It is absolutely amazing what Tiffany Thigpen Croft, a local Christian wife and mother, armed with only a blog and the power of free speech and her faith in God, has been able to accomplish. Tiffany has done what most baptist pastors in this city were too cowardly to do. And she didn't have a budget, a PR firm, or any position of power in the city of Jacksonville.Tiffany reported on her blog this weekend that Darrell Gilyard, former pastor of Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church, has agreed to a plea bargain in his case involving lews and lascivious conduct against a 14-year old. This is very good news - according to Tiffany, Gilyard has admitted guilt, and will serve 3 years in a state prison, and will carry the "sexual predator" label for the rest of his life. This plea bargain will save the horrific ordeal of a public trial and his victims having to testify.
Tiffany had her faith and a deep conviction that a person standing for truth and justice COULD make a difference. She started a blog to call out an abusive pastor in this city, and demanded justice - and she encouraged victims to come out. She used her blog as a vehicle for victims to share their stories. Information provided to Tiffany via her blog was shared with the State Attorney's office, and this aided their investigation.
Tiffany started her blog about the Gilyard case back in December 2007 when this news about Gilyard's abuse at Shiloh first broke. Tiffany was brave enough to come forward and share her testimony of how Gilyard tried to seduce her as an 18-year old back in the early 1990's when she was at First Baptist Jacksonville. She shared how Gilyard operated, what his sickening tactics were - and no doubt this caused other victims to recognize they weren't alone, and needn't be ashamed to come forward, that this guy was a monster who had preyed on many others.
Wade Burleson has written an excellent article on his blog about Tiffany, "Walking Where SBC Leaders Fail to Tread". It is true that many SBC leaders back in the 1990's who supported Gilyard and helped him to his meteoric rise - they absolutely failed to keep this man out of any positions of power - and their silence since Gilyard's arrest has been deafening. Thank the Lord that Tiffany wasn't trying to avoid controversy or wasn't afraid of being labeled as a troublemaker - she spoke the truth, and called for others to stand with her, and she took the arrows that came her way. Tiffany didn't complain about the attacks against her from people supporting Gilyard, she maintained a spirit of love, always expressing a desire for healing for Gilyard's victims and for repentence and justice in Gilyard's life.
And most importantly, Tiffany didn't cave into those cowardly voices that told her that her blog was harming the cause of Christ, that it was beauty-shop gossip and should be shut down. No way - Tiffany stood strong, knew that truth was on her side, and she KNEW that God was pleased with what she was doing. You see, for far too long, people inside baptist churches have been afraid to call public attention to abusers, especially pastors. They have used the illogical excuse that to do so would harm Christianity - that people would be turned away from Christ if light were shone on the abuses of pastors, that things should be kept quiet. They've even used lame excuses like the pastor is God's man, and "touch not thine annointed", or "just let God handle it."
The realilty was back in December 2007, God WAS handling this matter, and to help Him accomplish His will, God was looking for someone in Jacksonville. Not someone to hush it up, but to rise up and call for justice. God was looking for someone to shine the light on Gilyard to help bring about justice and healing. To call for others to demand justice. To encourage others who had been abused by Gilyard to come forward.
And He found Tiffany.
And Tiffany said "Yes, Lord".
Thank you, Tiffany.
Amen.
ReplyDeleteThank you Watchdog, for standing with Tiffany from the beginning.
God bless you Tiffany.
I pray for true repentance for Darrell Gilyard. I do not know how the victims can be comforted and healed. But Lord is good and He is merciful.
Amen, indeed.
ReplyDeleteAnd it is appalling that there is a deafening silence coming from the "leadership" of the SBC regarding this case and others involving pastors and deacons of our churches. The pastors and staffs of SBC churches including some here in Jacksonville quietly hold comtempt for Catholic churches and their doctrine, i.e., J. Smryl at FBCJ, including the alledged priest molestations of young children, but they don't say a word about D. Gilyard or B. Gray or others in our own denomination. It is a shame and disgrace!! It is time for the people in the pews to start speaking out about our leadership and their abuse of their offices. It seems that our pastors are only concerned about the size of their homes, the make of their cars, the size of their office suites, and the NUMBER of people who attend their churches, but not neccesarily their salvation. Hypocrisy and greed are unchecked and unrepented. It seems that the "flocks" are having their ears tickled by these pastors and the majority don't care how their pastors are living. Thank God for Tiffany, the WD and others who are speaking out about all theset things - may their tribe increase.
Anon - back when Smyrl was on his Catholic kick, he blamed the priest sexual abuse scandals on the reformation:
ReplyDelete""...how could that happen [12,000 pedophile priests]?....There was a little historical event called the reformation that was denied. And when you deny the sufficiency of the Lord Jesus Christ as the only mediator and the sufficiency of scripture alone as the only authority you will unleash all your sin."So the very root cause of the pedophile priests was the denial of the reformation.
To Darrell Gilyard, I would like to quote Mac Brunson..."HAH!"
ReplyDeleteAnd to Mac Brunson, I would like to say "HAH!" Tiffany's blog did help bring down "God's man" didn't it.
No, Mac didn't say
"Hah!" to Darrell about his being caught and convicted. He said it to his own flock, not after they did something silly or wrong, but while congratulating them about their work in the South Campus. I wonder how he will treat them if they do something wrong. With loving pastors like Mac, who needs an angry pastor.
(Sorry, couldn't resist the shot at Mac for saying NOTHING about Gilyard while attacking anonymous emailers and bloggers for years during that same time span. Plus, my ears are still ringing from the big ol "HAH!" Mac yelled at us.)
I agree I think Tiffany Croft is a hero. (God's man, yikes)
ReplyDeleteHey leave FBC out of this. Rev Blount and King and Team Brunson and Maurilio and Soud are all too busy "aggressively confronting" criticism of Millionaire Mac and Twittering Maurilio to worry about such trivial matters as a pastor using his position of trust to sexually abuse young ladies in his congregation. Obviously, Darrell Gilyard is not a problem, but bloggers are. Gilyard can go on preaching, but bloggers..."SHUT EM DOWN!"
ReplyDeleteTAKE THAT Paige Patterson!! Or as Mac the Fake would say, "HA!"
ReplyDeleteThank you Tiffany!
ReplyDeleteWhat's new at the South Campus? Any report this week on the "Nickels and noses" counted down there?
ReplyDeleteThank God for Tiffany and her stand against the evils of Gilyard.If not for Tiffany keeping the spotlight on Darrell's case I'm sure this probably would have been swept under the rug! And thank God for you Dr.Dog for your stand against the wrongs of Mac Brunson! What ever happens from here on with Mac and FBCJ,you my friend are a victor for having put the spotlight on other hidden abuses happening everday in many of our so-called Churches!!!
ReplyDeleteDr. Dog:
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Smyrl has to say today about D. Gilyard and his exploits - who is to blame for that? I guess Mr. Gilyard ignored/denied the reformation too.
Just curious, Could the subpeona on Tiffany blog info have anything to do with the embarassment of Gilyard for some of the SBC leadership who are close to Mac? Like Vines who preached at Gilyard's church? Or Patterson who protected Gilyard?
ReplyDelete4:03 you aren't really asking that r u? I thought that was about as obvious as anything could possibly be.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Patterson and Vines are thinking about their past support of Gilyard now? What happened to the spiritual discernment of these men? They knew for years, there was a potential problem of this sort, yet they continued to ligitamize Gilyards, I hate to say...ministry. Maybe without their support Gilyard would not have continued in the ministry of deceiving/abusing women. So, would you call Patterson and Vines enablers? After all Vines did add his stamp of approval to Gilyard by preaching in Gilyards church after his (Vines) retirement from FBCJ. This is just one occurence that has turned me away from churches and preachers. Just a thought and a question. Thanks Tiffany, you are a hero!
ReplyDeletePlease read Christa Browns's story here, in Pastor Wade's blog. Thanks.
ReplyDelete"I wonder what Patterson and Vines are thinking about their past support of Gilyard now?"
ReplyDeleteOh you know, alot of damage control moves, i.e. back pedaling, distancing and the like.
And we're supposed to buy it all.
Cuz we're gullible sheep.
I am a little hazy on ALL the details of the DG story so I apologize where I may be wrong, but here goes: Didn't this whole sordid mess start in the early 90's? Wasn't there a breaking, in-depth article in the Dallas Morning News about this, oh say 10 yrs. ago? This being the case (I think,) why on earth has it taken up to 20 yrs (when the first rapes/molestation accusations happened) to bring justice? Can someone help me out on this one?
ReplyDeleteI have been a member of FBC since 1978 and I have had enough. When we brought Mac Brunson in, we asked him to be the PASTOR of our church, not a world traveler who shows up every now and then, leaving the pull pit to whoever is available when he is gone.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking of running an ad on Craigslist in all major cities that reads:
PASTOR NEEDED
First Baptist Church of Jacksonville Florida is seeking a full time pastor.
Requirements: Attendence !!!
It starts at the top... and from many accounts, PP had no interest in helping the young women who came to him about Gilyard in Texas.
ReplyDeleteIt starts at the top... and from many accounts, PP had no interest in helping the young women who came to him about Gilyard in Texas.
ReplyDeleteMay 19, 2009 12:18 AM
He was actually given the authority to DECIDE if their stories were credible! He said no. The later he refused to meet with MORE women UNLESS they had THREE witnesses.
He said accusations against elders require three witnesses. Of course we all know that sexual predators always do their dirty work in front of witnesses.
So, all you elders out there who are sexual perverts; YOu are protected by scripture! According to Patterson
"This being the case (I think,) why on earth has it taken up to 20 yrs (when the first rapes/molestation accusations happened) to bring justice? Can someone help me out on this one?"
ReplyDeleteWhen you have big cheeses like Patterson and Vines supporting your ministry, you can get by with it for a long time.
Hint: They found out that Gilyard lied about his background long ago and did NOTHING but keep supporting him.
