News

Paige Patterson, ousted Baptist seminary leader, to teach ethics course

Paige Patterson, left, and Richard Land will co-teach an ethics class this fall. Patterson photo by Matt Miller; Land photo by Adelle M. Banks

(RNS) — Paige Patterson, ousted as president of a prominent Southern Baptist seminary this spring for allegedly dismissing women’s concerns about domestic abuse and rape, is set to teach a Christian ethics course at a Charlotte, N.C., seminary later this month.

Patterson, once the top elected official of the Southern Baptist Convention, was removed in May from his position as president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary after reports that he mishandled rape allegations by students. His lawyer has rebutted those claims.

Patterson plans to co-teach a mid-October weeklong class on “Christian Ethics: The Bible and Moral Issues” with Richard Land, president of Southern Evangelical Seminary, a school that is not affiliated with the SBC.

“Dr. Patterson’s one of the most significant figures in evangelicalism in the last 20 years, at least, of the 20th century and the first part of the 21st century,” Land told Religion News Service, “and we believe that there are a lot of people who would like to hear from him about living the Christian life in America. I believe he’s an asset to evangelicalism and we’re looking forward to it.”

Richard Land, middle, president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, N.C., prays at a meeting of Connect316 on June 11, 2018, at the Omni Hotel in Dallas. Photo by Kathleen Murray via Baptist Press

Land first met Patterson when Land was a student at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary and soon became a staff evangelist at the church in the city where Patterson was pastor. Patterson and Paul Pressler, a former judge and prominent Southern Baptist layman who has been the target of sexual abuse allegations, which he denies, were both groomsmen at Land’s wedding.

In the 1980s, Patterson and Pressler together led the denomination’s conservative turn, creating a resurgence (critics called it a takeover) from what they saw as a liberal drift. Land was among those who hailed the move that led to more conservative leadership across the SBC’s seminaries and agencies.

Land has not escaped controversy himself. In 2012, he was the subject of an ethics probe that resulted in his receiving a reprimand for racially charged words on his former radio show and for quoting material without attribution. He retired early as the leader of the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission when he took the helm of the seminary now housed on a two-building campus in Charlotte.

Since his departure from Southwestern Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, Patterson has been busy with speaking engagements, according to Scott Colter, a spokesperson.

Paige Patterson, former president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, gives a report June 14, 2017, during the Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting in Phoenix. Photo by Adam Covington via Baptist Press

“Dr. Patterson continues to receive frequent speaking invitations both domestically and internationally,” Colter told RNS. “Encouraging God’s people and sharing the saving message of Christ remains his top priority in every engagement. His calendar is quite full in the months ahead, and he is currently booking into late 2019.”

This latest juncture in Patterson and Land’s friendship was greeted with disappointment by leaders of the “Such a Time As This Rally,” a protest held outside the SBC meeting in Dallas in June that has continued as a movement urging greater awareness of sexual abuse among pastors and seminarians.

“Paige Patterson has proved time and time again that he is unfit to educate others on topics of ethics and morality,” said Ashley Easter, spokesperson for the rally. “Anyone who invites him to speak on these topics is guilty of the same hypocrisy as Patterson himself.”

Karen Swallow Prior, an English professor at Liberty University who helped draft a May letter from thousands of Southern Baptist women to Southwestern Seminary’s trustees questioning Patterson’s leadership, said she hopes the course will include the perspectives of evangelical women.

Participants of the “For Such a Time as This Rally” hold signs outside of the Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center on June 12, 2018, on the first day of the two-day Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting in Dallas.  Photo by Marc Ira Hooks

“I strongly and sincerely encourage them to invite women who have been subject to ethical failures within the evangelical church to come and share their experiences with the students,” Prior said. “Doing this would be a great step forward in advancing these important conversations, particularly around sexual ethics.”

Land said the seminary, whose students mostly take classes online, had an overall enrollment of 210 for the fall semester as of Monday (Oct. 1).

Asked about those who may disagree with him on the appropriateness of an ethics course being taught by Patterson or him, Land said: “No one’s forcing them to take the class.”

