Letters to the editor and a certain faculty member at Covenant College...

Joseph,

Speaking only for myself.... Absolutely not. No way. Never. These are men (and women) who have sought, pursued, accumulated and wielded teaching authority in an arm (albeit perhaps malformed) of the Church. And the ringing klaxon of the survey is that 34 percent of the professors surveyed say they believe Barack Obama is a Christian.

Imagine 34 percent of the company of Elijah's school of the prophets saying they viewed King Ahab as a Christian. The parallel is unmistakable. Both men permit and protect child sacrifice even as they pay lip service to the true God.

At the level of this question, by any standard, any definition, any meaningful analysis, this survey is evidence of something deeply and irredeemably disturbing at work among the Covenant faculty. Something still smells in Denmark....

Yours in Christ,

David

Dear Mr. Dempsky,

There were many, many confessing Christians who took the same position supporting Adolph Hitler. We see their error now, and the day will come when yours is as clear. In your own case, though, history will record that the slaughter of the Third Reich pales in comparison to the slaughter promoted by your bedmates.

Still, I honor you for signing your full name. I'm betting, though, that your salary is not paid by Covenant. When someone whose salary is paid by Covenant mans up and identifies himself by first and last name as one of those who is convinced Senator Obama is a Christian and supports him for president, I'll consider honoring him as I've honored you here, with biblical warning and this warning of God's coming judgment against immoral men and those who support them:

"For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them; for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light (for the fruit of the Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth), trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them; for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret"

(Ephesians 5:5-12).

Sincerely in Christ,

Tim Bayly

This is a gag right?

I mean nobody expects me to believe that somebody associated with Covenant college actually shows up here to contend that voting for a man who has voted several times to let those born alive die from neglect is something that could ever be promulgated as Christian.

Nobody from Covenant college would really publicly attest that voting for a Marxist who hates white people is Christian.

OK guys ... what's the gag?

Mark,

I'm trying to decide whether your analogy was a joke or not. It was more funny than applicable, so I will assume it was an attempt at humor.

Also, I'd like to see some scripture from you on dismissing Sam's concerns over misuse of scripture. Not really, I just think you're being unnecessarily disagreeable.

Sam brings up an interesting point about Obadiahs and Elijahs. On our internet forum for discussion here at Covenant, a poster recently brought up the difference between Obadiah and Elijah in dealing with evil in the time of Ahab. As someone with left-leaning political views, it was refreshing to hear voices of encouragement in the evangelical lefts' attempt to reform the status quo, instead of reverting to an imaginary time of religiosity permeating all society.

Does Obama have all his ducks in a row? Absolutely not. But I think he's the better shot at reducing Abortions - something that Conservative Republicans have failed to do since Roe v. Wade over 30 years ago. He sees the economic problem as a major factor, and supports programs to aid potential mothers and infants not only financially, but with social and medical aid as well. Will it work? Our economy's poor shape makes things complicated. But I think its a better shot than trying to ban abortions period, which from a pragmatic standpoint, just isn't going to happen.

I've tried the pro-life standpoint of the arch-conservative and given up on the countless "election-time pro-lifers" and started to see the attraction of using our tax dollars to provide a good and just service. Would this eliminate abortions? No. But we're not going to eliminate it on either option, so can we call ourselves Christians if we oppose measures that will likely reduce the number of abortions?

Bret,

No gag, and I have no interest in your belief of my position.

Mark and Bret,

This question is for Tim, not for you. Tim is a pastor - I don't know who you guys are and my question was not directed to you. Please refrain from your usual tag-teaming whereby you venomously attack those who comment in an effort to make their legitimate questions appear less so.

You two really need to exercise some restraint here. I have not quoted scripture, you're right. However, I have made a reference to scripture that seemed to escape your attention. I didn't say some pastor, I said many pastors. Do not misrepresent my statements and I will strive to show the same respect to you.

I am not going to provide you with an alternate exegesis as I have no obligation to do so at this time nor is this comment field a correct medium for such a response. You will most likely be inclined to twist these words, I respectfully request that you refrain.

Tim is a pastor, he has provided statement after statement with verses quoted in-between. I am calling, I feel respectfully, on him to support those statements with more than a scattering of verses ripped from their contexts; as I feel it is his duty as a leader of Christ's followers to provide a comprehensive explanation of his teaching.

As the night is beginning to wane and my responsibilities call me elsewhere, this is tonight's final word from me. Please take your time to respectfully consider my words and if you feel it necessary, respond. Anything disrespectful will not be tolerated nor taken into consideration.

I'm trying to decide whether your analogy was a joke or not.