Why isn't the SBC firing Patterson as a seminary president? That is the big question. He is not qualified.
Tiffany Croft has done a great thing to help expose a predator and bring him to justice.
ReplyDeleteI hope and believe that her actions will encourage others who witnesse or are aware of abuse to speak out.
The best thing to do in an situation of abuse, in my opinion, is get to the police as soon as possible.
Louis
"When you have big cheeses like Patterson and Vines supporting your ministry, you can get by with it for a long time."
ReplyDeleteThat's what I don't get about all these Vines supporters and their constant, "oh it was never like this under Vines and the Lindsays" They dang near canonize Vines.
How come there was no outrage when he had DG at his Final Farewell (or whatever it was)? Why in cripes name was this acceptable?!?
This blog isn't about Vines, but if you ask me, Vines is cut from the same bunk mega-cloth that Mac, PP, etc are cut from.
I wish Tozer and Spurgeon would come back and kick the above metioned arrogant, pride-filled, deceptors' a$$.
By the way, I also posed the question "Why does PP still have a job" on a post several days ago. Unfortunately, ole WD chose not to publish (no hard feelings, brother).
Anon - I didn't allow your comment through because you used profanity, just like you did in this one. State your views, leave the profanity like "A$$" out and the profane word you used in Sunday's comment.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
(no hard feelings bro)
;)
"Why isn't the SBC firing Patterson as a seminary president?"
ReplyDeleteBecause they are too busy firing TRULY called and qualified people of God like Sheri Klouda and Wade Burleson.
Let us with broken hearts and desperate conviction pray through the scriptures for Tiffany. God called and equipped her to stand and fight. Gentle followers of Christ please do not stand idly by now that this one man is incarcerated. The insistent anguish of all his many victims will continue to echo through their lives for years and years. Pray on!
ReplyDeleteAnd now there is also a prison of sorts that the world has fashioned for Tiffany. The worldly and perverted lovers of the flesh will seek, like roaring lions, to devour her. All manner of stinging barbs and mocking innuendos await her as she rests and recovers from this life draining sequence of events. There are those who love darkness who now know who to sneer at.
We who are so full of thanksgiving for someone standing when and where so many others would not; must now recognize our honor and privilege to intercede for Tiffany and her family as the future is full of those who would churn to see her minimalized and her life "spit on." The evil of the silence of responsible leaders will in effect resound. These are exceedingly evil days.
Again, please pray scripture for Tiffany and her family. We are so indebted to you Tiffany and also to your amazing husband who has and will continue to endure the worldly fall out as you responded in faith to God’s call on your lives to stand.
Praise God from whom all blessings flow!
Peter Curtiss
we are also endebted to WD for bringing to light the truth about Mac.
ReplyDeleteSermon excerpt from Bellevue Baptist Church, Steve Gaines.
ReplyDeleteComparison of suicide, and the sin of those "messin' with the church".
So with what I just heard the unpardonable sin is messing with the pastors. Is that what I heard? I believe the unpardonable sin is not accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior.
ReplyDeleteSomeone needs to tell these guys (preachers) that they are not the appointed and the anointed. They are SINNERS just like the rest of us and the Unpardonable Sin is not accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior......period.
ReplyDeleteyeah DG, Mac and other abusers of the sheep - you don't mess with the Church of God.
ReplyDeleteSo according to SG's hillbilly madness, the sheep can't call out unrightousness in their leaders or they will suffer God's wrath.
Let me lay some words on your possum-haired head Gaines, blogging "ain't" on God's radar screen. He is too busy dealing with the abusive wolves and false teachers exploiting His holy word.
Anon post from previous thread:
ReplyDelete------------------
I really do not see that you have a supreme court case here. I doubt that you really have much of a case at all. Everything that I know that was said of you is proven and truthful. The lawyer that you selected is pretty indicative of where you want this to go. It seems pretty evident that you are looking for some sort of settlement. Your only leverage is the negative publicity angle. If your real intent was to better FBC or the cause of Christianity, you might have chosen a less litiguos path. Afterall, the only reason that JSO got involved was the public safety. Think about it. You did write some pretty awful things and you used data that was entrusted and intended for church uses and you might have knowledge or participated with the pictures. While you might be harmless, there are those that read these posts that might take life too seriously. Some might argue that your actions were somewhat menacing.
Congrats Anon. I really haven't read a post before like yours, where every single sentence but one was false.
ReplyDeleteYour only non-false sentence is "Think about it."
This story is about RACE! You mullet wearing, NASCAR lovin, KJV preaching bigots have crucified a great man. You ought to be ashamed, he is innocent! Go back to your country music, you've lost your trailer, your mind, and your decency! Shame on you!
ReplyDelete"This story is about RACE! You mullet wearing, NASCAR lovin, KJV preaching bigots have crucified a great man".
ReplyDeleteIn the olden days, at least in stories and legends, where dragons ruled, they requested periodically virgins for sacrifice.
Why do the virgins have to come from the sheep/pews to feed this dragon/Darrell Gilyard and other perps?
Why?
It roils my stomach to even suggest to you to find your own virgins and not-so virgins to feed this dragon.
Forgive me, while I go and throw up.
Anon 10:08. You should not be so disrespectful of those that agree with the Watchdog. These are the very backbone of our democracy. We love our country music. Also, the KJV was here hundreds of years prior to these newer versions. Grow up and quit being so petty. Additionally, with interest rates so high, why you picking on us who live in trailers? You better watch out as your home could become a forclosure in the days and months ahead!!! Shame on you especially bring up the race issue. Ain't got nothing to do with anything near this blog site. You must be from outer space.
ReplyDeleteCongrats Anon. I really haven't read a post before like yours, where every single sentence but one was false.
ReplyDeleteYour only non-false sentence is "Think about it."
May 19, 2009 9:24 PM
This is what is known as 'planting poison pills'. I hope you are ready for the onslaught against your character, Tom. I have seen folks whispered about as homosexuals, porn addicts, in order to marginalize them and get others against them. (The best defense is an offense against the other party)
One of the leaders who led the whisper campaign about a dissenter being a porn addict....WAS a porn addict himself. It came out a few years later when his wife told another elder' wife because she was sick of living the lie.
There are a long list of things for you to be accused of:
Violating 1 Corin 6 (Mac violated it first by employing the magistrate against you.
Using a secular lawyer (This one cracks me up)
You are in sin you are touching God's anointed
You only want money
Youonly want attention
You are bitter and hateful
You are rebellious
You are revengeful
There are many more...we can start a poison pill list.
But to me, you are a hero for standing up to the worldly system that calls itself a church.
Matt
KJVO stuff is silly. Read the preface by the translators. It is online and very instructive. They TELL folks to use other translations, too.
ReplyDeleteNever forget that the KJ translators were laboring under a church/state magistrate. King James was a tyrant. It was the KJ translators who ADDED the word 'office' to describe an elder/bishop. It is NOT an office. It is merely a function in the Body. Equal to all other functions and gifts.
Matt
with regard to Vines, there was no blog when he allowed DG on the platform but I can tell you, many of us were shocked and disappointed in our pastor. It felt like a kick in the gut. That's the first I personally questioned his leadership. It's very difficult to reconcile as he is a great expositor of scripture and always came across as humble and loving to his people.
ReplyDeleteMatt 11:40: Re: KJV. Although I have appreciated some of your comments in the past, I have just found out you don't know everything. Neither do I, but, I'll stick with my KJV. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteJerry Vines masked his real person until Dr. Homer Lindsay died; then he really exposed himself to be a hypocrite. He was never humble or even approachable. He just play-acted. And look what he left FBC with. Where is the discerning spirit? It's certainly not with him, or he just didn't care. He is to blame for the Gilyard, and Mac mess as well! God have mercy on the innocent lives of the babies women and families they have destroyed.
ReplyDeleteCongrats Anon. I really haven't read a post before like yours, where every single sentence but one was false.
ReplyDeleteYour only non-false sentence is "Think about it."You shouldn't let things get under your skin. You realize that in a situation like this everyone is right and wrong to some degree. This matter involving your "rights" to privacy and "anonymity" are intrusive of my rights to safety and security when I attend church. You are definitely not 100% right. I think all the observers of the post recognize that your agenda is not entirely "for the good and well being" of the Christian faith. You do have a monetary interest in the outcome or otherwise you would use the church's resources to air your grivances. You might even consider accepting church discipline. You did agree not to press suit against the church when you joined and to observe the common rules. Your further pursuit of this matter violates every FBC church members rights and expectations. It does not matter whether the individual members, and posters, agree with you or not. You are effecting the corporate resources. You basically agreed to do no harm to the church when you joined. That is what you should "think about."
I would bet that if your damages are relatively more than the damage that you inflicted then you would not need the courts or media to solve this. I do not speak for the church, but I think that I understand how the situation would get handled.
By the way, I hope that you find some truth in all of the sentences. You probably are a decent guy and I do think that you at least started with good intentions. The pictures thing might be considered menacing and was probably the point that the church involved JSO. That act, whoever did it, was over the line and born out of this blog.
" Truth said...
ReplyDeleteThis story is about RACE! You mullet wearing, NASCAR lovin, KJV preaching bigots have crucified a great man. You ought to be ashamed, he is innocent! Go back to your country music, you've lost your trailer, your mind, and your decency! Shame on you!
May 19, 2009 10:08 PM
"Truth" your moniker is a misnomer! There are no great men!Only God is Great and Good! I'm black by the way and this story has nothing to do with race,but everything to do with right and justice! Darrell Gilyard is a bad individual plain and simple!!And by your comments I believe you my friend are suffering from ignorance and bigotry!
May 20, 2009 9:47 AM - wake up! There were no pictures. There was and is no threat. The church was upset about the relentless, critical blogging and used their resources, including contacts within the JSO to out the blogger so they could trespass him and his wife and effectively "shut him down." Were you not listening to the sermons of mac about this? And did you hear Judge Soud's resolution? It was about "unjust criticism" being "aggressively confronted." This is not speculation, this is from the words of Mac and Soud themselves.
