Really odd, but maybe not pathetic and disingenuous

Well, SharperIron (SI) made the mistake of drawing attention to my comments regarding the faux Faith defenders and caught some flack over it. I am not a member of SI, so I don’t have commenting rights. I can read it though, so I poked in over the weekend to see what was being said. Some exception has been taken to my description of certain responses to the Central-Faith situation as pathetic and disingenuous. I was reminded of the old preacher’s line about what happens when you throw a rock into a dark alley—the dog that barks is the one that got hit!

Really, though, was it too hard to understand my point? I don’t think I need to read minds to know that the guys most strongly criticizing Kevin Bauder and Central regarding separation clearly don’t know much about Faith. As Kevin noted, George Dollar counted Faith among the Moderate Fundamentalists back in the day. I wonder if Kevin’s critics were favorable to Faith maintaining its relationship with GARBC all the way up to and through the abolition of the approval system? Or if they considered holding a seat on the GARBC’s Council of 18 a good thing? I could go on, but I think that’s enough to confirm my point. That point was simply, “it is evident that they know nothing about that institution beyond a few quotes they’ve plucked from publications.”

But, in the interest of fairness, there is an email bag button to the right and if anyone that feels I’ve misrepresented them would like to send me evidence that corrects me on this point, I’ll gladly and publicly declare the evidence of your past and present support of Faith. Shouldn’t be hard to do—just tell me when you took a group of prospective students to visit the campus or had a representative in to present it to your church. Or perhaps, send me a copy of a note you sent them encouraging their stand within the GARBC or thanked them for supplying speakers and leadership for the GARBC.

For the record, I won’t hold my breath while I wait.

There was one comment made that I did want to interact with a little because I think it shows how an argument can be twisted to one’s advantage. Here’s what was posted as a parody on what I had said:

Parody on Dr. Doran, rpittman wrote:

I can’t or won’t avoid noting that some of the defenses of the announcement about the Central-Faith merger not happening are amusing. I’m not going to link to any of the ones I have in mind because doing so would actually serve their self-serving purpose. I am pretty sure that the folks who are “crying” that the merger didn’t go through because of feigned concern that no merger might weaken the historic Fundamentalist separatist stand against KJVOism never gave a rip about separatism prior to this. I write this quite confidently because it is evident that they know nothing about historic Fundamentalism and KJVOism beyond a few quotes they’ve plucked from publications. The occasion of the potential merger simply served as an opportunity to take shots at KJVO believers who are defending miltant (sic) separatist Fundamentalism and the KJB. IOW, they were using the merger to score their own points. Pathetic and disingenous.


This is simply a parody of Dr. Doran’s post on his blog to illustrate the nature of his language and charges. It does not need to be refuted because it was written as parody, not argument.

About this I would say simply two things: (1) it would only stand as an analogy if it were true that the people addressed had previously shown no interest or support of the two institutions, and if that were so then I’d have no problem with it being published; and (2) there is, I think, a logical problem with it since it replaces a specific school with a movement and doctrinal position—suggesting that someone doesn’t know anything about a specific school is much different than suggesting they know nothing about Fundamentalism and KJVOism.

My larger point was and is aimed at the kind of convenient “alliances” which are formed not out of mutual agreement, but from opportunism. As I said above, I am prepared to be corrected, but I think some of Kevin’s critics have also been critical of the position which Faith has always maintained (but they didn’t know that Faith maintained that position because they really don’t care about Faith).

Comments are closed.