tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post2222278976151154136..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: T. D. Jakes (and the like) Part Two: thinking clearly about repentancePhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger94125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-4425544826941001812012-01-31T15:03:43.573-08:002012-01-31T15:03:43.573-08:00These two prescient posts sensitized listening to ...These two prescient posts sensitized listening to ER2 for anyone who read them.<br /><br />I know the following is an over-simplification, but I think it is a somewhat realistic assessment. I worked in mergers and acquisitions consulting for quite a while. Most of these don't turn out as planned. But they are carried out in exactly the way that this process has been conducted. Very senior and influential leaders on both sides script their messages, make pretty significant organizational decisions (and some personal concessions) and then use themselves as the shills for the new organization via media in a neutral setting (not in either legacy turf).<br /><br />This is not a doctrinal or theological discussion among these men and has not been from the beginning. It is an organizational decision that is being "sold" to the various stakeholders who can impact the future success of this new merger. It is almost clinically corporate in approach and execution.<br /><br />The various hindrances to success (intransigence against change, party spirit, LegacyCo partiotism, etc.) are relabeled with (as the textbooks say) negative characterizations: "personal agendas," "xenophobia," and, as in this case at this point, more potent ones like attributing lack of support to cliques, racism, retaining power, lack of vision, etc.<br /><br />The objectives from the start (DJPs first post pointing out the disconnect between what is happening vs what is being discussed) was (I believe) purely organizational, the ER2 event the sales job for the NewCo (post merger). No new info showed up, ambiguity was embraced as the safest way to retain both camps in the merger, and no new decisions were reached.<br /><br />This is so clinically merger-speak that it would be very surprising if consultants were not engaged (again, IMO) to provide council. The doctrinal issues are not really the issues (chasing these is irrelevant to the decision makers here), the decision to hold the event is not the issue, even the event itself is not the issue now -- it is all about accepting the new organizational alliance and demonizing or at least neutralizing centers of opposition. <br /><br />As in all M&A activities, there is no going back. They pulled the trigger on the NewCo and now they have no (easy) choice (though we always have choices) but to try to get the chips to lie as positively to the cause as possible. It is, like most M&As,unlikely to be successful, but it will, also like M&As, be very costly.C. T. Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03091864218423907942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-24722277182337918582012-01-25T10:29:01.276-08:002012-01-25T10:29:01.276-08:00Update: assuming that Trevin Wax's report is a...Update: assuming that <a href="http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2012/01/25/elephant-room-2-live-blog-session-4/" rel="nofollow">Trevin Wax's report</a> is accurate, it doesn't appear that any of these considerations had the least impact on the session. I could wish that someone with influence would have pressed these thoughts home effectively.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-52431989972360238612011-11-18T19:36:59.709-08:002011-11-18T19:36:59.709-08:00I haven't been by in a couple days and it'...I haven't been by in a couple days and it's probably a good thing. I wouldn't have been nearly as cordial as Chantry. DJP probably would have had to moderate <i>my</i> posts.<br /><br />BTW, was I the only one who noticed OSO's return to this blog just a few days ago? It was on Frank's Occupy movement post.Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15285043747501470199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-37471546425841782042011-11-18T12:10:40.018-08:002011-11-18T12:10:40.018-08:00Wait until you read TWTG; more such "easter e...<i>Wait until you read TWTG; more such "easter eggs" await</i><br /><br />I'm a witness. "Frozen meat chub" alone has so far, by my count, made 2 appearances.Rhologyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14245825667079220242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9230128133643754882011-11-18T10:54:25.545-08:002011-11-18T10:54:25.545-08:00It has been asked why there are now no HBC peeps c...It has been asked why there are now no HBC peeps commenting when so many commented on the open letter to James MacDonald.<br /><br />I think that the number of Harvest Bible Chapel pastors who commented on Tom Chantry's open letter compared to the lack of them on these two posts has to do with the fact that Dan is asking good questions without drawing wide conclusions ... well done Dan.