ReplyDeleteThey never thought Tom would find out what they did, since they destroyed the criminal file. But only after they were caught with their pants down, did they begin to make up some story about a threat. They knew they could NEVER admit what they did so they flat out made up other threats. They don't exist. Period. There was no investigation. They got Tom's name and closed the file. Then they aggressively confronted Tom thinking he was a coward. Now they have involved the JSO and SAO and think they have gotten away with it. But like SG said in the video, you mess with his bride he will tear you up. (That is really more threatening than anything Tom has said here) So, they messed with Tom's wife and bullied her when they knew (John Blount admitted to the news reporter) they never thought Tom was connected to the alleged stalking and mail stealing. So why trespass her? Again, to bully an innocent lady, the bride of the man who needed to be "shut down" for "unjust criticism."
Spin it all you want, Brunson supporters, the above is the simple, logical and obvious truth. A jury of non Kool-Aid drinkers will recognize it and they will send a message to the church and city that the citizens will not tolerate this.
VOR
May 20, 2009 9:47 AM - hey, your last post now makes YOU a threat to my safety and security and you need to be outted and trespassed and shut down. Isn't this what you are saying? That because Tom posts here he deserved to be outted and shut down since he was a threat. You just did the same thing. And my mail was stolen a few months ago? Was that you? Probably since you wrote that comment, you are a suspect. And someone was taking my picture last month, really, and I think it was you. Who are you? I must know! Call Detective Hinson and give me your name so I can take appropriate measures and trespass you away from my home and work.
ReplyDeleteHelp JSO, SAO and congregation! I am threatened by all of this blogging.
"By the way, I hope that you find some truth in all of the sentences. You probably are a decent guy and I do think that you at least started with good intentions. The pictures thing might be considered " [Anon 9:47am.]
ReplyDelete"Anon" since you appear to be an expert on the character of Dr.Dog. I particularly noticed that you made no references to Mac! What is your expert opinion and diagnosis of Mac Brunson actions through out this whole ordeal?
Help JSO, SAO and congregation! I am threatened by all of this blogging.Well there are at least 2 of us that aren't taking life too seriously.
ReplyDeleteLOL
This situation has gotten way out of hand. I might suggest that Tom invest in some google adwords to sell sheep and doves and such since he is getting so many hits. At least someone will get something out of all of this.
I think that Mac is a sinner just like the rest of us. He is probably trying to do the best that he knows how to spread the gospel. If he receives blessings along the way and pays his taxes and tithes, then I am largely okay with that. If his actions cause some to stumble then that is just par for the course.
ReplyDeleteYour "Dog" reference causes me to consider your self-confidence.
Perhaps Tom can post some etiquette rules to make this experience more enjoyable.
"
ReplyDeleteI think that Mac is a sinner just like the rest of us. He is probably trying to do the best that he knows how to spread the gospel. If he receives blessings along the way and pays his taxes and tithes, then I am largely okay with that. If his actions cause some to stumble then that is just par for the course."
May 20, 2009 10:40 AM
Anon you've got that right. Mac is a sinner just like the rest of us. Next is he really concerned about the Gospel,or how much money he can line his pockets with? And I guess by your thinking it's alright when people are caused to stumble due to a pastor's wayward actions; that not what Jesus said[Matt.18:6-7].Also how much is enough? The Apostle Paul worked at times to prevent being a burden on some of the Churches.Is Mac really trying to spread the Gospel,or spread his "BRAND"? I'll say one thing you've got correct: Mac is trying to spread something his way,but it sure as "Hades" isn't the Gospel!
Matt 11:40: Re: KJV. Although I have appreciated some of your comments in the past, I have just found out you don't know everything. Neither do I, but, I'll stick with my KJV. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteMay 20, 2009 3:29 AM
It is real simple, friend. Read the history of the KJ translation. Even the secular written history of King James is illuminating. The reasons 'why' he needed a new translation is quite interesting.
Read the preface written by the translators which is quite long and you can find it online. It is very interesting.
It a simple matter of historical fact. Nothing sinister here.
BTW: I use the NKJV all the time. But then, I use quite a few translations. My favorite is the interlinear.
Matt
" The pictures thing might be considered menacing and was probably the point that the church involved JSO. That act, whoever did it, was over the line and born out of this blog."
ReplyDeleteWhere are the police reports? I am sure if someone were taking pics of me out jogging, I would call the police and file a report with the best description I could give them of the photo stalker. So, where is the documentation?
What date did the Brunson's call police? What was the date of the so called photo stalking? What was the date of the mail theft? Why wasn't the PO contacted who handles such things?
It is becoming obvious those things were made up.
"This matter involving your "rights" to privacy and "anonymity" are intrusive of my rights to safety and security when I attend church."
ReplyDeleteHow so? Please explain.
" I think all the observers of the post recognize that your agenda is not entirely "for the good and well being" of the Christian faith."
Which Christian faith? Mac's or the one in scripture? They are not the same things at all. You really think it is best for the 'Christian faith' to sweep evil under the rug and pretend to be Christians to the world? They already know most folks are hypocrites.
"
You do have a monetary interest in the outcome or otherwise you would use the church's resources to air your grivances."
What church resources? What on earth are you talking about? The resolution? "Grievances".
" You might even consider accepting church discipline."
This one is priceless. Let the wolves 'discipline' you.
" You did agree not to press suit against the church when you joined and to observe the common rules."
You are not too bright are you? He is not "pressing suit"against the church.
" Your further pursuit of this matter violates every FBC church members rights and expectations."
Explain how members rights are being violated by Tom. (They are by Mac)
We have a good idea what the 'expectations' are for FBCJax members: Pay up and don't ask the wrong questions.
"It does not matter whether the individual members, and posters, agree with you or not. You are effecting the corporate resources."
How? Explain. the church is not being sued. I guess it will be a hardship to have to tell the truth in depositions. Frankly, I don't think they will.
"ou basically agreed to do no harm to the church when you joined. That is what you should "think about."
Mac is the one doing harm to your big building with lots of programs and big salaries. Where in the NT do you find that those in the ekklesia agree to never speak negative truths about wolves in the Body? Ever heard of Diotrephes? I doubt it. I am finding most folks in mega's are extremely illiterate about scripture. They are so used to being spoon fed milk from proof texted topical sermons and shallow seeker literature from the celebrity pastors who are in it for fame and wealth. Lots of proof texting on obeying the leader and giving your money. Just like the Pharisees did.
This situation has gotten way out of hand. I might suggest that Tom invest in some google adwords to sell sheep and doves and such since he is getting so many hits. At least someone will get something out of all of this.
ReplyDeleteMay 20, 2009 10:32 AM
Mac is the one 'merchandising' the Gospel for profit.
"I think that Mac is a sinner just like the rest of us"
ReplyDeleteAnother biblically ignorant FBCJaxer?
Ja 3
My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.
To all the above.
ReplyDeleteWow! I am really learning much. I did not realize how little I knew.
I am simply pointing out that right and wrong, in a worldly sense, is relative. Neither the church nor Mr. Rich could possibly be right 100% of the time. I hope that you brothers and sisters are not quite so insulting to those you come in contact with personally. Just because someone has an opposing view does not validate rude insults...at least that is what my momma taught me.
Ja 3
ReplyDeleteMy brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.
May 20, 2009 12:46 PM...if you can't take the heat then stay out of the kitchen?
Seems like pretty good advice. I hope that you are not implying that there are those that are less sinful than others?
Tom, Lets count the poison pills in May 20, 2009 9:47 AM comment. Never mind, most make no sense whatsoever. They are such a good try even with all the logical fallacies:
ReplyDeleteNote to readers: Poison pills are meant to malign the dissenter and put doubts in people's mind about their intergrity, character and motives. Some are quite ingenious. The poison pills are not for Tom (the dissenters in a cult) but for those who might believe him.
" You realize that in a situation like this everyone is right and wrong to some degree."
Here we have the old standby of situational ethics. There are no absolute truths when it comes to these things. (and these are the same folks who rave about inerrancy)
"This matter involving your "rights" to privacy and "anonymity" are intrusive of my rights to safety and security when I attend church."
This one is so sinister, I would check the IP if I were you. I would consider this one a direct threat knowing what I know about how these folks operate. If they can paint you as someone to fear from violence, they will.
As a matter of fact, I think you are seeing here the first hints of their defense in depositions. My guess is the commenter is close to the situation in some degree.
My guess is that Mac will make up some anonymous phone calls that were threatening, etc that he never reported to give some creedence to his actions in this matter.
"ou are definitely not 100% right."
This is meant to give Brunson some credibility. Grasping at straws.
" think all the observers of the post recognize that your agenda is not entirely "for the good and well being" of the Christian faith."
Planting a poison seed here. Here is a question to this person: What IS good for the Christian faith? Truth? Honesty? Obedience to scripture? Then we have ample proof that Mac's agenda is not good for the Christian faith. His behavior, sermons, deeds all point to a man who has rotten fruit. Poison fruit.
Matt
continued on the next comment...
continued....
ReplyDelete"ou do have a monetary interest in the outcome or otherwise you would use the church's resources to air your grivances."
This poison pill is meant to make readers ASSUME there is a process for true grievences, questioning of leaders or even dissent within a mega church. There aren't. There is only a process to 'shut them down'.
"You might even consider accepting church discipline."
This poison pill is meant to communicate to readers that you have refused discipline from your 'leaders' (Pharisees) Perhaps this person sees trespass warnings as a form of church discipline in the NT? Perhaps this person really believes that church discipline includes using the civil Like Rome.
"You did agree not to press suit against the church when you joined and to observe the common rules."
This poison pill is meant to communcate to readers that you agreed to these things and now have gone back on your word. Would this person please post the document Tom signed? And would this person please show us the docket number of the suit filed against the 'church'?
