Calvinism, Christian Love, Church Bandwagon, Disturbing Trends, Doctrine as Idol, J.D. Hall, Spiritual Bullies, Troubling Tweets

Who is @Rhology? What are #pulpiteers? How Do They Function?


Alan Maricle aka @Rhology defends and imitates J.D. Hall’s (aka @pulpitandpen) bad behavior on Twitter.


Admin note:  I’m going to take the easy route here and jump into a situation to discuss it without giving a lot of background. However, if you want to know the background of this story, please visit Wartburg Watch blog and read Dee’s excellent article, JD Hall and Friends: “Theological Thuggery” and Braxton Caner’s Suicide.

Ok, the brief background to this story is concerning J.D. Hall, the lead pastor at Fellowship Baptist Church in Sidney, Montana. He maintains a blog, does frequent podcasts, and has an online presence on Twitter as @PulpitandPen. J.D. Hall has been going after Ergun Caner on Twitter for quite some time. It was when he started tweeting Caner’s 15-yr old son, Braxton, that it crossed the line for me. I saw the behavior as highly inappropriate.

Late in July, Braxton Caner committed suicide. The blogosphere and those who have been following this story on Twitter have been responding to this situation, calling Hall’s twitter behavior as bullying and saying that the tweets could have contributed to his suicide. There has been media outrage about this. And rightly so.

Last night, I woke up in the middle of the night and shouldn’t have looked at my phone, but when I did, I saw that @Rhology had responded to a tweet of mine.  Earlier in the day, I had responded to this.


Screen Shot 2014-08-06 at 8.58.37 AM


Well, now at nearly 3AM my time, he was engaging me.  I responded a few times and realized it was futile. You can find that conversation here on a Storify I created:

@Rhology, a #pulpiteers, and defender of J.D. Hall shows us what his kind of Christian love looks like


This is a good sampling of what @Rhology is like and how he interacts with people on Twitter.


Who is @Rhology?

I found his name listed at J.D. Hall’s blog site, Pulpit and Pen:

Alan Maricle is an abolitionist living in Oklahoma, and blogs at  Abolish Human Abortion and Rhoblogy.

A quick Google search showed that he is an abortion protestor and has been named in the news. In that article he is shown protesting outside a high school. I’ve never heard of abortion protestors outside of high schools.  In this article, he is protesting at Satanic Exorcism Ritual at Oklahoma City’s Civic Center.

But it is his online dialogue, how he debates, and who he defends which disturb me the most.

It’s important to note that J.D. Hall has a group of friends, called #pulpiteers (taken from Hall’s Twitter name and blog name, @pulpitand pen and Pulpit and Pen, respectively) whom he refers to on his tweets.  I’ll explain.

Twitter 101


For those new or unfamiliar with Twitter, let me explain a bit because it’s important to understand how this social media is being used by J.D. Hall and his group.

On Twitter, everybody has their own “handle.”  Mine is @DefendtheSheep. The @ sign identifies a Twitter user. There are also # – hashtags.

A while back, I organized a group and the social media guru in the group decided to use the hashtag #whowouldJesusSue (this was to bring social media attention to Alex Grenier’s lawsuit by his pastor and father, Bob Grenier of Calvary Chapel Visalia). People tweeting about this story included the hashtag #whowouldJesusSue. We’ve seen conferences identified by hashtags. Let’s say Southern Baptist Conference wants to coordinate a Twitter hashtag for an upcoming conference. They might announce #SBC2014 as the hashtag. The cool feature about hashtags is you can click on the hashtag because it is a hyperlink and see all other tweets that include the specific hashtag. When I clicked on  #whowouldJesusSue hashtag, I could see all of the tweets and people involved in helping this cause. I was able to find other like-minded individuals who were supportive of the cause and connect with them. It’s a very handy feature on Twitter.

So, J.D. Hall, has essentially created a group of his buddies that he refers to as #pulpiteers. He includes the hashtag in his tweets and when his friends tweet, they also include it. They can quickly click on the hashtag to see what their group is tweeting about.

Clicking on this #pulpiteers link, you will see all of the tweets that have the hashtag #pulpiteers. Right now, there is a loud response to J.D. Hall and the #pulpiteer’s behavior and so people who are upset at them are also using the hashtag.  If you scroll down, you will see what it used to be like with primarily JD Hall and his buddies using the hashtag.

