|
Reply To Tim Haile’s Rejoinder By Jeff Belknap Since my previous reply to Tim’s announcement, the brethren of the South End congregation in Louisville, KY have graciously agreed to let Weldon and I debate at their building (which can seat 350 people, with ample parking and easy expressway access). Additionally, because Weldon is the one who initially responded to my debate offer by accepting the propositions that I wrote, until I get a firm answer from him (as to whether he is willing to debate them at a location where it is possible), entertaining Tim’s offer for yet another debate is premature. Moreover, Tim stated in his initial announcement about Weldon’s acceptance of my debate propositions: “I told brother Belknap that I would be happy to debate him using the same propositions that brother J.T. Smith and I used. He was not interested. I will be curious to see what he does with one who has accepted his wording for both the affirmative and negative propositions.” Consequently, I find it puzzling that although brother David Watts previously asked Tim to debate this issue with him (“using the same propositions” that Tim and brother J. T. Smith used), it is Tim who seems uninterested, since he has yet to answer brother Watts’ request. If brother Tim is truly interested in debating the issue, why doesn’t he accept brother David Watts’ offer? Tim could hold a debate with David at a location that would be agreeable to them, and Weldon and I could debate our agreed-upon propositions in Louisville at South End. This arrangement would afford brethren exposure to both sides of this issue on two different occasions, which would be a very good thing! Tim’s statement that implies I am less concerned with the unity of the Lord’s church in Scottsville and other places not in or near Beckley, is simply not true. Scottsville is just as close to Weldon as Beckley is to me, yet the situation that prohibits debate in or near Beckley does not exist in Scottsville. Hence, I simply suggested Scottsville as one possibility among many. In my reply, I stated “I would agree to debate Weldon on this issue in ANY CITY in the U.S. that is not near Beckley”. Brother Tim also charged that it is because of my efforts on this issue that division is already “in,” “around” and “near” Beckley, WV. Unfortunately, his inaccurate public charge makes it necessary to remind the readers of the background of events that are unique to the Beckley area, which led the men to their decision that a debate on this issue would be destructive to the work here, rather than helpful. The truth is that the churches in and near Beckley had no trouble over the post-divorce “putting away” for post-divorce fornication doctrine for two years after the Mental Divorce website was established (though the members were well aware of its existence during that time). It was only after Weldon began using his Beckley radio broadcast (sponsored by the Beech Creek Church of Christ, Meador, WV) as his weekly “outlet” (his word, not mine) that problems emerged with some among the congregation. It was the decided consensus of the men (in Beckley’s business meetings) that the unrest we have experienced was the direct result of Weldon’s weekly radio broadcasts, in which he repeatedly promotes post-divorce “putting away” for post-divorce fornication and remarriage to another, as well as making numerous scornful and disparaging remarks towards the preacher “in Beckley” and his “website.” [All of this has been well-documented in our business meeting minutes on different occasions.] If it had been someone else who had broadcasted such inappropriate and divisive things on the local radio station, it would have been bad enough. However, due to Weldon’s previous history as the evangelist here for ten years and several brethren’s continued personal friendship with him, his attacks against their present preacher multiplied the distress factor (Jude 16). With all the personal relationships in mind, please acknowledge just a few of the following quotes from Weldon’s radio program (The following quotes by Weldon were all taken from his Beckley radio program that is sponsored by the Beech Creek Church of Christ in Meador, WV, broadcast Sunday evenings at 8:00—8:30 p.m. on WJLS 99.5 FM) See AUDIO CLIPS and scroll down: “Some fellows have come along today, and they have become adamant and zealots for it, and ah, they’re right, it’s all black and white, and if you don’t agree with me, you’re a heretic, and that’s nonsense. Ladies and gentlemen, that’s the most absurd thing I ever saw or heard of in all of my life.” (2-8-04) “Now, wouldn’t it be nice, ladies and gentlemen, if we could get some of these boys today, these brethren today, to debate this, on this putting away?” (2-8-04) “And I want to tell you, these computers, it’d be a good thing if somebody walked in over there, and stole the thing. The brotherhood would be a way ahead, they’d cut down on all of this argumentation about this one issue preacher, obsessed with it, day and night, all that’s on there is