Taking off the Gloves

In my inbox this morning.

We have disabled the following material as a result of a third-party notification from Bob Jones University claiming that this material is infringing:

Dr. Rand Hummel Demonstrates How To Blame The Victim

Please Note: Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to prevent this from happening, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others. For more information about YouTube’s copyright policy, please read the Copyright Tips guide.

If one of your postings has been misidentified as infringing, you may submit a counter-notification. Information about this process is in our Help Center.

Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material was disabled due to mistake or misidentification may be liable for damages.


— The YouTube Team

Well…I guess that’s one way to deal with those who are exposing you.

Update: The sermon in its entirety still exists here: http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=94092035500. The clip I took starts about 17 minutes in.

254 thoughts on “Taking off the Gloves”

    1. WTH?? I still don’t get the “Yea I’m first” game. I guess the old “first baptist” mentality is hard to kill.

      1. One cannot explain “The First”, one must _experience_ “The First” in order to understand “The First”. It’s a totally metaphysical experience.


        1. It is an experience that transends explanation. It is almost as enlighting as getting a fresh piece of fried chicken right out of the skillet.

        2. It’s like winning Monopoly. Totally pointless in every day real life, but for a minute, you feel like you own the world.

          It’s the small things that give joy.

      2. Don, Chad, Natalie and Naomi,
        Thanks for your comments in helping me to try to understand the “I’m first” phenomenon. Perhaps I need to experience it to appreciate it.

    1. Yes, I wonder, too, how BJU, instead of the speaker, can own this copyright.
      I also think this use of the sermon was pretty far inside the “Fair Use” standard.

  1. Don’t you think it’s time for you to get over whatever hang-ups you have? Your site started out as something that was somewhat humorous, but this witch hunt to “expose” people you disagree with is getting old.

    1. Whatever I lack in humor these days is made up for by the chuckles I get from comments like these.

      Bravo, sir. You’re standing in the gap and making up the hedge.

      1. Would a true fundie stand at the GAP? I don’t think they are allowed to shop there are they? 😯

      2. I would have had to say “Fine, but you also need to straighten out Hummel’s views so he doesn’t give any more reasons for the school to be publicly embarrassed like that. What he did say was pretty bad, you know.”

        It is strange that certain people get more offended at the exposure of someone’s sinful words or actions than they are at the words or actions themselves.

        1. “It is strange that certain people get more offended at the exposure of someone’s sinful words or actions than they are at the words or actions themselves.” – Word!!!

          I think that one deserves a whole SFL post on its own.

      3. I am a new reader, so I am trying to discover the purpose of the site. Are you just trying to show “fundies” as dumb or make them a laughingstock? Are you wanting to promote an ongoing tit-for-tat argument that gratifies someone’s sense of superiority? Is the purpose to foster unity in the body of Christ in spite of secondary disagreements? What I am seeing is a stereotypical description of Fundamentalists set up like a “straw man” so it can be easily knocked over. Then the anti-fundies giggle, commend each other and start building the next straw man. If we are saved, we are brothers and sisters in Christ! We are not one another’s enemies and we are admonished in Ephesians to “let no (discouraging) communication” be part of our speech. We are called to build up each other. What do we want the lost to think if they stumble on this site? That Jesus is the Great Unifier or the Great Divider? 😕

        1. Luk 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

          Luk 12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

          Luk 12:53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

        2. Whoa, whoa, whoa! Those verses in Luke are *not* saying Christians will be divided against each other. Christ’s teachings are most definitely divisive in that they should be creating a division between His followers and the rest of the world.

    2. Jonathan–If the fundies took one tenth of the energy they spent in railing against women and homosexuals and used it to get child molesting pastors out of the church, they might be worth something.

      But they don’t, so they’re not.

      1. Really? Fundies aren’t worth anything? That’s a pretty rough assessment. But I guess you would know, right?

        1. “Learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow.” Isaiah 1:17

          “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.” James 1:27

          God wants those who profess to follow Him to defend the helpless.

        2. Amen and amen to Pastor’s Wife!!! Saying fundies are “worth nothing” is not what I believe or what I’d say. But the sentiment is as PW quoted. Let the world see fundamentalists SERIOUSLY doing this, Jonathan–taking the beam out of their own eyes before they start screaming at the motes in others’–and maybe this site would die out. As long as the attitude is “circle the wagons” instead of dealing honestly with sin, this place will thrive.

    3. Hey Jonathan Pearson! Back so soon? Yesterday you threatened to take a few days off.

      1. I believe you may have me mistaken with someone else. I rarely post on here. However, I could be mistaken (something no regular commenter on this site would admit to), so if you can provide the link, that would be appreciated.

        1. This isn’t you?

          Jonathan Pearson March 1, 2011 at 12:05 pm
          In case you haven’t figured out by now, Darrell has a very distinct way of thinking. If you don’t agree with him, then you are labeled a “fundy” and are subject to ridicule from all of his readers. They are constantly accusing fundies of being narrow-minded, but fail to see that they are guilty of the same thing.

        2. Average Joe, that was me, but you said I threatened to take some time off. It would appear that I did no such thing. I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of accusing “fundies” of being narrow-minded while being exactly the same way to someone who doesn’t agree with the overall view of this site.

        3. The confusion was after your comment yesterday about five comments down another John said this:

          John (Yes, that one) March 1, 2011 at 3:06 pm
          . . . I picked a good day to prowl here after awhile . . . Maybe, I’ll visit back in a a few days in my spare time, just to see my point repeatedly proven again.”

          I think Average Joe thought that was your comment.

        4. thanks Pastor’s Wife – that’s the comment I was referring to. I guess that wasn’t you(Jonathan Pearson) then.

        5. I am a regular contributor to this site and I am often wrong. I couldn’t possibly learn anything if I thought I was always right.

          You see, I am well-educated, so I can see just how small what I do know is in comparison to what I do not know.

    4. Most of the people here with “hang-ups” have these “hang-ups” as a direct result of the strong arming and bullying we put up with in fundy churches for years. At the risk of over complicating things, if you don’t like what you see or read here, there are millions of other sites that you can go to.
      Just go to them instead.

      Oh, and of course, we will pray for you and your family.

      1. I grew up in a “fundy” church. I attended a “fundy” college. I was even there the same time that your beloved Darrell was there. It’s just sad that most of you are unable to get past it. There are a lot of more important things than making fun of a pastor’s clothes or white piano or pulpit shaped like a cross.

        1. The venom with which you and your fellow fundies respond here only affirms I made the right decision. May God richly bless you and yours.

        2. There are also a lot more important things than the length of a man’s hair, a woman’s skirt and whether or not Jesus wore a dress; and yet ‘Fundies’ have preached entire sermon series on this things. We’re merely commenting on them.