I'm glad you got it worked out G.S. How long did it take? I'm no Republican. I find national socialism every bit as unattractive and offensive as the communistic type. Your proposed solution to the problem of abortion is fascinating but one would think Christ, not Demos, the answer to the problem.

Guys,

Sorry, but "being restrained" is not in my spiritual gifts portfolio. I got the "its clobbering time" spiritual gift. Many members but still one body and all that. I'm sure you'll understand.

You gentleman dress up your Dracula ideas in the tuxedo of feigned civility and expect us to go all weak in the knees. Sorry, the only thing Dracula is good for, tux or no tux, is practicing thrusting stakes through the heart.

First, G. S. proposes that (in my best Alistair Cooke voice) we should consider Obama given his desire to reduce abortions by way of government programs.

Now there's a grand idea G. S. that's never been tried before. Why don't we apply that reasoning to helping single mothers? The State could give them more money, aid, and assistance for every out of wedlock child they have.

Wait a minute ... we did try doing this and it amounted to a subsidy, which created more of what we said we were trying to fix. Suddenly we had single moms having litters of children so has to get free handouts.

Now you come along and want to suggest what a cerebral idea it is to subsidize women who are pregnant out of wedlock thus insuring that the result will be more of what you say you're trying to fix. Will you guys ever learn that when you subsidize a behavior you always get more of that behavior. This isn't enlightened reasoning. This is the same crap sandwich that we've been force fed since the great society. Typical pagan liberal leftist thought. All that matters is good intentions, never mind that the consequences always come back and bite you in the arse.

Now you bring up a good point about Obadiah. What I'd really like to see is some Obadiah's bring their ministry skills to the pedophilia camp. Goodness knows, that we need some Obadiah's in those circles working inside the pederasts camp helping to bring about less child rape cases by supporting the Child rapists.

This is as restrained and respectful as I get when dealing with this kind of tripe.

I hope I didn't veil my contempt to much.

Bret,

I have proposed solutions to the problem. All I see from you is intolerance. Also, "it's clobbering time" is not mentioned in scripture as a spiritual gift. I'm afraid you've been misled somewhere along the line. "Being restrained" as you call it, or patience as I call it, is listed as a fruit of the spirit. Saying harsh words hastily out of righteous indignation against a brother is no more righteous than the actions you cry against. If you have anger issues, might I suggest a meeting with your pastor or another Christian counselor? I've seen what "angry Christians" can do to a church, and it isn't pretty.

Going back, it does concern me that several comments on this blog condemn various alternative tactics proposed to deal with abortion, while offering no substitute. Like I said earlier, legislation is more or less not an option, at least at the level that would reduce abortions to the levels of a well funded support program.

You assume too much in thinking that government support of those in need will make the situation worse. I would rather try and fail than to sit back and do nothing about the problem. Talking on a blog about how much you disagree with people hardly sounds like a wise use of your energies. When you have a proposal, then we can talk.

I have proposed solutions to the problem. All I see from you is intolerance.

Ah, G. S., I've only begun to intolerant. Wait till I really warm up.

Also, "it's clobbering time" is not mentioned in scripture as a spiritual gift. I'm afraid you've been misled somewhere along the line.

I must have been misled from that passage where Paul registers his hope that his enemies would castrate themselves.

Apparently your leftist mindset doesn't register "clobbering" as falling under the spiritual gift of love. That's right G. S. by clobbering your ideas and thrusting a stake through the heart of your proscribed support of murder, buggery, Marxism and what not, I am showing my love to the ones who will be murdered, caught in the lifestyle of sodomy, and destroyed by the class envy that you are supporting.

No, no, my pagan interlocutor, it is you who have violated scripture by calling evil, 'good,' and good, 'evil.' There is little sense in trying to achieve some kind of moral high ground when you've quicksand all about you.

"Being restrained" as you call it, or patience as I call it, is listed as a fruit of the spirit.

Sorry, Bubba, I don't do patience when somebody is advocating that it is Biblical to support a Mass Murderer.

Your patience as you define it is not a fruit of the spirit but is the produce of hell. God will surely damn those who have the kind of patience that you're speaking of.

Saying harsh words hastily out of righteous indignation against a brother is no more righteous than the actions you cry against.

LOL ...

My saying hot words is equal in unrighteousness to your advocacy of supporting infanticide and buggery and Marxism and black liberation theology.

LOL ...

You're killing me G. S.

Look, old chap, in the end we each serve a different God. It will do no good to try and appeal to your God to try to make me behave.