<br /><br />Tom's letter (and this is no complaint of Tom on the whole ... his comments are typically great) was a critique of a ministry based on a handfull of kids.<br /><br />And now again, Tom jumps to "a train wreck" when describing the ministry of HBC and opens up again where his letter was off base. You can't make sweeping generalizations based on such a small percentage of a church's youth. I have heard countless testimonies at many baptisms at HBC where the youth absolutely nail the gospel ... <br /><br />Tom also showed a lack of pastoral care in doing absolutely nothing about the issue during the time he had connection with the church ... which greatly lessens the strength of his "concern".<br /><br />So there is a gaping difference between the two posts which more than likely leads to the gaping difference in those who respond.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12313739199470646212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-5108794406647117702011-11-18T09:05:40.896-08:002011-11-18T09:05:40.896-08:00@rom623rom828
Just to refresh, our conversation f...@rom623rom828<br /><br />Just to refresh, our conversation from last week, you wrote:<br /><br /><i>I'm really surprised that the MacDonald/Jakes association hasn't been critiqued more in regards to the "prosperity" message.<br /><br />Phil J, Frank T, Tom C, DJP -- any concern here? </i><br /><br />to which I responded:<br /><br /><i>I was never aware of an overt prosperity gospel slant in Harvest's teaching. What I would characterize as the outcome of their teaching was a lot of "on-fire-for-God" talk and very little humiliation, repentance, and gratitude for the cross. </i><br /><br />Let me make very clear here what it is that I'm saying; I have taken a very public stand against the ministry of HBC. I did so on the basis of many interactions over several years with dozens of kids who attended that church. The constant refrain of criticism was that I was expanding anecdotal evidence into an unjustified mis-characterization of a church. When I responded to you, I was not saying, "You are making an illegitimate accusation." I was saying, "That goes beyond the scope of my own knowledge."<br /><br />I am not an investigative reporter. I find the quotes and links which you give very disturbing indeed. However, I could never hope to comment on these matters with the same confidence as I did in my initial letter. <br /><br />My contention was (and is) that HBC is busy inculcating its kids with something other than the gospel. Consequently I wonder how great a priority gospel is in the church. I know my observation is accurate, and I believe the question about priorities is both legitimate and also very telling for the current controversy. <br /><br />Beyond that, I said this (to you last week):<br /><br /><i>the whole model for Harvest is more business oriented than church oriented. Sooner or later profits stagnate and growth becomes problematic, given that growth is achieved through capital investment. I don't know how you run a church that way without becoming manipulative about giving.</i><br /><br />That is not an accusation on my part so much as an expression of concern, but understand, when a church consistently teaches its people something other than the gospel, and when its leadership then blurs the lines of gospel matters such as the nature of God, the nature of gospel communication (Dan's point Tuesday), and the nature of repentance (Dan's point today), and when its response to criticism of these actions is anger and defensiveness, does it have any right to outrage when it is accused of other wrongs? I think not.<br /><br />Nevertheless, Dan's point Tuesday and Thursday is a good one. Let's stick to what we are absolutely certain of, because it is enough. Dan's two arguments this week are enough to strip the Elephant Room of all credibility - even if nothing more were asserted or proven. And these arguments <i>assume the truthfulness and good intentions of James MacDonald!!!</i><br /><br />I understand your concerns, and believe me, you have put them on my radar, but no, I am not going to personally give a lot of time to investigating Harvest's mishandling of the money issue. Isn't it enough that I have made the argument that the place is a trainwreck when it comes to gospel proclamation? Do I really need to say more? <br /><br />Likewise, try to appreciate what Dan is doing here: he's toppling every argument in favor of the ER by accepting their premises and demonstrating that they <i>still</i> don't amount to any sort of credible defense. Does he really need to say more?Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-47877279005920384712011-11-18T08:26:22.654-08:002011-11-18T08:26:22.654-08:00@djp: "I don't know MacDonald. I don'...@djp: "I don't know MacDonald. I don't even know a lot about him..."