        3. I’m actually a little bit tickled that JPearson knows about the white piano part… 😀

        4. Who said I was a “fundy”? I just don’t think it is right to take potshots at them. You talk about the “venom” that people use, but have you read the other comments that are posted, particularly those directed at the pastors? Most of what I read on here does not line up with John 13:35.

        5. I’ll admit that sometimes it’s hard to read the comments about pastors. My husband has been a pastor (youth/music or senior) for nearly 20 years; he’s hard-working, compassionate, dedicated, gentle, and funny. He’s not greedy, pushy, or self-seeking in any way. But I have seen pastors rant and rave in the pulpit, blasting away with venom at other Christians with whom they disagree, and I realize that the posters are talking about them.

          John 13:35 does tell us to love, but it’s not loving to ignore evil. Ephesians 5:10-11 says, “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.”

        6. Jonathan,

          Those of us who had no choice but to abandon the Faith of our parents are going through the typical stages of grief. Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance.

          Yes, you will see Anger in this page. When we left our churches, many of us were leaving our whole life behind, family, friends, past, present and future. Most of us thought we were rejecting Salvation.

          But, you see, very few of us left the Fundamentalist churches because we no longer believe in Jesus. We have left because we can’t abide by the hypocrisy, the petiness, the unending rules, the overbearing control.

          Many of us are grieving the fact that we allowed ourselves to be manipulated for so long. There is embarrasement there also.

          Grieving experts talk about two years -minimum- that need to be allowed for any of us to process our grief. Some of us take a lot longer.

          If this web site can help the process follow it’s normal course, and help us come out the other side with a love of God intact, and a healthier approach to the constant bombardment of negativity we still get from our extended families, so much the better.

          So many of us have NEVER been allowed to feel anger, in a misguided attempt to follow WWJD.

        7. We are all forgetting internet rule 14

          Do not argue with trolls – it means they win.

        8. Jonathan, a lot of the problem is that many of us tried respectfully addressing some of these issues WITH those who were in authority, and were publicly humiliated by aforementioned authority.

          Obviously, two wrongs do not make a right. However, to forbid the voices of the wounded who over the years have been repeatedly spiritually flogged and raped, compounds and perpetuates a wrong that keeps on opening the wounds. Two wrongs do not make a right, either.

          Some of us tried for years to work within the “system” – unsuccessfully. Unless you have walked in our shoes, and felt the pain of our wounds, you would do better to let it be. We need ministers of grace, and mercy; we do not need one more executioner.

        9. @pastor’s wife, I can appreciate the need to point out evil, but a good portion of what I’ve seen on this site is just vitriol being poured on “innocent” people. For example, how many “loving” comments were written about the students who were doing the skit that was posted a few days ago? How many “loving” comments were written on the post about the KJV being the Bible God reads? One commenter said that being KJV-only simply shows a high level of ignorance. Is being KJV-only evil? Do see my point?

          In addition, a number of the situations that are posted on here have nothing to do with you or me. I could be wrong, but I don’t see why Darrell or anyone else needs to butt in or stir up situations from churches that they aren’t personally affiliated with.

        10. @Mark Thomas, I would be interested in knowing which of my comments you are taking umbrage with? I have been respectful and haven’t said anything out of line or out of character for the tone of this site. Please let me know what I said that you find doesn’t line up.

        11. For example, how many “loving” comments were written about the students who were doing the skit that was posted a few days ago? How many “loving” comments were written on the post about the KJV being the Bible God reads? One commenter said that being KJV-only simply shows a high level of ignorance. Is being KJV-only evil? Do see my point?

          You mean you missed the campfire that evening where we all stood around holding hands singing “Kum-Ba-Ya?” Dang you should have been there.

          Why to we make fun of skits like that? Because many of us have participated in the same stupid crap. And yes they are sometimes fun and we look back on those times sometimes fondly even… but the message they present is usually shallow and trite.

          As for the KJV-Only comment: “being KJV-only simply shows a high level of ignorance.” Truer words could not be spoken. And your strawman is non-sequitur, Ignorance evil.

        12. “Ok, I couldn’t watch the whole thing…I tried, I really did. Idiots. All of them.”

          @Don, this was a comment that I found about the skit. I have no problem with comments that poke fun at the skits because, yeah, we all grew up doing them. When names are leveled at people because some disagrees with their views, that’s a completely different story.

        13. I’m gonna agree with Johnathan here. He’s being nice, just disagreeing. If there’s venom around, it’s not in his comments. This can be a dangerous crowd to disagree with (and that comes from someone who rarely does).

          Just suggesting a little step back and self-eval.

        14. @Midori, disagreement is fine. But I question whether Jonathan has really been nice:

          “Don’t you think it’s time for you to get over whatever hang-ups you have?” – not nice but insulting

          I was even there the same time that your beloved Darrell was there.” – the extra adjective is passive-aggressive

          There’s a tone to his comments that I for one am very uncomfortable with.

        15. Also he said, “It’s just sad that most of you are unable to get past it.” That’s very condescending.

          I’m not sure of your definition of “nice” but that’s not mine.

          Is he screaming abuse at us? No. Is he self-righteously criticizing us and telling us to “get a life”? Yes.

        16. @Jonathan, sometimes this site points out serious error; sometimes it pokes fun at silliness (especially because growing up in the IFB anything fun WE wanted to do was often labeled as worldly and trifling, but if the leaders instigated it, then it was worthy. Sigh.)

          I have to disagree with this though: “I could be wrong, but I don’t see why Darrell or anyone else needs to butt in or stir up situations from churches that they aren’t personally affiliated with.” We are part of the universal body of Christ. Unlike Cain, we can’t shrug our shoulders and ask, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” We are. False teaching or warped doctrine or hypocrisy is still wrong no matter where it appears.

        17. It’s a lot nicer than a lot of the things said about him, IMO. None of those comments offend me. I don’t know how he could convey the ideas much nicer than he’s done.

        18. @Pastor’s Wife, you’ll have to forgive me. I don’t hold to the “universal church” doctrine. My denominational affiliation puts emphasis on the local church body. While I can understand where some folks might believe in the universal church, it’s just not what I hold to. And even if we are a universal body, I still don’t think that gives us the right to butt in where we don’t belong. I don’t tell Mark Driscoll, John Piper, or your husband how to run their churches and I certainly don’t want them telling me how to run mine.

        19. I definitely think Christians should belong to and be involved in a local church, and I do believe that local churches should be self-governing. But I believe that all Christians are part of the body of Christ; we share fellowship when we meet even if we’ve never had the privilege of belonging to the same local assembly. I also believe we have a responsibility toward each other.