#pulpiteers Gang Mentality

When you look at those who identify with the #pulpiteers hash tag, they are essentially saying, “I am one of them,” “I am choosing to wear the label,” and “I align myself with JD Hall and his message.”

I was thinking about this. Isn’t this what we see with teenage gangs who wear certain clothing, i.e., certain colored bandana, a certain kind of hat, etc?  I hate to say it, but it looks obvious to me that this group is functioning as a gang would. They wear their label proudly and behave just like a street gang, but instead of using real weapons, they use God and scripture as a weapon.

J.D. Hall is the gang leader and the #pulpiteers will fight to the figural death defending their hero leader or also one another. They use Christianese talk, quote Scripture, talk about love, but their behavior completely discounts everything they say. So many people are picking up on it and in fact, a UK blog site, the freethinker – which looks to be an atheist blog site, was the first to cover the story connecting J.D. Hall with the suicide of Braxton Caner, The suicide of a preacher’s kid.

The following Twitter conversation is a prime example of a pulpiteer defending another pulpiteer.  Dustin Germain is part of that group. He mans J.D. Hall’s website and is the one who made the choice to pull down the article J.D. Hall posted after the online dialogue. (In the post, Hall defended himself, and later added some sort of apology, but not really an apology as far as I’m concerned. The article can be found in Google’s cache.)  Anyway, here is an example of Dustin Germain aka @paperhymn coming to the defense of Alan Maricle aka @Rhology who is coming to the defense of J.D. Hall. His comment is at the bottom of the tweet thread.


Screen Shot 2014-08-06 at 8.38.58 AM


These gangsters are deluded. They have made up their own religion where love means gang-like badgering and bullying and calling people to repent.  This is not the 1 Corinthians 13 love I see in the Bible. This is not kindness that brings people to repentance.

Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? Romans 2:4


Updated to add this image about #pulpiteers. Special thanks to Kay who provided the info:


Related link:  Michael Newnham of Phoenix Preacher, The Rise and Fall of J.D. Hall




265 thoughts on “Who is @Rhology? What are #pulpiteers? How Do They Function?”

  1. Mark,

    In my opinion, Mark, yes, good. Now he will see what it is like. People are always saying that “no one understands unless you’ve been thru it yourself”, right? Well, he is going through it, and now he gets a chance to understand. Good.



  2. Ok, I found it:

    Texas Penal Code Sec. 33.07. Online Harassment

    (a) A person commits an offense if the person uses the name or persona of
    another person to create a web page on or to post one or more messages on a commercial social networking site:

    (1) without obtaining the other person’s consent; and

    (2) with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate, or threaten any person.

    (b) A person commits an offense if the person sends an electronic mail, instant message, text message, or similar communication that references a name,
    domain address, phone number, or other item of identifying information belonging to any person:

    (1) without obtaining the other person’s consent;

    (2) with the intent to cause a recipient of the communication to reasonably
    believe that the other person authorized or transmitted the communication; and

    (3) with the intent to harm or defraud any person.

    (c) An offense under Subsection (a) is a felony of the third degree.

    An offense under Subsection (b) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the actor commits the offense with the intent to solicit a response by emergency personnel.

    Reading this legal definition, do you think he broke the law?


  3. JA,

    Your key word, “think”, as in, Yes, I think, or believe that he broke the law. But as you rightly note, only a judge can determine that. But based on what I read, yes, that is what I believe.



  4. This bunch has had some twitter trouble before with all the fake accounts they have created. Here is a post that would fit 2(b) of the online harassment code and is probably why his account was shut down by Twitter. (Lumpy Peter was an account created to jab at Peter Lumpkins and it appears it is a pulpiteer creation given all the people it interacts with.)

    Lumpy Peter ‏@GeorgiaHoot Feb 14
    @PastorJChester This time they’re claiming harassment because I included their email addresses which are publicly listed on their website.

    No problem – they just create a new account:

    Traditional Fool @DoubleGAHoot · 2h
    Tomorrow a supposed man of God will stand in a pulpit in Knoxville and claim to stand for the Truth after making outrageous lies all weekend


  5. @ Ed:

    I’m not saying it’s impossible that he broke the cyberbullying laws. I’m saying it’s impossible that he committed the legal crime of murder. I have explained this to you multiple times on this thread and yet you insist on conflating those two things (cyberbullying and murder). I’m not saying this because I’m afraid of a lawsuit, I’m saying this for the sake of honesty and legal clarity. J. D. Hall did NOT murder Braxton Caner in any legal sense of the word and a charge of murder WILL NOT stand in court. A charge of cyberbullying? You might have a shot at that. But like JA said, you will have to wait and see what the court says.