<br /><br />@Tom Chantry: "I was never aware of an overt prosperity gospel slant in Harvest's teaching." <br /><a href="http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2011/11/not-for-stout-of-heart-either.html" rel="nofollow">source</a><br /><br />Thanks DJP, Tom C, Phil J, Frank T for all the various blogs and comments over the past few weeks regarding the Modalism issue associated with The Elephant Room. <br /><br />However, I think up to this point, you have largely ignored this <br /><a href="http://jamesmacdonald.com/blog/?p=9055" rel="nofollow">statement by MacDonald</a>: "I am also excited <br />to hear [Jakes] state his views on money, which may be closer to Scripture than the monasticism <br />currently touring reformed world"<br /><br />In previous posts, I have included links to Harvest web sites that illustrated what I perceive to be a overt "prosperity gospel" slant at Harvest. Certainly not like the ever flowing stream that comes out of TBN but still there to some extent. Some of your readers have caught on to this as well as evidenced in their comments posted.<br /><br />The time has come DJP, Tom C, Phil J, Frank T for you to do some further investigation on the prosperity gospel leanings of some of the Elephant room participants, beginning with MacDonald. <br /><br />Here's another link to get you going:<br /><a href="http://revelation22-20.blogspot.com/2011/10/james-macdonald-casts-vision-at-harvest.html" rel="nofollow">James MacDonald Casts Vision at Harvest Bible Chapel </a><br /><br />Tom Chantry: after all of this, are you still unaware of an "overt prosperity gospel slant in Harvest's teaching"?rom623rom828https://www.blogger.com/profile/12218793043467137920noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-37748039016256745772011-11-18T05:51:58.571-08:002011-11-18T05:51:58.571-08:00"I am only focusing on the words, the choices..."I am only focusing on the words, the choices, the implications."<br /><br />As a fine shepherd does. Gracias me amigo en Christos.<br /><br />I read Psalm 65 this morn, as I reading through the Psalms, and the words of this song simply lift the soul to heaven. What a wonderful Father we have, who would give His Beloved for unbeloved unloving rebels like us.<br /><br /><br /> "O You who hear prayer,<br /> to you shall all flesh come.<br /> When iniquities prevail against me,<br /> you atone for our transgressions.<br /> Blessed is the one you choose and bring near,<br /> to dwell in your courts!<br /> We shall be satisfied with the goodness of Your house,<br /> the holiness of your temple!"<br />(Psalm 65:2-4 ESV)<br /><br />Have a great weekend, and a worshipful Lord's day in the house of our Lord, with His redeemed!donsandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03665794015011057098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3032839659484585402011-11-18T05:51:18.386-08:002011-11-18T05:51:18.386-08:00As Dr. White has stated in his book on the Trinity...As Dr. White has stated in his book on the Trinity: "I love the Trinity!"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84607484000017982622011-11-18T05:49:55.267-08:002011-11-18T05:49:55.267-08:00Dan, Dan, Dan. When will you ever learn? We're...Dan, Dan, Dan. When will you ever learn? We're supposed to speak the truth in LUUUUUUV. This sounds more like an interrogation! He that is without sin, etc., etc., etc.... zzzzzzz.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-67218256965538558622011-11-18T05:11:07.872-08:002011-11-18T05:11:07.872-08:00Let me be clear, for my part: anyone reading both ...Let me be clear, for my part: anyone reading both posts fairly has to see that I refrain (unless I have deceived myself) from judging MacDonald's heart. I don't know MacDonald. I don't even know a lot about him, except that good folks expect better of him. I am <i>only</i> focusing on the words, the choices, the implications. I <i>think</i> this is the spirit and intent of the "Judge not" command.<br /><br />IOW (still trying to be as plain as I can) my argument is not that James MacDonald is a bad man; it's that I don't know how not to see these as bad decisions, and the rationale given as a bad rationale.<br /><br />Perhaps more can be said, but that's what <i>I'm</i> saying, and I think that's enough to drive this conversation.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65352495480527512492011-11-18T05:03:37.030-08:002011-11-18T05:03:37.030-08:00There may be a peron here who knows a thing or two...There may be a peron here who knows a thing or two about the book of Proverbs, but in reference to the attitude emanating from MacDonald there two verses come to mind:<br /><br />Proverbs 11:2 When pride comes then comes dishonor, but with the humble comes wisdom. (not seeing any wisdom here)<br /><br />Proverbs 16:18 Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before stumbling. (to the prideful... beware of where your pride will lead you)<br /><br />And from that right strawy epistle of James....God is opposed to the proud. (and, yes, that means you prideful Christian)Morris Brookshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18083884122271855154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-17775518092515200592011-11-18T04:17:43.766-08:002011-11-18T04:17:43.766-08:00Dan: first laugh of the day, thanks.
