For the record I have no idea who the author of the letter is and have no problem with not revealing the name on this forum.
I do disagree with you bolded statement above. He may not have intended to attack but he certainly did.
He initially starts with statements he has heard some preachers make which would be fair to discuss. As the letter moves along the accusations become more generalized.
By the second paragraph he is talking about "Ultra right wingers" in general, the term itself being obviously pejorative, and their inconsistencies. He continues in this vein through the rest of what you have posted.
By the final paragraph he is asking "Could it be that the very thing that ultra right wing preachers lack is true bible holiness? "
If this is not an attack on conservatism then please explain what that kind of attack would look like.
Again what part of the Fruit of the Spirit was he manifesting?
Probably the same fruit that ultra cons exhibit when they characterize all those who don't hold their "standards" as greasy-grace, charismatic, spineless preachers who won't stand for anything.
__________________ "Many people view their relationship with God like a "color by number" picture. It's easier to let someone else define the boundaries, tell them which blanks to fill in, and what color to use than it is for them to take a blank canvas and seek inspiration from the Source in order to paint their own masterpiece"
Probably the same fruit that ultra cons exhibit when they characterize all those who don't hold their "standards" as greasy-grace, charismatic, spineless preachers who won't stand for anything.
Probably so.........I HATE the broad brush in any circumstance.
*Not all ultra cons are mean spirited, and not all liberals are spineless, non-doctrine preaching equivocators.
*Not all foreigners are terrorists.
*Not all liberal Democrats are godless abortionists in favor of same sex marriage.
*Not all televangelists are money-grubbing extortionists, preying on the pocketbooks of the gullible and easily frightened television viewer.
*Not all lawyers are dishonest.
*Not all politicians are double-tongued.
Unfortunately, it's usually the radicals of any movement that define the movement in the minds of the observers, or should I say, create the stereotypes.
__________________ "Many people view their relationship with God like a "color by number" picture. It's easier to let someone else define the boundaries, tell them which blanks to fill in, and what color to use than it is for them to take a blank canvas and seek inspiration from the Source in order to paint their own masterpiece"
Probably so.........I HATE the broad brush in any circumstance.
*Not all ultra cons are mean spirited, and not all liberals are spineless, non-doctrine preaching equivocators.
*Not all foreigners are terrorists.
*Not all liberal Democrats are godless abortionists in favor of same sex marriage.
*Not all televangelists are money-grubbing extortionists, preying on the pocketbooks of the gullible and easily frightened television viewer.
*Not all lawyers are dishonest.
*Not all politicians are double-tongued.
Unfortunately, it's usually the radicals of any movement that define the movement in the minds of the observers, or should I say, create the stereotypes.
You aren't the current pastor of the church Rodney and Sis. Legg pastored are you? Is Roger named after his dad? If I am not mistaken Rodney's youngest brother was named Roger. In fact, I am almost sure his name was Roger.
Bro. Trellus an Sister Lorena Legg, Rodney's mom and dad were tremendous folks and were a great help to my dad when he pastored them.
No I am not the pastor there. Roger is named after his dad and a good preachers. ALL of the leggs can preach.
Probably the same fruit that ultra cons exhibit when they characterize all those who don't hold their "standards" as greasy-grace, charismatic, spineless preachers who won't stand for anything.
Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding................we have a winner, folks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I could have an ultra-con preach for me, but they would NEVER have me come preach for them. Once again, their acceptance of a liberal would mess up their whole "theosophy!"
I have no problem with folks who are far more strict than I am. The only problem is that the vast majority of them believe that their stands are not just good for them and their poeople...they believe that they are required...not just required to please God, but many times required for salvation.
And then many do the very same things the writer of the letter states with blatant hypocrisy. Certainly not all, but true UC's are that way by the very nature and, for the most part, accepted definition (at least here) of Ultra-Cons. It's called straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Other excesses are excused while preaching a strict "holiness" standard.
__________________
"Those who go after the "Sauls" among us often slay the Davids among us." Gene Edwards
There's no doubt that many of us moderates or even those who would be labeled "liberal" would seem dogmatic, biased and unkind by many because of the stand taken on many issues.
It really does no good to point the finger at anyone really; that's if we're going to be really fair and objective here, because it's all relative and subjective as to who is unreasonable and dogmatic, isn't it?
All of us draw lines at some point and set the bar at some level. It may be lower or higher than where others do but we all say, "I'll go this far and no further" at some point. And we all have areas and issues that we will NOT compromise in and are very intolerant regarding.
Just like the ultra-Cons.
__________________ Smiles & Blessings.... ~Felicity Welsh~ (surname courtesy of Jim Yohe)
As one who has attended Ultra Conservative and what some would call liberal churches, I have never seen what the author has described. I have been with Morton, Westberg, Booker, Godair, and others, and have found them to be good men. Did I agree on every issue, no, but they would discuss them in a civil manner.
Now, why was the author not willing to attach his name to the letter? Furthermore, if he is so upset with these practices, why not name names?
I have had a few ministers who have made me uneasy in the spirit. Some were conservative and some were liberal. I would say that the author of this dissertation will look back and regret the tone of this letter, at some point.
And your name is?????
Mine is Chuck Tatum. I live in Georgia. I am not affiliated with any organization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Phelps Probably so.........I HATE the broad brush in any circumstance.
*Not all ultra cons are mean spirited, and not all liberals are spineless, non-doctrine preaching equivocators.
*Not all foreigners are terrorists.
*Not all liberal Democrats are godless abortionists in favor of same sex marriage.
*Not all televangelists are money-grubbing extortionists, preying on the pocketbooks of the gullible and easily frightened television viewer.
*Not all lawyers are dishonest.
*Not all politicians are double-tongued.
Unfortunately, it's usually the radicals of any movement that define the movement in the minds of the observers, or should I say, create the stereotypes.
Linear Mode
