Posted on 12/04/2006 1:47:14 PM PST by bahblahbah
A protest in Ballard Sunday against an Evangelical pastor's rhetoric about women was called off after a local citizens group said the pastor agreed to tone it down, if not abandon his philosophy.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
"A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband is not responsible for her husband's sin, but she may not be helping him, either" -- after haggard affair
"Father, Son and Spirit. But some chicks and some chickified dudes with limp wrists and minors in 'women's studies' are not happy because two persons of the trinity have a dude-ish ring."
"if Christian males do not man up soon, the Episcopalians may vote a fluffy baby bunny rabbit as their next bishop to lead God's men."
I'm sure many won't like him, but all you calvinist freepers with a sense of humor should listen to sometime. Church: http://www.marshillchurch.org/ Media: http://media.marshillchurch.org/ Pod/Vidcast Feeds: http://www.marshillchurch.org/feeds/ Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Driscoll
Church: http://www.marshillchurch.org/
Media: http://media.marshillchurch.org/
Pod/Vidcast Feeds: http://www.marshillchurch.org/feeds/
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Driscoll
I was relieved to see that this was not Mars Hill, NC but Mars Hill in the State of Washington.
Not the Mars Hill mega church in Grand Rapids, Michigan?
BRILLIANT! The man has a way with words.
Women aren't called to be "deacons", IMO, however, a woman can be called to be a deaconess.
I went to college at Mars Hill when it was a junior college back in the 60s. A beautiful place.
So what exactly here is supposed to offend me?
everything.
You've got to be kidding me. Now we have a group called People Against Fundamentalism?
That's it. Attention everyone.
I've just founded a new group. It's called:
People Against People Who Are Against People
In particular, Chapman and his supporters mentioned earlier entries from Driscoll's blog, one of which suggested to some that the wife of evangelical leader Ted Haggard was partly to blame for his contacts with a gay prostitute.
"A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband is not responsible for her husband's sin, but she may not be helping him, either," Driscoll wrote.
Surely if the writer had a clue he would not have allowed in print Chapman's claim that Driscoll partly blamed Haggard's wife when the following sentence proves just the opposite. Not helping him does not equal "partly to blame".
I don't have a problem with any of those quotes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.