About the author

Adelle M. Banks

Adelle M. Banks, production editor and a national reporter, joined RNS in 1995. An award-winning journalist, she previously was the religion reporter at the Orlando Sentinel and a reporter at The Providence Journal and newspapers in the upstate New York communities of Syracuse and Binghamton.

50 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • Next, David Yonggi Cho and Kirbjyon Caldwell co-teaching financial best practices for pastors. International edition.

  • According to The English Standard Version organization, there are “six features of biblical ethics”. I’m hoping that “Paige Patterson [shall cover them all in his] mid-October weeklong class on ‘Christian Ethics: The Bible and Moral Issues’ with Richard Land”, I really do.

    (1) “Biblical ethics is covenantal or communal. … The ethical life portrayed in Scripture is intended especially for those who are in covenant relationship with God”!

    (2) “Biblical ethics is grace-motivated. … Throughout the Bible, upright living does … lie essentially in believers’ … spiritual and moral transformation brought about in them by the gospel … and the ongoing work of the Spirit in their lives”!

    (3) “Biblical ethics is transformational. … It is an ethic generated by a law written on the heart … and the animating impulses of the indwelling and sanctifying Spirit”!

    (4) “The ethics of the Bible is countercultural. … Those who are in a covenant relationship with God are called upon to … [engage in the] radical assessment and, if necessary, replacement of [cultural] values in light of the kingdom into which believers have been drawn by God’s grace”!

    (5) “Biblical ethics has an integrative character. Reaching into every corner of human living, the system of ethics taught in the Bible touches belief and conduct … private behavior and public morality … personal piety and communal justice”!

    (6) “Biblical ethics [is] eschatological character. … Followers of Christ pursue holiness by looking back … to what God has done, sending his Son, uniting us to Christ, and placing his Spirit within us … and [by] look[ing] forward to what God will do, as Christ returns a second time to execute justice and finally redeem his people from all sin and suffering.”

    Source: Dieumeme Noelliste, “Biblical Ethics: An Introduction”, The English Standard Version organization.

  • Why should anyone care what this guy has to say at a seminary with 210 students? They are all nuts there or they would not be inviting this man at this time.

  • I know, right? Remember when Kirbyjon “Caldwell endorsed Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary”, and when, in 2010, “after media reports that 18 percent of Americans thought President Obama was a Muslim, Caldwell told reporters he had known Obama for years as a Christian who prays daily”? What was he thinking, right?

  • Leave it to a religious organization to decide that someone they’d fired for bad behavior should teach a course in ethics. Choices that catastrophically asinine could only have a religious basis. 

  • So the people most likely to use “moral relativism” as an epithet are most likely to use relativist moral arguments or just act immorally.

  • I’m not sure I’d want to be in Patterson’s ethics course. Christian ethics are humane and Patterson’s not about humanity. He’s about power.

  • Ethics at church start with one’s answer to this question: “Do you consider the Bible to be literally true in all respects, the infallible Word of God?” If the answer to that is not at least “Probably Not”, then all of that person’s real ethics are out the window as far as I am concerned. The Bible is an assembled collection of writings by various men over time, some unknown. It is supposedly the best that certain church people could find, put together and “canonize” or sanction by church authority in early centuries. That’s it, period. It’s fine for people to retain all these writings as ancient lore and attempt to draw some value or lessons from them. But when, by osmosis (or something), the claims about the book are suddenly enlarged to be THE inerrant thing, supposedly adequate for all purposes indefinitely and reliable in all respects (when it clearly is not), then there is an ethics problem with the people who claim such anyway. These folks (including Patterson), as you know, are now the main supporters of Donald J. Trump as the spiritual guide for America. Amazing stuff but not good stuff.

  • The list of oxymorons keeps steadily increasing.

    To
    deafening silence
    honest thief
    seriously funny and
    American English
    we now have to add
    Christian Ethics.

  • Whataboutism notwithstanding, you Atheist Lot are so lucky. “The list of [Atheist] oxymorons”, see, is only 3 too many:

    (1) Michael Shermer
    (2) David Silverman
    (3) Lawrence Krauss

    “[Atheist] Ethics”, anyone?

  • But I AM “surprised at all” by Michael Shermer, David Silverman & Lawrence Krauss.

    Wanna know what these Model Atheists are up to nowadays professionally?