Wait until y...Dan: first laugh of the day, thanks.<br /><br />Wait until you read <i>TWTG</i>; more such "easter eggs" await.<br /><br />(c:DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-11088421586015483152011-11-18T01:23:51.996-08:002011-11-18T01:23:51.996-08:00Made this for you guys. You can have it for the Po...Made this for you guys. You can have it for the Po-Motivators collection if you'd like. I've run into this phenomenon a gazillion times.<br /><br />http://bit.ly/ueprZF <br /><br />Enjoy!<br /><br />KennyUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04327983436754453871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-11566602572815815882011-11-17T21:44:03.571-08:002011-11-17T21:44:03.571-08:00the ability to punctuate a discussion on the Trini...the ability to punctuate a discussion on the Trinity and repentance with a remark on the Norwegian Blue is what makes DJP so awesome.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17213246364974821216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21323332538857919802011-11-17T19:53:20.429-08:002011-11-17T19:53:20.429-08:00Sean
As I documented in a post the Dan linked to,...Sean<br /><br />As I documented in a post the Dan linked to, Jakes was indeed a modalist. Jakes admits that in his teens he was a staunch defender of the Oneness position.<br /><br />His words were, "<i>And yes, I did grow up in a Oneness church. I started there. I started in a Baptist church, but at around 16 or so I did become involved with Oneness. I used to adamantly defend every tenant of what they believed.</i>"<br /><br />This tells us that he knows the theological disagreements well, yet he speaks today as if they are no big deal.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01410144337505012175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-31476243959493848072011-11-17T19:18:04.735-08:002011-11-17T19:18:04.735-08:00I do miss the OSO days and how Dan clarified OSO&#...I do miss the OSO days and how Dan clarified OSO's posts. lol.CRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01912897040503058967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-39943484241633180542011-11-17T15:44:54.747-08:002011-11-17T15:44:54.747-08:00I doubt that we will be seeing any true Biblical r...I doubt that we will be seeing any true Biblical repentance coming from either Jakes or McDonald. Since I haven’t checked my brain at the door, I can confidently state that Jakes has not moved from his Sabellianism beliefs and the only thing that ER2 may provide is proof of his masterful obfuscation of what he really believes. I do hope however that sometime very soon he truly repents of his sin and turns to the Christ revealed in Scripture.<br /><br />I am saddened by the lack of discernment being exhibited by JM which appears to be coupled with a hardening of the heart and the rearing up of pride. I confess to being a regular listener to Walk in the Word but am finding myself questioning the continuation of this in light of current events.<br /><br />What does it say when JM, RW, PC&D and others have to go back and delete tweets, blog entries and information posted on their various websites? This done, apparently, in an attempt to cover their tracks, obscure understanding of who they truly are or otherwise hide something they said so as to minimize further scrutiny of published views or an attempt to douse the firestorm their unbridled tongue has caused.<br /><br />It seems to me that they are sloppy in their communication and/or are cavalier in the way they approach important doctrinal matters. This of course goes back to one of Dan’s points in yesterday’s post when he said that two of the nicest things that can be said of Jakes is: <br />that he is —<br />1. An extremely poor communicator; and<br />2. An extremely poor judge of what is important?<br /><br />It has also been pointed out that this evaluation certainly applies to McDonald.