          BTW, all the IFB churches I’ve attended have always made it their business to criticize how other churches are run. If someone changes the name of their church, it’s because they’re compromising. If someone uses praise music, they’re worldly. If someone has an elder board instead of a pastor or doesn’t have an evening service on Sunday, they’ve departed from the old paths. A lot of our churches had an atmosphere that scrutinized and attacked other believers while not accepting any questioning of themselves. This blog gives us the opportunity to look at the procedures/doctrines/activities we grew up with and examine them.

        20. @Sarah: NOOOOOOOO!!!!!! There definitely is NOT any white piano! Don’t let them tell you there is!

        21. RobM…the white piano…it awaits in the white room with the blue (or is it red?) carpet between the american flag and the Christian flag…

        22. “Your beloved Darrell”? Granted, he is a handsome man, but really….

          Also, your spite is so thick and rich, I want to drizzle it over some pancakes. Mmmmm….pancakes.

        23. Sarah, there IS a white piano, be not misled.

          Come sit over here with the real self-righteous… err, I mean, real RIGHTEOUS people and we will lead you to the white piano.

          Every head bowed and every eye closed… *organ plays softly and 150 SFLites just started twitching*

        24. The jedi mind tricks are persistent and powerful, but you can resist. There’s no requirement to pretend there is a white piano!

        25. You’re right. Some of us need to watch ourselves when we make fun of people involved in the fundy world–like kids doing the skits, or some poor woman at the piano.

          But, sarcasm is a legitmate, Biblically condoned way to deal with the leaders, perpetrators and perpetuaters. So is sharp, even harsh language. For example:

          Joshua 17:15
          And Joshua said to them, “If you are a numerous people, go up by yourselves to the forest, and there clear ground for yourselves in the land of the Perizzites and the Rephaim, since the hill country of Ephraim is too narrow for you.”

          Judges 10:14
          Go and cry out to the gods whom you have chosen; let them save you in the time of your distress.”

          1 Kings 18:27
          And at noon Elijah mocked them, saying, “Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, or he is relieving himself, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.”

          1 Kings 22:15-16
          And when he had come to the king, the king said to him, “Micaiah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we refrain?” And he answered him, “Go up and triumph; the Lord will give it into the hand of the king.” But the king said to him, “How many times shall I make you swear that you speak to me nothing but the truth in the name of the Lord?”

          Job 11:12
          But a stupid man will get understanding when a wild donkey’s colt is born a man!

          Job 12:2
          “No doubt you are the people, and wisdom will die with you.

          Job 38:5
          Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it?

          Proverbs 26:16
          The sluggard is wiser in his own eyes than seven men who can answer sensibly.

          Isaiah 47:12-13
          Stand fast in your enchantments and your many sorceries, with which you have labored from your youth; perhaps you may be able to succeed; perhaps you may inspire terror. You are wearied with your many counsels; let them stand forth and save you, those who divide the heavens, who gaze at the stars, who at the new moons make known what shall come upon you.

          Amos 4:4
          “Come to Bethel, and transgress; to Gilgal, and multiply transgression; bring your sacrifices every morning, your tithes every three days;

          Zechariah 11:12-13
          Then I said to them, “If it seems good to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” And they weighed out as my wages thirty pieces of silver. Then the Lord said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—the lordly price at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord, to the potter.

          Matthew 23:16-17
          “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.’ You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred?

          1 Corinthians 4:8
          Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! Without us you have become kings! And would that you did reign, so that we might share the rule with you!

          2 Corinthians 11:19
          For you gladly bear with fools, being wise yourselves!

          And of course these are only the ones where we can perceive the sarcasm in English translation. There are actually many more, many including clever word plays, in the original languages that don’t come across as sarcasm to us. And I only quoted one example of Jesus callings the Pharisees pretty harsh names–we could quote a lot more.

        26. Jonathan Pearson: “I don’t hold to the ‘universal church’ doctrine.”

          So, does Christ have a plethora of bodies then? Where in the Bible does it say that there are many bodies? I’ve never read that. I’ve never seen that implied anywhere. Sure, a local church is a PART of the body, but is it THE body? How?

          And you know how I know you’re a pastor? You had a pretty good string of posts on March 2 from 9 A.M. to 12 P.M. Must be nice to get paid to troll the interwebs.

  2. Isn’t there a “right to use” clause that allows you to use anything that is already posted for informational purposes?

      1. ah yes, what was I thinking? Well, we can always link to them.

        Seriously, is there anything we can do as a group, anyone we can contact?

        Meybe we could get the CLA to look into this for us?? 🙄 😈 :mrgreen:

      2. @darrell- i appreciate your original post on rand’s sermon and your subsequent comments on dealing with people who have been abused. your advice has been thoughtful and caring.

        with regard to the “taking off the gloves” post, you may not like infringement laws and perhaps this would be a good opportunity for an intelligent discussion on what constitutes “fair use” but bob jones didn’t pull the video, google did. this isn’t just a fundy issue.

        bju has the legal right to restrict audio/visual recordings in their chapel and to use them or grant use of them as they please. google via youtube apparently recognized that legal right and exercised good judgment in removing the video.

        as you noted, the sermon is still available in another format on Sermon Audio. So the issue obviously isn’t with the content of the sermon or silencing the opposition. the real issue is copyright infringement. you apparently never asked them for permission to post the video.

        fundamentalism isn’t perfect and i think that it’s great that you are pointing out flaws and abuses. but did bju really take off the gloves? why would they have a personal score to settle with you?

        maybe they just want you to obtain a legal copy of the video. you could write bju and request one. they may or may not give it to you, but that’s their choice.

        just some thoughts …

        1. bob jones didn’t pull the video, google did.

          Read the letter again. Google pulled it at the request of Bob Jones University.

          bju has the legal right to restrict audio/visual recordings in their chapel and to use them or grant use of them as they please. google via youtube apparently recognized that legal right and exercised good judgment in removing the video.

          I suggest you read all of the posts on Fair Use that have been placed in this thread.

          but did bju really take off the gloves? why would they have a personal score to settle with you?

          As for “why” you’ll have to ask them. But evidently they did come after me personally because they got Youtube to take down a video I posted. That’s pretty personal.

    1. There is fair use. I don’t remember this video, but Darell if you posted this for the purpose of commentary then you clearly have a fair use claim. Seriously you should contact youtube and file a counter notice to get the video back up. Put the ball back in BJU’s court.

      1. ^^^

        Do this. Speeches made in public are fair game. Chapel can be attended by anyone who walks onto campus. Therefore, it was a public speech. Get on the horn with YouTube and protest mightily.

