What is relevant is that I do not think he should have been kept in leadership period. Get over it. I do have a right state my position with out being hassled by you. I do not often get upset here on CF but your continual hassling of my statements it over the top. I am not quite sure why it is so important to you to take the side of the perpetrator and the church. You have a right to do that of course but as far as I can tell the wife did nothing wrong so why is she fair game. i asked this before and got NO answer then so don't really expect one now. Unsubscribing.
I have answered the question before , several times. What part of your question am I not understanding ?
post #26...
She gossiped about her husband and about Saddleback church.
The thing about gossip is that no formal criminal charges are filed and the accused party is not given due process.
post # 44
The criminal aspect of this situation was settled. She pushed for a greater penalty than what the law allows for her husband.
She has brought accusations against Saddleback church with zero evidence.
Saddleback church has not committed any crimes.
This man was convicted of crimes. Justice was served. The justice system did it's job. End of story.
But yet it isn't the end of the story...
Let's clarify the issue. What specific crimes was this man charged with ? What was the evidence of those crimes? What crimes was he convicted of ? And what is the penalty for those crimes ?
Next question. What specific crimes has Saddle back been charged with ? What is the evidence of those crimes ? What crimes has Saddle back been convicted of ? And what is the penalty for those crimes ?
from post # 52
She bore a grudge rather than loving her husband and rather than loving the people at Saddleback church and rather than loving the other people effected by her talebearing.
I classify this story as mainly gossip. Although I prefer the biblical word talebearer.
Notice that in the original context loving your neighbor as yourself is contrasted with bearing a grudge. Something being encouraged by some in this thread. Encouraging someone to bear a grudge does not lead to loving each other. That should be self evident.
The way I read it, Saddleback and this man are convenient for some who have grudges and an agenda to push.
My position on Saddleback is that if we have an issue to bring against them , then we should bring it in the right way.
Contact Saddleback or even make a public appeal for a higher moral standard. Another good idea. But in that appeal , there should be an appeal made to God's higher standard of justice , not our pet peeve issues that we take to wild extremes while ignoring other issues that s don't bother us so much.
post #53
This woman demanded that partiality be shown to her.
Well stated. Your questions bring out an important issue. Are we interested in living a higher standard of righteousness ? Because God's standard of righteousness applies to all without partiality.
post #97
She is acting in a haughty and prideful manner. Up on her high horse rather than humble and remorseful that she has brought shame upon the Christian community.
It sounds like they both are full of pride and don't even know enough to be ashamed of their poor testimony.
They both make the church look bad.
As for " hassling you "... We all can get frustrated when posting. My suggestion is to take a break and think about something more edifying. I get frustrated too. Take responsibility for your own actions and feelings. Don't make false accusations against me. The fact that you feel frustrated is not me hassling you. It is called having an argument and both parties in the exchange have feelings.
We have had a back and forth now for several rounds. It is a nasty accusation to make to accuse me of hassling you when you invited the discussion up until this point. Anyway , if you have your regrets for arguing and how that made you feel then use it as a growth experience. Consider the fact that usually both parties feel bad after a frustrating argument.
I asked you about your one post whether you were being sarcastic when you apologized that things about this subject bothered me. But it didn't feel like a real apology. It felt like a slam. You did not respond. As I said , everyone has feelings.
Anyway , you said you are very frustrated and unsubscribing. So I hope you are able to reestablish your peace of mind quickly. Being frustrated like that is a really bad feeling. I think most of us on this message board have felt that way , at times.
If you feel a need to confront me about things , then please p.m. me. I will hear you out.
Concerning your question.....People in churches make a lot of mistakes and commit a lot of sins. It bothers me more though when someone attacks the church and by extension attacks the Christian community. As though their situation and frustration is more important than anyone else.
The trouble with someone elevating their rights over others like this woman has done is that other people always get hurt. Hurting others by mistake in a fit of passion is more forgivable than a calculated action taken with no regard for others. I suppose that would be my biggest grievance with this woman.
