Being Without Sin

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone! In the wake of recent events, this phrase has been taken up like a battle cry by those who wish to defend the sinful actions of a man who (ironically enough) has spent his entire career throwing stones. It’s odd that fundamentalists aren’t concerned with who is pelting the Catholics, the gays, or men-with-Calvinist-looking-beards with rocks. If the rule was that one can never speak out about sin until they themselves are perfect then we can only assume by their proclivity for judgmentalism that fundamentalist pastors are all perfect and rule churches full of sinless people.

Even as we watch them defend the indefensible,however, it’s hard not to feel a pang of sympathy for the people who have believed a lie and followed the Deceiver. When your pastor is the final authority on what God says to the point where he himself attains the status of a demigod then it must be a crushing blow to realize that he is nothing but an idol with his feet stuck in the mire. It is a hard thing to see your Dagon broken to shivers and to realize that you’ve been played for a fool.

All is not lost, however. Perhaps love may win a few at last and two or one will truly begin to renounce their worship of men and their trust in the arm of flesh. Maybe a few will even depart from that place and find a strange and glorious freedom for their souls. But I fear that many will still stand hurling the stones of self-righteousness, and hatred, and fear even as they search for a new idol to prop in place of the one that now lies shattered in the dust.

Christ, have mercy.

329 thoughts on “Being Without Sin”

      1. I agree.

        It helped to read this after reading some of the anger, defensiveness, blindness, and actual ugliness on facebook from the Hammond crowd.

        1. A friend wrote this: ” I can’t carry the weight of others’ ignorance and evil. I forgive them for their lack of truth, grace and honesty.”

  1. I’d hope that something this large scale happening in the IFB mothership would awaken more than a few…but knowing how deeply indoctrinated WE were in those circumstances I guess I shouldn’t be holding my breath.

    1. I grew up in a church less than five minutes’ drive from HAC. We proudly wore the label “Independent Fundamental Baptist”. But whenever we heard about anything weird happening in Hyles’ empire, we would just congratulate ourselves on not being like THOSE people.

    1. I’ve seen sooo many First Stone posts from people I’ve grown up with (grew up in a IFB church and school and went to Texas Baptist College) on facebook and a lot of these posts are by people who consistently post statements and verses on various issues of God’s judgement for this sin and that sin….talk about talking about of both sides of your mouth.

  2. I keep hearing “we’re all sinners, just the same!” As if we’re all Jack Schaaps and Joe Paternos and Jerry Sanduskys (like that idiotic article from Relevant honest-to-god entitled “We are all Paterno”).

    No. No, we’re not. Yes, we all screw up. But most of us manage to not rape or sexually abuse people. And lots of us manage to not cover up someone else’s crimes.

    That’s another thing. You can argue that all sin is the same to God. (I disagree, personally, and think it’s dangerous to say that telling someone, “No, those jeans don’t make you look fat” is just as much a sin as raping or killing someone.) But let’s just say for the sake of argument that all sin IS the same. There is still a different between a sin and a crime. If you tell me that I don’t look fat in these jeans, the police aren’t going to come knocking on your door. Let’s not forget that government is ordained by God.

    (I know I’m preaching to the choir here. Just had to get it off my chest. 😀 )

    1. Apparently we both have stuff to get off our chest this morning.

      Fundamentalists say all sin is the same. Doctrinally that is a correct statement. All sin is the same in that it condemns us in the eyes of God and helps us realize the need for savior.

      However, all sin is not the same in the eyes of the state of Indiana, Illinois and now Michigan.

      1. Actually, it is not correct doctrine to say that all sin is the same. Some sins are going to be punished more severely in the day of judgment. “It will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in that day than for you.” If all sin was the same, there would not be degrees of future punishment.

      2. Michigan, too? Really? Good Lord! 🙄

        I’m going to assume that Schaap is in deep doo-doo but no one will know exactly how deep until we know 1. when the relationship with what we’ll call Victim #1 started (which will determine how old she was), 2. if there are other victims and 3. how old those girls (or boys?) were when those “relationships” started.

