Hyles blog

[phil]

http://www.falleningrace.wordpress.com This is Dave Hyles new blog

also there's a site that claims to be run by his daughter Amy Hyles

http://www.amyhyles.com

[Persnickety Polecat]

Is he *seriously* comparing himself to Job??? To JOB??????

Does he not get that Job was stricken terribly through no fault of his own, while Dave Hyles brought all his troubles on himself by acting not only disgracefully and immorally but also, in some cases, *illegally?

I'll stand in judgement on that prick any day, tyvm.

[phil]

All he really seems to do with his posts is blow a smokescreen with his and just emotively sermonize everything to deflect any criticisms and alleged accusations against him. He won't even talk about what exactly he did or what his journey toward his alleged healing involved.

[Persnickety Polecat]

(09-03-2012 10:11 AM)phil Wrote:  All he really seems to do with his posts is blow a smokescreen with his and just emotively sermonize everything to deflect any criticisms and alleged accusations against him. He won't even talk about what exactly he did or what his journey toward his alleged healing involved.

"Gosh, all you people who are judging me? Neener neener neener, God loves me better than He loved my victims!!!"

Oh, wait, that's not exactly what he said, is it? But it's pretty darn close.

[Tennessee Gal]

As sad as it makes me to read his blog, I have to agree with the earlier posts. Much of what David said is true, but my impression is his blog was a smoke screen to take the heat off of him.

Where is the admitting of sin or repentance? It was like Curtis Hutson refering to Jack Hyles's adultary and inappropriate use of funds as a local church matter. My foot, he was the pastor's pastor to thousands of preachers. He wanted to cover up sin pure and simple and his smoke screen was " If this information on Dr. Hyles is made public it will hurt Fundamentalism.

[phil]

I doubt he'll admit there are victims. It seems he's only admitting to falling 20 years ago, well on page by "Dr." Mike Johnston it says that. It's more like he saying "It only happened one 20 years ago and God has forgiven me! So since I answer to God (and he has forgiven me)you have no right to judge me."

[phil]

(09-03-2012 10:51 AM)Tennessee Gal Wrote:  As sad as it makes me to read his blog, I have to agree with the earlier posts. Much of what David said is true, but my impression is his blog was a smoke screen to take the heat off of him.

Where is the admitting of sin or repentance? It was like Curtis Hutson refering to Jack Hyles's adultary and inappropriate use of funds as a local church matter. My foot, he was the pastor's pastor to thousands of preachers. He wanted to cover up sin pure and simple and his smoke screen was " If this information on Dr. Hyles is made public it will hurt Fundamentalism.

I think not starting a blog that would be a good way to keep the heat off of himself

[elfdream]

A long time ago in the super early days of the church they had public confessions. Similar to what modern churches who practice Biblical church discipline do although in my time bouncing in and out of churches I have been to exactly ONE church that did that. The penitent said in public what he/she did wrong and asked for forgiveness (because when you sin you not only offend Christ, who is the head of the Church but you also injure his Body...which is the church.) The person was not restored to full fellowship until some acts of penance were made. It could be anything...from walking around in sackcloth for two weeks or working with the poor. The penance itself didn't 'save' or 'forgive'. It was a show on the part of the penitent that he/she was serious. He was sorry and would do anything to make amends. Sometimes it was years before complete fellowship was restored. In other words sin was taken seriously.

I HAVE seen this done in Protestant churches. The person got up, admitted fault and asked for forgiveness. The person was able to come back to church but was not allowed to be in a position of leadership until a period of time had passed but apart from that he was restored.

Not saying we should return to the old ways but the rest of us need some assurance apart from someone's 'word' that they are sorry and have truly changed.

[Dude]

I haven't looked at the blog yet, but in reading the posts here and previous things he has said, I suspect he thinks he has a shot at the pastorate at FBCH.

[Grandma2012]

(09-03-2012 11:15 AM)elfdream Wrote:  A long time ago in the super early days of the church they had public confessions. Similar to what modern churches who practice Biblical church discipline do although in my time bouncing in and out of churches I have been to exactly ONE church that did that. The penitent said in public what he/she did wrong and asked for forgiveness (because when you sin you not only offend Christ, who is the head of the Church but you also injure his Body...which is the church.) The person was not restored to full fellowship until some acts of penance were made. It could be anything...from walking around in sackcloth for two weeks or working with the poor. The penance itself didn't 'save' or 'forgive'. It was a show on the part of the penitent that he/she was serious. He was sorry and would do anything to make amends. Sometimes it was years before complete fellowship was restored. In other words sin was taken seriously.

I HAVE seen this done in Protestant churches. The person got up, admitted fault and asked for forgiveness. The person was able to come back to church but was not allowed to be in a position of leadership until a period of time had passed but apart from that he was restored.

Not saying we should return to the old ways but the rest of us need some assurance apart from someone's 'word' that they are sorry and have truly changed.

In all of my MANY years in Baptist churches (most independent, but also a few years SBC), the ONLY "church discipline" I have ever seen, in which anyone "confessed" their sin and asked for forgiveness, involved (I have witnessed multiple instances of this) a young female who had become pregnant outside of marriage being forced by church leadership. On one occasion, the female was accompanied by the involved male.

So color me skeptical about "church discipline".

(Rant off).