If you have anger issues, might I suggest a meeting with your pastor or another Christian counselor? I've seen what "angry Christians" can do to a church, and it isn't pretty.

I'll make sure and let my Pastor know your opinion G.S.

Still, to everything there is a time and a season under the sun G.S.

If you have issues where you can calmly advocate murder, might I suggest repentance and fleeing the wrath to come? You can do this on your own without meeting with a pastor or Christian counselor. Even now, I am seeing what those who civilly advocate murder can do to a church, and it isn't pretty G.S.

Going back, it does concern me that several comments on this blog condemn various alternative tactics proposed to deal with abortion, while offering no substitute. Like I said earlier, legislation is more or less not an option, at least at the level that would reduce abortions to the levels of a well funded support program.

Here is a substitute G.S.. We should promote Capital punishment for both the Doctors who preform the abortions, the mothers who bring their children in to be aborted, the Fathers who encourage abortion, and politicians that create a climate for abortion.

You assume too much in thinking that government support of those in need will make the situation worse. I would rather try and fail than to sit back and do nothing about the problem. Talking on a blog about how much you disagree with people hardly sounds like a wise use of your energies. When you have a proposal, then we can talk.

Well I've given you my proposal. Capital punishment for capital crimes and I appeal to Genesis 9:6

Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed for in the image of God made He man.

And I will end with several other proposals.

How about thinking through the implications and consequences of your rush to amend a problem before you exacerbate the problem by advocating ignorant solutions that have been tried and have failed before. Try and failing and in the meanwhile making the problem worse is not a solution. Remember ... first do no harm.

Second, you really need to read a book on the failures of the great society.

Third, you really need to read a book about Biblical government.

The State can kiss my asterisks.

Dear Samuel,

Your behavior here leads me to ask whether you've ever posted comments on a blog before? It's not the best form to demand a blog owner respond to your accusations, answer your questions, or deny he "fully and completely supports" everything written by this or that commenter.

If I have something to say, I sign it and post it. If someone else has something to say, they do the same. Looking at the signatures will help you know who is and isn't speaking. If it's still confusing, take you and me for an example. Just because you post comments on this blog doesn't mean you "fully and completely support" everything I've written here.

I hope this clarifies things for you.

Thank you all for responding to my comments, even when your response has not been requested. It has given me a better sense of who you are and how you argue.

Tim,

Questioning my blog interaction experience is not an answer to my question, especially when you don't seem to grasp the nature of blogs yourself. If you don't want people to question you, don't allow comments, and reformat your blog to come more in line with the format of an opinion article in a publication and post letters to the editor. Your rules do not govern my rules of conversation or to whom I respond.

Second, you comment hastily. You need to put more time and effort into your responses so you do not have to constantly re-edit yourself by going back and changing your previous comment.

Third, I hope you believe me when I say that I have not intentionally accused you of eisegesis, merely asked you to provide exegesis explaining how you arrived at your conclusions. I have also not condemned you as some have said. I hope you will accept my apology for any ill-written statement that caused you to infer such meaning. I'm sorry if my words were unclear.

After studying your and your compatriots' form and method of argument, it saddens me to say I have come to the conclusion that you three are not open to discussion or even to the possibility that you may be wrong. I hope that your interpretations bring you and those around you joy. I will not provide any more comment on your blog as it will inevitably, as Amy put it so eloquently, "fall on deaf ears." Had you been more welcoming and open to discussion, I would have gladly debated you. Unfortunately, I feel none of my questions or challenges were honestly or adequately answered, nor even entertained.

This is my last visit to your site and I just wanted to clear those things up. Be assured that you, Mark, and Bret all have my best wishes and are in my prayers. If you (Tim) have any concerns you wish to discuss, you have my email.

God be with you.

S.D.

"I hope you will accept my apology for any ill-written statement that caused you to infer such meaning. I'm sorry if my words were unclear."

Samuel, perhaps you wrote them too hastily. Someone once said not to do that.

The truly laughable thing is that people think government funding reduces the number of abortions. Given all the money we've blown since the Great Society, what leads us to believe that? Trillions of dollars of other people's money spent, and yet still a million+ abortions a year. The reason for this is that there isn't a fixed market. When you subsidize something, you get more of it... more people find it possible to chew up those dollars w/out doing productive work and then along comes the inconvenience of a pregnancy...

How far behind, say, Gordon Conwell, is Covenant?

"Think the Third Reich, people, and ask yourself whether we've learned anything--anything at all--from the Holocaust?"

You should talk to one of the regular contributors to your blog (Reverend Bret McAtee) about that. I'm sure he can explain to you how the Holocaust is pretty much a big hoax.