    And as you can see by the exchange you’re now having with JA, you may not think defamation is a big deal, but it is for bloggers. Like I said, legalities are important.

    This will be my last reply to you. Please do not interact with me further about this. Goodbye.


  6. I agree with Hester there is no legal definition of murder here and it is not wise to say such. I can understand someone making the point that Jesus said hating someone is the same as murder in your heart. But that is to convict ourselves. Not each other.

    However, JD Hall and company maintain their methods of rebuking and harassing are actually “love” in calling out what they decide is sin.

    The cyberbullying is another thing altogether. The age difference is a huge factor and not the first time they have targeted someone underage from what I gather as other incidents are spoken about. I was aware of all the fake accounts and the drive bys linking to those accounts. But, I cannot for the life of me figure out how Wade can declare it was not bullying.


  7. Hester,

    This is a respectful reply, Hester.

    If you look at my very first comment to you, you will notice that my “opinion” was NOT based on criminal carnal law, but sinful spiritual law.

    But somehow we, both you and I, somehow got caught up in criminal carnal law. I never meant to imply the word murder to criminal carnal law, but apparently that is where it went. I only meant to imply that I “think” that he is culpable, in some sort of capacity.

    And, you now seem to acknowledge, finally, that maybe, just maybe, he might have broken a criminal carnal law of some sort, i.e. cyberbully. But you refused to acknowledge that earlier on. You only said that it was creepy, etc. Being creepy isn’t against the law.




  8. Hester,

    You indicated to not being a Calvinist. Reformed or Puritans or something else of something I’ve not mentioned are avoiding the Neo-Calvinist label, typically however they all embrace some or all TULIP and the Doctrine and Methodology is very similar.

    You are being cryptic


  9. Hester is not being cryptic. I think she’s trying to stay focused on the conversation at hand — a conversation that has evoked VERY strong emotions and opinions.

    I have to admit, agnosticism looks much more peaceful right now.


  10. Mark,

    I am tempted to concede that the T in TULIP is correct, though only as applied to those who subscribe to the doctrine of T. On reflection, however, I am satisfied that many or even most 5 pointers may be counted as amongst members of the Body of Christ, however misguided I may think them in their theology. If even 5 pointers may be so incorporated into the Body, then not even the doctrine of T can be to any extent correct, since being truly T (as defined by TULIP) logically excludes any possibility of being redeemed.

    As to whether Hester does or does not subscribe to any or all points of the TULIP pentagram, I agree that the question is irrelevant to the discussions in which she is engaged. Not that I think the questions you raise about TULIP are unimportant in other contexts.


  11. Gary,

    For years the local Presbyterian seminary was one of my clients. They subscribe to TULIP officially but you would never know it. They went the social justice route instead of the “doctrine over people” route and were great people to deal with.

    From my study (and this is just my opinion) the current Neo Cal movement is more like Calvin’s Geneva in method than what passed for Calvinism after the Puritans. I think that is what scares people the most. The authoritarianism. The pastor as your Holy Spirit, church membership covenants, redemption groups, etc, etc.

    It is like pew sitters are slowly giving up their freedoms and rights to think for themselves. It is scary.


  12. Hester mentioned the difference in moderating between TWW and SSB at Wartburg Watch site and I thought it would be good to copy my comment to her here. I hope some will find it helpful and explain why/how I moderate the way I do:

    Hester wrote:

    I had an extended, serious argument yesterday with someone at another blog about whether Hall murdered Braxton. Some people are taking this way too far. I am SO GLAD Dee took the measures she did in this instance.


    Moderating is a tough job. Sometimes it’s just not fun. A couple of things to consider when comparing TWW and SSB.

    1) Dee rocks at moderating. She’s taught me a lot.

    2) This current article went viral and likely has brought many new people to TWW, some unfamiliar with the way things roll here. Dee was inundated with well over 500 comments on the first day. It was important for her to lay the ground rules.

    3) My article discussing Hall was not a big one – it was mainly a post to keep people abreast of what was going on, and it was mostly the regulars commenting, except for a few from the #pulpiteer group.

    4) I greatly value freedom of expression. I’m careful about what I allow and don’t allow and I think about my lawsuit quite a bit when determining whether comments remain or not.

