152 thoughts on “Fundy Facebook of the Week: Suppository Preaching”

        1. Man, wouldn’t like having to clean up the sticky glass on that showcase after Logan-boy has been left alone with it. 😯

      1. Not to mention the fact that it’s extremely doubtful that anyone asked him that, since one does not normally hear a minister referred to as an “apologetic preacher.” However, his statement that IFB pastors never apologize for anything is quite accurate.

    1. I’ll give him the benefit that he knows what the word “apologetics” means; he just chose to turn it into a joke.

      However, it’s possible that he scorns apologetics. I remember coming across a book about giving reasons and proof for what we believe (maybe a Josh McDowell book?). I was very happy to find it and told someone I knew about my interest and excitement only to be told, “You shouldn’t need reasons. If it’s in the Bible, you should just believe it. ” The implication was that you should just blindly believe without bothering to involve your mind.

      I do think there is a time when we must believe no matter what, but I also think that our faith is reasonable and that it is a worthy endeavor to consider those reasons.

    1. How is he NOT making a poop reference?
      You can say “stink” instead of “feces,” but you’re still down there at the downstream end of the alimentary canal.

  1. Shows the ignorance of the man. He probably didn’t understand the words, the questions and their meanings. Since the words “expository” and “suppository” rhymed he thought he’d be cute. Instead he appears ignorant and foolish.

    Preaching the word of God is more than reproving and rebuking. It is exhorting and encoraging (I Timothy 4). The pastor is also to feed the flock, not shaft them (I Peter 5). A preacher that preaches just to remove “stink” is a poor preacher. Imagine a shepherd that all they did was bathe the sheep….the sheep would starve, thirst and freeze.

    1. Or suppose you only give your sheep suppositories, and never any food.
      I’ve read of people afflicted with neuroses who did that to themselves. Some were hospitalized in time to save their lives, and others weren’t.

  2. Is he a younger guy? I can’t tell from the picture. I know when I was in the extreme camp, I’d hear stuff like that; it was because some entertaining preacher said it, and they wanted to be like him. I love apologetics and expository preaching, it’s sad that he’s more concerned with being a KJV preacher than a Bible preacher.

      1. One of Phil’s Kids!
        Just wait until he follows his master by putting out his own “comedy” recording.

        ‘O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!’ He chortled in his joy.

  3. Thank God for people like C.S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, and Ravi Zacharias that He has used in my life to dispel this myth that anti-intellectualism is not Biblical.

  4. Generally non-typically educated(local church institutes, etc.) ‘preachers’ are taught anti-intellectualism for the purpose of disguising the poor training they are receiving.
    Then they are unleashed on us to prove their ignorance.

    1. Yes, in the years before the honorary doctorate became de rigueur, it was faddish for preachers to flaunt just how uneducated they were. Our own pastor used to brag endlessly about how he dropped out of Bible college during the first semester because he realized that he didn’t need what they were teaching him in order to be able to preach. Granted, his appraisement of the quality of Bible college instruction was probably correct as far as it goes, but what he meant was that preachers don’t need no stinkin’ education.

  5. *sigh* I find it ironic that the fundies often rail against other preachers and churches for giving into entertainment in their worship and preaching style. Yet they do not see how this really is just them trying to “entertain.”

    But underlying this statement is a deeper theological problem. Their view that the only real use for preaching and the Bible is to “get the stink out of people”. There is this understanding that humanity is bad. And while yes, without God’s grace, we are depraved, the truth is we are not without God’s grace. And ultimately, the fact that christ died for us while we are yet sinners seems to indicate that God valued us and therein lies a bit of good.
    There is so much more to the message of Scripture than you’re a sinner and going to hell. Its a shame they do not preach the whole of Scripture.

    1. Their form of “entertainment” can be so warped. We were pretty much “trained” to always laugh at the MoG’s jokes, no matter how bad it was. Otherwise if we didn’t, we would get preached at about not laughing at the MoGs “entertainment”.

