some real celebrating to do. selahV

Anonymous said...

Correction: that was 500 million. A half-billion that was to go to Planned Parenthood folks. 825-billion is the entire package. my opps. selahV

Bart Barber said...


With one exception that I instantly regretted, the only comments that I have ever removed from this blog are those that:

1. Contain foul language.

2. Are unrelated to the topic at hand (e.g. spam).

Bart Barber said...


I suppose that, to avoid a cop-out, I should opine further. CB's tone with Debbie is harsher than the tone that I have taken. I don't doubt that the reason for this is precisely what CB has stated—he is concerned for her and is trying to get her attention and cause her to gain her sight.

It is not an unknown phenomenon, and better than Jesus' interaction with the Pharisees we might have cited Jesus' interaction with Simon Peter in which He called him "Satan." Yet Jesus loved Peter. I mention this not to equate CB with Jesus (nor would I equate Debbie with Satan. . . or with Peter), but to prove convincingly one point: Verbal harshness and love are not mutually exclusive.

It is a fact and a point well taken, I think, that Debbie is the immovable object. She is Wade's Old Yeller. I have no doubt at all that she'd take a bullet for the man. I, for one, admire that kind of loyalty, wherever it has been placed, and even if it gives rise to other things that I find less admirable. But there's no reasoning with her. She's a lady of obvious passion and compassion, and those are virtues, but it seems to me that CB is saying that her passion and compassion and loyalty would be well tempered by some other checks and balances. No fact exists that she will hear, no event can occur that she will observe, but that she will remain at her post with her weapons at the ready.

If Debbie is the immovable object, CB may well be our irresistible force. The meeting of the two is dramatic. But I confess that, in reading what CB is writing, since I know that nothing else has worked at all, I find myself rooting for his approach, hoping and praying that the object will give way to the force.

I confess that, when it comes to Debbie and her allegiance to Wade, I have given up on her. Giving up on somebody is not a loving action. It is a more comfortable option and it certainly reduces conflict, but giving up on somebody is quite the opposite of love. CB hasn't done so. I'm not going to criticize him for that.

CB Scott said...


I have been praying for President Barack H. Obama since he won the election. He is the president of my nation. Thus he is my president.

I am getting a little long in the tooth and I can't see as well or move as fast as I once did, but he is my president. He is the Commander and Chief of my homeland. Therefore if he called upon me to go to war today, I would go. And I would make an effort to kill as many of the enemy as I could by any means possible as long as God continued to give me the strength to do so.

Yet, let it be known; I believe President Barack Obama not to be a child of the Living God. I base my belief upon his own personal testimony as he shared it April 2004, with Cathleen Falsani, religion writer for the Chicago Sun-Times. She is a graduate of Wheaton College, holding masters degrees in both theology and journalism. I have the entire interview in print. Anyone that wants it can get it.

According to his testimony and using the New Testament as a standard of judgement it is my opinion President Barack Obama is not a Christian.

Therefore I pray he come under the convicting power of the Holy Spirit and see his lostness as God sees it and cries out to God for forgiveness and places complete faith in God the Son for his soul's salvation. That is my primary prayer for him.

My second prayer relating to my president is that he sees the wickedness of his position on unborn children and turns from his barbarian mind-set toward them and seeks every measure afforded to the most powerful man in the known world to stop the murder of the innocents in this nation and abroad.

Every word I have related here is my honest conviction and I am ready to face God with these convictions and frankly, I already have even as I express them for my God knows the inner workings of the hearts of all men living or dead.

I challenge any and all Christians to pray that President Obama seeks the face of God in all things and that in doing so he becomes the greatest president this country has ever had. And I mean even better that the great Teddy Roosevelt, Andrew Jackson and thirdly, Ronald Reagan.

That is my prayer for the president and I hope it is the same with all my brothers and sisters in Christ.


Wayne Smith said...


Your comment above just gave me a good belly laugh.
You said: “It is a fact and a point well taken, I think, that Debbie is the immovable object. She is Wade's Old Yeller. I have no doubt at all that she'd take a bullet for the man.” That’s like calling Debbie a Dog and I know that you didn’t mean it that way. I had all my teeth extracted this morning and I needed a good laugh.