    5) If you think back on the thread, there were 2 issues going on: one was Ed discussing “hate in your heart = murder” in connection with Hall’s behavior, the other was on the legal aspect of cyber bullying. I dealt with each issue differently based on my legal experience.

    6) In the first hate = murder issue, Ed was looking at Hall’s behavior and judging his behavior to be hateful and then using Jesus’ words about someone who has hatred in his heart is like a murderer. I haven’t gone back, but I don’t think I told Ed to cool it down on that topic even though it is very strong wording.

    Ed was challenging us to think of how Jesus would respond to Hall’s behavior which he judged to be hateful. He’s coming from the spiritual side of things, not the legal side of “murder.”

    6) I did, however, jump into the conversation when it was said as a matter of fact that Hall’s behavior was cyber bullying. I challenged him on that and said that he couldn’t legitimately say that because he is not one who gets to interpret law.

    Ok, so why did I not come down on the “murderer” part even though those words were stronger? Because he was discussing specific scripture. I know from my lawsuit that discussions about interpreting scripture, spirituality, religious practices are all part of the religious autonomy rule and the courts won’t touch it. Now someone could hand pick a phrase from Ed’s comment and file a defamation lawsuit (as my pastor did), but any decent attorney (my pastor did not have a decent attorney) would look at the context and it is clear that he was discussing the issue based on a Biblical passage. The courts will not touch Biblical interpretation and settle spiritual disputes.

    However, when he was talking about Hall being a cyber bullying, it crossed over into civil law, not spiritual law. That’s why I told him to drop it a few notches (and he did).

    So, it may have appeared that I was not holding a tight ship, however, I was allowing discussion based on my personal experience of being in a defamation lawsuit and knowing what courts are looking at and will throw out.

    This was part of my lawsuit and might help when looking at how the court looks at lawsuits involving religious disputes:

    While it is true that Pastor is a member of the clergy and that is his “profession,” he cannot sue lay persons for remarks he finds offensive about his pastoral techniques or teachings which intrude on religious beliefs of the speaker. Clergy cannot sue attendees or congregants for spiritual disagreements or critiques relating to performance of clerical/pastoral duties. Such matters are within the church autonomy doctrine.

    Subjecting lay members liable for freely speaking about their confessor/counselor would interfere with their protected rights of religious conviction. No matter how offensive or heated the religious dispute or subjective the criticism of the pastoral conduct.


    Click to access 2012-05-01-Smith%20Memo%20in%20Support%20of%20Special%20Motions%20to%20Strike%20regarding%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf


  13. Anyone can sue anyone for anything if they can find a lawyer to pursue the matter, and it seems that judges are hearing most of everything these days. What is moral isn’t the same as what is legal. It’s actually very courageous of Julie Anne to allow some of these discussions, considering what she’s been through.

    When I started blogging, there was an active legal charge that had been filed against someone. My husband and I approached the matter as though we could be sued if we discussed similar matters online and whether I should use my name or not. I consider whether I’m willing to go to court on a matter whenever I post anything. This is a consideration that one must have for a blog host when posting anything potentially libelous on someone else’s venue. And even soliciting the owner’s permission can become a painful matter. You can easily become the personal scapegoat should trouble arise, making you wish you’d documented/recorded every exchange you’d had with the owner of the venue.

    We live in a world that is always changing, and you can sue anybody for anything. I’m of the opinion that any other perspective is reckless.


  14. That’s just it, Cindy. My pastor’s attorney was stupid for taking the lawsuit, but guess what, I’m sure that attorney still got paid even though he lost the case.

    So you’re right, I do open myself up for risk and I try to minimize it based on the knowledge I got from my case.

    I don’t know if I’ve ever said this before, but there were attorneys who told me that my pastor’s attorney could have gotten in some sort of trouble in “attorneyland” for taking his defamation case since the evidence was so clearly lacking.


  15. Julie Anne,

    Thank you for that post. I was indeed trying to focus on the spiritual aspect, until I brought in the cyber bully stuff.

    As you may remember, in the beginning, I was unsure at what great input that I could contribute to your blog, seeing how that I have never been spiritually abused.

    I’ve been put in my place before. I don’t mind. I can take it. I submit!!! (Oh, did I say that?)

    The only thing that I could come up with was to present scripture. That scripture is to uplift, to edify the church, and the abused. Not to brow beat, or condemn them. But we do have knowledge of what is good and evil. There is only two sides. Good. Or Evil.

    Spiritual is always greater than the carnal. But we live in a carnal world. The carnal is yet temporary. I focus on what is eternal.

