What are your thoughts re Hegelian dialectic?

[Josh]

In this article The Synthesis Moment of the SBC is an interesting insight into the secularization of church leadership. What do you think about it?

Reposting this as some have asked what the original intent of this thread was.

[Bootstrap]

In this article The Synthesis Moment of the SBC is an interesting insight into the secularization of church leadership. What do you think about it?

Reposting this as some have asked what the original intent of this thread was.

I think it's a blog post from one of the factions of the SBC - it seems rather uncharitable and misleading about some other SBC leaders. But none of us are SBC here, it's a bit hard for us to be experts on their inside politics. I am familiar with the teachings of some of the people he refers to, they don't seem to teach what he implies they teach.

Regardless, the biggest problem the SBC faces at this point is probably a lack of unity that goes so far that leaders are willing to attack each other in public like this, with blatant smear campaigns. I don't think we should enable that kind of behavior. Perhaps the most Christian thing to do is to ignore this entirely. It's not in our jurisdiction. I mean, would we want Baptist forums spreading gossip about Catholics and Mennonites?

Also, it's rather out of date. Ed Litton has now been appointed. The obvious thing to do now is to wait and see. I mean, do you think the SBC benefits from our discussion here? Or that we have the inside scoop? Or that we help build the Kingdom of God by taking sides in their internal battles?

[Bootstrap]

The whole article itself is nothing more than an attempt by the author to cast aspersions on his opponents within the SBC (of which Beth Moore and Russell Moore are the two most prominent) by painting them with vaguely Marxist-sounding language. Rather than to addressing the arguments and points they make in a honest manner. So it is entirely fair to say "wait a second, none of this Marxist-sounding Hegelian framing is appropriate. We should look at their actual arguments rather than use fallacious pretexts to dismiss them outright."

Exactly.

I'm imagining the Pharisees telling Jesus to go somewhere else if he doesn't like them stoning the woman caught in adultery. Surely there are other places for him to hang out if public stonings don't appeal to him. Jesus should start his own thread.

Except - that woman was actually caught in adultery, this seems to be making things up. 19 pages in, it's pretty obvious that some of these accusations are being made without evidence. And also, these particular Pharisees will not reflect on their own sin and turn away. They don't have any sense of shame. Once the goon squad chooses a victim, it does not like to let go.

I really am trying to be Christlike here.

[justme]

would you people just stop it?
this whole thread makes no sense to me.

[silentreader]

would you people just stop it?
this whole thread makes no sense to me.

It's becoming pretty obvious it is not making sense to anybody.

[Ken]

would you people just stop it?
this whole thread makes no sense to me.

What are you confused about?

MaxPC posted a specific article that took a certain view about the current split happening in the SBC. Some people agreed with it. Some people disagreed and pushed back against some of the examples used in the original article, mostly about sincerity (or insincerity) of Beth Moore and Russell Moore in their dissent against the SBC.

But yes, after 19 pages I don't think there is anything new to say.

[Bootstrap]

I made a casual reference that people like Beth Moore rely on a Hegelian dialectic to guide their sense of morality, and yes, Moore definitely does approach everything through the lens of an oppressor-oppressed dynamic.

The complete derail was Bootstrap claiming Beth Moore is some paragon of morality and virtue because she spoke against Trump. Needless to say, that’s not how I identify someone as a sincere Christ follower.

Sexual immorality is bad. But only when it's real. False accusations are bad. If you brush off sexual immorality on your side and make false accusations of sexual immorality on the other side, that's not promoting righteousness.

Beth Moore spoke out against Trump bragging that he can do whatever he wants to women and get away with it. Beth Moore works with sexual abuse survivors, she spoke out about it, that's when the knives came out for her. People are trying to say that she endorses sexual immorality, but they don't seem to have proof of it.

Beth Moore is clearly Christian and teaches straight out of the Bible. As far as I can tell, the only reason she is on "the other side" is that she criticized Trump. Let's be careful about crucifying Christians because they don't agree with our politics.

[Bootstrap]

would you people just stop it?
this whole thread makes no sense to me.

It's becoming pretty obvious it is not making sense to anybody.

Yes, it's time to drop this thread. And maybe we can drop other threads when we get to page 19 and it's clear that the thread makes no sense.

[Soloist]

I made a casual reference that people like Beth Moore rely on a Hegelian dialectic to guide their sense of morality, and yes, Moore definitely does approach everything through the lens of an oppressor-oppressed dynamic.

The complete derail was Bootstrap claiming Beth Moore is some paragon of morality and virtue because she spoke against Trump. Needless to say, that’s not how I identify someone as a sincere Christ follower.