      1. How well I remember that!

        You didn’t laugh when you found it funny — you had to laugh to “encourage the MOG”.

        You didn’t come forward if God had spoken to your heart through the message — you came forward to “encourage the MOG”

        It was all (well, mostly) about the MOG being exalted.

    2. So true on both points.

      I totally agree that their yelling, screaming, waving the KJV, folksy style of preaching is ALSO entertaining in its own way to those who want THAT and who will not sit for a thoughtful, detailed exposition of a Biblical passage.

      And their constant focus on sin often leaves them deficient in preaching on grace and on God’s love.

  6. Having just been given suppositories during my recent hospital stay (first time ever for both), let me just say that I would imagine listening to him preach is as joyful as receiving the suppositories.

  7. Ok, I assume y’all will cover the obvious so after digging around FB I found he has posted 19 times since the beginning of the month, comments on his own posts, and has said this:

    Feb,28 at 10:45 pm by the side of my bed 36 years ago GOD CALLED ME TO PREACH!!!
    Since that night I have preached over 14,500 times in over 1,500 different churches. Now we cover 6 states on television each week as well as broadcast around the world twice a week on the Internet. It’s been a wonderful journey and I believe our outreach has just started!!!

    So if that is true, he has preached about 402 times a year??? All his prideful boasting aside, I simply cannot believe that. He’s claiming he has preached to a congregation every day for 36 years and then some?

    Oh and to finish it off here is a gem:

    in the meetings I’ve been in and my time as an evangelist, I find many Pastors/Preachers that treat young preachers like we are inferior to them. . . If I read my bible correctly, ever preacher has to get in touch with the same Spirit. I believe young preachers that have labored in the word and knows what the Spirit of God is ought to be given due respect. I not only speak for myself, but I know other young preachers that are treated wrongfully.

    So 1. respect your pastor no matter what age both you are and he is, and 2. persecution from within the IFB itself.

    1. The photo he shared of the 19 year old was Dr. Phil Kidd’s photo. So I’m assuming the 14,500 messages are by “Dr.” Kidd. This guy doesn’t even appear to be old enough to be more than 25.

      1. So Phil the Kidd claims to have preached over 402 times per year for 36 years?

        Dude obviously goes for quantity over quality. Still, it’s hard to see how he finds the time for all those sermons, in between running a martial arts dojo and being one of the leading stars of American comedy, flying around the world in a balloon powered by his own breath, and oh, finding a cure for hangnails, no doubt.

        1. To judge from the number of sermons he claims, he may consider every expulsion of flatus a sermon.

      1. Oh, yeah– he’s probably using Fundy math. The same system that lets a pastor whose church has 200 people attending on a good Sunday say he’s “seen 65 million people saved,” and so forth.

    2. It’s the Hipster Fundy! He’s so persecuted the persecuted persecute him. He would explain but we probably haven’t heard of the verses he reads to back up his worldview.

  8. I get the feeling this guy would get along well with the “Hillbilly Preacher” from the Church in the Barn. They’re both working the same “aw, shucks, I just calls it like I sees it” shtick.

    Lord help us if this guy’s written a book, though.

    1. …though admittedly, what made the Hillbilly Preacher especially special was his own patented brand of arrogance, rather than his “I’m just a hillbilly, don’t know nothin bout no grammar” approach.

  9. And one final quote and I promise (fingers crossed) to stop, “Whether it’s television, women wearing pants, men preaching in colored shirts, playing sports… Those things don’t make a person “more spiritual” than the next. Yes, the Bible clearly teaches that the saved are to be separated from the world, clean and holy.”

    Now this post is a bit off of the typical fundy banter in that he is trying to decry fundies calling each other other out over standards, but still. Colored shirts???

    1. It’s sad how many things people can find to make up rules about (so they can feel spiritually superior).

      Most of us haven’t heard rules about the color a preacher’s shirt should be, but apparently there are some people who have opinions on that! I’m guessing they think white is formal and traditional so colored shirts are casual and thus disrespectful.

