Sheri Klouda PhD vs. SWBTS, Paige Patterson

Someone can only call it what it is.

In the OT the people did not like the prophets. They sought to kill them.

Jesus was not bitter but angry and turned over the tax gatherers tables. They were the religious people. Jesus only condemned the religious people. Jesus is not about saving religious organizations but about saving people.

Someone needs to be the prophet among the SBC and stand up and be counted. They need to expose the sin so the SBC can be restored to where it should be or help it die.

Personally I would like to see the SBC be restored or crash quickly. I am tired of reading the news about it in the paper and hearing about it on the news.

 

Sounds somewhat like the founder of Southwestern, though I'm not sure about his position on women's rights in theological education (and if referring to Carroll, the War for Southern Independence was not an attempt to overthrow the US government).

pij, you said you are more interested in perspectives on Sheri Klouda suing. I have no specific perspective on Sheri Klouda, but am opposed on principle to Christians suing, whether it is you, I, Sheri Klouda, Paige Patterson or anyone else.

Beyond that, the impression I got early on was that Ms. Klouda was saying that this was hard on her, her family, etc., but that she did not want to escalate it, go all anti-Southwestern, etc. If the impression I received from what I read is correct, then she has changed horses in midstream.

 

And the SWBTS folks said that they were going back to their roots.

 

Don't think this has been posted here, but I may have overlooked it. Here is the complaint that has been filed:
http://www.twelvewitnesses.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/district-court.pdf

A non-pdf version is supposed to be posted here:
http://baptistblog.wordpress.com/

Also, I thought this (what might be termed a "CBF take" on the issue) was fascinating: "Sure, what Patterson did was unethical. And Klouda wants to complain ... now? She knew the game, even helped write the rules (which were used to harm reputations and careers of previous professors), from the beginning."

 

This is the first time I have read anything about this. Do you have any evidence to support your claim?

 

If you haven't noticed, you aren't an o.t. prophet, nor are you Jesus.
But you constantly attack the sbc.

 

oh my heavens.....get over it! some people don't like the sbc....some people do. some people feel they are the divine authority over every doctrine.....some understand that we can live together with different interpretations.....some feel as if they must get the last word in.....PLEASE STOP TRYING TO GET THE LAST WORD IN.

 

No, he's a New Testament prophet:

Ephesians 2:11-15
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.

As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ...

He is not, but he is a disciple of Jesus. What do you think Jesus has to say about this situation? I'm sure he would say blistering things about the way certain people in SWBTS leadership has treated many of the faculty, students and churches in Fort Worth.

I have known many fine faculty members who have been mistreated by the administration of SWBTS. And my church in Fort Worth has been consistently and falsely accused of all sorts of things by the trustees and past president of the seminary. It doesn't take a Bible scholar to know that those who consistently take pleasure in falsely accusing their brothers are not those who are led of the Spirit.

If you look carefully, I believe you will see that he is condemning immoral acts, attitudes, and positions of certain decisionmakers within the SBC, not the SBC itself. The SBC is full of fine people who have trusted leaders who lie and do not practice the truth. They listen for code words such as "inerrant" and "conservative" but fail to notice the utter lack of fruit of the Spirit and the abundance of the works of the flesh.

Galatians 5:14-26
For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.

For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please.

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.

Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.

Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.

 

The Bible gives us all we need.

It says to let not many be teachers because they incur a stricter judgment. If one expects to be a teacher or leader then they must be held accountable to the highest standard--a standard much higher than the world has.

You do not understand what the primary role of a prophet was in the OT and NT. The primary role of a prophet in the OT and NT was warning the people. God uses people to warn others of dangers.

Ever notice how many times in the OT the people listened? Then notice what happened?

When quite a number of pastors spoke aginst the practice of the BFA they were ignored and told not to worry. Then all of a sudden the crooks were exposed and the pastors were right. Rather than people listening to those pastors they shunned the same pastors who could have helepd to save them from their trouble. But instead people accused them of being anti-SBC and anti-Baptist until they lost their money. The people trusted the crooks to tell them the truth. When the crooks told them a lie. That is much like trusting Satan to give you the truth.
Ever heard the saying, "Humble yourselves before God has to do it."

God will humble those who are unwilling to be humble. He will do it in a way they will not like.

 

so the bible allows, suing beleiver, gossip, and vindictivness?
humm, thats a new one on me.

 

Could you give specific examples?

 

I don't come here and attack anyone elses church, it's called common decency. Not somehting thats too awful common here.

 

gb, please note that I didn't make that claim. That is what someone else wrote. I just posted that to give a feel of how some of the old "disenfranchised" feel toward some of the new SBC wranglings. Their idea seems to be basically that those who have driven out others shouldn't be surprised if someone turns on them and drives them out. I read some of the same type of feeling toward W. Burleson in the blogs when they were wrangling over the IMB.

I have no knowledge that the claim is true, and thought the way I addressed it would show I didn't intend to acknowledge the truth of it -- only to exhibit that is what some people are thinking.

 

Actually it is here: http://baptistblog.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/district-court.pdf , and it is pdf also.

 

The book of Revelation did. Jesus did. Paul did. Amos attacked religious folks.

Jesus condemned the religious people of the day. He called them white washed tombs.

 

My guess is that Southwestern will have some money and the purchase of her house ready for Dr. Klouda to make the lawsuit go away and to make her go away. Probably a real good idea at this time. Even if they decided to go to court, they lose! Testimony about meetings, regardless of what was said in them, emails concerning staff, regardless of what was said in them would all be things that would become part of the public record. That is the last thing anyone at Southwestern or the SBC wants right now or ever!

Also of note is the recent tying together of the six seminaries directly to the SBC, you remember the one New Orleans protested so vigorously, that could make this suit much more interesting in a hurry!

How is this going to affect their accreditation if not silenced? Southwestern has way too much to lose and really nothing to gain by not striking some agreement.

There you have it your Cooperative dollars at work! Thanks Paige, anymore brilliant ideas?

 

They have done that sort of thing in the past.

They quickly changed their theology when a former professor at SWBTS threatened to sue them. All of a sudden their money became more important than their theology. Kind of shows how much they believe the Bible--just like a chameleon.