<br /><br />It has been rightly stated many times by our hosts and contributors that words mean something. Scripture instructs us to say what we mean, James 5:12 and Matthew 5:37. Our parents taught us that if you tell the truth, you won’t have to remember later what you said. <br /><br />I think it speaks volumes when these guys are rushing around trying to clean up or sweep under the rug things they previously put out there for public consumption. Reasons certainly could include that they are not courageous enough to ‘man up’ and stand by what they say, they don’t really mean what they say or they have no filter between their brain and their mouth so they really don’t know what it is that they’ve said until the reaction pours in. Why would a Christian Leader (defined in prior posts) feel compelled to alter the perception of their stated views by removing information from social media?<br /><br />On one hand it smacks of deceit. What do people think when a politician does such a thing other than thinking the person is involved in corruption. On the other hand, how smart are these guys? I mean, come on, in today’s tech world do you really think that you are going to remove something and that it will be gone forever? Don’t they know that it has probably been downloaded and saved by someone somewhere or that anyone with rudimentary computer skills can retrieve the information from the Google farm?<br /><br />I can’t say what their motives are but certainly it can be said that they are not exhibiting leadership qualities and they have no business being in the place of leadership. At least at this time and until such time that there has been true repentance and restitution made.<br /><br />A shout out to the Pyro guys and a question for Dan, Frank and Phil: During the last 5 years while you may have had occasion to retract or apologize for something you’ve posted here, have you ever gone back and deleted something you posted because of the reaction it caused or because you got ‘called out’ on a view or position you had taken? I think I know the answer to that question and this demonstrates the difference between wise words grounded in scripture and the words spewed by those who are not so very wise.<br /><br />Thanks for standing in the gap.CCinTnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16009763520139761873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-12480037509657350842011-11-17T15:21:52.957-08:002011-11-17T15:21:52.957-08:00Bishop55: "I guess Phil Johnson is arguing f...<b>Bishop55</b>: <i>"I guess <b>Phil Johnson is arguing for secondary separation</b>, too. ...<br /><br />I'm OK with standing with Phil Johnson on this one even if I'm branded a <b>secondary separationer.</b>"</i><br /><br />Perhaps Phil Johnson is arguing for secondary separation (I think he would agree with you, but I'm not sure).<br /><br />Q: When is secondary separation good and when is it not good?<br /><br />For example, fundamentalists or alleged fundamentalists are often derided for being secondary separatists. It seems as if anyone who practices secondary separation is deemed or labeled a fundamentalist, an icky fundamentalist.<br /><br />Can someone practice secondary separation without being a fundamentalist?<br /><br />Or if you practice secondary separation, does that automatically qualify you as a fundamentalist?<br /><br />Suppose someone were to deem you a fundamentalist because you believe that it was big mistake for MacDonald to invite Jakes to ER2, for believing that MacDonald needs to separate himself from Oneness Pentecostal T.D. Jakes, how do you respond? Do you declaim the label of being a secondary separatist fundamentalist? Or do you begrudgingly accept it?<br /><br />If you declaim it, what makes the secondary separation of <i>those</i> fundamentalists different from what you're espousing and doing?<br /><br />What is the difference between a "good" secondary separation of a biblical Christian and a "bad" secondary separation of a fundamentalist?Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-79325851197904570702011-11-17T15:11:48.256-08:002011-11-17T15:11:48.256-08:00@Bishop55 - 12:47