      2. I think Mark is right – if they have publicly posted the message on “sermonaudio”, then it seems perfectly legitimate to use a part of it as an example.

      3. “When a copyright holder sues a user of the work for infringment, the user may argue in defense that the use was not infringement but “fair use.” Under the fair use doctrine, it is not an infringement to use the copyrighted works of another in some circumstances, such as for commentary, criticism (emphasis mine), news reporting, or educational use. The defense generally depends on a case-by-case judgment of the facts.

        Fair use is codified at Section 107 of the Copyright Act, which gives a non-exclusive set of four factors courts will consider in deciding whether a use is fair or not. These factors are

        the purpose and character of the use,

        the nature of the copyrighted work,

        the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and

        the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”


        Also, chillingeffects can help you draft a counter-notice.

      4. AGREED! This is ridiculous. It’s not like it was BJU’s copyrighted video and you grafted it. Good grief.

      5. I agree with what everyone else said. Counter. REVOLT!!! 😉

        But, seriously, yeah, sounds like you have claim.

    2. From my experience in the performing arts world, I tend to doubt this. I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know the ins-and-outs of the copywrite laws, but I do know that, for example, an unauthorized person making a recording of a live performance is against the law, even if the performing organization is itself making a recording for radio broadcast.

      1. Let’s look at the four factors in this case:

        the purpose and character of the use, commentary/criticism (fair use)

        the nature of the copyrighted work,
        publicly-given sermon

        the amount and substantiality of the portion used,
        now this one, I don’t know exactly, but seeing as the clip began at 17 minutes in, very likely less than half was used, and even more likely less than that.

        the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work
        Is there a market for these sermons? My impression is that sermon audio offers them for free downloads. A clip of the sermon would be more of an incentive, I’d say, sending people to the full sermon to get the context.

        In the case of a live performance, an illicit recording can easily cut into the market for that performance, which is where the argument for fair use would fail.

        Looking at the surface, I’d say that Darrell has a good case for fair use. Sending a DMCA counter-measure is up to him.

      2. Oh, in the intrest of full disclosure, I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. (I have, however, used a DMCA take-down order to stop a particularly persistent plagiarist.)

  3. You better be careful! Pretty soon a couple of Bob’s cousins might show up at your door with some “suggestions” about how to improve your blog and make sure nobody gets hurt.

    You won’t be able to miss them. Pushing 400 lbs, ill fitting suits, and usually named vito or tony, very vague about who they work for.

      1. No no no, not white, that’s just a very old Thomas Kinkcade(?) tie.(looks closer)…or maybe a Bible verse….(looks even closer) Nope, my mistake, it’s the church constitution written in gold…

  4. AGH! I go take a shower and missed being first!

    Ooooooohhhh…. that means someone from BJU is reading here, which instantly makes you an apostate, and now, I’m going to tell their pastor!

    1. Guess you better stop taking those showers. It’s interfering with your SFL job. :mrgreen: Hehe…

      1. Oh gawd, SFL takes up enough of my time. I HAVE to steal myself a way to go make a living and wash the stink off every now and then.

        Trust me, its not easy.

      1. Figures, if you wanna have free speech to post & comment on video clips that aren’t copyrighted even, better host them in Russia apparently. 🙂

    1. Just an update on the Vimeo thing I posted here. The blog owner got the videos reinstated by filing a DMCA counter-notice and claiming Fair Use. Took a while, but the videos are back up where he put them to begin with. So, filing a counter-notice can work.

      Of course our “beloved” Darrell had a far more interesting and brilliant idea… :mrgreen:

    1. There’s just no Biblical defense for doing that though. It’s never right to do wrong in order to get a chance to do right. It upsets me to think that there are “Christians” who would deny saying something, even though they know they did, just because someone can’t prove it. A true believer knows he must walk in integrity. No lawyers tricks to get off the hook when you’re a follower of Christ. You speak the truth and humbly confess your faults. You don’t pretend you didn’t say something that you really did.

      1. @PW

        You just gave me fundy/wilds twitches by using their own phrasing against them. I wonder how they would respond to that one 👿

      1. Nah, if they’re not interested in Westboro I doubt they’d go after BJU. Religion isn’t a high-priority target on their list. That’s not to say that we couldn’t take a few pages from their book and mirror the daylights out of that video and/or host it on a site that doesn’t have to respond to frivolous requests like this.

        1. host it on a site that doesn’t have to respond to frivolous requests like this

          bjutube? that was a short-lived project 😉

  5. Bob Jones University. Appealing to the system to defend them. The same system that they denounce as “what has taken America away from God”

    1. Amen and Amen!

      “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man!” – Luke 6:22

      Whats good for the goose…

    2. I believe that Darrell might just be standing in the gap against apostasy, without apology, because he and God make a majority, and his walk talks louder than his talk talks, so that in order to make a difference he has to be different, because God just needs a few good men.

  6. Cults really hate to be exposed.
    The ministry must be defended at all costs.
    Their ministry is god.

    May the fundie cult suffer a slow, agonizing, and humiliating public demise, being impaled on it’s own sanctimonious pike of piety.

    1. Sanctimonious Pike of Piety
      +235 Str
      -415 Int
      Chance on Hit: Spearing your victim makes you feel good.
      Use: Shiny lights make your attacks appear less lethal to observers.

      1. I’m lost on the + & – “str” “int” I assume it is Warcraft or some roll playing reference???

    2. Is the Sanctimonious Pike of Piety related to the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?

      1. No doubt! I just want to make sure I get notified when its time for us to feast on sloths and orangutans!

        1. I want an arm (with sloths and orangutans, that’s where most of the meat is).

  7. They love their first amendment rights over there at BJU. Of course, anyone caught using the University’s own pulpit against it, shall have their first amendment rights quickly suspended.

  8. Does anyone know what Hummel said that’s so controversial? Inquiring minds want to know!!!

    1. I guess I don’t get it — what’s so wrong about telling people to forgive others?

      1. Ya, I just browsed it but I didnt come across anything very controversial.

      2. It may be that the section in question was considered to be “blaming the victim”.

        The young girl was told to ask forgiveness from those who had abandoned her and the one who abused her (because of her anger toward them).

        1. Guilt Ridden, I’m going to do my best to be civil.

          With fundies, it’s never about the victim getting closure. It’s always about the abuser getting justified. If the victim “forgives” her abuser then if she ever mentions it again, even if the abuser does it again, then she’s not a good Christian! AMEN?!?!?

      3. The problem, Guilt, is that here was an underage girl telling someone about her sexual abuse. The first thing that should have been done was the cops called and an investigation started and then the perpetrator sent to JAIL. Then she needs some proper counseling. Telling an abuse victim that the first thing they need to do is forgive is perpetuating the abuse. The first thing they need to do is tell the truth and get that b@$7@rd in jail and get safe.