  • Whataboutism notwithstanding, what’s your favorite atheistic “epithet”, then, for Michael Shermer, David Silverman & Lawrence Krauss?

  • Ethics are atheistic by nature, you don’t appear to understand the meaning of “oxymoron” and we atheists aren’t particularly “lucky” – we just apply reason and avoid constructing our own mental millstones.

    Other than that – thank you for your comment – please rest assured it has been noted.

  • You mean like “when [Billy Graham] was caught on Richard Nixon’s hidden tape recorder”? Or like when Joel Tooley, lead pastor of Melbourne First Church of the Nazarene, “want[ing] to show [his] daughter ‘the grandeur of the presidency’, [decided to] take her [to] a Trump rally … [so as] to burnish his Alt-evangelical credentials”?

    Request for Information: How are both instances “endlessly entertaining” yet “so tragic”?

    Source: Mullett 7 months ago & 2 years ago at Religion News Service.

  • “Allegedly” is the key word in this article. The Executive Board of Trustees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary had no evidence to fire Patterson. The Executive Board consists of a group of weak men who were rotating off and wanted to be a part of naming the next president. The general board of trustees had a win/win solution that the Executive Board of Trustees vetoed. There is so many things wrong with this story spiritually, legally, and ethically that people are not keen enough to uncover. It took a Southern Baptist woman to expose this for what it really is: https://sbcissues.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/the-untold-truth-facts-surrounding-paige-patterson-and-his-removal-from-swbts-by-sharayah-colter/

  • The Executive Board of Trustees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary is who fired Patterson. They went against the better judgement of the General Board of Trustees that did not fire him. It was just a small group of power hungry men who vetoed the voice of the people at Southwestern.

  • You mean like the power The Executive Board of Trustees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary exercised in firing Patterson with no concrete evidence?

  • Michael Shermer never recovered spiritually from his girlfriend Maureen being paralyzed. It was a sad chain of events in his life that left him mentally hopeless.

  • I get that you don’t think Patterson ought to have been fired. Still, I question why someone who’s under a fog of suspicion was hired to teach an ethics course, when it’s very likely there’s a long list of qualified instructors to pick from, who aren’t under a fog of suspicion. Why were they passed over, for Patterson? 

    Your answer explains why: Other folks are ticked off at his firing, so they propped him up and gave him another gig, as a way of “sticking it” to the people who’d fired him. 

    Thanks for clearing that up — and for making clear the pettiness and petulance of Christianists. 

  • The funny thing about reality is that it’s a harsh taskmaster. Things remain stubbornly true, without regard to how anyone feels about them. For instance, I would love for the color of the sky to be red. But it was, is, and always will be blue, no matter how vehemently I wish it weren’t.

    The same is true of Li’l Paige. He is, in fact, under suspicion. It doesn’t matter that he doesn’t like it. It matters even less that you dislike it. But it remains the case.

    The question is, are you … or your hero, Li’l Paige … mature enough to deal with that? I’m not seeing it. Given that Christianism and childishness go hand in hand, that makes sense. I guess.

  • You said this already. What you didn’t concede is that Li’l Paige was fired by the seminary board for a reason. You, and Li’l Paige, may not like that reason. You may not think that reason carries any weight. The fact remains, however, that there was a reason for it. That you and your idol don’t like it, has no bearing on that reality. 

    Which is why I explained to you already that reality is a harsh taskmaster. It doesn’t take your — or anyone else’s — feelings into account. You may feel as though Li’l Paige was wronged, but that’s irrelevant and of no account to anyone but yourself. 

    And your answer explained to me why Li’l Paige — who’s undeniably under a cloud of suspicion, without regard to whether or not you or he are mature enough to admit it — was hired to teach ethics, of all topics. His hiring is a gigantic middle finger being hoisted in the direction of his accusers and the seminary board. 

    That’s what this is all about. And it’s every bit as childish as I’d expect, coming as it did from a bunch of militant Christianists. 

  • One needs to clear the fog from their mind on this. Also, it looks like Patterson has moved on and is speaking and teaching as usual. The Southwestern Board is left trying to do clean up to a school that used to be the top SBC seminary but I’m sure educated people will choose Southern or New Orleans now.

