John R. Rice Family Disavows Sword of the Lord Editor

AVL- you answered for me, thanks. Mr P is pretty good at twisting things around. His type and S. Smith's elitism is somewhat new to Fundamentalism. Note he tries to say I am attemting guilt by associating him w/ Cloud. NOT TRUE! I was attempting; perhaps poorly, that his info seems to be straight from Mr Cloud, that's all! I too read David Cloud's newsletters, some are very informative, but sadly he fosters the elitism rampant in Fundamentalism.
Mr P seems to imply that Joy has no right to express her opinion even though she's J.R.Rice's daughter, and knew her father better than he does, Cloud, Smith, etc...because she's a woman! (like E.G. White)Bro Rice had no sons, so who else in the family can express their dismay at the current direction of the Sword?
As far as S. Smith taking the Sword in the direction he deems necessary, good for him! I still rec the Sword, despite it's elitist leanings, but I no longer in good conscience can send my monthly financial support.
BTW, my Dad stopped recieving the Sword because he had signed up for their lifetime membership subscription, then they turned around asking for more money to continue his subscription! A far better publication, and it's **free**, although they ask for contributions, is the Biblical Evangelist, edited by Robert Sumner, who's not afraid to expose the narrowness, and elitism in Fundamentalism. BTW, this is where I read Joy's article, I wasn't even aware that it appeared in Falwell's publication till I read the first post in this thread.
For those who have read the Sword for years, even since 1969, and think that the Sword is as good or better now, I'm at a loss for words. </font>[/QUOTE]Dr. Sumners paper is quite good. I have only corresponded with this brother, but he has a very humble spirit. He was gracious enough to send me a copy of the article and a copy of his paper. I have asked to start receiving it again.

AVL1984

 

I have to say that the Sword is standing strong. I wouldn't give J.Rices daughters the time of day. I think he would be ashamed of them. They are whiney flaming liberals that wouldn't know a separatist stand if it hit them in the face. Their article was published in Falwells news paper. Now theres credibility for you. I hear everyone talking about how the Sword is taking a different direction. "FOOEY" I think it is mainline christianity that is on the slippery slope. The Sword is a standard bearer. If you don't like it then take your compromising self and join Falwell and his crowd. There is something for everyone. It's called Burger King theology. "Have it your way"!

 

***yawn***

 

As a Fundamentalist, this kinda attitude embarrasses me.

 

I agree Pastor KevinR. The Rice daughters are far from being flaming liberals, and anyone who thinks they are should go look in the mirror and see if they're not a pharisee posing as a legitimate Christian. It's a shame the Fundamentalism has become so divisive today, and that the Sword, which once was a fine paper, is today in the middle of the mudslinging.

AVL1984

 

I live here in Murfreesboro, TN, used to be a member of the Franklin Road Baptist Church, and know Dr. Shelton Smith personally as well as many other Sword staffers. I would like to say a word on behalf of this brother. I have observed Bro. Smith for several years, and he has a good testimony. He is a consistent man of God and I appreciate his courage and stand. Though I do not know the Rice sisters or family, may I add this, the Sword exists in a very differnt world then that of John R. Rice's day. If Dr. Rice were alive today, you cannot say that he would hold out the hand of fellowship as he might have then. Many "fundamentalist" groups have become very soft and compromising in their stands and many cannot be affiliated with groups and churches that "used" to have strong fundamental stands. There are many preachers today that wouldn't touch Jerry Falwell and that crowd with a ten foot pole. So, how can we condemn Dr. Shelton Smith without talking to the dear brother personally and hearing his heart? Isn't that what the Lord would have us do?