    Did JD Hall do what is good? I only want people to think. To think spiritual. To think good. To focus on what is above. There is where your treasure is.

    In no way do I wish to test the reality of a defamation lawsuit.

    God Bless!

    Ed Chapman


  16. Ed,

    If you were a flyby, you’d have been banned 🙂

    But I get where you are coming from and understand your zeal. It doesn’t hurt that we had pizza and beer together and great conversation a while back – haha.

    Your heart is in the right place in trying to protect/defend the abused. thanks!


  17. Ed,

    The end result of abuse may very well be justice and retribution. But to the abused the scar and pain vs. justice and retribution may not always remedy the damage already done.

    On numerous occasions I have challenged JD’s, Pulpiteers and John Carpenter’s toxic Methodology, even so much as refer them to the Holy Spirit for guidance rather than rely on their repetitive heavy-handed predatory tactics..

    Even if JD receives what he dished out it won’t change the loss or pain people are feeling that was caused by him his Pulpiteers or John Carpenter.

    There is nothing good about JD receiving what he dished out, because it won’t replace Braxton.


  18. No problem, Mark. I forgive you. This stuff is so emotional and intense. You all would laugh at me if you saw how I attempt to comment to someone and replace the comment even 5 times before settling on something that is appropriate to post. Sometimes I have to walk just shut it down and come back after I’ve calmed down.


  19. Gary,
    Thanks for your thoughts.

    Abuse happens differently and in my case it was by someone who denied being a Calvinist while embracing all 5 Points of TULIP.

    Unfortunately, I tend to jump into the middle of things when the slightest hint of Calvinism is brought up, even in an off-topic situation..

    In my case if someone who denies being a Calvinist, but won’t admit to embracing TULIP they aren’t necessarily being straight up, which is their right.


  20. Mark,

    Is toxic good, or evil? Is predatory good, or evil? Is justice good, or evil?

    Does God believe in carnal justice? If so, what kind of justice? I agree, no amount of justice will bring the dead back to life, but does that negate out justice? I agree, do not pay back evil for evil. That is, if you agree that what JD Hall did was evil.

    Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

    JD Hall has done unto others.

    God gives warning, Judge not lest ye be judged.

    Matthew 7:2 (NIVr)
    You will be judged in the same way you judge others. You will be measured in the same way you measure others.

    He brought this upon himself. Now he is finding out that he needs protection, police protection. Why? This is his own doing.



  21. “He brought this upon himself. Now he is finding out that he needs protection, police protection. Why? This is his own doing.”

    I would hold off on that one. After watching their methods and tactics over the last few years and knowing they tend to lean toward the “Rahab lies” are for the Glory of God in their quest to “downgrade” evil sinners, I not buying yet. They are known for their fake accounts and planting information to influence opinions. it can take a while to figure it out though. they are good at it the social media game. JD has shown no serious sorrow, communicated a grudging agreement to leave Caner alone and has made himself out to be the real victim in the last CP article.


  22. Ed,

    Not sure if he will ever feel what its like. But it still won’t bring back Braxton.

    But I get where you are coming from.


  23. Mark, I think no consequences only embolden more abuse and bullying from not only him but other quarters in Christendom. Caner lost his big job but it still was not enough for them. He had to be ruined. Ironically, they have not had the same problem with Mahaney or Driscoll over the last few years.


  24. “I have to admit, agnosticism looks much more peaceful right now.”

    Sure does. I sometimes pretend to myself to be an agnostic, or an atheist (while maintaining my relationship with Jesus, which makes no sense), for a day, when I need peace and relief from the pressure and turmoil that is modern Christianity.


  25. Lydia,

    I’d love you to read this. Reason: JD Hall had consistantly asked what bible book, chapter and verse forbids him from engaging Caners son. He also asks what he has to repent from several times, too.

    Well…here it is:

    Everyone should read this!

    See if Peter Lumpkins would like this on his post. I can’t post on SBC. I was banned long ago…not by Peter, but by someone else.

    Peter’s Post:



  26. Lydia,

    Even if Pulpit and Pen Blog no-longer exist and JD’s radio show ends and JD stops using twitter and he stops repetitively reminding his church how unworthy they are, all of which may be a blow to his ego, it won’t bring back Braxton.
    (and hopefully all these things will come to pass, in order for him to stop verbally abusing and preying on people)

    I guess I’m more in a fog by what is transpiring and whether or not JD endures what he has dished out is of not delight to me either way, I guess I have become either numb or callous.