  • My point is that he was fired without any concrete evidence. This will all work itself out. Southwestern Baptist Theological will get what they wanted, a new president, and they will be doing cleanup for years while other seminaries will fill the void.

  • Re: “My point is that he was fired without any concrete evidence.” 

    So what? Lots of people do things they shouldn’t, without leaving any “concrete evidence” behind. The lack of “concrete evidence” is not proof they didn’t do them. And, in Li’l Paige’s case, the fact remains that there IS a cloud of suspicion over him, given that there were multiple, independent accusations against him. Among them: 

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/05/22/southern-baptist-leader-encouraged-a-woman-not-to-report-alleged-rape-to-police-and-told-her-to-forgive-assailant-she-says/
    http://stopbaptistpredators.org/article/darrell_gilyard2.html
    https://www.vox.com/2018/5/9/17332524/paige-patterson-sbc-metoo-evangelical

    Oh, and Li’l Paige actually, sort-of, almost apologized … but his sort-of almost apology was along the lines of, that’s not how I remember it — which, honestly, is no apology at all. But it certainly doesn’t mean what you think it means, which is that he denied the allegations altogether. A half-admission (which is what he did) is NOT a categorical denial … no matter how vehemently you might think otherwise. 

    Re: “This will all work itself out.” 

    Not if people like you are cheering him on, and not if organizations are lifting their metaphorical middle fingers at his accusers, on his behalf. 

    Re: “Southwestern Baptist Theological will get what they wanted, a new president, and they will be doing cleanup for years while other seminaries will fill the void.” 

    You make it sound like that’s a bad thing. Maybe cleaning house from Li’l Paige and his ilk is just what they need. Ever thought of that? Oh wait, you haven’t … you worship the guy. So forget I asked. 

    Again, this childish response — hiring Li’l Paige to teach ethics, of all things — is exactly what I expect of infantile, militant Christianists. I can’t say I’m surprised at all. Fundagelicals, as usual, have managed to live down to all my expectations of them. And I say that as someone who used to be one … so I certainly know whereof I speak. 

  • Well they crucified Christ without evidence or cause so I’m not surprised they would do the same to His followers. What is interest is that Southwestern teaches the Bible that they cannot obey.

  • Re: “Well they crucified Christ without evidence or cause so I’m not surprised they would do the same to His followers.” 

    Actually, that’s not what the gospels report. They say the crucifixion had a “cause.” He was killed because he’d claimed to be “king of the Jews.” 

    Re: “What is interest is that Southwestern teaches the Bible that they cannot obey.” 

    Christians have more or less never obeyed their own Bible. I can count on one hand — minus a few fingers — the total number of Christians in all of history who’ve actually lived as Jesus taught. 

  • Actually, if we are going to be accurate, no man took Christ’s life, He freely gave it. However, while doing so God exposed the inconsistency of man. In the same way, God has exposed Southwestern Baptist Seminary’s inconsistencies, and I would add hypocrisy with how they handled Patterson as a brother-in-Christ. Jesus came to redeem people, not to make them perfect. It seems God is using SWBTS as an example to remind us that man still needs redeeming, even men at a seminary thats seems as smug as the pharisees during Jesus’ day.

  • Re: “However, while doing so God exposed the inconsistency of man.” 

    Huh? That people are inconsistent was something that needed to be “exposed”? Hell, I’ve always known people are inconsistent … and I figured it out without your deity’s help (or that of anyone else). 

    Re: “In the same way, God has exposed Southwestern Baptist Seminary’s inconsistencies …” 

    I thought the seminary board members fired Li’l LPaige. Now you’re telling me your deity did it. Hmm. 

    Re: “and I would add hypocrisy with how they handled Patterson as a brother-in-Christ.” 

    Christians being hypocritical is not news. They raised it to an artform centuries ago, in spite of the fact that the founder of their religion is reported to have clearly, unambiguously, and explicitly ordered them never to be hypocrites. Ever. For any reason or at any time. 

    Re: “It seems God is using SWBTS as an example to remind us that man still needs redeeming …” 

    Why would people who follow a religion founded by a supposed redeemer, need constant reminding of their need for their redeemer … ? What you posit is illogical, if not totally nonsensical. 