Is this person ignorant about the suit or just trying to plant a rumor that you are suing the church?
"our further pursuit of this matter violates every FBC church members rights and expectations."
This poison pill will not work with any thinking people. It sounds strangely enough like something Hillary Clinton would say.
"t does not matter whether the individual members, and posters, agree with you or not. You are effecting the corporate resources."
This poison pill is going to blame Tom for ruining the church's financial well being. Mac may have to give up the baby blue Jag.
"You basically agreed to do no harm to the church when you joined. That is what you should "think about."
This poison pill is a logical fallacy. How can truth harm a church?
" would bet that if your damages are relatively more than the damage that you inflicted then you would not need the courts or media to solve this."
This poison pill assumes Tom hasdone damage to the church. The church has definitely done damage to Tom and his family. But that is not important. Only the corporate mandate of the organization is important. Individuals in the Body of Christ matter not.
Mac is the one responsbile for the media being involved. If there was no story, they would not pay attention. Using the civil magistrate was a huge mistake. Not wise. They thought they could hide it.
"You probably are a decent guy and I do think that you at least started with good intentions."
This poison pill is meant to make us think the writer is unbiased. He/she isn't as is obvious by this next statement which indicts Tom with NO PROOF:
"The pictures thing might be considered menacing and was probably the point that the church involved JSO. That act, whoever did it, was over the line and born out of this blog."
This poison pill ASSUMES there WAS a STALKER who took pictures. So, what date was that stalking? Where is the documentation that police were called and responded. Where is the description of the stalker? Don't you think neighbors should have been warned?
There is not one shred of evidence there ever was a stalker. That poison pill is not good enough. Now, they are trying to spread the rumor that even if the 'fake' stalker was not Tom, then it was someone who reads the blog. They want readers to assume there WAS a stalker.
This is desparation. Tom, I would be checking the IP of this one. He/she is giving you guys some inkling of what you can expect in those depositions.
These guys have no problem lying. They think like, 'Rahab', they have license to lie to save the 'ministry'.
Matt
I am simply pointing out that right and wrong, in a worldly sense, is relative. Neither the church nor Mr. Rich could possibly be right 100% of the time. I hope that you brothers and sisters are not quite so insulting to those you come in contact with personally. Just because someone has an opposing view does not validate rude insults...at least that is what my momma taught me.
ReplyDeleteMay 20, 2009 1:17 PM
Your backpeddling is not impressive. You do not have an 'opposing' view. You accused Tom of stalking Debbie Brunson. Where is your proof? You ASSUME there was a stalker. Where is the proof one was reported? If you cannot produce it, then you are enabling sin and lying.
Right and wrong in a worldly sense is relative? You sound positively emergent. Can you please expound on that profound thought?
No one has insulted you. You have been taught by Mac that disagreeing is rude, mean and constitutes insults. You have been taught wrongly. You came here to sow seeds of doubt and prop up a tyrannical Pharisee. I am simply pointing that out. But I think you have actually helped Tom.
I pray you get out of that temple of entertainment that makes profit of the Gospel for a few.
Matt
LOL - I am beginning to question my church's leadership on how they could have ever taken this blog seriously. Entertaining to say the least...but harmless.
ReplyDeleteThe church did need to get involved with the picture thing for the sake of the assurance of safety... that was over the line...probably harmless, yet over the line.
Please accept my apologies for the intrusion on this blog. These rainy days!
Y'all be sweet now!
Seems like pretty good advice. I hope that you are not implying that there are those that are less sinful than others?
ReplyDeleteMay 20, 2009 1:20 PM
Read the verse again and again, friend. It is not about who is the less sinful. It is about stricter judgement for those who teach.
I know it is popular to make comments about our elders (spiritually mature) being sinners like everyone else. But where does that end? How are we to have spiritually mature ones in the Body of Christ when their fruit is just as rotten as the worldly?
Are YOU saying the Cross is a license for those who are to be the spiritually mature to consistently sin? No big deal?
Here is something you might find of interest:
Per Dr. Paul Martin of Wellspring, of the 210 verses that refer to false prophets, priests, elders and Pharisees, here is a summary of their content:
99 verses (47%) concern Behavior
66 verses (31%) concern Fruit
24 verses (12%) concern Motive
21 verses (*ONLY 10%*) concern Doctrine
Matt
"The church did need to get involved with the picture thing for the sake of the assurance of safety... that was over the line...probably harmless, yet over the line. "
ReplyDeleteWhere is your proof it happened. There should have been a report filed. A date it happened? Anything? Did Hinson take a description of the stalker down on paper? Was only Hinson informed of the so called stalker? I would think his job is the safety of the Brunson's and he would have dates, descriptions, reports, etc. Where are they?
You are seriously backpeddling from your first comment. I can understand why. But you HAVE been a big help to Tom. I should think Mac will ask you not to comment on the blog anymore.
Matt
Darryl Gillyard was an affirmitive action cause for the powers that be in the SBC. I speak the truth to power. Gillyard was given a leg up by Lindsay, Vines and Patterson because he was a minority in a lilly white SBC.
ReplyDelete"Darryl Gillyard was an affirmitive action cause for the powers that be in the SBC. I speak the truth to power. Gillyard was given a leg up by Lindsay, Vines and Patterson because he was a minority in a lilly white SBC".
ReplyDeleteHe might be. But from reading some of the comments by Gilyard's supporters, I have come to the conclusion that maybe he is a gifted preacher or speaker or say a motivational speaker. I will be honest to say I have not heard him preach.
But then we are asked/commanded to test the spirits [of the preacher]. This sermon of Pastor Wade Burleson is very apt here.
#18. Testing the Spirits (I John 4:1-6), of the series I John: The Christian and Complete Joy. If you watch the video, it's titled "Testing the Spirits", May 17, 2009 - Part 18 of series (1 Jn. 4:1-6).
III. There is a particular method to obey this command -- "By this you know" (v.2).
John does not leave us in the dark as to how to test the teaching of the Spirit of God.
A. Look for a confession that Jesus is God and Lord (v.3).
This is basic Christology. Jesus Christ is Jesus "the Messiah" come to earth. If you have somebody who denies that Jesus is God come to deliver us from sin you have what John calls "the spirit of anti-Christ" (v.3). (See I John 2:22). But even demons believe Jesus is God and tremble at the thought (James 2:19). "You must confess with you mouth that Jesus is Lord" (Romans 10:9). He's boss.
B. Examine to see divine life in the one who is teaching (v.4).
"Little children, you are from God . . . He who is in you is greater than he that is in the world. They [false teachers] are from the world" (I John 4:4-5). Look at their lives for a demonstration of regeneration (i.e. "humility, grace, love").
C. Find out if there is a willing submission to the word of God (v.6).
"Whoever knows God listens to us" (v.6). The inspired word of God is our guide.
"Darryl Gillyard was an affirmitive action cause for the powers that be in the SBC"
ReplyDeleteAmen to that.
"He might be. But from reading some of the comments by Gilyard's supporters, I have come to the conclusion that maybe he is a gifted preacher or speaker or say a motivational speaker. I will be honest to say I have not heard him preach."
ReplyDeleteI posted this on Tiffany's blog but it did not make it.
Gilyard was at Criswell, a very conservative Bible college. He was a promising quasi conservative future black preacher. this is a bigger deal than some think. If you can remember back in the late 70's and early 80's, the SBC was dealing with accusations of being segregated and exclusive.
But conservative black preachers were a rarity. So, Gilyard was mentored. And because he was mentored and promoted by Patterson and others, when uncomfortable things came out, they would rather save face than admit they had little wisdom and discernment. So, they kept digging the hole deeper trying to maintain the facade of Gilyard and prop him up hoping it would just go away.
Patterson's own words to the victims who approached him on this matter, indict him.
"This matter involving your "rights" to privacy and "anonymity" are intrusive of my rights to safety and security when I attend church."
ReplyDeleteHow so? Please explain.
If my pastor's wife is getting harrassed then I want to know. I attend church with hightened alertedness as it is. It seems that every 6 months you read about some serious minded citizen doing the worst possible thing in a public school, abortion clinic, or church. What do you suppose sits in the back of Mr. Hinson's mind every day?
I want every direct threat or credible rumor of a threat sought out and investigated aggressively and thouroughly. If my wife were being harassed, I would investigate everything that looked involved. Do you think that this blog and Mr. Rich were singled out? I would bet that there are many situations that are investigated, and not made public, given the size of the church. I don't care if Mr. Rich was 100% right or not. If you do stuff like this blog then you might anticipate having to answer questions one day.
This is not Mayberry anymore.
Do you think that the police are going to say any more than necessary? I hope not.
I apologize to Mr. Rich if his privacy was violated in the interest of preserving mine and my families safety. If Mr. Rich actually has a right to privacy then the church would be wise just to pay off. Personally, I think that if someone plays with fire a burning sensation might occur.
Seeing how Mr. Rich conducts this blog I truly believe that he set this blog up to bring about vigorous debate on relevent issues. Debate is good and we should not blindly follow leadership.
I disagree with the premise that Mac is doing something seriously wrong and I support Mac. I think that he has a right to pursue happiness and success. I don't remember that a pastor has to sign some oath of poverty. I think that he does much more good than harm. As far as I know, Mac does not have check writing authority at the church and he spends the agreed time behind the pulpit. He seems adequate with the administration function with the job. His sermons are interesting, Biblically sound and he is qualified to preach. I enjoy his history lessons as well.
I am glad to see Mr. Rich return to issues such as the Gilyard matter. I look forward to the healing and I pray for all of the families that are affected.
"If my pastor's wife is getting harrassed then I want to know. I attend church with hightened alertedness as it is. ... What do you suppose sits in the back of Mr. Hinson's mind every day? "
ReplyDeleteThen I am sure that Hinson can tell you about the stalker incident. How the police were called and the date. Just basic facts of a credible threat. So, there should be a basic description, right? Was he black or white? What was he wearing? Even a date would be nice.