You've misread me, my frien...@Bishop55 - 12:47<br /><br />You've misread me, my friend. The leaders of TGC should clearly take a public and vocal stand against MacDonald's action regarding the Jakes fiasco. That's simple in my mind. But they won't. <br /><br />They won't because in part they are a coalition with an agenda that doesn't include discipline, in part becasue they know they are not a local church, and in part because of their perception of what some kind of discipline would do to the coalition. If MacDonald were in any one of their local churches, they would act quite differently, I assure you.<br /><br />Now here's my point. If they did, as TGC, discipline him in some way, it would not in itself tell us anything about God's will on the matter, or accomplish God's revealed will in the matter. God has nothing to say on the matter of gospel coalitions and their disciplinary polities. The end result therefore could be far worse since God is not pledged to stand by TGC as He will the local church in such matters (Mat. 18:18-20).<br /><br />So again, I say, join me in calling on the elders (and members too) of MacDonald's church to call thier fellow-elder (fellow-member) MacDonald to repentance for potentially violating Titus 1:9 on an elephant sized scale. They are the ones in the proper biblical role of authority to do so. TGC isn't.<br /><br />Same goes for our esteemed friend Phil.<br /><br />For the record, MacDonald is not in himself promoting modalism; Jakes is. Secondary separation would be separating from MacDonald because he associates with Jakes.Ted Bigelowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02558474337614839545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59673603869933421482011-11-17T14:57:55.423-08:002011-11-17T14:57:55.423-08:00You guys are spoiling me. I wasn't even trying...You guys are spoiling me. I wasn't even trying. Back in the OSO days, I'd sit and compose. He was light-years from a clue, regardless.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-13054255577779084322011-11-17T14:56:48.107-08:002011-11-17T14:56:48.107-08:00Classic. Reminds me of the old OSO days before Dan...<em>Classic. Reminds me of the old OSO days before Dan was forced to turn moderation on at his other blog</em><br /><br />And the wording of the resulting comment was quite a bit more entertaining than, "<em>This post has been removed by a blog administrator.</em>"<br /><br />;-)threegirldadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10514416693800430357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3616147066244133122011-11-17T13:30:50.863-08:002011-11-17T13:30:50.863-08:00bishop55 is a menace and must be stopped....bishop55 is a menace and must be stopped....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-3477233755904069192011-11-17T12:47:25.461-08:002011-11-17T12:47:25.461-08:00@Ted Bigelow
You’re right. The Gospel Coalition s...@Ted Bigelow<br /><br />You’re right. The Gospel Coalition should definitely sit back and let their membership promote false doctrine.<br /><br />Certainly that is God’s will. Certainly Christ is pleased.<br /><br />I guess Phil Johnson is arguing for secondary separation, too. In his 11/11 Pyro post he wrote:<br /><br /><i>That, I think, is why MacDonald and the ER pose a major problem for the Gospel Coalition. He is a council member of TGC and an influential spokesman for the movement. And <b>the first point</b> in TGC's confessional statement is "The Tri-une God."<br /><br />So is biblical and historic Trinitarianism an essential tenet of Gospel truth, or is it not? If yes, then TGC needs to hold its own council members to the implications of that. If not, one wonders what was the point of the organization in the first place.<br /><br />Or to put it another way: <b>The collective leadership of TGC are going to have to decide which is more important: the Gospel, or the Coalition.</b></i><br /><br />I'm OK with standing with Phil Johnson on this one even if I'm branded a secondary separationer.Robert Andrejczykhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02370938277209661657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-18149100679225498772011-11-17T12:10:07.185-08:002011-11-17T12:10:07.185-08:00"....But then, maybe I'm just a wild-eyed..."....But then, maybe I'm just a wild-eyed conspiracy nut who needs to be locked up in a rubber room where he can do no harm."-meanie<br /><br />Yep.<br /><br />"..is it a damnable heresy in and of itself?"_Good Old Matt<br /><br />Yep. <br /><br /><br />ps (Just kiddin Sola)donsandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03665794015011057098noreply@blogger.com