I don’t mean anything by this comment. You are a Sister in Christ who is just as set in your ways as CB Scott, Bart or Wayne Smith. I see the Hearts of all of You and Love You All in the Name of the Lord.

CB Scott,

Your comment above is Spot on and We All should be on our knees Praying for the Holy Spirit to come on Out new President Barack Obama and Convict His Heart to except Jesus Christ as his Lord and Master, Also for Wisdom from God in all his Decisions.


Anonymous said...

CB, your prayers are my prayers for this president. However, so far, he's off to a pretty poor start. selahV

Tom Parker said...


You said:"It is a fact and a point well taken, I think, that Debbie is the immovable object. She is Wade's Old Yeller. I have no doubt at all that she'd take a bullet for the man. I, for one, admire that kind of loyalty, wherever it has been placed, and even if it gives rise to other things that I find less admirable. But there's no reasoning with her. She's a lady of obvious passion and compassion, and those are virtues, but it seems to me that CB is saying that her passion and compassion and loyalty would be well tempered by some other checks and balances. No fact exists that she will hear, no event can occur that she will observe, but that she will remain at her post with her weapons at the ready.

If Debbie is the immovable object, CB may well be our irresistible force. The meeting of the two is dramatic. But I confess that, in reading what CB is writing, since I know that nothing else has worked at all, I find myself rooting for his approach, hoping and praying that the object will give way to the force.

I confess that, when it comes to Debbie and her allegiance to Wade, I have given up on her. Giving up on somebody is not a loving action. It is a more comfortable option and it certainly reduces conflict, but giving up on somebody is quite the opposite of love. CB hasn't done so. I'm not going to criticize him for that.

January 27, 2009 12:45 PM

No, Bart you sit idly by while a man verbally abuses a woman and you do nothing. You also throw in your verbal abuses. Way to go!! Atta boy. Two peas in a pod.

I do agree with your consistency. It would be hypocritical to crticize someone for what you do also.

Bart Barber said...

Tom Parker,

I'll look for your defense of Tom Hatley, you vindicator of the oppressed, you.

Anonymous said...

Tom Hately? Really Bart? Tom Hatley did what he did to himself. No one did it to him.

Bart Barber said...


Yes, Debbie, I know. It's EVERYONE ELSE'S fault. The bitter pursuit of one's vengeance always is.

CB Scott said...

Well Tom Parker, you Ole Liberal,

I too admire Debbie's sand. I always have. I have fought with Bart at least once about her back a year or so ago.

And I agree with Bart. She would take a bullet for Wade. I think Wade would probably take a bullet for her. I also admire Wade's grit. I always have. Now, I must say both of them have gone farther and father astray from orthodoxy. But I do admire their grit.

I admire the grit of a lot of these bloggers on both sides of the fence. There are many of them. A few are Bart, Wes, Wade, the Littleton brothers. Marty, Art, Both Tims, R and G., David Rogers and that Middle East Nut. There's SalehV and Lin and Lydia. Did I mention Debbie or Vol? There are so many. What about Bob Cleveland? That guy stood up on his hind legs and reared up and spit right in the eye of cancer like it was the common cold.

Then there is Peter, Dwight, Malcolm, Ron P., Timmy Brister, Tom Aschol and Les. And, of course, Alan Cross. And let none of us forget the great Benjamin S. Cole.

There are so many who have true grit. It would take all night to name them. I have fought with every one of them and was challenged by their engagement.

Then, of course there is you. And all the nuts, flakes and wild geese who have moved into Blogtown in the last year.

I just gotta ask you, Ole Liberal Tom; Is there anyone you would take a bullet for? Is there anyone?

Do you have any grit at all?

If you do, get it out here and let's get at it. Quit hiddin' behind Debbie's skirt and chunkin' rocks like Earnest T. Bass.

Tell the truth. Did you vote for Obama? What is your real position on abortion? Where were you in 1988 when the blood was flowing down in San Antonio and Ole Randall Lolley took a stroll down to the Alamo?

Where were you when we were fighting it out over the Sanctity of Human Life at the BSSB?

Where were you when Baptist preachers were making threats to kill the wife and children of Paige Patterson if he did not shut-up?

Where were you when a Baptist father asked me to watch out for his daughter who was serving on the BF&M committee because he feared for her safety back in 2000?