" want every direct threat or credible rumor of a threat sought out and investigated aggressively and thouroughly. If my wife were being harassed, I would investigate everything that looked involved."
And they should be investigated. Where are the documents?
This is how it works in mega's friend: When there is ANY threat it is documented. Why? To see if a pattern emerges OVER TIME.
I have worked with security in mega (one mega has hired a former secret service man and another a former Philly policeman and another employs security that Beth Moore uses for her events)
Here is what the staff is trained to do: Threatening phone calls are documented as to time, voice, etc. They are to report every single incident And a report is taken. A stalking of a celebrity pastors wife would be taken very seriously. There would be a report somewhere. A date it happened.
What you are missing is that it was NOT taken very seriously at all. That should be a clue.
Or, is Hinson that incompetent? Which is it?
At the opening service of one mega, a heckler, stood up and yelled. He did not even get to finish his heckle as he was jumped on by two plainsclothes police and was downtown and booked before the third hymn was sung in service.
If mail had been stolen at the pastors home a report would have been made with the police and the PO. There would be evidence of documentation. It is a HUGE clue to you there is no documenation.
Are you getting my point? If there WAS a ANY threat or even perceived threat, there would be documents. Hinson knows this and so does Mac. But they expect you to believe otherwise. So far, you are going right along.
Matt
"o you think that this blog and Mr. Rich were singled out?"
ReplyDeleteDo you call a resolution, trespass warnings and subpeona's not being singled out? The WHOLE point was to single out WD. Now, where are the documents about the stalker and the mail?
" would bet that there are many situations that are investigated, and not made public, given the size of the church. ... If you do stuff like this blog then you might anticipate having to answer questions one day."
Is that a threat? Sounds like one. Tom, check his IP. He is making threats against you for daring to blog on this. (BTW: In a mega, anything investigated has a paper trail UNLESS they lied)
"o you think that the police are going to say any more than necessary? I hope not. "
You don't get it. It is not just the police. Mega security keeps records, too, of every incident. No matter how insignificant. So where is the report of the stalking incident that was credible?
WHERE IS THE STALKING INCIDENT REPORT? HINSON HAS NOTHING? NO NOTES ON A DATE OR ANYTHING?
"Personally, I think that if someone plays with fire a burning sensation might occur."
Another threat, Tom. Send this IP to your lawyer. Anything can be perceived and spinned as a threat, friend.
" disagree with the premise that Mac is doing something seriously wrong and I support Mac. I think that he has a right to pursue happiness and success."
That would be because you are biblically ignorant. And I grieve for you. Of course, we know that Paul was answering the call to pursue happiness and success. (sarcasm intended)
" don't remember that a pastor has to sign some oath of poverty. I think that he does much more good than harm. As far as I know, Mac does not have check writing authority at the church and he spends the agreed time behind the pulpit. His sermons are interesting, Biblically sound and he is qualified to preach. ."
Church is a cultural endeavor for you, isn't it? May you meet the Savior face to face. Then, you will understand.
Matt
Jesus saves. Even child molesters? It something i still have a hard time with. As someone who spent my early childhood in the care of someone who my family trusted that took away so much from me. It has effected me in so many ways. It has cost me so much. From the pain i have delt with to the mistrust i now put in all others. The victim is left with addiction or some even worsre disfunction. The Rapist, Some sick memory he carries like some trophy. To those who stand up and speak out like Tiffany and Watchdog. Thankyou.
ReplyDeleteAnother Victim: Thanks for your comments. I can believe your statement about mistrust. You certainly are entitled to that type of thinking and it is no surprise to me that you would be so inclined. I was never in your shoes, however, I can tell you that Jesus is the only One who will and can get you through such a circumstance. Time does heal all wounds but the memory will probably always be with you. I will pray for you and hope others will as well. God bless you.
ReplyDelete"A Pastor does not have to sign an oath of poverty" etc.
ReplyDeleteNo but he will sure sign a contract fast enough. I have often wondered why, if a pastor is called of God to preach at a church why pastors ask for contracts. And most of these contracts are what I call the "rip off" type. Guaranteeing them all sorts of perks that most average Joe's don't get. Why don't these preachers just "trust the Lord", like they ask us to do about things. And arn't we just to "Trust the Lord" about everything the preachers do and say to us. So why do they get the contracts, and we get to pay for it. And what if the return on our investment is not worth the contract, what then? And don't they actually have to show up to be called "the preacher".
Some preachers say "I have been called by God to this church" or "God spoke to me while I was here or there" and "I just know this is where God wants me". Yea right! "Where's my contract"!!! And if God called the preacher, why did it take "negotiations" to CONFIRM the calling. The back and forth of selection committees and maybe a lawyer or two just to guarantee the "Calling". And what about throwing in a few "free gifts" here and there to "sweeten the pot", I mean calling. And oh yea; " God called my family to be on staff too". And my secretary and her husband, and maybe some more people from another church I served in. What a "calling". No sir, not a bad calling. And God just told me to do all of this to serve Him.
Wait a minute, are we talking about church and preachers, or government officials running for office? What's the difference?
I have problems with preachers and others making millions off of Gods Word, and off of the name of Jesus. I know many preachers are actually called to preach. The real ones rarely have mega churches. They most likely will never be rich. At least not rich off of the gullible sheep. But the "real preachers" will get the reward in heaven when they hear "Well done good and faithful servant". I grew up with "real preachers" in the past, they didn't do this stuff. Does anyone know where we can find a "real preacher"?
To Anon 10:29. Thank you for your prayers. When i read of things like this it really upsets me. To think a Crime such as this would be covered up by those who are only intersted in the effect it might have on them. And when you take a cold hard look at it. It boils down to money.
ReplyDeleteDear Anon 9:37:
ReplyDeleteWhen you find that church that has a called pastor preaching the Word, please let us know, sincerely. I left FBCJAX recently because of Mac and I am looking for a new place to worship, serve and study. I am afraid to go to another Baptist church as the SBC seems to attract this type of wolf-in-shepherd's clothing pastors. I wold appreciate direction. WD, if there is anyway I can get you my email for this info I would be happy to do so.
Anon and Matt:
ReplyDeleteI think that Anon vocalizes the feelings and concerns of many regarding security in the local church, especially when there are reports of staking and mail tampering.
Matt agrees with this, that such reports are serious and should be looked into. However, for Matt and many others on this blog, the absence of details and documents reflecting those details cause him to conclude they are not true.
For purposes of the lawsuit, I am wondering if the court will be allowed to engage in the sort of criticisms that Matt has mentioned, i.e., that because there are no documents or recorded details, we can presume the reports of staking and mail tampering are not true and thus conclude it's a sham.
I am not sure that a court can do that.
I think that whatever Detective Hinson and/or the Brunsons say about this will be unrebutted facts (because no one will come forward to say, "It was a woman, not a man etc.").
So, if there are facts that the Brunsons were being stalked or having their mail tampered with are unrebutted (even if they are suspicious) then they are settled and the court assumes them to be true for the purpose of legal analysis.
The legal question I guess might be, given those unrebutted facts, is it acceptable within the law enforcement world to search out the true identity of a critical blogger to see if there is a connection.
I do not know the answer to that question.
There are several issues here, but the fact that Hinson made or kept no records regarding the reports will not probably not undo what we anticipate will be his unrebutted testimony that such reports were made to him.
Louis
speaking of pastors pursuing happiness and success, has anyone at FBC Jax inquired about Mac's negotiated compensation package if he is forced out or resigns?
ReplyDeleteI am sure the members think it is none of their business what they may have to pay out when he leaves.
TO Anon May 21, 2009 9:37 AM:
ReplyDeleteMMMAAAANNNN! You are absolutely, spot-on right! I concur with every point.
I would love to hear answers from these despicable pastors and other para-church leaders (**cough-cough** seminary presidents). The thing is, they'll just "intellectualize" their answers, "spritualize" them or simply read a prepared statement from their high-priced consultants and lawyers.
Man I'm really hating church these days. No way in my good conscience can I support these type of churches. Sheesh, if these pastors aren't ripping the sheep off, then they're molesting them! Sadly, some are doing both!
Anonymous 5/20 9:47 AM:......Why should Mr. Rich accept "church discipline"? (your words) For what... Asking questions that have yet to be answered. I would also question your statement regarding the "well being and good of the Christian faith":(your words) Being a blind follower of men is not a requirement of a christian or the christian faith in general. Maybe in a cult.
ReplyDeleteAs to Mr. Rich's actions affecting the "corporate resources" (your words), So, you admit church is a business now, and "corporate resources", would that be the tithes and offerings given for Gods work? Stewardship is everyones responsability, yes even the "corporation".
As to menacing pictures (your words), What pictures? Proof please!
Don't forget..involving the police and the media came from the church leadership. And also don't forget it was determined by the JSO that NO crime was committed!!!!
And observing the common rules (your words) you mentioned, is that the last set of by-laws that passed that no one (membership at large) saw, the same by-laws that membership does NOT have a copy of. The same by-laws that were never discussed or explained to membership? If you have been a member of FBCJ for any length of time you probably did not ever "agree" to anything of the sort that you are referring.
Former Jacksonville pastor pleads guilty; sex offender Gilyard will get 3 years.
ReplyDeleteFormer pastor Darrell Gilyard pleaded guilty this morning to molesting a teenage girl from his Jacksonville church and sending lewd text messages to another.
Gilyard will be sentenced June 11 to three years in prison and will be required to register as a sex offender under terms of his plea agreement. His prison term will be followed by three years of sex-offender probation requiring him to avoid contact with children and limiting where he can live.
The mother of one of his victims told Gilyard in court that he "lived a lie" and that she would pray for him.
Gilyard and his lawyer left court out a back door to avoid reporters.
Gilyard, 47, was arrested 16 months ago and has been free on his own recognizance. He remained free until his sentencing. Circuit Judge Michael Weatherby warned him he would face up to 15 years in prison if he doesn't show up for sentencing.
