Tabloid Blogging
Posted byBecause of the recent tabloid blogging that has occurred at this site here and here, we at SBC Today have been busy answering questions on when we would respond to what one Calvinistic professor called, “lies and slander” of the aforementioned postings. At first, we were not going to respond. After all, what logical and rational thinking person would think that Dr. Patterson was out to get rid of the Calvinists at SWBTS knowing that he brought on Calvinists to the faculty while he was president of both Southeastern and Southwestern and that a 5 point Calvinist from SWBTS called these accusations “lies and slander.” But alas, it seems that logic is being thrown out the window concerning these posts.
Therefore, we will provide something of more substance on this subject before Friday, but until then may we direct you to Bart Barber’s thoughts regarding this matter.
10 Comments
February 5th, 2009 at 1:15 am
With great respect to the work of Herman Melville and Star Trek…
“Aye, aye! and I’ll chase him round Good Hope, and round the horn, and round the Norway Maelstrom, and round perdition’s flames before I give him up.”
- Captain Ahab
“He tasks me. He tasks me and I shall have him! I’ll chase him ’round the moons of Nibia and ’round the Antares Maelstrom and ’round Perdition’s flames before I give him up!”
-Khan in Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan
“He vexes me. He vexes me and I shall have him! I’ll chase him ’round Pecan Manor, and ’round B.H. Carroll Memorial Building, and ’round Ft. Worth Hall, and ’round perdition’s flames before I give him up!”
-Enid
Ron P.
February 5th, 2009 at 8:16 am
Ron
February 6th, 2009 at 7:27 am
Why don’t you have the courage to allow comments on the Patterson post? There are two sides to every argument. You becaome like the now defunct “Baptist Fire” when you don’t.
February 6th, 2009 at 7:41 am
Brother Reformer,
You are correct. There are two sides to every story. We placed the true side out there while WB placed “Wade’s World” fantasy land side out there. When confronted with his–in his mind only–sources he has refused to present them.
This is a pattern that he does. If you remember, he used an anonymous source to level untrue charges against Dr. Mohler and SBTS. Did you see the Calvinist that came out against him concerning that anonymous source? Where are they now? As a matter of fact, Dr. Ascol chided him for using an anonymous source to level such a charge. What does Dr. Ascol say about his latest anonymous source? Here is his response; “It appears that there was a plan to remove the Calvinist professors but that it has been, at least partly, thwarted. Also using anonymous sources. The height of hypocrisy.
Blessings,
Tim
February 6th, 2009 at 7:53 am
Where did you get the quote from Tom Ascol? Is it actually from his blog or hearsay?
Read the current one-word response on his blog to a question concerning this subject in the current post comments. (The post itself is unrelated to the current issue). That doesn’t sound like what you’ve quoted here, though, “it appears” is not an absolute statement.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Brother Reformer,
I will be gracious here because my anti-spam word is “gentleness”. But, I do believe you to be honestly seeking truth and thus I will comply.
You can go here. It is the first comment in WB’s second post. Dr. Ascol has been strangely silent other than his comment that you referred me to on his blog. However, the above link is to a private email he responded to. Also, notice the difference in the time stamps. The one on his blog was 2/3 and the one on WB’s blog was 2/4.
Blessings,
Tim
February 6th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Brother, I don’t have to have an anti-spam word for me to be compelled gentle toward you. I do not ask these questions to exhaust your patience.
So, you have taken a quote from Wade’s blog in the comment section from a guy named Jimmy. Have you contacted Tom Ascol to confirm this quote before posting the words attributed to him here?
February 6th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Replace Jimmy with “Jerry”
February 6th, 2009 at 9:35 am
Brother Reformer,
If you will continue reading in Wade’s comment section you will see that others affirm that it is from Dr. Ascol.
Now, let me ask you something. It seems that you agree with Wade, but now you call into question comments he allows to stand on his blog? There seems to be something duplicitous about that logic.
Blessings,
Tim
February 6th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
So, you willingly admit that you haven’t varified what you accuse Tom Ascol of saying. Even though, if you were to give him the benefit of the doubt or at least do what a journalist does, you would confirm your sources.
There is no one other than Jerry outright verfying that they had a conversation with Ascol and heard those words. Tim, aren’t you doing here what you’ve accused others of doing? You question the validity of what is posted on another blog and then go on to quote from the comment section as if you know without a doubt that it is a fact.
I have not given you any indication that I have accepted anything as absolute “fact” from Wade’s blog, but you have.