        1. I guess I was thinking that legal issues (like calling the police and having him prosecuted) had been resolved years ago when the mother found out about her daughter’s abuse.

          Why didn’t the mother notify the police at the time – no one here seems upset by that!?!?

          Perhaps the daughter didn’t want to be taken away from her mother, so she didn’t tell the police? It’s hard to say without getting a clear picture of what happened.

          But it was still appropriate counsel to get her to release her anger and forgive them. Forgiveness doesn’t mean not prosecuting them. It sounded like she was helped by what the preacher said.

        2. Rand Hummell is a mandated reporter for suspected child physical, sexual abuse or neglect. He openly said he did not address what was done but told the girl that she should go home and repent to her molester!

          Reports of abuse must be made by telephone as soon as possible after the abuse is perceived. Which agency to call depends on where the abuse occurred. Hummell should have contacted the local law enforcement agency where the girl was from. Then the relevant state agency, such as the CPS, DYFS, or the Department of Developmental Services, whatever it is called in her state. Telephone reports must be followed up in writing within two working days on special forms available from each state protective services agencies. These agencies would have told him what form to use.

          I have no idea what the reason was that the girls mother did or did not do. Nor does that leave Hummell off the hook in any way. There are civil and criminal penalties if a mandated reporter does not report Child abuse.

        3. @ Guilt,

          “Why didn’t the mother report it?”

          Who says the mother knew? In many of these cases the minister is the first one to find out.

          What burns me is that Seminaries will have any amount of courses on OT, NT, Hermeneutics, Soteriology, and barely one or two semesters of pastoral counseling. Then we expect them to know what to do in so many of these cases where professional help is needed.

        4. Well said, Kitty. That’s exactly the way I understand the laws on reporting child abuse (which happens to be something I had to have annual training in for a former job).

        5. Perhaps I missed something, but as I understood what he said (and I may have missed something):

          She thought that God hated her because-
          1) Her father abandoned them
          2) Her mother remarried when the girl was 13
          3) From 13-15 she was abused by her stepfather
          4) Her mother found out and divorced the man (ending the abuse)

          So, the mother clearly knew.

          I know that a mandatory reporter needs to report current abuse, but I don’t know how far back in time they are supposed to report – if someone tells him of an abuse 5 years ago, must he report it? 10 years? 20 years?

          As others have pointed out, this may have been merely an illustration that was created from multiple sources.

          I don’t think that she was told to repent, only to forgive them – to let go of her anger and bitterness that were injuring her.

        6. @Guilt,

          I stand corrected. Yes, the mother knew.

          I will have to admit that I had to listen to the sermon several times before it dawned on me what people considered offensive. -Which made me feel awful, the fact that the sexism is so ingrained in me that I don’t spot it immediately.

          From a really old Chuck Fager article:

          “Perhaps more egregious, for the WBC [Women’s Bible Commentary] authors, are the repeated images, beginning with Hosea, and recurring in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Nahum and other books, portraying God’s relationship to Israel and humans in general as a dysfunctional, abusive marriage.

          Here God is the steadfast, longsuffering (but all powerful) husband, and Israel/humankind a chronically adulterous, promiscuous whore of a spouse. The female sinner is repeatedly punished by the righteously angry Divine Husband, through the most gruesome violence imaginable: exposure, multiple rapes, murder of her children, dismemberment, cannibalism, etc.

          Once this pattern is pointed out, its pathological character almost leaps out at you. Commenting on a typical passage, Nahum 3:5 (“`Behold, I am against you,’ says the Lord of Hosts, and will lift up your skirts over your face, and I will let nations look on your nakedness…’”), WBC contributor Judith Sanderson declares: “In a society where violence against women is epidemic, it is extremely dangerous to image God as involved in it in any way ….What would it mean to worship a God who is portrayed as raping women when angry?”

  9. You should check to see if they even did copyright the sermon. They have to register it in order to file that claim. If they didn’t you could file a counter notice to get the video back online. The EFF has some wonderful information about your rights and would likely offer help http://www.eff.org/

    You could also look into the Berkman center at Harvard http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/

      1. Totally. If they had just let it go, I myself would’ve forgotten about it.

        Now, I get a reminder, and they look doubly lame because they look like they’re trying to pull a “cover up”.

      2. Indeed. The original item was posted last June, almost nine months ago, as a daily entry on a fairly obscure blog. I doubt that many people have seen it since then, and many who saw it back then must have forgotten it by now.
        But now … it will go far and wide.
        For example, I missed the whole thing last year, but after today, I know all about it.

  10. I’m not impressed at all when people try to suppress information. If they believe it, why be ashamed of it? If they now wish it hadn’t been said, why not step up courageously and Biblically and admit that what was said was wrong?

    Things done in secret will be revealed. Christians should be authentic and transparent. We need to live so we never have to shrink from having our words or actions exposed to the world at large.

    1. Well, one of the issues is that the preacher (Dr. Hummel) was possibly confessing to a crime. If you know that a minor is being abused and don’t report it to civil authorities, you are yourself committing an offense. (Of course, it may be that law enforcement had already dealt with the rapes he referred to, but he didn’t say that.)

      In any case, it’s spectacularly bad advice to tell a rape victim to forgive her rapist, instead of making her safety the first priority.

      Again, maybe more was done than he reported in the sermon, but if not, there’s plenty to cover up in terms of criminal and civil liability.

      1. In that case, Proverbs has a message for him:

        “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.”

      2. I have no problem when people say, “I was wrong when I said that. Here’s what I believe now.” But saying they never said something that they clearly did say is very different from that.

        Of course, BJU hasn’t gone so far as to say Dr. Hummel never said what he said in the recorded sermon. But they don’t seem to want anyone to remember he said it.

        Personally, if I had given as rambling and theologically shaky a sermon as that one, I would pray that nobody had recorded it. But that doesn’t seem to be the issue here.

  11. The sermonaudio address (the link didn’t work so I copied and pasted the URL) has a video link. I guess it is the whole sermon. Is BJ going after sermonaudio next? Did BJ grant them a copyright?

    This is so sad.

    1. OK, I’m trying to listen to the “sermon.” 😯 Ironic that he is talking about hypocrisy.

  12. Really makes you wonder who asked YouTube to pull the video…if it was a rogue person acting along or an official decision. Hmmmm

      1. Yeah, I believe some random person claiming to be from Bob Jones (& maybe even working there) requested that Google take the video down. Google doesn’t have the time to verify if the person really speaks for the organization or not.

      1. I’m curious if you are planning to I guess contest or whatever the process with youtube is? I’d really like to know if BJU actually copyrights their chapel service videos!