    If it is determined that laws have been broken then I want the criminal justice system to do their job.

    I just want the abuse to stop, which is good.


  27. Mark,

    Lydia had mentioned the word “consequences”. Sin has consequences. In the following there is a consequence for meddling. God warned him to not interfere, or else:

    2 Chronicles 35:21-24

    But Neco sent messengers to him, saying, “What have we to do with each other, O King of Judah? I am not coming against you today but against the house with which I am at war, and God has ordered me to hurry. Stop for your own sake from interfering with God who is with me, so that He will not destroy you.” However, Josiah would not turn away from him, but disguised himself in order to make war with him; nor did he listen to the words of Neco from the mouth of God, but came to make war on the plain of Megiddo. The archers shot King Josiah, and the king said to his servants, “Take me away, for I am badly wounded.” read more.So his servants took him out of the chariot and carried him in the second chariot which he had, and brought him to Jerusalem where he died and was buried in the tombs of his fathers. All Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah.

    Somethin Bad!



  28. Ed, she is right. The thing with JD and his minions though is he makes it his business to call out other “Christians”. That is his “downgrade” focus. THAT is what his “ministry” is all about. He is in a war with other Christians he thinks are heretical or wrong.

    My guess is that if most people who are defending him, but not in that movement directly, read a lot of his stuff they would be embarrassed. Including Wade. I am thinking most went directly to the twitter exchange and that was it. I thought that was bad enough all by itself because he is a grown man and pastor….. but am also aware of all the other hate that they have spewed on folks for years and their authoritarian bent. They are also not aware of all the fake accounts used against people, etc.

    I am guessing, though. Maybe not. Maybe this is the new normal and if you hated Caner then whatever goes? These days nothing surprises me when it comes to Christendom. I have seen too much.

    I don’t think he will stop. I think he will lay low for a while because we all need money to live on. But, It is who he is and what his ministry is about. Just like James White is about debating pro Calvinism. It is what they know and do. To them it is Christianity and it pleases God.


  29. Lydia,

    Ya, James White would debate the “exe-Jesus” about being a busy body, putting it in Greek historical context, blah, blah, blah, instead of seeing it for what it is.

    And, what it is, is equated to, ya know, that word that people is so afraid to say? That M word. 1 Peter 4:15.



  30. JD Hall and his minions act feral. My father who was southern Baptist acted like them, it gives them pleasure, amusement, and satisfaction to cause others pain.


  31. My guess is that if most people who are defending him, but not in that movement directly, read a lot of his stuff they would be embarrassed. Including Wade. I am thinking most went directly to the twitter exchange and that was it.

    Lydia, have you been in my head? Stay tuned.


  32. JD Hall and his minions act feral. My father who was southern Baptist acted like them, it gives them pleasure, amusement, and satisfaction to cause others pain.

    I’m curious about this, Guest. When we live with our parents, they set our “norms” for us. At what point did you decide to leave that “norm” and decide for yourself that your father was acting inappropriately?


  33. I’m not at all sure that the people spoken about in the blog would understand or get it at all. They would probably feel they are doing what God had for them to do. Make war with others.


  34. Kay,

    I’m about 1/2 way done with the 36 minute audio. So far, he seems to be justifying this. We will see what the rest of it states, but so far he seems to be glorifying himself, rather than God. Lots of “I” statements, and “My” statements. He seems to think that it is his job to fight. At one point he states that he was fired for being a whistle blower. Ahhh, now we are getting somewhere. He’s a disgruntled ex-employee.

    Well…I gotta take a break from listening to him for a moment. He’s too narcissistic so far.



  35. Well, he said a few things he definitely should have said, he said a few things that left me thinking, “Why would you say that?”, and then he left some important things unsaid.

    In particular, he never he said he shouldn’t have interacted with Braxton on Twitter. He said, instead, that he did it with the wrong spirit.

    Huh?! I don’t get it. So, it would’ve been ok to do that if it were approached differently? How about leave a 15-year old kid out of the whole thing?

    Talk is cheap, though. He claims that things will be different. We’ll see if (a) he truly does behave differently from now on, and (b) he reigns in his pulpiteers to do the same. I’m hopeful it will cause change, but I’m very skeptical.