about marriage, divorce and remarriage.” (2-22-04) “My, my, my, what have we come to? And he causes dissention in the church, and unrest in the church, and confusion in the church. And you know, brethren, there’s something to think about. When members of the church give on Sunday of their money, and you pay somebody of this kind, you’re having fellowship with him.” (2-22-04) “And what about this man over in Texas who’d gone to Vietnam and he came back, and his wife had divorced him. What would you tell him to do, my friend? What would you tell him to do? Ya-oh, you can’t marry. I tell you about some of these preachers, if we got in a fix like that, they’d be remarried in six months.” (2-22-04) “Let me tell you something, I was preaching before you were born. And that’s for sure, and I’ve been at it a long time, and my reputation is intact across this country. And if we want to start lining up preachers, lining up churches, well, we could go at it, friends.” (2-22-04) “Now I want to talk a little while tonight on what I began on last Sunday evening, concerning a website by a preacher in Southern West Virginia.” (2-29-04) “Now, I haven’t heard a word about a debate. And I want an oral debate, and I’m going to keep insisting we have an oral debate. Now let me tell you something, brother. You don’t intimidate me. No siree, you want a debate, we’ll see how much courage you have, how bold you are.” (2-29-04) “And maybe some of the people over there who are standing with him could goad him and dig him a little bit, and get him to debate.” (2-29-04) “But I don’t believe he’ll have a debate, be willing to have an oral debate, I’m not going to hold my breath until he agrees to have one. I don’t know what he’s scared of, he claims he’s got the truth on all of this, and let’s see if he’s got the truth.” (2-29-04) “So you can see how absurd and illogical all of this is, Ladies and Gentlemen. That’s why I’d just love to have the chance for a public oral debate, so I could show the fallacy of this brother’s argument, which he’s dividing the church and causing dissention and problems across the country.” (2-29-04) “Now, we have flattering preachers. Oh, you’re the greatest, they’ll say. And they go on, and back slap and apple polish. They’re like the Absalom, of David’s son of Second Samuel 15. Why he would kiss ‘em and tell ‘em what he could do for ‘em and stole their heart in Second Samuel 15 (laughs), and verse 6, and these sweet-talking preachers can come along and use this sophistry and build up false arguments, vain, by vain deceit, and deceive people and they fall right in with it.” (2-29-04) “And if you want to do right with me, you just remove my name from that website and all the material and then I won’t have to deal with this, will I? But just keep in mind that this brother introduced me on the website. I didn’t bring it up, and if he hadn’t introduced me, this would never have been discussed whatsoever.” (3-7-04) “Ha, ha, no, no, na, this man in Southern WV friends, revived it, he brought it up on his website and that’s a fact and you know it. And he can take care of it, just take it off and we’ll be through with this, but he hasn’t done it yet. It’s still up there and I’m not going to hold my breath until he does take it off, but you wonder sometimes where honor is in all of this.” (3-14-04) “She can’t remarry whatsoever without living in sin, adultery, and she dies that way, she’ll go to hell. Now, that’s this man’s position, that’s not mine.” (3-14-04) “And some of the young men today don’t know they’re green. They’re dumb and don’t know it. And they need to be humble. Ladies and gentlemen, we’ve got to have the right kind of attitude and some of ‘em have caused trouble in the church and tear up the church.” (5-30-04) “And brethren do the same thing, and shame on those, who instigate these problems in the church, who introduce them and bring in all this dissention and schism into the body of Jesus Christ. It is of the world, it’s carnal, it’s wrong. And I want to tell you ladies and gentlemen, those that are guilty of such shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Are you listening to me?” (5-30-04) “Now, someone sent me a print out of the website of the preacher in Southern WV, we’ll just call him JB. He mentions my name all the time on his website, and he’s riding his hobby horse again. Now, he’s been riding that horse for a long time. In fact, he could be properly called a nag. Now, you know what a nag is, a nag is a horse that is become old or worn out. And he’s worn out this hobby horse, ladies and gentlemen, ‘cause it’s one issue over and over and over and over, and that’s marriage and divorce and remarriage.” (7-4-04) “Now you know I’m getting tired of this friend, just plastered on a man’s website time and time again. We need to get a life, move on to something else, neighbor. Obsessed with this and that is something hard to understand.” (7-25-04) As these quotes illustrate, Weldon has been dragging this congregation through the middle of this controversy in the