    The fact remains, Li’l Paige was hired to teach ethics, of all things, as a way of lifting a collective, metaphorical middle finger at his accusers and those who’d fired him. I don’t find that kind of raging immaturity impressive. Maybe you do, but if so, that suggests you’re as immature as they are. 

  • Work on reading and comprehending. I will try to break it down for you again with numbers. 1. God exposed the inconsistency and hypocrisy of the Pharisees who wanted Christ dead. 2. In the same way, God exposed the inconsistency and hypocrisy of the modern day Pharisees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (i.e. Board of Trustees) who fired Patterson. 3. Southwestern needs a redeemer still because they have left or never had a relationship with Christ from their actions towards Patterson.

    I realize you are bothered by Patterson teaching. Maybe you are jealous that you are not teaching the ethics class. Maybe you are envious of him getting gigs while you are writing posts that only I’m reading. I don’t know why you are butthurt by all this but the fact still remains, Patterson’s accuser (Megan Nichols Lively) or the seminary have no evidence that proves he did anything unethical. In fact, the opposite is true, there is evidence that Patterson is innocence. https://sbcissues.wordpress.com/2018/05/31/the-untold-truth-facts-surrounding-paige-patterson-and-his-removal-from-swbts-by-sharayah-colter/

  • Re: “I will try to break it down for you again with numbers.” 

    Fantastic! So will I. 

    Re: “1. God exposed the inconsistency and hypocrisy of the Pharisees who wanted Christ dead.” 

    As I said, this hardly needed to be “exposed.” You might not be aware of it, but just over a century before Jesus’ reported career, a movement within Judaism began which would be called the Essenes. They decried the priesthood as corrupt, among other things. In fact, the Pharisees themselves had come into existence not long before, and they too were critical of the priesthood (which would later be known as the core of the Saducees sect). 

    To say YHWH somehow “needed” to “expose” the flaws of anyone in Judea is, quite simply, ludicrous on its face. Judaism had already fractured, once, over the flaws of the religion and its leadership — including its inconsistency and hypocrisy. Your deity wasn’t telling anyone anything they weren’t already well aware of. 

    Re: “2. In the same way, God exposed the inconsistency and hypocrisy of the modern day Pharisees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (i.e. Board of Trustees) who fired Patterson.” 

    See above for a relevant historical example of it NOT being news that people are inconsistent and hypocritical. Next thing you know, your deity will “reveal” that water is wet and the sky is blue. Yawn. 

    Re: “Southwestern needs a redeemer still because they have left or never had a relationship with Christ from their actions towards Patterson.” 

    I will repeat: Christianity itself is founded on the belief that humanity needs a “redeemer.” It’s not news to them, or at least it shouldn’t be, that they need one. What part of this did you miss, when I said this before? 

    I get that you’re angry your idol got fired, and you’re applauding that he was hired to teach ethics, of all things, as a giant collective metaphorical middle-finger at his accusers, but too bad so sad for you, your anger is irrelevant to anyone or anything else. It simply doesn’t matter. It certainly doesn’t impress me — since I see it as the infantile impulse it is. 

    Re: “I realize you are bothered by Patterson teaching.” 

    At no point have I said a word about your idol’s “teaching.” I did, however, say something about his immaturity. Not to mention the immaturity of those who hired him to teach ethics, of all things. And yours, for cheering on their snide, juvenile stunt. Immaturity in grown adults is never appropriate and always wrong. So it’s never wrong for me to point it out. I will continue to do so, without regard to whether or not you like me doing so. 

    And guess what? There’s not Thing 1 you can ever do to stop me! 

    Re: “I don’t know why you are butthurt by all this but the fact still remains, Patterson’s accuser (Megan Nichols Lively) or the seminary have no evidence that proves he did anything unethical.” 

    Irrelevant. Lots of wrongdoing happens without leaving any tangible evidence behind. For example, if I were to speak to you in person and threaten you, that very well could be a crime (i.e. assault), but if there’s no evidence of it (e.g. video of my threat), that doesn’t mean the crime hadn’t happened. 