        1. For pigment, yes. That is, for objects that absorb light.

          For light itself, white is the perfect balance of all colors combined.

      1. Hyles must have worn white pajamas, too, because the only way it’s mathematically possible that he preached over 40,000 sermons (as he said he did) is if many of them happened while he was sleeping.

  10. Potty jokes from the pulpiteer. I guess he really wants to start a religious movement!

    And he takes what should be holy and makes it profane and lewd.

    Ezekiel 22:26″Her priests have done violence to My law and have profaned My holy things; they have made no distinction between the holy and the profane, and they have not taught the difference between the unclean and the clean; and they hide their eyes from My sabbaths, and I am profaned among them. ”

    It would be good if”Evangelist Logan Parton” would shut his mouth once in a while to actually do some study and meditation. 14,500 sermons in 1500 different churches in 6 states over 36 years? When does he have time to open the Bible, much less any study aid? When does he have time to prepare a lesson?

    Or maybe, if he is a “suppository” preacher, it all comes out of him in a rush as crap? Perhaps the big stink he is around is him.

    Lord, save us from these awful conceits!

      1. He says he doesn’t apologize for anything do you think he is really that self righteous thinking nothing he says is wrong, and does he apply that to his life outside of the pulpit sounds like this kid needs a few life lessons. Phil has taught him well. Maybe he should use the suppository to remove his head from Phil Kidds rear. I looked over his FB page he talks like he follows Phil Kidd around like he idolizes the man. pretty sure you shouldn’t put your faith in man but maybe he hasn’t read that part yet.

        1. Q: Do you think he is really that self righteous?
          A: Yes.
          Q: Does he apply that to his life outside of the pulpit?
          A: Yes.

        2. Thank you Big Gary. I was hoping the answer would be No. I am ashamed I gave him any credit I knew better…… 🙁

        3. Any preacher who says he doesn’t need to apologize for anything CLEARLY does not understand the gospel and should resign.

  11. In other words, either the word of God or God himself is likened to a suppository according to this M-O-g’s witless analogy?

    So…. according to LP this is where we get the term, “Holy Sh*t.”

  12. Second Timothy 2:24-25 says, “A servant of the Lord must not quarrel but must be kind to everyone, be able to teach, and be patient with difficult people. Gently instruct those who oppose the truth. Perhaps God will change those people’s hearts, and they will learn the truth.”

    Was this preacher gentle to the person who asked him? Did he teach? Was he patient?

    Or was he quarrelsome, making a joke at the expense of someone asking some very pertinent and important questions?

    Forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but in 25 years of Fundamentalism, I am hard pressed to think of any preachers who weren’t quarrelsome. Now in 2 years in the Episcopal church, I can’t think of any leaders who are even close to quarrelsome. I have met several Episcopal leaders from around the diocese and around the country recently, and I am continually dumbfounded at how warm, gentle, and patient they are. And not that they’re pushovers – I just saw one very patient woman very clearly and gently reprove someone who was acting inappropriately (not that she did it publicly, I was just part of the group where it happened).

    Not once have I been in a homily where a voice was raised, or a group was made fun of, or belligerent statements made. Occasionally a guilt trip will slip through, but it’s not the guilt-meat-and-potatoes of the pulpiteering I remember from Fundyland.

    You can keep your “fighting fundies”. I’ll take the servants of the Lord over them any day.

    1. Great point, Clara. I don’t understand how people who claim to love the Bible so much ignore it so thoroughly! The Bible is clear about the type of character a pastor should have, so why do churches continuing appointing, listening to, and applauding men who are not Scripturally qualified?

  13. He uses “KJV only” as a proxy for describing what kind of preacher he is. For all those who have posted rants here about how not all fundies are KJV worshippers, take note!

  14. He also has an image of the Baptist flag (gag!) with this quote:

    “We Thank God For Our Heritage: Who’s Gonna Fill Their Shoe’s?”