The former pastor of Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church had faced two felony counts of lewd conduct involving sexually explicit text messages sent to a teenage girl and one felony count of lewd molestation for fondling a teenage girl whose parents sought counseling for her from the pastor. One of the texting counts was dropped as part of the plea agreement.
A Palatka native, Gilyard rose quickly to prominence after seminary, pastoring one of the nation's fastest-growing churches while still in his 20s. He left that church in Texas amid accusations of sexual impropriety and came to Shiloh in 1993.
For more on Gilyard's plea, check back on Jacksonville.com and see Friday's Times-Union.
News4Jax > Ex-Pastor Pleads Guilty To Sex Charges.
ReplyDeleteAfter the plea, his lawyer rushed Gilyard out a side door.
Prosecutors said Gilyard has a history of inappropriate relationships with his parishioners.
"He was a person who obviously could not control his sexual desires," said Assistant State Attorney Alan Mizrahi. "He used his position of trust to gain access to children and he used that position of trust to gratify himself."
Other women have come forward to say Gilyard had inappropriate relationships with them, but the only criminal charges included the two juveniles.
FirstCoastNews > Former Shiloh Pastor Pleads Guilty to Molesting Teen.
ReplyDeleteJACKSONVILLE, FL -- The former pastor of Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church is now looking at three years in prison.
Darrell Gilyard appeared in court Thursday morning where he pleaded guilty to molesting a 15-year-old girl at his church.
He also admitted to sending explicit text messages to another teen.
Prosecutors say Gilyard will be sentenced in June to three years in prison. The prison time will be followed by three years probation and Gilyard must register as a sex offender.
Gilyard stepped down as pastor of Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church in December of 2007 as allegations against him surfaced.
In January of 2008, police arrested Gilyard on lewd and lascivious charges. A mother told police her 14-year-old daughter received an explicit text message from Gilyard that appeared sexual in nature.
In a separate incident, court documents revealed a 15-year-old girl told police Gilyard kissed her on two occasions while in a darkroom. Gilyard had been counseling the girl.
The records also showed Gilyard left four churches in Texas during the eighties and nineties after women complained of sexual abuse.
Gilyard is also facing a paternity lawsuit filed by a woman who claims the former pastor is the father of her 3-year-old daughter. The woman claimed in her lawsuit Shiloh knew or should've known about Gilyard's past.
anon 9:37 a.m.
ReplyDelete"where can we find a real preacher?"
Believe me, God has rams in the bushes. You are on point in saying that the "real" preachers are not in mega churches(most of them anyway). They are not concerned about money or a contract. They are concerned about the souls of the lost and the spiritual growth of the sheep of God. Not their pockets. The Apostle Paul and other disciples displayed the character of a true servant of Christ. Even Jesus didn't focus on the cashy cash (only in a negative way). He came to seek and to save that which was lost. What's gonna happen when the money doesn't matter in the end?
Words of a Fether > Brood of Vipers.
ReplyDeleteThis is beyond evil. No wonder the apostle John stares in horror at what he can scarcely believe was ever the ekklesia in Rev. 17:5-7. (There are only two entities in the Bible that were ever said to be “married” to God: Israel and the ekklesia, and I think we can rule out Israel in that passage. The reason this matters is because she is called a prostitute, and this is God’s way of referring to His wayward “wife”.) How can any group of believers harbor such evil, enabling it by silence while the perpetrators roam freely among the sheep?
But while many good points are made at that link, here’s what I think is the foundational “enabler”: The Institution, the “church”, the System. It fosters hierarchy and divides the Body. It puts up barriers between the people and their Savior and God. Of course even a “house church” can be just as bad, but when you have multi-national conglomerates that call themselves “Christian”, you multiply both the severity of the crimes and the number of victims
Think about it. If you have been taught all your life that you have direct access to God, that you have the Holy Spirit to guide you and the Bible to keep you in the truth, then it will be much harder for anyone to use position or fear of hell to victimize you. But if, as in any cult, you have been told that you must blindly obey your rulers, who will not hesitate to hunt you down if you run or smear your name if you talk, you run a much greater risk of falling victim to the aggressive, to people who are known for their ability to put on a pious face while savagely tearing apart the sheep.
"So, if there are facts that the Brunsons were being stalked or having their mail tampered with are unrebutted (even if they are suspicious) then they are settled and the court assumes them to be true for the purpose of legal analysis."
ReplyDeleteLouis, Your comment is interesting to say the least. Hard to believe, too.
I guess the question becomes...what are the FACTS that the Brunson's were stalked or had their mail stolen. Are you saying the court will decide it is a fact simply because Hinson or Brunson say it is so? (Nevermind there is a stalker and mail thief still loose out there, right?)
Are you positively sure you are a lawyer?
Considering the fact that Hinson used these two incidents as part of his pretext for obtaining subpeona's, they are quite relevant as to whether they happened or not. But you insist they will be treated as FACTS. Even with no documentation.
Basically you are teaching that I could tell a detective friend my wife was stalked a year ago, he believes but there is no documentation. So, based soley on that, it would be considered a factual event in court. Is this because it was told to a dectective and their word cannot be challenged? I am not getting you at all.
Matt
Unfortunately, there is a business end to the church. It is necessary to pay bills and plan for the future.
ReplyDeleteCorporately, means many parts making up one body.
Mr. Rich's actions affected the body and we, the church, are certainly no better off. Some might argue that this blog effectively does more cumulative damage, to the body, than what the FBCJax leadership is accused of.
It would be an interesting economic study for both evangelistic and financial concerns.
By the way, I see many people baptized and profess Jesus Christ under the preaching at FBCJAX. I would be interested to learn if anyone was ever led to Christ from the words found in this Blog.
"Unfortunately, there is a business end to the church. It is necessary to pay bills and plan for the future."
ReplyDeletePlease show me in the NT where there were bills to pay for the church. You will see offerings taken to care for the Body who had needs and to send the Gospel OUT.
"Corporately, means many parts making up one body."
You are misuing the term Body of Christ. It is a spiritual term not an institutional term. The Body is an organism made up of the Spirit and People. And the people have the spirit indwelling.
"Mr. Rich's actions affected the body and we, the church, are certainly no better off."
You are much better off. You have been given a clear sign that your leaders (Who are Nicolaitans) are depraved and not of Christ. What you do with that information is quite telling.
" Some might argue that this blog effectively does more cumulative damage, to the body, than what the FBCJax leadership is accused of. "
We cannot damage the true Body of Christ even if we wanted to. The gates of Hades will NOT prevail against the true Body of Christ. EVER. Throughout history the blood of the martyrs became the seed of Body. So even death to the members of the Body could not damage the true church.
"It would be an interesting economic study for both evangelistic and financial concerns. "
This is typical thinking that God cannot accomplish His purposes without our money. And that we have to employ worldly tactics to see that through.
"By the way, I see many people baptized and profess Jesus Christ under the preaching at FBCJAX. I would be interested to learn if anyone was ever led to Christ from the words found in this Blog."
Many people walk an ailse, get baptized and never know Christ. Our churches are full of them. See Matthew 7.
You need to study the book of 1 John. Then study Matthew 5. You do not seem to know what a true follower of Christ looks like.
May 21, 2009 6:00 PM
let's stop pastor darrell gilyard together > You are no longer silenced.
ReplyDeleteBut, how sad it was to sit there and watch a man with such gifts, such potential, hang his head as he received the sentence for crimes that he hoped no one would ever know of. The same crimes he has intimidated people from reporting, the ones he has tried to convince others did not happen, the ones he himself has adamantly denied - until now. What a shame, I am truly sad for him.
Anon 6:00 There is a premise here that one should consider "business". The Lord's house is now a business, exactly the point. It should be a house of prayer and preaching rather than a place where funding seems to be one of the major objectives.
ReplyDeleteMr. Rich has done nothing amiss. All he did was attempt to get answers and was met with a lot of stonewalling. Bring us the answers to some of the questions raised on this blog. This blog., was not set up as a means to bring people to Jesus. It was set up to bring accountability to the church leadership. It has been met with arrogance and ego.
Concerning baptisms. Are these individuals getting saved in the church under someones preaching are or they led to Christ by someone else, and then brought to the church? Most people get saved one on one outside the building not necessarily in a church. Do you have any facts and statistics to support your position that it is the "preaching" that is getting people saved? How many ARE getting saved? And how does the number truly getting saved compare with the number getting saved in the past. This site should have been around for the last fifty years. It would certainly have been a different perspective. What we have come from, to what we are. Sadly, the church as we knew it, a place of God, for the most part, is basically OVER. Ego, power and position are front and center now.
ABP News > Former rising star preacher pleads guilty to molestation.
ReplyDeleteA woman who claimed she resisted sexual advances by Gilyard when she was 18 and a youth leader at First Baptist Church in Jacksonville in 1991, started a blog in 2008 urging others with similar stories to come forward.
Tiffany Thigpen Croft said in a recent posting she was not rejoicing about Gilyard's downfall, but she labeled him a sexual predator and said he should suffer consequences for his actions. Croft said if Gilyard had not been sentenced "I am confident that there would be more victims."
In April Gilyard settled a lawsuit with a woman who claimed he sexually assaulted and got her pregnant, but a paternity suit against him continues. According to the Florida Times-Union, an earlier sexual misconduct case against him was settled quietly by his church for $300,000.
Jacksonville News > Former Jacksonville pastor pleads guilty in sex case.
“You taught us the truth ... but you lived a lie,” one victim’s mother told Gilyard, 47, in court. She said she’d continue praying for him.
...
So was a woman who writes a blog titled “let’s stop pastor darrell gilyard together.” Tiffany Thigpen Croft said she watched Thursday’s court proceedings with a mixture of satisfaction for Gilyard’s victims and sadness for the self-imposed downfall of a talented preacher. Most importantly, she said Gilyard won’t be able to harm anyone else while locked up.