  36. Ed, He took a lot of his CV info offline because folks were pointing out the holes in it and problems with his timeline. I cannot remember the details but it went along the lines of something like, “successful church planter at age 18” or something like that. And, “award winning entrepreneur in marketing by age 26” or something like that. Cannot remember details but it was quite incredible.

    And that would be another point about these guys. You have to screen shot everything, follow every thing very closely, etc. Who wants to do that? They do. That is THEIR ministry.


  37. “In particular, he never he said he shouldn’t have interacted with Braxton on Twitter. He said, instead, that he did it with the wrong spirit. ”

    He cannot say it was “wrong” in totality because that would negate his “downgrade” calling out ministry. Give an inch, remember? His defenders, the ones who really do not know that much about him, have no real clue what they are dealing with.

    And this is why even though I had a serious problem with Caner years ago, about a year into it, I was appalled at where it was going. I wanted no part of it. It reminded of the tactics of Doug Phillips and those guys.


  38. I wanted to chime in about Chris Rosebrough’s recent show…the same one that’s already been mentioned. I didn’t transcript it word-for-word, so you might want to listen. It’s only about a 15 minute portion of his show where he discusses this situation.

    Here are my notes on what I thought was a particularly interesting part. Rosebrough (CR) is obviously using this tragic situation to further his own agenda.

    In the show, CR says there are “two main camps in the SBC….the Arminian/Palegian and Monergist/Reformed” (sorry for any misspellings). Says there is an “internal feud” in the SBC.

    Also, CR says the Armenians/Palegians, who are defenders of Caner, are taking the exploiting Braxton’s suicide to smear the character of Jordan Hall.


  39. Kay, I have heard it before but am always wondering why he talks about “millions” going through his hands, award winning, breaking records, etc but never the name or type of business. It has been a mystery. The dates for the college stuff are easy enough and I graduated HS early, too, and started college before 18, So I get that part. but the timing of taking it down and then responding are curious. JD can question others but cannot be questioned himself without it being a sin.


  40. Darlene,

    Pretty sad stuff.

    In Chris Rosenboroughs world, calling people Pelagian is an insult. It means they are heretics. Arminians are tolerable. They are Calvin-lite. I first came across the Pelagian insult a few years back so I started to see what I could find. You can find nothing written by him because it was all destroyed so you have to glean it from the various council stuff that deemed him a heretic. Augustine deemed him a heretic. From what I could glean, I agree with Pelagius more than Augustine! Pelagius basically thought the determinism was not Christianity. And because of that he believed man had the ability to decide for Christ or not and the ability to live a holy lilfe. He also believed that people could have kept the law if they wanted to. (I agree with that, btw, because I cannot fathom a God who would make laws He knew His people “could NOT” keep. Can you imagine doing that to YOUR children? But many believe God did just that to people)

    That is my take on it anyway.


  41. Darlene,

    That’s is about the jist of it. Sounds like politics, huh? But it’s not just politics. It’s nasty war of words.

    Whenever I debate a Calvinist, or as they like to call themselves, reformed, they accuse me of being a pelican, or whatever they call it. Or, they accuse me of being an artesian, or whatever they call it. I have no idea why they only think that there are only those two choices. Most people that I know have no clue as to what those are.

    But yes, the SBC is having serious problems attempting to integrate Calvinism beliefs with the Baptists, many of which either do not believe in Calvinism, or are ignorant of what Calvinists believe. And it is causing much conflict.



  42. Ed,
    I was raised a Baptist, not SBC, Missionary Baptist that came out of SBC. I’m told because the SBC was allowing women preachers. There could be more to that story, but I was too young at that time to care and didn’t ask later on. Depending on who the preacher was at the time, I had no problem with the teachings of the MBA. I’m not sure if the MBA even exists anymore. When trying to find a local church in that association I couldn’t find one closer than 60 miles away.

    The whole Calvanist/ Arminian thing was never an issue or brought up. Until a few years ago I couldn’t have told you who believed what. We were advised not to listen to Christian Radio or ever go into a Catholic church for any reason. The whole “wind of doctrine” thing could mess with your thinkin’. There were more southerners in the church than were from MI.

    The church I attend now doesn’t claim either Calvanism or Arminian (spelling??). They look to the Bible and simply believe the Gospel. Anything outside of that is up for debate.

    The way it is looking to me. The SBC could have another division. Calvanism is not going to go over with a lot of true Southern Baptists. Drive through TX and you can’t drive through a small town without finding a small Southern Baptist church. There are the mega churches in Houston and the like. But there are many small churches with the old town ways.