You talk about mean conservatives? You don't know anything. Where were you when a liberal entity president had a good man put in a straight-jacket and hauled off tho the mental hospital just for calling attention to all the sexual sin going on in a Baptist agency?

You don't know anything. It is like Larry Holly said back in 1986. Had the CR not happened; "The Southern Baptist Convention will be taken over by the Methodists and Sodomites."

You are "all-time talkin" about how bad the CR is, how bad the CR is, like a broken record.

What did you do; Read Bill Leonard's book? Is that your source? You read Wade's blog? Is that your source?

Well, come on down here to Birmingham, Tom. I will buy your lunch and tell you a few stories myself. I will invite some other old vets of the Baptist Battle for the Bible and you can listen to their stories. Then, maybe you will have a little different outlook on all of us ole CR devils and the "terrible deeds we committed."


Anonymous said...

I remember now why "Christians" are so scary to me. There is so much hate here.

CB Scott said...

Well, Anony,

If "Christians" are "scary" to you; just think about what hell is going to be like.


Bart Barber said...


If you've never had anybody love you enough to give you a stern talking to—to argue with you, even, when you need it—then you are much to be pitied.

volfan007 said...


Dont read the Bible where Jesus got onto the money changers and those selling animals in the temple. That might be more than you can take, especially since Christians are supposed to follow thier Lord.

Also, the Apostle Paul turned a couple of fellas over to the Devil because they were causing so much trouble for the cause of Christ. Turned them over to the Devil!

I guess you dont understand a lot of things about Christianity.


Anonymous said...


You are correct to recall some of the hate and viciousness on the moderate side. It was there in spades for many years.

The guy in Nashville who complained about the sexual stuff at the Sunday School Board whom they tried to have committed was unbelievable.

But that's the tip of the iceberg.

There were nasty things said and done on both sides. I will say that. But you will not get any moderates to admit that.

That is because they are very vested in the myth.

I do not put Wade in that category. His resume and even his spoken testimony, to this day, is that the CR needed to happen.

I see Wade as complaining about current personalities and policies, not the CR.


Anonymous said...

I will go on record saying that I like Debbie very much.


Anonymous said...

On the so-called economic stimulus plan:

This plan won't stimulate much.

Even if one agrees with the approach, only about 5%(say the experts) is for infrastructure projects.

There's a lot for schools, state government bailouts, teachers and other Democratice core constituencies.

There's also about $400 million for fighting sexually transmitted diseases and even more for fighting Global Warming.

Now, many may believe that these are the things we should be spending money on.

But to call it an economic stimulus plan does not make sense.


CB Scott said...


I know Wade. I don't know if you know the history of that statement or not, but I do know Wade. I stood by him when he was right about the IMB. My problem with Wade now, is that not only has he swallowed the Kool-Aid but he is selling it by the gallons at this present time for his own purposes that are rather transparent to those who have an actual understanding of the structure of Baptist life.

And Louis, I know about the "ice berg." I was there. I helped put C-4 under it and blow it up.

And since I don't know you or your positions on all of the past or the present; I will admit we took no prisoners.

Did we do some wrong things during the CR? Yes we did. I know I certainly did. I have been to the woodshed of God. It is my present intent to be an honest man and finish well.

Is your real name Louis? Do we know each other?

As for you saying you like Debbie very much; so do I. I have defended her many times . In the last year I have not been able to do so very often. She bought a whole lot of that "Kool-Aid" I mentioned earlier.

So let the record show that I like Debbie very much also and I do admire her grit. I also like her enough to tell her she is headed down a wrong road at the moment and I am praying for her to turn around. Oh yeah; and stop buying the Kool-Aid.

I would like to meet you one day, Louis. If you were around back in the day I would be glad to hear your story, no matter which side you were or are on as related to the CR.


Anonymous said...


Quick summary.

My real name is Louis. A lot of people ask me if that is my real name. It is. Some think I am Louis Moore. I am not, though I have met and like Louis. First met him in Houston in 1985 when he was the religion editor at the Houston Chronicle.

Do I understand that you are from B'Ham Alabama? I lived there for a while. I have been to Shades Mountain Baptist, Briarwood Pres, Philadelphia Baptist, and Shades Mountain Independent. Albert Lee Smith was a great guy. Did you know him?