  13. Can I just say?: If you don’t like this site … uh … don’t visit it.

    Mindboggling, I know. I’m pretty much a genius for thinking up stuff like this. 😛

    1. Honestly, though. It’s like someone complaining about the slant at Foxnews.com. If you don’t like it, why would you visit? Reading the Daily Kos churns my stomach, so I don’t go there. It’s not exactly rocket science. Sounds like we’re not the ones with “hang-ups” to get over.

      1. Yah, maybe, but there’s no new idea being expressed. There’s a difference between presenting an opposing view and just being a troll.

        1. Gah, that was supposed to go under Stony’s comment.

          I thought George and I had an understanding!

        2. The rule of George corollary: never argue with Stony! bwa ha ha ha.

          I get you, and I agree. The last thing I want to hear is the same old arguments that basically boil down to: you don’t agree with me so you’re bitter, nyah. But we also don’t want to stomp dissent and become no better than what we mock.

    2. In their defense, the internet and *groups like this do become pretty bad echo chambers. We group together in like-mindedness and reinforce our biases, in whatever group or hall of mirrors we create.* So it’s not a bad idea to get outside thoughts and ideas from time to time.

      The comment portion in *s above is also directly applicable to fundy churches. Or lots of other churches, for that matter.

      1. ^^Like. If everyone stops reading things they don’t agree with, there won’t be anything worth reading any more.

        1. Oh, Midori, just come on over to the forum. 😉

          Yes, we should always be working against our confirmation bias. I think our community contains far, far more disagreement than fundy ones or even most churches. And just in case we got something wrong on our fundy critiques (where we do often agree), there will always be a stream of fundy trolls rolling through to correct us. 🙄

        2. And if you disagree with anyone, you will be labeled a “fundy troll”. You are accepted here as long as you agree with everything that is written. Wait, doesn’t that sound like a…fundy church?!?

        3. “I think our community contains far, far more disagreement than fundy ones or even most churches. ”

          Ay-men! (oops, sorry, reflex)

        4. JPearson, people don’t get labeled trolls for disagreeing, but for trolling. Are you coming into a space that’s designed for people to reminisce and process their fundy experiences so that you can correct everyone repeatedly, thus disrupting the purpose and sense of community? Or do you disagree but leave room for others to do the same with you? Not attacking people (or continuing to do things that people perceive as attacks) also helps people not see you as a troll. I was not thinking of you when I wrote my original comment, but if people are calling you a troll (it appears they have above), those are my helpful tips for avoiding that in future.

          Check out some of the disagreements on the forum. Where are you going to find a community of Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, Atheist, Orthodox, Metropolitan Community Church, Agnostics and more (!) hanging out? Not in a church… 😉 We’re also pretty diverse politically, and those gatherings don’t happen enough, either.

  14. Under the Fair Use act, you can use portions of a work as parody, or for criticism. They can’t protect their copyright against that, legitimately.

  15. Save it. Save it all. They are getting hinky because of all the investigation. I’m not surprised they are doing this. They’ll prolly do more. They hack into stuff, they act like petulant little children.

    I’m pretty careful about not publishing stuff with a copyright symbol on it. But this is public stuff. It’s a sermon. . . .

    1. I agree! Let’s make sure we have a recording of that full sermon, stat. And let them censor – it generates publicity (not to mention justified outrage)!! 😆

      Let the people who claim to be so correctly Christian be open about what they do! After all, why would they ever want to hide what they’re doing in God’s life? cough.

    1. I think I’m in trouble. I’m starting to get a lot of these inside jokes about Bob Jones U.

    2. Camille, I love you.

      Darrell, please exercise your rights (as they have) and submit a counter notification. It clearly falls under Fair Use. One day BJU is going to wake up to the fact that they can’t censor those souls that are smart enough not to throw down tens of thousands of dollars for a four year prison term.

  16. Who took the video? If BJU took it, then they do own the copyright. I’m sure you know this, but this is a standard DMCA takedown notice. Any online video site that wishes to maintain its “safe harbor” from the government has to take down these videos immediately upon receiving a claim of copyright from the “owner.” If you (or someone else who gave you permission) took the video, you can contest this takedown. If not, there’s not a lot you can do about it.

    As a side note, I did a speech on the DMCA in your class, Camille, remember? You gave me a C, I’m pretty sure. 😆

      1. unless you can accredit his degree, it won’t make that big of a difference!

    1. Take the video, parody the hell out of it, and repost. Subtitles are your friend here.

  17. The problem in some of these “schools” is that the professor/preachers can offend and not apologize because they think they are somehow superior. They can insult but still think they are right. They can make mistakes in their teaching and never admit it. They practice what the man in the video preached – that the offended must apologize while the offender is not addressed.

    It is the spiritual arrogance that so deeply hurts and offends.

    1. Really, if you’re going to tape it, you need to be very careful about saying stupid stuff, like berating rape victims and heresy. You know, that kind of stuff.

    2. It’s the old philosophy of if I make you feel bad, you probably have something of which you need to repent.

      1. Ah! yes, Pulpit Infalibility
        To Question anything those who stand behind the sacred desk say is to question the Almighty himself. Because when they stand up there they are standing for gid and should be given due reverence!

        (and PW knows when I speak with such broad sarcasm it is not directed at all pastors… just the ones it applies to. 😉 )

        1. I excuse you from having to add disclaimers to your statements anytime you criticize a pastor! 🙂 You’ve been through the wringer with them and deserve to vent!

      2. This reminds me of someone I’ll call Lulabelle, because that isn’t her name:
        L does something massively hurtful.
        G: “Please stop doing that hurtful thing, Lulabelle.”
        L, in a extremely accusing tone: “You’re mad at me.”
        G: “Well, you could say that, yes.”
        L, obviously outraged: “You don’t like me anymore!”
        G: “That’s not true, but now you’ve managed to change the subject from what you did to what I’m saying and feeling. Congratulations.”

    3. Its misdirection. Its like the Wizard of Oz distracting his subjects from the man behind the curtain.

      “You got upset because someone molested you? well you better repent of that anger and bitterness while analyzing whether or not you asked for it! Oh the shame for getting angry at your abuser, he’s a man of gid so maybe we should just make this all go away! It would hurt the cause of Christ otherwise. Hey, come over to this side of my desk and I’ll make you feel better”

      The above is not a parody, its not intended to be hyperbole. It is a condensed version of what a friend of mine experienced when she finally did manage to tell someone she trusted about her abuse at the hands of a church leader. The way these things are handled many times in fundy circles lead to more abuse, further victimization, and devastating spiritual, emotional, and physical results. Rand Hummel may have the best motives and intentions, but that doesn’t excuse such willful ignorance, nor does it mean those who have an issue with his ignorance are bitter, but even if they are it doesn’t change the wrongness of the action or words.