    I shall now make an attempt to untangle the meaning of this fragment through grammatical and historical analysis.

    First, we see that “our heritage” serves as the antecedent to “their.” “Their” modifies “shoe’s,” so it seems that “our heritage” is in possession of “shoe’s,” or, more precisely, some omitted object belonging to the heritage’s shoe. Thus, the line of possession runs:

    Heritage –> [owns] –> Shoe –> [owns] –> ???

    Now, we can extract some additional meaning from the fact that “their” is plural. Thus, “our heritage” must be functioning as a collective noun which takes the plural. This is generally permissible in British, but not American, English. Thus, I suggest that the author is referring to Baptists’ British heritage. This entails a tacit acknowledgement of the origins of the Baptist church in the separatists of England, and not from the Trail of Blood, as was previously supposed. Indeed, “our heritage” understood as “British Separatists” actually renders the meaning of the fragment clearer overall:

    “We thank God for British Separatists: Who’s Gonna Fill Their Shoe’s __________?”

    Read in this light, it now seems clear that “shoe’s” refers to a shoe belonging to a Pilgrim. (Who, incidentally, did not use the King James Bible. I am unsure of whether this impairs their status as part of the Baptists’ heritage, but I shall overlook that discrepancy for now.) I suggest it is a reference to William Mullins, the Pilgrim shoemaker who perished the first winter at Plymouth and whose will provided that all of his shoes be sold to the New Plymouth Company. Unfortunately for the scholar, the trail goes cold here and there is scant, if any, evidence of what became of Mullins’ shoes. Determining what object belonged to one of the shoes that might require “filling” by today’s Baptists may be a question lost to time.

    Nonetheless, in light of the foregoing, one can pretty confidently paraphrase the facebook fragment as follows:

    We Thank God for the Pilgrims: Who’s Gonna Fill Their [i.e., William Mullin’s] shoe’s __________.” Evidently this is a matter of great import to today’s Baptists. How unfortunate that their rejection of intellect and scholarship will prevent them from ever arriving at the answer to such a vital question!

      1. Now I know what it feels like to be a preacher on a rabbit trail and not quite sure how to get back to where I started!

        And now you know how my brain works on a slow day in the office!

  15. If he were truly doing what he says – giving the Word and allowing God to work in the lives of His listeners – then he WOULD be doing expository preaching, because it is the “setting forth or explanation of the message of the biblical text.”

    I liked this explanation of expository preaching:
    http://blog.lifeway.com/pastorstoday/2014/01/08/seven-qualities-of-expository-preaching/

    Do you think the reason certain IFB-x preachers criticize expository preaching is because evangelicals use it? And, God forbid, they have to separate from the evangelicals.

  16. I heard apologetics preached ER screamed about like this often at HAC. I left there thing the meaning was apologizing for our “stand”. It wasn’t until I looked it up I realized how wrong it all was.

  17. Did anyone notice that his response was, “Lord, no! I don’t apologize for anything.”

    My fundy family would consider that using the Lord’s name in vain.

    (Then again, we were in fundy circles that preferred reverence and decorum, that desired substance (expository preaching) over show, and that valued education, so I’d never heard of a lot of these guys that I’ve been exposed to on SFL like Phil Kidd. )

    1. “Did anyone notice that his response was, “Lord, no! I don’t apologize for anything.” ”

      I honestly cannot remember a single IFB preacher ever apologizing for anything, unless it make him look good in front of HIS flock…never.

      That’s just my experience.

  18. I have looked over his FB page its kind of like a shrine to phil kidd did anyone check him out on YouTube he’s like Phil Kidds mini me. I think they are drinking the same Kool-Aid.

    This is my next favorite quote on his page.

    “Many have inquired of me, “where do you pastor?” My reply: “science has yet to produce an aspirin big enough to allow me to pastor.”

    Really kid is the aspirin for you or the congregation?