I grew up in a mainstream Presbyterian Church in my Southern City. Also attended my grandmother's Methodist Church in Decatur, GA quite a bit growing up. Very mainstream. The minister was a great guy - Bev Jones, who went on to become a Bishop in the Methodist Church. Also attended EYC at the big Episcopal Church in my city with friends.

Became a Christian at age 13 through the ministry of a Southern Methodist Church. Joined a Baptist Church at age 16. Was the largest Baptist Church in town. Very solid, dignified preacher. A great pastor. Was conservative.

Went to a local Baptist College from 1979 to 1981, and realized immediately that the religion department in that school was way off the reservation, but the state convention said and did nothing about it, and even claimed that the professors were conservative. A huge ruse that brought support from churches in the state. The student body, even the non-Christians, knew better. The college has since left the Baptist fold.

Became involved in the CR in the fall of 1979, and have been pro CR ever since.

I have many moderate friends, even some in well placed CBF places. We disagree about Baptist matters. We also disagree about gay marriage, abortion and every other political issue that has moral overtones.

Have served on a Teller's Committee at one convention. Served as a Trustee at an institution from approx 1990 to 1996 or so.

Started a church with 4 other couples in 1992. It is an SBC church by affiliation. Our cultural feel is not typical SBC, but we are very supportive of the seminaries, the mission boards etc. We give a good bit of money directly to the SBC rather than routing it through the state convention. Our church is on the reformed side, but we don't make a big deal about it or even talk about it. We just teach the Bible.

My wife was raised on the mission field (SBC) in South America.

I am almost 48. Practiced law for almost 23 years.

So, that's me. I use my real name, but don't go into my identity any further than that, and I don't drag my church, my pastor or friends into the blogging world.

I am not in the Baptist or religious world for pay. Our church doesn't talk about the CR. Most of our members have no Baptist background. Many of our members are under 30 and have no knowledge of the CR.

I read Bart's and Wade's blogs and join in on the comments. I really don't know that much about either guy or what they are trying to accomplish. I really don't care about that. I just enjoy reading from different quarters of SBC life.

My involvement in the CR has enabled me to meet many interesting and great people. Some are on different sides of various controversies.

I am very independent in my thinking, but usually anger former moderates on blogs (who now don't want to admit they were moderates). I find that many of them are on edge and ready to fight at the drop of a hat. I really don't find as many conservatives in blog world that are as angry, although I do find many conservatives on blogs who will say things they should not say.

I used to enjoy dialoging with Ben Cole until he quit to do whatever. His last post was very sad, in my opinion. He is one of the most talented writers in the SBC, in my opinion. But I think that his interests and heartbeat have moved him from the ministry to other things. He will probably follow Bill Moyers' path - eventually out of the SBC and perhaps the Christian faith altogether, but I certainly hope not.

So, that's it.

Thanks for the inquiry.

See you around.


CB Scott said...


I knew Albert Lee well. I spoke with his widow not long back. He, Sam Currin and I did a few things together back in the day.

Many people say I am responsible for Ben Cole's involvement in most of this and maybe I am. Ben is doing well. We speak often, but not lately. We have both been very busy. I think he is a perfect fit for what he is doing now. Ben Cole is my friend, and I love him no matter what. Ben is not out of the faith.

I have been in Birmingham since August 2005. I was born in Alabama, but not Birmingham. I never served in any type of ministry in Alabama before coming back in 2005. I have served in five other states the greater part of my ministry life. I never thought I would come back to Alabama.

You did not say we have met, but it is obvious we know many of the same people. I was on a board the years you mention you serving on one.

Is this the first time we conversed on a comment thread other than being indirect with one another a few times? I have said a few things on blogs I should not have said, but not recently:-) And I rarely get angry anymore.....been workin' on it:-)

Thanks for responding.

Maybe someday?


Anonymous said...


Are you going to the Convention this year? If so, I'll look for you.

With regard to Ben, I don't think that he is out of the faith now at all. The tone of his last post was so sad, however, that I have wondered what his future path will be. As I said, he is very talented. I hope that he can use his talent for some good things. We have spoken on the phone. I like him.

I actually think it would be good for him to get out of SBC life for a while. I don't know what went on with Dr. P at SEBTS, but I have heard from many people (some who were there) that Ben was really hurt by all of that.

