Jim: On principle only, not my personal fondness for RVC, what, in the name of common decency and all that’s Christian, is the point of introducing Doug McLachlan’s first tenure at Fourth into this discussion? Because (1) knowing Doug (one of the finest and brightest students I’ve had, 1st of a small handful of summas from CBTS) as well as anyone, he would eschew vigorously such an act, (2) coming from a former fundamentalist who converted to a conservative evangelical always carries extreme prejudice both in motive and content, and (3) posting a website for the cyber world to see is nonsensical. Your parting shot that “dead fundamentalists were not perfect” was gratuitous, inflammatory and unconscionable. If this is any kind of resemblance to the apparently newly discovered and coveted kind and gentle fundamentalism, you have discredited them and embarrassed yourself. The mean, bad, unholy ‘ole fundys usually were not as resourceful as you. This is as kindly and gently as I can put it. Comment HereIn his first comment at SI Dr. McCune wrote, “…bare their teeth and draw their swords in defence and propagation of truth itself along with doing so for the innocent and defenseless.”
Jim Peet, maybe you just learned what strength under control looks like. Maybe you learned a valuable lesson in humility. Well, it looks like Jim didn‘t learn anything. Instead Jim responded with an exclamation point laden angered reaction. Jim responded with an acerbic, acrimonious and arrogant tone. The only missing part of Jim’s reaction is the threat to ban and pulling the comment* so that he (Jim) could assail the author with impunity, his common course of action when he takes personal offense. (Although no telling what Jim might have said if he sent a private message to Dr. McCune.) Maybe the caliber and reputation of the author (Dr. McCune) caused Jim some restraint that is certainly not common to him as SI administrator.
Who might be counted among Kevin Bauder’s contemporary “‘pugilistic and bellicose,’ ‘alpha males,’ ‘big boys,’ ‘bullies,’ ‘chieftains,’ etc.?” Jim Peet’s caustic reaction to Dr. McCune qualifies him for inclusion. And there is nothing about Jim Peet’s teeth and sword that can be considered “a defence and propagation of truth itself along with doing so for the innocent and defenseless.” Bottom line, IMO Jim got his feelings hurt and instead of a careful, courteous response he let his emotions lead the way.
LM
* For prime examples see, SI's Deplorable Moderator Actions Run Off Another
SI Gang-Tackles “Doc” Clearwaters...
Site Publisher's Invitation:
If you are visiting for the first time, or the first time in a long time, I encourage you to review and read any of the other articles you will find in the right column of the Iron Skillet. There are numerous, thoroughly documented articles that irrefutably detail SI’s bias and hostility toward historic, balanced Fundamentalism and its corporate favoritism toward the so-called “conservative” evangelicalism, its star personalities and their fellowships.
Site Publisher’s Addendum:
ReplyDeleteFor those who identify with or simply appreciate the best of fundamentalism and still participate at SI I would encourage you to consider ending your active participation there. Your participation is somewhat of a lifeline for SI to continue its crusade on behalf the so-called “conservative” evangelicalism (ce), promoting a convergence with the star personalities and fellowships of the ce camp, and positioning against what we find to be the best of fundamentalism’s history, legacy, leaders and practices today. Your participation feeds the SI threads and fuels SI moderators and certain other participants to promote pro-evangelical personalities, doctrines and agendas at the expense of fundamentalism.
I would also encourage the few current or potential advertisers who feel strongly about fundamentalism to consider this: Is Sharper Iron the best place to invest the resources God has entrusted to you? Do you want to reach and/or attract the kind of persons to your college or ministry who frequent and support SI? SI is a site that frequently allows for, promotes, and its leadership happily joins in on, the redefining, castigation and besmirching of fundamentalism. SI, furthermore, heaps lavish praise on the so-called “conservative” evangelicals. SI does not tolerate legitimate criticism of it’s star personalities, preferred doctrinal positions or fellowships. Should those kind of messages from SI be sustained by financial support from fundamentalist institutions?
Pastor Mike Harding posted a very special comment in the SI thread. I have always appreciated his wisdom and perspective. It is plain to see that his final paragraph was for the benefit of Jim Peet and JamesK.
ReplyDeleteDr. McCune
I realize that sites such as SI have a way of leveling the playing field. Sometimes that's good, but not in this case. I have been a student of Dr. McCune for many years at DBTS where I received both my M.Div. and Th.M. while pastoring a very busy and demanding church. I usually arrived at DBTS in Allen Park, MI from Troy about 6:30 in the morning to get ready for my first class. I think in the ten or more years I attended there I can count on two hands the days I didn't see Dr. McCune at 6:00 AM in his office studying, reading, or praying. I had no intention of pursuing those degrees at DBTS when I took my first class from Dr. McCune. After that class, however, I was hooked. Not only did I take every class that Dr. McCune ever taught at DBTS, I traveled several thousand miles to another seminary in order to take a class from him that he had not taught at DBTS.
In all my years at DBTS, I have never known another student, graduate, faculty member, staff member, or local pastor to ever address him in a public venue as "Rolland". All of us without exception had and have such enormous respect for the man's education, teaching, books, syllabi, character, integrity, work ethic, history, longevity, graciousness, and courage that we would never view or address him in such common terms in a public venue.
I realize that some individuals' ignorance is only surpassed by their arrogance, but in this case if I had ever said something so careless so as to evoke a public and stern rebuke by such a man as Dr. Rolland McCune, I would simply take a quiet seat in the back of the room and consider deeply what I had said."
Neither Jim Peet or JamesK show no inclination to find a quiet place for reflection.
LM
JamesK: Cut Off at the Knees
ReplyDeleteThis was just too funny to let slide off into cyber space. At SI you have a collection of all sorts. If there is one crown jewel of the lunatic fringe that has to be JamesK. This person is one of very few in the blogosphere that I don’t waste any brain power on. Yesterday, however, Dr. Rolland McCune interacted with some comments by JamesK and boy, was it funny to read. I share with you now, Dr. McCune,
“James[K]: I frequently surf SI for things that interest me, and quite infrequently post a comment on things I think I understand. But your responses on this thread cause me nothing but frustration because they come across, to me at least, as one of the biggest collections of convoluted nonsense I’ve ever seen. How a story, which ‘may or may not be true,’ purporting to give ‘another side’ to a previous post or account of a deceased fundamentalist leader and his ministry (Response # 43), ever be justified or commended is indeed troubling. Response # 47 is so esoteric and apocryphal that it defies untangling. I’ve been told that my intelligence is normal but I’m stumped on this one. I guess I’ll have to stay on the porch for a while and ponder the ‘gold’ in the thought of ‘McCune applauding a CE group.’ At this point it appears to be nothing but good old fashioned iron pyrite. If I ever understand these things, I may sally forth again on SI.”
James, how are your knee caps doing this morning; ouch?
Hey James you need to relax, ice down those knee caps, you'll feel better.