      1. This type of thinking doesn’t make sense!!! This poor girl has been molested, yet SHE is the one at fault and SHE is the one who needs to apologize??? At what point does the perv who molested her have to take responsibility?!

        1. Please excuse the language but . . . HE NEEDS TO HAVE HIS PRIVATES RIPPED OFF AND FORCE FEED TO HIM! (of course in Christian love)

        2. Seriously it will depend on who the perv is in the church. If the perv is related to the local pope, is a charter member, or is responsible for 5-10% of the weekly intake of Tithes and offerings that pay salaries then it is safe to bet that “never” would be a good answer unless the police are called in by the victim or someone sympathetic to the victim. Then the whitewash and forgiveness sermons will begin ramp up.
          If it could possibly be a real public issue then they employ the Roloff maneuver: ship the victim out of state. Out of sight… no problem.

        3. Yes, there is deep misogyny here. Women are to blame. And none of their thinking has been affected by feminism.

      2. If God is truly a God of justice, the child molesters and rapists and the fundy preachers who cover up for them will be raped for all eternity by demons as they burn in hell. They’ll get the same mercy they showed their victims. None.

  18. What investigation? (Not been around much, haven’t heard about any investigation–am I out of the loop?)

  19. I’ve noticed you can’t find much of anything from Bob Jones University on youtube. I wanted to see a clip of the Larry King interview, but I can’t find that anywhere.

  20. As a mother to daughters, this clown’s comments made be sick! Any pastor who first demands that a young woman who has been abused apologize to the abuser is a creep. Yes, forgiveness is needed. But the abuser needs to be made responsible as well as the mother if she never reported it to the authorities. To send her to the man that abused her as a young girl to ask for forgiveness…argh!

    Although, we must first consider whether any of this is even true. Fundy pastors are masters at not only story telling but story MAKING.

    1. Rand Hummel’s sermon is not only legalistic, and heretical, but it is a perfect example of straining out a gnat and swallowing up a camel (the heavier matters of God’s law, like justice).

      I will pray that fundamentalism, as a whole, calls this clown to task and censor him.

  21. Have you thought about adding commentary, re-upping it and defending it under fair use?

  22. Guess it’s ok to copyright a sermon but the big bad publishing house that dares copyright a Bible is out for profit only!

  23. I never have understood this whole white piano thing. Where did that come from? I would think a white piano would seem awfully nightclubby.

  24. BJU is committing a sin of omission by claiming that people can’t listen to their sermons. Isn’t the point of a sermon to reach the lost?

  25. Jonathan Pearson March 2, 2011 at 10:02 am
    Who said I was a “fundy”? I just don’t think it is right to take potshots at them. You talk about the “venom” that people use, but have you read the other comments that are posted, particularly those directed at the pastors? Most of what I read on here does not line up with John 13:35.

    Jonathan Pearson March 2, 2011 at 3:20 pm
    @Pastor’s Wife, you’ll have to forgive me. I don’t hold to the “universal church” doctrine. My denominational affiliation puts emphasis on the local church body. While I can understand where some folks might believe in the universal church, it’s just not what I hold to. And even if we are a universal body, I still don’t think that gives us the right to butt in where we don’t belong. I don’t tell Mark Driscoll, John Piper, or your husband how to run their churches and I certainly don’t want them telling me how to run mine.

    When you criticize others, it’s OK, because in your opinion, their comments don’t line up with Scripture. When others criticize you, you don’t believe in a universal church body, so they’re butting in where they don’t belong. If no one’s opinion outside your little group matters to you, why do you expect anyone outside your little group to give a flying fig about your opinion? I don’t mean to say no one discussed or disputed it, I just want to know why you think we should give it any weight or authority. In other words, why is it not butting in when you do it?

  26. I predicted this months ago, BOJO is going to go the Scientology route and start out lawyering the critics. It may be time to organize.

  27. Also, at any time on youtube you can access street fight videos where kids, underaged, really hurt one another. I realize that legally theses issues are unrelated but you’ve got to love youtube’s priorities.

    1. I think it’s an automated form. Youtube doesn’t actually even review it. Someone clicks the “This is mine, and they don’t have permission to use it” button (so to speak), and it automatically takes down the video and generates the message. Ball is then in the poster’s court to say “nuh-uh.” Youtube doesn’t really get involved at this stage.

      1. Midori,
        that makes sense, I didn’t realize it was automated at this stage.

  28. You know what’s really bad too, I personally had a hard time picking up on the “angle” of the sermon, like I was back in the pew again, getting completely bamboozled by the preacher boy. Seriously, that hypnotic effect is still with me while another part of my mind is screaming “JUST GET TO THE POINT, DOUCHE.” There is no other corner of LIFE that puts up with this kind of mealy mouthed manipulation outside of The Pulpit. Even American politics gets called out right after the speech.

    1. AS I said above, the sermon itself was rambling and disjoint on one hand, and theologically unsound on the other. But I don’t think that’s why the Jonesists want it pulled from the Internet.

      1. Agree but my point was that the rambling and disjointed nature was no accident, its purpose is to disarm the listener and I found myself slipping into his web. I hate that! 😡

  29. A few thoughts on the original video:

    Rand later responded to an inquiry about this video saying that the situation was reported to the authorities and that the incident in question had happened five years before he spoke with the girl.

    My concerns with what he said are these…

    1. If he did express empathy and concern to the girl over her situation he did not bother to relay that to his audience. An audience, btw, comprised of preacher boys who are now going to understand that “tell them to forgive immediately” is the correct template for dealing with rape victims.

    2. He did not give any acknowledgment that there are stages of grief, that anger is a legitimate emotion in the situation and not everyone may be ready to forgive at every given moment…and that’s ok.

    3. He claims that he knew he had given the correct advice due to a letter about “getting my smile back.” Without serious follow-up in a structured way, there’s noway to know if this was a permanent recovery or if it was merely a temporary repression of emotion that would later leave the girl feeling even worse when the feelings of anger and pain come roaring back. A very complex emotional trauma is presented in an incredibly simplistic way by a man who is not a professional counselor or mental health professional.

    4. That’s not to say that the advice to forgive those who have hurt us is bad. In fact, many secular counselors will give the same advice…at the proper time when the victim is ready to cross that bridge. There’s a time and a place where that has to be confronted but Rand’s tale is ignorant at best or purposely ignoring the complexity of the situation at worst.

    1. Darrell,

      IMO, your points are very important. You have good incite into the dynamics.