I think it would be good if he got around some mainstream evangelicals that were not at all politicized by the Baptist battles.

I know that in my own life that much of my spiritual interests are outside of SBC life. I think that keeps me focused on things other than Baptist politics. If one gets caught up in it too much, it can not only be a waste of time, it can be very discouraging over the long haul.

Let me know if you will be in Louisville, and I will make an effort to find you.

Of course, that goes for anyone in the blog world who would care to meet me, but I don't presume that there is a long line for that.


bapticus hereticus said...

In my lifetime no President was expected to do so much in so short a time, even Nixon, whom had to contend with the war in 68, than Obama. But in terms of the stimulus plan, I, too, would like it to be more aggressive in terms of infrastructure; but in the main, the financing of the plan will stimulate the economy. Notwithstanding the recently alleged CBO report, about 70% of the money will be in place by the end of 2010. That the plan will favor some democrat issues is not disputed, for it would favor repub issues, which would not be generally questioned by repubs, if McCain was elected. Both sides will need to give a bit (i.e., our nation needs a dual emphasis on organizations and people) to fashion workable solutions, but for one side to give and receive no votes from the other will in the end lead the party in power to ignore the party out of power.

Anonymous said...


I know that the Dems are in power. They will pass plans to give money to their constituencies. I am not surprised by that.

But after all the talk about "earmark" spending in the campaign and how bad it is, it is ashamed that what should have been a stimulus plan has become a "pork" plan. This thing is nothing but that. I would be just as opposed to this if the Republicans were doing it. This bill is not getting the usual scrutiny of a spending bill because it is being proposed under the guise of something that requires immediate action. That we must act swiftly. Then one looks and lots of the money has nothing to do with stabilizing anything and won't take effect for years.

I favored the original bailout bill - TARP. I thought that stabilzing the banking system was a good thing. Getting rid of the toxic assets and shoring up the banks.

But now I am concerned about that money. It hasn't been spent wisely - even if we can figure out where it has been spent.

I could be wrong, but I think that this is the largest deficit spending bill in US history. The times are unique, and action is called for.

But a "Pork" plan is not what we need right now.

I am afraid that passing this will send all the wrong signals and will thus NOT help consumers have more confidence in the US economy. I am fearful that passing the plan (and I think it will pass) will only cause most business people and oddly enought most common people on the street to think that the government is up to spending more money that can't be repaid.

Those are my thoughts. For whatever they are worth.

If the bill does pass (and I think it will pass), I really hope it stimulates the economy and gives people confidence. I am just not seeing any of that yet, especially from the neutral observer crowd in economic circles. This thing is sending shivers down their spines. I think that's why the market hasn't been reacting all that positive either.

But having said all of that, there are over 300,000,000 people in this country, and we are going to engage in economic activity. We are going to recover. It's just a matter of time.

I just want our government to do things that will help and not hurt.


bapticus hereticus said...

Louis: … after all the talk about "earmark" spending in the campaign … it … has become a "pork" plan.

bapticus hereticus: I suppose some will call it such, even if the greater reality is something other than that. At the heart of the criticisms of the plan is this: it is not something the repubs would do; that is, it does not emphasize tax cuts and reduced spending. First, given our situation with two wars, the first is difficult, and second, the previous administration and its congress for six years did little to convince us that reduced spending is important. Now that we have an economy in a deregulated mess and we are still fighting two wars, additional tax cuts are difficult (but if the federal gov does just that, you can be sure tax increases will be forthcoming from state and local govs) and reduced spending is not really an option at this time. Really the fear is that Obama will be successful; recall Limbaugh's "I hope Obama fails." Would success build the democratic party. Yes, definitely so. But when repubs had the White House and Congress they had an opportunity to do so (i.e., build) for their party with their successes; instead, they left us a mess. Not that they did it alone, mind you, but, yes, they bear the burden for most of it. Thus the American public stated in November, let's do something different with different people, for what we have been doing is not working.

CB Scott said...


I will be in Louisville.

I am staying in the Crown Plaza Hotel.

See you there.


Rob Ayers said...

Thank you Bart for this excellent post. Thank you CB for your heart felt rejoinders. If ever I run afoul of the truth, I pray that someone like you give me the needed corrective to put be back in line