    By the way, I’m not “butthurt.” Nice try at disparaging what I’ve said — but your subjective assessments of my emotional state carry no weight with me, and do not invalidate anything I’ve said. Mainly I’ve commented on the childishness of what happened here — i.e. your idol being hired to teach ethics, of all things, as a giant collective metaphorical middle finger at his accusers. If that’s not the definition of “juvenile,” then I can’t imagine what is. 

    I can, and will, keep repeating that ad nauseam if needed in order to get it to sink into your thick skull (which is in the tank for your idol). 

    What’s more, your definition of wrongdoing — that it occurs only when tangible evidence of it is readily at hand — just doesn’t hold water. You know it, and I know it. So get off the “you can’t prove that” crap. It’s a common criminals’ contention and I always dismiss it as such, automatically, every time I hear it. 

  • If it’s not news then why should your deity — and you! — obsess over it as though it needs perpetual attention? 

    Just wondering … since you brought it up and mentioned it more than once. 

  • Just because it’s not news to you it may be news to someone. 😉 Btw, your original comment it’s news to most so you may need to take your own advice. 😀

  • Re: “Just because it’s not news to you it may be news to someone.” 

    No, it’s been pretty much obvious to the vast majority of humanity for thousands of years now. But nice try. 

    Re: “Btw, your original comment it’s news to most so you may need to take your own advice. :D” 

    Do you even know what you’re talking about? Doesn’t look like it. You went off the rails when you decided that the one thing your deity obsesses over is making sure everyone knows human beings are inconsistent … and for some reason he obsesses over delivering this message repeatedly over thousands of years — even though, for all that time, humans were already aware of it. 

  • I don’t think you even know what you’re talking about at all. You’ve just got your panties all in a wad over your idol, Li’l Paige, and you’re horrifically enraged that there might actually be other people in the world who think he might be less than perfect. Well, too bad. Go cry to someone who’s impressed by your sanctimonious outrage. That isn’t me. As a rule I’m never impressed by sanctimony; quite the opposite, I consider it the last refuge of the terminally infantile (to borrow a phrase from the late, great Isaac Asimov). 

  • Idol? 😀 I’m reformed dude. You are the one that is clueless. 😀 I just believe people should be treated right. Especially by a seminary that teaches the Bible.

  • Re: “Especially by a seminary that teaches the Bible.” 

    Would that education have included 2 Tim 3:16-17? That reads as follows: 

    “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” 

    Li’l Jeffie being “reproven” and “corrected” is actually very scriptural. I hope you realize that. Maybe you hadn’t — but now you do (since I just quoted the appropriate passage to you). Or maybe you don’t care that it’s scriptural, and will remain offended on behalf of Li’l Jeffie. 

    Either way, your idol (yes, your idol!) wasn’t “attacked.” He was rebuked, criticized, confronted, corrected. But not “attacked.” 

  • No evidence = no grounds for correction. Bearing false witness and false judgement are serious sins of the. Bike you quote. Check your heart, the hatred seems strong in you. Are you one of the trustees undercover?

  • Re: “No evidence = no grounds for correction.” 

    The pastor who addressed your idol, Li’l Jeffie, certainly thought he had grounds to correct him. And the Bible tells him he should (as I quoted). 

    Re: “Bearing false witness and false judgement are serious sins of the. Bike you quote.” 

    Who said anything false? Even if they did, that’s not my responsibility. It’s theirs. I’m just pointing out to you that one Christian confronting and upbraiding another, has Biblical sanction. I get that you dislike it — but hey, too bad so sad for you. 

    Re: “Check your heart, the hatred seems strong in you.” 

    “Hatred”? Where, exactly, did that come from? That I criticize Christians doesn’t mean I “hate” them. That I disagree with you does not mean I “hate” you. You’re assuming facts not in evidence. 

    Re: “Are you one of the trustees undercover?” 

    Really, dude? You’re stooping to that in order to discredit what I said? Really!? You’re that sanctimoniously desperate? 

    You know, that’s truly hilarious! 

    Dude, wake up. Take a look at my other comments here on Disqus, where I have a years-long history. Better yet, go to my blog, which has been going for over ten years now. Take a look at all that material, and then try to tell me I’m a trustee for any Christian organization. 

    Go ahead. Just try it. Anytime. Be my guest! 

    Your contention is laughable beyond words. Really. I mean that. 

ADVERTISEMENTs