      As a survivor of child sexual assault, who now works with both children and adults who have suffered recent sexual assaults or molestation, Hummell’s advice really bugged me. Hummell told the second girl to go home and apologize to her molester, I cannot mentally conceive of a situation where the victim should *ever* be put in the situation where the victim is to apologize to her molester for any feelings, anger or even hatred she had toward him. Doing so, gives the power back to the rapist/molester. Rape is a crime of power, domination, and control that is not really about sex, per se. Confronting a molester is not to be taken upon lightly either. He did not give her the option of not confronting her molester. Credible therapists, and imo, wise pastors, would take the survivor through some important preparations for such a thing.

      1) The survivor needs to be the one set the boundaries with her molester. She choose the timing, and choose the location to be comfortable and convenient for the survivor.

      2) Practice role playing with a therapist or someone the survivor trusts.

      3) Write out the main points you the survivor wants to make and memorize them.

      4) Imagine the worst reaction the survivor could get and if the survivor would be able to handle it.

      5) The purpose is for the survivor to speak up , say what the victim wants to say and ask for what the victim wants, whether the victims will receive it or not, and know that the survivor took charge of the situation. This will completely flip the situation around from what it was during the abuse; confronting is very powerful.

      6) Survivors should be told that it is fine if she decides not to confront her abuser as well.

      Hummell, did none of this.

      Important things for the survivor to know about how abusers may respond:

      1) Abusers don’t like to feel out of control and don’t like to be confronted. (If there is any reason to believe that the abuser will be dangerous or if the survivor is in doubt if the reaction will be a violent one, the victim should keep it to a public place, and bring witnesses.)
      2) The abuser will probably not admit to the abuse or even think what s/he did was abuse.
      3) The abuser will likely put the blame on the girl.
      4) It’s a good idea to bring a friend for support or to have someone to meet up with afterwards even if the survivor does not think their abuser will be violent.

      1. I agree with all of Darrell’s and Kitty’s points.
        One more thing: The safety of the victim should always be paramount. No exceptions. As Kitty says, sending a survivor back to her abuser should be done only with the utmost precautions, and often it shouldn’t be done at all. This applies to spousal and other domestic abuse as well as child abuse.

        As Darrell rightly points out, Dr. Hummel’s audience for this sermon was largely future pastors and other church workers in training, so it was very important to communicate this to them. Most, if not all of them, will eventually confront the problem of how to help someone who is being abused or who has been abused by a parent, spouse, employer, or other person who had power over them. “Forgive the abuser” or “pray for the abuser” doesn’t come anywhere near being an adequate response by itself.

    2. Probably the most ironic thing of this is I bet this is just another sermon illustration and never even happened.

      1. This particular situation may or may not have happened, but, I know for a fact that other girls told Hummell and others on staff at the Wilds and at BJU. The victim is blamed, the authorities were not told. This scenario has occurred over and over for the last 25-30 years.

  30. Just my two cents;
    Sometimes things are just made too simple. We think we can understand the doctrines of God yet do we really? Forgiveness is a tough one. I remember years ago a missionary who had a brother who was murdered. He cried uncontrollable because he had to go visit the murderer and didn’t think he could forgive him. As I watched I thought I knew what he was going through, I didn’t. When my brother was murdered by his son it was my turn to work on forgiveness. I’m still working! Tears come to my eyes even now two years later. Oh if it was only so simple.

  31. I remember this sermon being preached when I was at BJU. The thing is, everything he is saying about forgiveness is correct. We do need to forgive. Bitterness does create all kinds of problems, spiritual and others. But he picked a couple of remarkably bad examples to use. His first example is a girl who is angry at her sister for *being raped*!!!!!!! He dealt with the girl for being bitter without ever confronting her with this basic fact–her sister was raped!!! Hellooooo!!!!! He never addressed the fact that her anger was severely misplaced from the outset.

    1. As Darrell said in the original post, it’s a prime example of blaming the victim. No doubt the sister would have been better off if she never went to that party, but that in no way means that she is somehow to blame for the fact that some people drugged her and then gang-raped her.

  32. *They* have removed some other videos from youtube, too. BJU, try all you want, the truth is getting out.

  33. I very clearly remember the day Dr. Fremont talked about counseling girls or women who were abused. He said that they first needed to admit some “enjoyment”. And that was in Psych 101, my freshman year.

    1. Instead of following my first impulse, I’ll just pray that he never gets to “enjoy” any such experience. And that he quits teaching people such craziness.

    2. I recommend an excellent book by Linda Fossen called “Out of the Miry Clay”, in which she describes her sexual abuse as a child by her preacher father, and how God has used it to lead her into a ministry to victims of sexual abuse, especially those who are in prison. One thing she mentioned in the book is that, often, the victim does get some enjoyment from the abusive act; and she counsels women not to blame themselves for that, because God designed their bodies to get enjoyment from sex.

    3. What a perv, I sure he was all ears during those admissions. Transparent much??? 😡

    4. Walter Freemont! That old bird!

      I was having nightmares in the dorm and was sent to him for counseling. I have a extensive abuse history, including being kidnapped and held for 9 years by a psycho. At this time, I was working hard to act like I had put it all behind me, smile, smile smile, but that nasty PTSD kept sticking it’s ugly head up. Of course, in BJULand PTSD doesn’t exist. To say, I received no help at BJU would be a understatement. If I remember correctly, Freemont was the first person I had opened up to about anything outside of my foster parents at the time. When I told him I had been raped as a child, his very FIRST question was:

      “Have you ever taken part in the sin of masturbation?”

      I was a 17 year old Freshman girl!

      After he said that, I started having flashbacks and literally felt like I had just been raped again.

      A few days later, once I got myself together. I went to Jim Berg to complain.
      Bergs question to me was, “Well? Have you?”
      Counseled with Berg too. That is a story for another day.

      1. 😯 Holy crap, indeed.
        “Have you ever taken part in the sin of masturbation?”

        What the h–l does that have to do with PTSD due to having been raped as a child???

        Lord, have mercy on us all.

  34. I found what I believe to a be really great gospel-centered (rather than guilt-centered) resource for survivors of abuse and sexual assault. The book is entitled, “Rid of My Disgrace” (actually on the book, he whole title has a red line through it except for “grace”) by Justin and Lindsey Holcomb. It works through some of the stages of grief and shares stories of survivors and how they’ve struggled and been on a path to healing. It is one of the most balanced approaches I’ve found focusing on gospel-centered counseling about these issues. And by balanced, I mean I that I feel it presents the issues as they really are, acknowledges the trauma and the various means by which people work through it and provides helpful insights and ways to encourage. All without putting stigma on survivors, accusing them of any p[participation in the act, ignoring their hurt or being unhelpful in their healing process.

Comments are closed.