Sexual immorality is bad. But only when it's real. False accusations are bad. If you brush off sexual immorality on your side and make false accusations of sexual immorality on the other side, that's not promoting righteousness.

Beth Moore spoke out against Trump bragging that he can do whatever he wants to women and get away with it. Beth Moore works with sexual abuse survivors, she spoke out about it, that's when the knives came out for her. People are trying to say that she endorses sexual immorality, but they don't seem to have proof of it.

Beth Moore is clearly Christian and teaches straight out of the Bible. As far as I can tell, the only reason she is on "the other side" is that she criticized Trump. Let's be careful about crucifying Christians because they don't agree with our politics.

Why not just split off all the Beth Moore nonsense then into its own thread and leave this one for something else then?

As for Beth Moore is clearly Christian, how can you possibly say that this group of people on Menno is not and she is? Seems that the politics of some Menno's doesn't line up with your politics. Maybe your words are harsher then you intended but thats how you are presenting your opinion about the opposition that stated opinions against her.
She promotes unbiblical teaching such as women pastors, now if she is specific about them just being over women or children's ministries...
I will admit on further digging she has carefully avoided stating her actual opinion and has not openly claimed to support homosexual marriage, but she certainly has done the same the other way around and refused to say its sinful as she singles out these abusers as especially sinful among that group. The same logic she uses could be applied to any situation. Does Jesus look at that pedophile with hate? This isn't somehow a higher love for sinners, its a political statement reflecting the times. I will not debate a random teacher with you as I hardly know who she is anyway and I hope she's not teaching your theology.

As for the southern Baptist it may surprise you to learn that the supremist and the abusers are in every church denomination. The southern sympathies run deep and have much more to do with more of a librarian mind set.
They just want to educate you okay libertarian mind set.
There totally are racists in the south, but I've ran across more open racists in Oregon and Arkansas then I ever did in Louisiana or Florida

[Bootstrap]

Why not just split off all the Beth Moore nonsense then into its own thread and leave this one for something else then?

Because people like you keep responding in ways that seem to require a response. And I've responded to the other topics it claims to be about. The goon squad is not out for only Beth Moore.

As for Beth Moore is clearly Christian, how can you possibly say that this group of people on Menno is not and she is?

I am not saying anyone here is not Christian, I am saying that participating in the goon squad is unbecoming of a Christian. Have you read anything that Beth Moore writes? Have you heard her speak? For any Christian who reads the Bible, it should be obvious that when we condemn others without cause, there's a serious danger that we are heaping condemnation on ourselves. But this has come to become such a habit among many Christians, even a dominant part of some Christian subcultures.

It's Pharisees proving to each other that they are among the cool kids because they too condemn today's victim. It's not Christlike.

Seems that the politics of some Menno's doesn't line up with your politics. Maybe your words are harsher then you intended but thats how you are presenting your opinion about the opposition that stated opinions against her.

No, this is not about politics. This really is about basic Christian teaching about speech. Do we engage in public campaigns of condemnation against people and groups we do not know, without even taking the time to read what they write or listen to what they say? Is that what Christians do? I'm not the person who keeps reframing this using the world view of American politics. I keep bringing it back to basic biblical teaching on bearing false witness, gossip, and slander.

She promotes unbiblical teaching such as women pastors, now if she is specific about them just being over women or children's ministries...

But why are you singling her out for this? Are you going to make a list of all the people who believe that and start a thread attacking them? Why or why not?

I will admit on further digging she has carefully avoided stating her actual opinion and has not openly claimed to support homosexual marriage, but she certainly has done the same the other way around and refused to say its sinful as she singles out these abusers as especially sinful among that group.

So her actual position is not what she says and writes, but what you believe it to be? She says all sex outside of heterosexual marriage is wrong. What more do you need? Regardless, are you in a position to fully understand her and her writings and make a fair judgement? "For you will be judged by the same standard with which you judge others, and you will be measured by the same measure you use."

As for the southern Baptist it may surprise you to learn that the supremist and the abusers are in every church denomination. The southern sympathies run deep and have much more to do with more of a librarian mind set.
They just want to educate you okay libertarian mind set.
There totally are racists in the south, but I've ran across more open racists in Oregon and Arkansas then I ever did in Louisiana or Florida

This is one of the reasons I rather like both Russell Moore and J.D. Greear. They are biblical teachers who speak to these things. I live in North Carolina, in the same city as J.D. Greear. I'm not a big fan of megachurches, but I see people from his church everywhere building Habitat houses, working with refugees, witnessing to people in the coffee shops.