worst possible way for approximately two years and vilified its present preacher to the very community that it is trying to convert. Moreover, he also sent brother Tom O’Neal the church directory, so that Tom could send his infamous 11 page letter filled with slanderous surmisings and false accusations which followed the same intent and purpose. See: http://mentaldivorce.com/mdrstudies/OpenReplyLetterToTomONeal.htm Is it any wonder that the brethren here have absolutely NO desire to add any more friction to an already inflamed situation? Because I trust that I am fulfilling God’s command to teach truth and expose error on my website, I do not have the option to refrain from such for the sake of peace (Ephesians 5:11; James 3:17). However, honoring the brethren’s wishes to avoid further harm and undue difficulty by agreeing to debate this issue only outside of the Beckley area is something I can do. Tim also asked if there were any churches in the area that “endorse” me. In fact, there are numerous churches across the country, as well as a few nearby congregations that still stand opposed to post-divorce “putting away” for post divorce fornication and remarriage to another. Additionally, I am thankful to report that it is not me that these churches “endorse,” but the same truth that I do (I Timothy 3:15)! However, even if no other churches near Beckley, or in the state of WV, in the U.S., or anywhere else in the world opposed the post-divorce “putting away” for post-divorce fornication doctrine, what would that prove (II Corinthians 10:12; Galatians 1:2, 6-9)? The sad reality is that the one posing such a question about how many churches “endorse” a man reveals more about himself than what he asks of another (Psalm 118:8; I Corinthians 3:3-5, 21; 4:6). In his rejoinder, Tim stated that “some” believe my refusal to debate in Beckley is supposedly due to a fear of the consequences if people in the Beckley area have an opportunity to hear what my opponents have to say on this issue. Yet, contrary to this evil surmising, I have publicly stated (on various occasions) the reason for my refusal to debate in the Beckley area, and that reason has oft been confirmed by the brethren at Beckley. Additionally, it is disappointing that Tim would repeat such a speculation that judges one’s motives [which violates I Timothy 6:4 and is impossible to know (I Corinthians 2:11)]. It is well-documented that I offered to have (and distribute to the members at Beckley) a written debate with Weldon on this topic. His verifiable refusal of this offer proves that I have not prevented people in our area “an opportunity to hear what my opponents have to say on this issue.” Moreover, the ironic thing is that the brethren at Beckley have actually had much more “opportunity” to “hear” what my opponents have had to say on the issue than what I have preached locally. Weldon has been publicly advocating his erroneous second “putting away” doctrine on his Beckley radio program for two years now and his radio programs dealing with this issue have outnumbered my sermons to the local congregation on this topic by at least ten times! Considering Weldon’s use of the local radio program and Bill Cavender’s articles in TRUTH magazine on this issue (when the church was receiving and distributing the magazine to its members), the brethren in Beckley have been exposed to much more of the other side of this topic (orally and in writing) than those in any other area that I know of. This includes Hopkinsville, KY, Tulsa, OK and Bowling Green, KY, where the issue has been formally debated. Tim also stated his view that Beckley is “a location central to both participants.” Conversely, when I used a glossary on the word “central,” the synonyms displayed were: “middle, mid, inner, innermost.” Beckley is not somewhere in the middle or mid-way between Scottsville and Beckley. Likewise, on the radio, Weldon made the statement that “Beckley is central enough for me.” Nevertheless, both Weldon and Tim are aware that the brethren’s decision for me not to have a debate in Beckley is the reason for the “central location” stipulation. Yet both have asserted Beckley as the only place they are interested in debating me. In the face of these facts, such statements suggest that brothers Weldon and Tim are playing games. If Weldon continues to insist on debating in the one and only area that he knows it is not possible, then it will be apparent to all that either 1) he does not really want to me debate at all, or 2) his reasons for desiring debate are not simply related to a fair examination of the issue (as are mine), but to causing further antagonism within the congregation where I preach. In Tim’s original announcement of Weldon’s acceptance of my propositions, he stated, “Will brother Belknap agree to debate brother Warnock? We shall see.” Now that Weldon and I have agreed upon the propositions and also have a place that has committed to hosting a debate between us, the question is, will he debate? If so, let us begin making arrangements! |
|