I have been on here for several years now and have been pretty consistent about sticking up for ministries which are attacked and slandered. I have stuck up for Benny Hinn , Todd Bentley , John Kilpatrick , etc. Even ministries which I don't personally prefer , I still stand up for them.
The heresy hunters claim that it is necessary to harshly judge and condemn these ministries because their cause outweighs all other concerns.
This has been a recurring theme on more than one thread. People who attack ministries and other Christians whom they disagree with. I guess you have discovered one of my buttons.
It gets a little old and it does hurt bystanders like myself. It is frustrating and discouraging and not edifying.
Whatever happened to someone having a just cause that is proactive ? For example , why not set up a home to help pregnant women make better choices rather than protesting abortion clinics and in extreme cases even blowing up abortion clinics ? why not set up an adoption program ?
Mother Theresa became famous for her work to help the poor. She was not famous for railing against Christian ministries who didn't measure up in her eyes. She didn't incite anger at the churches for not doing enough to help the poor.
The people who have acted Christ like in the face of injustice are heroic. They shine the light of Jesus in an angry world.
Those who promote their own rights and parade their anger in front of the world are only witnessing of themselves. They are not a Christian witness since Christian means Christ like. Jesus was beat up too. In fact he was treated far worse than anyone ever in history. When he rebuked and corrected , it was not done out of self interest.
This woman took the low road. Of course she is not the only one who is giving a bad witness in the situation. That is obvious.
So far , the husband and the church have kept pretty quiet. the wife is the one who wanted to take her cause to the world. I find it inconceivable that people would support this woman in this.
It really is not doing the woman any favors either. People should be helping her to heal by letting go of her grudge and directing her energies in a more positive direction.
She has certainly done her part to pick a fight with the church and with her ex husband. Instead of leaving him in peace to move on with his life , she is baiting him in public slander of him and his church. If they responded in kind to her and trashed her name in the community as a liar , then she would have received even more wounds.
Bottom line. I find it tests my gullibility to expect me to support a cause which defines itself by attacking other people.
If this woman set up a program to help battered women or made her cause bringing reform by educating churches on how to better handle these types of situations , then she might be considered heroic. But all she has done is lash out and attack others. That is simply not the Christian way of doing things. That is just one more angry person slamming the church.
I don't support her cause because her cause is defined by hurting people. Does that clarify my answer to your question ?
As I said earlier , there is lots of blame to go around. Two flips sides of the same coin. A husband and wife who both want their way so badly that they will hurt others to get it.
Whenever she decides to set up a proactive cause defined by Christian values , then I will be supportive. When she starts speaking about God birthing something good out of this situation and starts making a difference for Christ , shining her light , then I will support her.
It is beyond ludicrous to expect people to classify what she is doing as a Christian witness.
By the way , your statement that you think the husband should have stepped down from his position at the church. I think that too. At least if we accept the information given at face value. Does he not have any shame for the problem his anger caused ? The honorable thing to do would have been for him to step aside. His Christian witness is tarnished by his actions.
As I said earlier in the thread, in order to have an intelligent discussion about the subject , people need to take certain things at face value. We give our opinions in that context , hopefully aware in the back of our minds that there are real people involved and that we really don't know the full story.
It is in that context that I give my opinion. And in that context that you give yours.
But your opinion about that was not really the problem here.
It is her willingness to hurt others to get her way and your support of those actions which sparked my argument with you.
The fact that she thinks publicly attacking the church is the right response to her disapproval of their choices is a red flag.
If you want to agree to disagree. Fine. It has been a frustrating experience on my end too.
In the future , a little validation of the point being made when someone says something would go a long way. It is possible to hold your own opinion and still hear the other person out. It helps to understand where the other person is coming from before deciding you disagree. That is advice that would help both of us to be less argumentative.