“This is for all the victims that were never heard,” she said. “It’s time to heal.”
Matt:
ReplyDeleteYes. That is what I am saying.
I think that because you are suspicious about the truth of the mail theft and stalking allegations that you believe a court will engage in that same skepticism when it analyzes this case.
Procedurally if one person says something under oath, and that is not rebutted by some other witness or by natural facts, the court takes that fact as true. There is no evidence to rebut it.
So, if the Brunsons say "There was a person following us" or "Our mail was stolen" etc., who is going to rebut that? The court would take their story or the report of that story as a fact.
You ask about documentation, which is a good question. But documentation doesn't make a story more or less true. Hinson could have prepared a document with all sorts of detail that could not have been verified.
So, you could tell a detective friend of yours that you believed you had been stalked. The detective could investigate that report.
If the detective were on trial a year later for some wrongdoing, your report to the detective that you had been stalked would be an unrebutted fact that the court would accept as true, unless some other countervailing facts were introduced. That would be true even if you lied about it, so long as you didn't tell the court it was a lie.
I know that sounds strange to a lay ear. But that is generally how it works legally, especially in the stages of litigation before the trial where the court is testing the allegations legally.
So, in this case, if a motion to dismiss is filed (which is common in this sort of case), the court may boil it down to the following:
1. Pastor and wife complain of being stalked and mail being stolen.
2. Report of same is made to a JSO detective.
3. JSO detective performs an investigation, which includes investigating the source of an anonymous blog that has been focusing on the pastor and his family.
4. JSO detective obtains subpoena from SAO to determine the identity of the blogger.
5. JSO identifies blogger, confirms identity with church.
6. Detective closes investigation.
Then, the court will look at the Federal and Florida statutes, Florida common law, and determine if this activity violates those statutes or common law.
If there are facts at issue (proof offered by both sides differs), then jury will decide which facts are correct.
But a court will not hear unrebutted facts, and then suspect that they may not be true. That would involve the court in speculation.
Please don't take anything I have said as being the whole story on this. There may be lots of facts that come out that will complicate this.
For example, what if a deacon comes forward and says, "I was in a discussion with the Brunsons and Hinson, and we all discussed how we could lie about this and that, and find out who the blogger is..." That would be the kind of fact that would cause a jury trial. The Brunsons and Hinson would deny that happened. Then the jury would have to decide which is true.
Without that kind of a dispute, the court will not throw out facts just because of suspicion or because there could be some motive to tell an untrue fact.
I hope that this helps explain what I said earlier.
Louis
Stop Baptist Predators > It should not be forgotten.
ReplyDeleteIf Southern Baptists are ever going to effectively address clergy sex abuse, they must begin to see that the problem is about more than “a few bad apples.” It’s about the way in which the barrel itself enables the rot.
That’s what we asked the trustees to do -- look at whether Patterson played a role in enabling the rot. That sort of accountability inquiry is the sort of thing that a responsible organization would do. It’s what an organization that truly cared about the safety of kids and congregants would do.
Why? Because when it takes two decades and at least 46 wounded people before a predatory preacher is stopped, there is something very wrong with the system. Either the institutional safeguards are non-existent or they have failed. And someone in a position of responsibility needs to look into it and to assess what went wrong.
It should not be forgotten that a great many people suffered grievous wounds in this dreadful saga.
What would Baptist leaders do differently to prevent so many from being so wounded in the future? What would Patterson and Vines do differently?.
Louis...Please.....enough already. Go away!
ReplyDeleteI don't feel sorry for Gilyard. I don't feel sorry for any sexual predator. I didn't feel sorry for Bob Gray or any person in a position of trust, especially in a church, that is a molester. Gilyard had ample time since the 80's to repent of his ways. He chose to continue on his path of crime. The real shame in addition, is the preachers that covered for him allowing him to roam free for YEARS to harm more unsuspecting victims. These predators are allowed freedom to do harm far too long.
ReplyDelete"So, if the Brunsons say "There was a person following us" or "Our mail was stolen" etc., who is going to rebut that? The court would take their story or the report of that story as a fact."
ReplyDeleteLouis, Your comment so intrigued me that I called a retired judge I know well last night and ran your scenerio past him. Of course, he said without knowing Fla law he could only speculate.
And on what evidence did they obtain subpeona's and issue the trespass warning.
They claim Tom was a threat. And those two incidents were used to make that claim. So, it is relevant how they were investigated and documented. (There is still a stalker and mail thief loose. Aren't the Brunson's concerned about that now?)
Remember, they gave Tom trespass warnings so they did violate his rights based on the investigation information they gathered which included the so called stalking and mail theft. They are quite relevant.
Where are the investigative documents on both incidents? Are you saying the PO would have destroyed those documents, too? If the PO did not investigate or it was not reported to the PO, why?
You are saying they have to be rebuted as factual events. You are claiming the counsel has no right to question them at all as to whether these two events happened or even if the stalker was a male or female? Counsel has to treat these 2 incidents, with no documentation as factual?
My judge does not agree with you. He says these 'events' were used to implicate Tom. As if he were the stalker and mail thief. So they are quite relevant in detail.
As a matter of fact, questioning on these two events might be just the proof Hinson needs that he was ill used. (Supposedly, they did not know that WD was Tom when they made the stalking and mail theft reports, right?)
I plan to get some more input because your scenerio sounds a lot like citizens have little recourse against major lies told about them in order to obtain subpeona's and trespass warrants.
It is a bit like OJ looking for the real killer. Why didn't Hinson keep looking for the mail thief and stalker taking photos?
Matt
Louis wrote: "So, if the Brunsons say "There was a person following us" or "Our mail was stolen" etc., who is going to rebut that? The court would take their story or the report of that story as a fact."
ReplyDeleteLouis, you sound so informed and persuasive, yet you are so wronbg. Are you really a baptist preacher/lawyer wannabe? You are wrong, Louis. Thousands of people testify they have been injured. Thousands of experts (doctors, structural engineers, etc.) testify as to "facts" unrebutted. Yet the jury is there to decide to accept that testimony as fact or not. They are told to use their common sense, lay their biases aside, and make a decision. If Hinson testifies he was told something by Mac Brunson, a jury can believe it or they can think the man (and Mac) are flat out liars! Period. Like Voice of Reason stated in a comment above, it is clear that the church was making every effort to "aggressively confront" "unjust criticism" and to "shut em down." Mac and Soud even said so from the platform. So a jury will be asked to either believe what Mac and Soud said from the pulpit, or believe what Hinson is saying after he destroyed his file and can't prove any allegations were made or any threat existed or any real investigation of the blogger was done. (never interviewed Mr. Rich) He will have to convince that jury that there was some reason to believe the owner of a critical blog was actually tied to any made up threats. He can't do that and he knows that. And if he tries (by giving us specific names and dates and details and descriptions of suspects), he digs himself in a deeper hole. Not to mention the inclusion of the memphis blogger and tiffany croft.
Nice theories, Louis. But those "what ifs" are not going to be treated as "fact" by a judge. A jury of non-Kool-aid drinkers will be asked to make the call. And either way, Soud, Hinson, Brunson and Blount and some select Deacons and trustees, WILL be held accountable, under oath, in a court of law! Amen and Amen.
"(never interviewed Mr. Rich) He will have to convince that jury that there was some reason to believe the owner of a critical blog was actually tied to any made up threats"
ReplyDeleteThis commenter makes an excellent point. When Tom was identified because of the subpeona he was never interviewed by Hinson about the stalking or mail theft. He was just given trespass warnings.
He was a threat? A possible stalker and mail thief but never interviewed by Hinson or anyone else?
Why is that? Louis?
If this blog was all about holding Brunson, Soud, Blount, Deacons and Trustees accountable, then all goals will have been achieved when their actions and words are finally scrutinized by a jury. Regardless of the outcome of the trial, the Watchdog's goals will have been accomplished. These men will have their actions openly debated in a court room for the whole world to see. If they can carry the day, good for them. If not, too bad. Either way, nice job, Watchdog. These guys will be answering for their abuses. And for that, this has all been worth it.
ReplyDeleteDo you really think that Brother Darrell cannot be restored? The hate I sense on this blog makes me shutter. Brother Darrell is a good man who made a couple of mistakes. Brother Mac, on the other hand, is a true victim of circumstances. You people have trumped up charges against a real stand up man and it is wrong! You would think the guy is the Anti-Christ, give me a break! Remember, they don't build statues to critics, you haters need to stop your gossip and get right with God! This rag you call a blog, it ranks right up there with the National Enquirer, TMZ, and People Magazine. That root of bitterness growing in you is going to cause you to eat a lot of TUMS! TUM TUM TUM...TUM!
ReplyDeleteMatt and Anon:
ReplyDeleteThanks for the thoughts.
Matt, I agree that the story can be probed or questionned by the lawyers. I doubt the court would cut off discovery if the plaintiff wanted to engage in that.
The Plaintiff can certainly work hard to gather facts to show that what the Brunsons said is not true. If facts can be obtained showing that, then the truth of the story can be a jury issue.
But if all they come up with is that Hinson goes to the church, the Brusons are not to be trusted because of their leadership decisions and the way they handle themselves, and Hinson cannot produce any reports (I thought I read at some point that the reports were destroyed after 90 days etc.), that will probably not be enough to create an issue of fact for the jury.
Someone mentioned lawsuits involving personal injuries. In our state, to allege personal injury due to an accident etc., the law requires expert proof connecting the reported event to the injury (causation) and the presence of an injury.
That means a doctor or other qualified medical witness must give an opinion that the injuries sustained are consistent with (and assuming the history presented by the plaintiff) and were caused by the accident etc.
But the plaintiff patient is usually the person in complete control of the report of injury. If the patient says, "I fell in hole in my neighbor's yard, and broke my ankle" and the doctor says, "The patient reported that he fell in a hole in his neighbor's yard. I have determined that he has a fractured ankle. His report is consistent with what I have found. I opine that the patient fell in a hole in his neighbor's yard which caused his fracture."
