Let us now consider one area that I believe represents a double standard. An area that you either honestly do not see or that you do not know exists. This is the area of music. The past few years, in article after article, you have attacked so-called rock and roll music in the church. Yet student after student has told me, and I agree, that they cannot see any difference in the type of music that is played at
Crossfire and so-called rock and roll. Pick up any tape of Crossfire and listen to the beat, it all comes out the same. It boils down to a matter of definitions. Stryper and others are defined as "
rock," but ours is defined as "
gospel." Why can't we get back to basic honesty? If we are
going to use the flesh and music to win them, we are going to have to keep it up to keep them. When Steve Fatter is told to fire it up, or some such language, in a Sunday evening service, and all of a sudden guitars begin to make the same beat as "rock," and the song is sung six times over in order to work up a "
dead" (as you categorized them) congregation into some kind of emotional frenzy, or to induce them to dancing, even to the extreme of bringing out a young black student to teach us how to "
dance in the spirit," isn't this carrying a double standard a little too far? What would those who believe and practice "
interpretive dancing" and rock and rollers think if they had been here?
Our worship is no longer spontaneous, rather it is mostly induced and manipulative. The last few weeks should have been a time of sorrow, repentance, and mourning. Rather, when a "
mighty man" has fallen, we are given over to shouting the victory. What victory? What are we shouting about anyway? The devil has kicked our teeth down our throats, and has virtually taken over the visible church, and the last great bastion of defense has been greatly weakened, and we are shouting.
One final area I wish to cover is that of stewardship. A good steward is one who is accountable. It seems that there is little accountability here in regard to the outlandish spending that has been so apparent. Much of the rationale for the extrav..agant spending is that people with money will give when they see their money spent qualitatively; i.e., extravagantly. Is this not pursuing carnal means to reach the purse of carnal people? Have we come to the place where the end justifies the means? Should not a race track owner be struck with fear of God and conviction of sin, rather than feeling such a pity for the "
fallen" man of God that he gives him a million dollars? Should not Johnny Camp's special a little over a year ago at least have called for a self.. examination? It is an old adage that when someone lives in a glass house, they should not throw stones. I know it bothers you and makes you feel guilty when you see and hear so much criticism over your lavish lifestyle, while at the same time, you are asking others to give sacrificially. This has to be true, else you would not apologize so often and play down your home, watches, cars, etc. Why do you do it? You are too much a man of God, and know the word of God too well, not to know this is true. Wesley once said that if a man can afford, in essence, a $300 suit, then he can afford to buy a $100 suit and give the other $200 to the poor and needy. Did not Jesus teach this: "..take no thought for your life...what you shall put on .. ," "
where your treasure is there is your heart also," and John's statement to "
love not the world, neither the things that are in the world." Are the many warnings of Jesus and Paul that the riches of the world will cor..rupt the man of God no longer relevant in this materialistic and secularized world? Can we really condemn the prosperity message when we are living it? Brother Swaggart, I know that in your heart you see these things. I believe that one of the greatest causes of the present situation has stemmed from riches and fame, which engenders pride and leads to self-confidence, which is a result of inbred sin, and in turn, is one characteristic of the unsanctified Christian. This was exactly the cause of the demise of the Bakkers.
Brother Swaggart, if you really believe that this ministry is of God, then submit to the brethren in Springfield. Don't compromise everything that you have preached and stood for over the years. No man is expendable.You have to know this. There are hundreds of people who will stand by you. True, the ministry will decline, maybe go bankrupt. But who built it, you or God? If God built it, He will raise it up out of the rubble and make it greater than it ever was. Pride will be destroyed and true humility will reign. I mentioned earlier that when I came here, I came to spend the rest of my days here, if that was God's will. I still feel that way. Others on this faculty feel the same. However, under
the present circumstances, I cannot do so with conviction. I feel that to do so is to compromise everything that I have stood for. Just as I feel that you will be doing (compromising all you have preached) . But, whatever your decision, Brother Swaggart, I want you to know that I love you as a brother, and have spent 3 1/2 of the happiest years of my life here on this campus. I will be eternally grateful. Whatever your decision will be, my attitude will remain the same. Thank you so much for indulging yourself to this harsh criticism.
In his service,
XXXXXXXXX
Phil. 1:3-6
"I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine for you all making re..quest with joy, for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now; Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:"[/quote]
(* a reference to Don Brankel who preached a message at FWC about a week after Jimmy's "
I have sinned" sermon. In this message, Brankel's text was
Proverbs 28:13...
.He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy..
We all noticed Donnie seathing and turning red, though the message was not aimed at Jimmy. After the service Donnie slipped Brankel a note telling him that "
if he didn't like it at JSM he should leave".
brankel did just that. Jimmy, realizing that Brankel was one of the few draws he had left that would keep people interested in his ministry, asked Brankel to stay. Brankel refused. Jimmy replied, "
Wait. You don't know how much I'm going to pay you yet!" Brankel responded, "
I'm not for sale" and walked out the door.)