  43. Brenda, “The church I attend now doesn’t claim either Calvanism or Arminian (spelling??). They look to the Bible and simply believe the Gospel. Anything outside of that is up for debate.”

    As you may notice, I make fun of the word Arminian, and that other one, I can’t remember.  I call it Artesian, and Pelican.  That’s just out of sarcasm, tho.  Most everyone that I personally know that are Christians have no clue what those people ever believed, nor do they even care.  How can I be accused of being either of those two when I have no clue as to what they even believe?

    What you said above is exactly how I know Christianity.  We all (non-Calvinists) believe the gospel just the same way, and we know that the things that we debate together is not going to affect our standing with God.  We see the debate as fun, and informative.  Others, such as Calvinism see the debate as divisive, and blasphemous on our part if we disagree, hence the sin of rebellion, punishable with church discipline.

    I think it was Mark, here on the blog, that first informed me about a year ago or so about the stealth tactics of the Calvinists to infiltrate and take over the Baptist church’s.  At first, I was skeptical about that.  But then I found a specific Baptist web site that had a step by step process of how to turn a Baptist church into a Calvinist Baptist church…in the stealth mode.  And based on those steps, it was going to be a long term process.  It had to be, because, as part of those procedures, they didn’t want to lose the congregation, so they slowly had to creep in Calvinist doctrines, so that no one would notice.

    Mark attended one of those church’s.  For a while he was blaming himself for staying for so long, because he knows the bible.  It was shortly after his testimony on Julie Anne’s blog that I discovered the SBC website…then I see Lydia posting there a lot, too.  I had a little chat with Peter Lumpkins, and he has absolutely no problem with the integration, although he disagrees with much of Calvinism, he still thinks it’s a good thing.  I totally disagree.  Everyone is supposed to be “like minded”, not all over the place. 

    I’m not a Baptist, or a Calvinist.  I’m just non-denomination.  It’s easier that way.  No politics.  The preacher reports, I decide.  I don’t want dead people deciding for me, i.e. conventions that happened some 400+ years ago that I didn’t attend, nor was I invited.  I wasn’t even invited to that Catholic meeting in 325 AD, either.  Why is it that dead people are making decisions for all further generations?  It reminds me of Al Gore when he began his global warming campaign.  The first words from his mouth was, “The debate is over!”.  

    In regards to Baptists, I remember the movie Blue Chips with Nick Nolte.  In the movie, he would meet the families of those who he was trying to recruit for his college basketball team.  When they would mention what church they go to, he would say, “I was raised a _________ (whatever the family said).  One father stated that he was a Baptist, and Nick said that he was raised Baptist.  The father pressed him on that and asked, “First Baptist, or Southern Baptist”, and luckily Nick said “Well, First Baptist, of course”, for which the Father said, “Well, good, cuz we don’t think that much of Southern Baptists around here.”




  44. I’m not a Baptist, or a Calvinist. I’m just non-denomination.

    That is where I am in this stage of life.The church I attend no longer has Baptist on their sign and were always independant anyways, never part of an association of any sort and were never going to be so it is now a Bible Church. I had pause about it at first, but have gotten over that through my un-brainwashing and independant reading and research.

    The preacher reports, I decide

    Yepper!! If I don’t agree or have questions about what is said, he hears about it. I sometimes think he doesn’t carry scripture deep enough and doesn’t mention that abuse is spoken of in scripture ever, so I do not hesitate to point it out. A couple of weeks ago he spoke on love. Big topic. Jesus has perfect love, without question I agree. Us humans have love as long as we are getting something in return, if not I’m moving on–didn’t agree. So I sent an article titled, ” I left him because I loved him.” That spoke of a different kind of love. The woman loved her man enough to not allow him to sin against her any longer even though she still loved him in spite of himself. (I can’t remember if it was from ACFJ or Leslie Vernick’s blogs.) With her away, he had to change his ways, at least against her. I belief that love is a choice in addition to a feeling. Others may not agree with me, they will say it is one or the other, but I am certainly not going to argue the point.


  45. Hi Ed,

    I may have mis-quoted in that is was my lack of biblical literacy that kept me from realizing my former Pastor was Stealth, making me and my wife vulnerable to his lengthy and deceptive abuse.

    Even after I left that church it took along time before God revealed to me this Pastor Sinning against the church


  46. Mark,

    Thank you for the clarification.  It’s been a while since we spoke of it, so I was trying to recollect it.




Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s