Based on the reports in the papers that have been linked on this blog (I have not read the complaint), the issue in the case is whether the JSO and the ASO acted within the law based on all the reports that had been given to them.
Again, if the plaintiff can come up with some countervailing facts that make the Brunson's report appear to be untrue, then there would be a question of fact. Without that, we have only speculation of motives and truthfulness.
And speaking of speculation, we are all speculating because we don't know what facts will tumble out during litigation.
I was just trying to make a point about what I believe to be pretty standard legal procedure. Whether it will happen depends on the facts that come out.
Louis
Anon:
ReplyDeleteYou are right that there will have to be some logical connection explained by Hinson between the blog and the reports of stalking and mail tampering.
I thought that Hinson's superior sort of laid out what the argument would be in one of the news stories.
Also, I thought the trespass warnings were connected to church discipline for the blog etc. I think it was obtaining the subpoenas and the WD's identity and turning it over to the church that is the legal issue.
I thought that the trespass warnings came after WD's identity was discovered and were issued because of a violation of church matters etc. and not because of stalking or mail tampering.
Louis
"Also, I thought the trespass warnings were connected to church discipline for the blog etc. I think it was obtaining the subpoenas and the WD's identity and turning it over to the church that is the legal issue."
ReplyDeleteThanks for the tip, Louis. Now we know their defense: Church discipline.
You are saying they issued the trespass warnings as 'church discipline' without EVER having talked to Tom. That is not illegal, obviously. Stupid, yes. Unbiblical, yes. Horrible witness, yes.
But it seems to be changing the tune from their actions and words. The blogger was supposedly the stalker and mail thief and a huge threat to the pastor's safety.
On the other hand, perhaps the blog was not enough to obtain subpeona's and the stalking/mail incident was used to create more of a threat.
Either way, they are certainly relevant.
"I thought that the trespass warnings came after WD's identity was discovered and were issued because of a violation of church matters etc. and not because of stalking or mail tampering."
They could only come after he was identified which is the whole point. Tom was never interviewed about the stalking/mail incident after they discovered his name by supeona. Why is that?
But they used both those incidents to prove a threat from the 'blogger'. Who was never interviewed at all. The fact they went to all that trouble to find out who Tom was and he was never even investigated about the stalking and mail theft incident is quite mysterious.
But thanks for the tip about church discipline and trespass warnings. If it flies, expect to see more of this within the SBC in dealing with any one who questions the big shots.
If our tax exemptions are ever taken away, we can only blame ourselves for what we have allowed our churches to become.
a couple of mistakes??????
ReplyDeleteAre you kidding me??????? 25 women complained in one church alone. Then there was the child molestation charges. a couple of mistakes, you say?
(And I am not even going to go into the "mac was victim..." phooey)
PLEASE GO AWAY AND don't come back this blog again.
If the judge allows the stalking and mail theft incident to be entered into the case as a pretext for the subpeona's, both incidents are open game.
ReplyDeleteBut since there is no documentation and they never interviewed Tom as a suspect and they never referred the mail theft to the PO, it is not looking good that is was a REAL concern as a threat.
Basically, what I am hearing Louis say is that whole defense will be that Hinson was helping FBCJax in their church discipline. Using his duel position with the JSO/FBC to help them carry out church discipline.
Anyone see a problem with that?
"It is a bit like OJ looking for the real killer."
ReplyDeleteMatt - right on target, once again. I chuckle because that's exactly like the scenario here, a bunch of fallacies and impossibilities.
The Mac's are a complete farce and have the same credibilty as the above statement coming out of OJ's mouth.
Anon said - "Gilyard is a good man who made a couple of mistakes."
ReplyDeleteAt least 46 of the same mistakes over a period of decades against sheep he was supposed to be pastoring as "God's man."
And Mac is "not perfect." You can even ask his wife he says. Ha ha. He is so funny that Mac.
Well, Watchdog can say the same things. He is a good man who made a few mistakes (asking questions and blogging) and he is "not perfect" either. So why trespass him and his wife?
Nice, anon. Really nice.
I have a theory. God put Mac in FBC JAX to purge it. Now we are making heroes out of people like Tiffany and others who really enjoy seeing other people fail. Don't get me started on WD, his actions are close to those of Judas. When you stand back and are able to observe this whole circus, you can see who the clown really is!
ReplyDeletelet's stop pastor darrell gilyard together > Extending Grace - A powerful message.
ReplyDeleteDarrell was certainly an incredible speaker and knew God’s word, how odd and uncomfortable it had to be for him to hear this. She reminds him that he, as the Shepard abused her daughter inside of the Shepard’s office. Among other things she also reminds him that lives have been destroyed and that he will have to give an account for this.
Her final message is so amazing it is God talking through a wounded person right in the midst of tragedy…she says “Just know God loves us and wants the best for us. I will pray for you as always that at some point you get right with God. You are forgiven by me. I have no malice in my heart as we all have sinned and woe is the man or woman that does not confess and turn from their wicked ways.”
Hallelujah! Praise be to Jesus! To Him is all of the glory and honor and praise! Ministering to the man that hurt her daughter, the same man that was supposed to minister to her.
Do you really think that Brother Darrell cannot be restored? The hate I sense on this blog makes me shutter. Brother Darrell is a good man who made a couple of mistakes. Brother Mac, on the other hand, is a true victim of circumstances. You people have trumped up charges against a real stand up man and it is wrong! You would think the guy is the Anti-Christ, give me a break! Remember, they don't build statues to critics, you haters need to stop your gossip and get right with God! This rag you call a blog, it ranks right up there with the National Enquirer, TMZ, and People Magazine. That root of bitterness growing in you is going to cause you to eat a lot of TUMS! TUM TUM TUM...TUM!
ReplyDeleteMay 22, 2009 9:54 AM
I am sure Mac really appreciates your comment in defense of him. Especially since you mentioned Gilyard's 'mistakes', too. Mac wants to be on record as having followers who believe Gilyard just made some 'mistakes'. No big deal. 46 victims of a sexual predator who just happened to be a preacher and used Jesus Christ as a cover to molest and rape women. No biggie, I am sure. But, according to you, he is a 'good man'. I would hate to see what a lost person looks like to you.
Hypocrites! John McCain...Adulterer! Most of you voted for him for President. Charles Stanley..divorced! Most of you listen to him preach! Rush Limbaugh...drug addict! Most of you dragon breath Pharisees listen to him everyday.
ReplyDeleteYet you want to crucify Mac.
I doubt that WD will even let this be put on this blog because....
THE TRUTH HURTS!
Get that log out brother, you will see I only have a toothpick in mine!
I just returned from a luncheon at which an FBCJ member was discussing this blog. She rattled off all the talking points about how WD has slandered Mac and should be prosecuted for doing so.
ReplyDeleteAccording to her, Mac had no choice but to "out" this "slanderer" for the protection of himself and the church. She went on to say how there are many very wealthy people at FBCJ and if they want to share their wealth with Mac it's nobody else's business.
She seemed to be high on the kool-aide!
By the way, she was talking to the woman sitting next to her. I just listened without speaking because I wanted her to say all she wanted to without hesitation.
Are there really people defending Gilyard??? Guess the justice system and the Judge doesn't agreee with them. All those he abused don't agree either. Someone asked could he not be "restored". To what? Was he ever saved to start with? Having a gift to act a part (preacher) and being a genuine man of God are quite apart. But we see alot of play acting in the ministry today, don't we. Well, 46 victims can testify that Gilyard was not as he presented himself to the overall public. He certainly is not Gods man.
ReplyDeleteIf you think Gilyard just made a FEW mistakes you are completely idiotic, in denial or not informed... maybe all of the above.
ReplyDeleteTiffany isn't rejoicing that a "man of God" has fallen but that an abuser has been hopefully stopped... at least while he's in jail.
I was one of the young girls that Dr. Bob Gray called into his office TWICE years ago. Someone came over from his office to the school and took me to his office. I have no recollection of him touching me or harming me in any way. For that I thank God. I called my parents in tears the day I heard the allegations come out against him just amazed at God's protection on my life...
and to think... I thought he had me to his office because he heard I was a nice kid and wanted to meet me (my dad was on staff there at the time). I believe the first time he gave me a Bible.
These men are shameful and worse.
You must be a twisted person to spew such nonsense about Gilyard who has admitted molesting girls! Go away!
This from Christa's recent post.
ReplyDeleteIt should not be forgotten that literally dozens of young women, college girls, and teens were wounded by pastor Gilyard while high-level Southern Baptist leaders stayed mired in their own complicity.
At least 44 people reported abuse by Gilyard during his career in Baptist churches. That was my count nine months ago, and those are just the ones we know about from published articles. There are likely many more who may have been so traumatized they stayed silent. And let’s not forget that the spouses, future spouses, and families of those abused by clergy are also people who suffer.
"Hypocrites! John McCain...Adulterer!Most of you voted for him for President."
ReplyDeleteIf the 1st Century Christians had the vote, who do you think they should have voted for: Nero or Caligula?
"Charles Stanley..divorced!Most of you listen to him preach! "
Nope. I think he is a fraud. And his divorce is JUST ONE reason I think he is a fraud. (He should have resigned)
Another reason is because he told some Criswell Trustees that anyone who went against him at his church either got cancer, lost their jobs or died. This was a warning to them NOT to fire Paige Patterson back in the 80's or bad things would happen to them, too. The guy is just another charlatan like Mac.
Anon 9:19 pm: you sir mist be the ultimate fool! You blog on things you have very little facts on! You try to justify your opinions through fraud and deception! You probably voted for a man who has never done anything significant except run for President for over two years and won! Your pandering to the left is obscene and accomplished nothing for this discussion!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tiffany Croft and her actions. Comparing what she did with what you are trying to do is ludicrous. At least she was trying to deal with a criminal act = you are just delusional. I pray for your repentance, too.
ReplyDelete