With a word of balance,
Ben

 

You are absolutely right! They are not flaming liberals or liberals of any stripe. However, neo-evangelicals are not liberals either. They believe the Word but they have little separation from religious compromise in practice. It is not black and white but it is a gradient--a gray area. This, I think, pretty much describes the Rice gals. So, just exactly where do we draw the line as Fundamentalists? Everyone has a different view. It is passing strange that those who blast the hard-liners for being unloving are so hard and unloving toward the hard-liners. There's a Bible word for this.....if I could just remember.......it starts with an H...hyper...hipper........uh.... Well, perhaps you know what it is.

 

As a Fundamentalist, this kinda attitude embarrasses me. </font>[/QUOTE]Yeah, the neo-evangelicals didn't have the stomach for it either. So, they left the Fundamentalist camp, which they were really never residents, and started their own little enclave.

 

***yawn*** </font>[/QUOTE]HEY! Watch out--oops!

So, did you swallow the gnat or the camel?


(BTW, I do know the correct exegesis of the verse to which I am alluding. Do you?)

 

Well said with kindness, compassion, and Christian charity. Those who condemn Dr. Smith so vehemently for his hard stand could learn from your Christian tenderheartedness.

 

As a Fundamentalist, this kinda attitude embarrasses me. </font>[/QUOTE]Yeah, the neo-evangelicals didn't have the stomach for it either. So, they left the Fundamentalist camp, which they were really never residents, and started their own little enclave. </font>[/QUOTE]IT's not a matter of stomaching anything...but I'm surprised that you are defending his attitude...what did you say about judging and criticising?
What you don't seem to understand is that some in the Fundamentalists camp have set themselves up as elitist popes, and when we decry that, then **somehow** it's not alright. We can't critigue them, but you seem to have no problem w/ them writing in their publications against so many who don't cross their "t's" like them, nor dot their "i's" like them...our problem is, that they've drawn the lines too narrow. I don't believe Dr Rice would be so narrow today, do you?

 

As a Fundamentalist, your attitude is a breath of fresh air.

 

As a Fundamentalist, this kinda attitude embarrasses me. </font>[/QUOTE]Yeah, the neo-evangelicals didn't have the stomach for it either. So, they left the Fundamentalist camp, which they were really never residents, and started their own little enclave. </font>[/QUOTE]IT's not a matter of stomaching anything...but I'm surprised that you are defending his attitude...what did you say about judging and criticising?
What you don't seem to understand is that some in the Fundamentalists camp have set themselves up as elitist popes, and when we decry that, then **somehow** it's not alright. We can't critigue them, but you seem to have no problem w/ them writing in their publications against so many who don't cross their "t's" like them, nor dot their "i's" like them...our problem is, that they've drawn the lines too narrow. I don't believe Dr Rice would be so narrow today, do you? </font>[/QUOTE]So Pastor K? are you saying that Master P is defending Shelton and DC's right to call into question other's walk with Christ, separation, etc who may differ from them, but none of us can dare turn around and question their questioning? sounds popish to me.
SNIP

[ September 25, 2004, 12:24 AM: Message edited by: Squire Robertsson ]

 

I think I would rather listen to Pastor K than shelton Smith anyday.
What really scares me is the attitude that you must not only vote with me but you must vote with me for the same reasons I do.That sounds like liberal thinking to me. I've seen to many liberals in action.You can say whatever you like as long as they agree with it,but heaven help if they don't.
Pastor K, I like your spirit of love.

 

I agree with that, Squire! I know some of the Rice family, and I know them to be dear, Godly people.

AVL1984

 

Bro. Bill, if you preach tolerance and love, then you must practice it or be found a hypocrite. What I fail to see from your post is your practice of tolerance and love for Bro. Smith with whom you disagree. You are, in fact, castigating him for castigating others. Aren't you doing the same thing? The teaching of "love your neighbor (i.e. friends) and hate your enemies" is Phariseeism, not Biblical Christianity. Doesn't Bro. Smith have the right to dot his i's and cross his t's differently from you? This may mean that he draws his line for separation in a different place from you but you must allow him this if you are to be consistent with your professed principles! Now, let's test your principles.

[ October 02, 2004, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: paidagogos ]