  19. I was present at Jack Hyles’ “40,000th sermon” according to his own “careful records”. (SOTL conference at BJU) It was quite a while later before I calculated that he would have to had preached 3x a day for his entire “ministry” at that point.

  20. I few days ago I had a little discussion with Evangelist Logan concerning his apparent anti-intellectualism.

    http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2013/08/fundy-tweet-of-the-week-reformation-is-like-the-holocaust/

    (scroll down to the last 10 or so comments)

    He is young. He is under the influence of some of Fundyville’s worst of the worst. He has latched on to some of the more outrageous catch-phrases of the Fundaloonies and thinks that parroting them with some serious huffing and blowing makes a sermon.

    He doesn’t know the difference between a bible college and a seminary, and doesn’t know the difference between hermeneutics and “homoletics” [sic]. He doesn’t think he needs to study in order to be a good preacher. He resists the suggestion that some formal instruction would be helpful.

    As I mentioned in one of my comments, I feel sorry for him. He’s full of piss and vinegar and the Power of the Call, and there’s probably not anything anyone can do about it.

  21. Is Evangelist Logan Parton any relation to Dolly Parton? If so, I can definitely see his need for suppositories. He’s just larger in a different area than Dolly.

  22. Dear Jeff Amsbaugh,

    Do you wonder why we left? It’s because, when people ask us to identify ourselves, we don’t want our answer to be that we’re one of the “KJV Bible preachers.” No, we want our focus to be Christ and His glorious Gospel, not a translation.

  23. It’s a good description of brainwashing, just the other end. He just needs to remember that, when ramming it home, he needs to let up every once in a while so the “stink” is able to pass, otherwise the entire situation will get much worse. Kind of like it does keep getting worse…

  24. More people that think they are the only ones entitled to an opinion! Everyone is entitle to their BELIEFS. If you don’t like it don’t watch it, read it, tweet about it or follow it. Put your energy in more important things like kids being abused to death. Babies being born addicted to drugs. Gripe or should I say voice you opinions about them. Sounds like most of you all put the suppository in the wrong end!!!!!!

    1. Did a bee go up your backside?

      Nobody here believes they are the only ones entitled to an opinion. However, we do believe we are entitled to ours.

      Furthermore, we are entitled to an opinion about the ways fundamentalists express their faith, including the hurts, the prejudices, the lies and other such they foist on others.

      And no, we are not going to let fundies off the hook. Should Darrell one day close this site, at least three others would open in its place. After all, Fundies as a whole think they are the only ones entitled to an opinion and they condemn everyone else roundly. Jesus did promise that they same measure of judgment you use to judge others will be used against you. Fair is fair.

    2. None, thanks for your advice. However, I regret to inform you that it will not be necessary. Frankly, what I choose to watch, listen to, read, tweet, follow, or comment upon is none of your biz.

      Everyone is entitled to his or her own beliefs and opinions. That much is correct. But you don’t seem to know the implications of this statement. What this means is that if I think your entitled beliefs are irrational, unfounded, untrue, or plain crazy, I am just as entitled to say so.

      Just thinking about some recent posts here on SFL. I have some opinions:

      KJV-onlyism is not another name for Christianity. Neither is contending for the faith of anti-intellectualism. Neither is whatever the hell you would call what Phil “The Pantie Preacher” Kidd does.

      I believe racism is morally wrong. Evil. And anyone who uses their platform to promote racism in the name of Christ is worse than evil.

      Preachers that insist their wives call them “Preacher” or “Pastor” are nuts.

      Bible colleges that cover up abuse know not what manner of spirit they are of.

      Preachers that spend their breath and bandwidth ranting ad nauseum about how important they are, and about how concerned God is about shirt color, hair length, hem length, music styles, political party, cultish separation from the world , about how we need to get back to the Old Time religion of the 1950s to win God’s favor, etc., deserve to be ridiculed. In my opinion, they are even requesting it.

      Well then . . . you were saying?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.