    2. I’m one who has made the statement “we’re all sinners, we’re all the same.” However, in no way do I say that to excuse or minimize sin or the sinner. The biggest reason I claim that statement is to remind myself that I, too, am fallen. I know from experience that it’s more more dangerous to be in a “I’d never do that” kind of mindset than it is to be aware of the dangers and to take appropriate action in guarding against them.

      1. I think that although it’s accurate to say that technically we are all capable of anything, we are not all sociopaths. For example, I am not capable of torture and sadistic murder at this point in my life. It would take a series of steps to get me to that point of depravity. Taking sexual advantage of a girl who’s 30 or 40 years younger than you is sociopathic behavior–outside the normal range of human sin.
        I have my own sinful desires–to get my way, to cheat, to lie, to steal, perhaps. But I have no desire to behead, torture, flail, decapitate, or brutally rape anyone. It’s silly to claim that we are all on this same level of depravity.

        1. “I think that although it’s accurate to say that technically we are all capable of anything…”

          Except I never said that…just sayin’. 😐

      2. I never said you did make that statement, but you did reference the general argument, which is what I was commenting on. I HAVE heard that defense (we’re all capable of doing what Schaap did, so we shouldn’t criticize) from a lot of other people regarding this case, so I thought it was worth giving my 2 cents’ on why that is b**sh**.

    3. Good points, Dani. People tend to forget that God ordained government to help us when we suffer from criminal activity and different crimes carry different consequences. I don’t view sin as individual acts, but rather a condition that was dealt with at the cross. However, this doesn’t mean mankind has mastered their own flesh. And when it gets out of control, there ARE consequences.

    4. Dani; well said.

      I, too, am fed up with the “All sin is the same” mentality.

      We are all sinners before God, and in that respect, we are all the same. That does not, however, imply that all sins are the same. As has been mentioned, if all sin is the same, then there is no point to the coming judgment of sin. Why would God keep books if all sin is the same?

      Christians are commanded to judge righteous judgement. We are to decide, based on Scripture, what is right and what is wrong. We can certainly say that Jack Schaap did wrong (assuming that he did what the stories say he did).

  3. There is so much to be said about this whole event. First, I think it is commendable to FBC that they are being seemingly transparent. Second, we need to pray for the victims involved in this tragedy. Third, we need to practice the scriptural principle of reconciliation (if Jack Schaap, ever decides he wants it).

    That being said, Darrell’s post goes to show the mentality of the IFB movement. There are a lot of folks that are quick to pick up the stones and few willing to lay them down.

    While we may decry Jack for picking up stones to fire at the adulterous woman, we also must not be ones who grab the stones to hurl them the other direction. Like Christ, we should set the stones down and display love, affection and forgiveness and even pity.

    One thing that struck me over this whole mess was the response by Dr. Bob Gray. His whole article which can be found here: is such a sad article. It goes to show how deluded some in the IFB movement can be. The premise of his response is that it is all about him and his works. He constantly says “we did not” and then follows it by a list of actions.

    There is nothing like taking our eye off of Christ and focusing it on us. This mentality is what has ruined fundamentalism. People forget Christ and elevate people to demigod and then they are shocked when they begin to act like it.

    We should all keep our eye on Christ, the author and finisher of our faith and forget the trifles of petty people like Schaap and their ilk. Forgive them when they request it, but until fundamentalists change the object of their faith from works to Christ, we shouldn’t expect a monumental shift in the movement.

    Sorry this was so long, but I’ve been holding it in. *Sigh* I feel better now. :mrgreen:

    1. Admiral911 – thanks for the link; I read Bob Gray Sr’s post. He’s been against Jack Schaap for years, and you will note he never mentioned his name.

      As I finished the article, I thought that perhaps the REAL issue is your sinful worship of Jack Hyles and his false teaching that soul-winning is everything and can even cover other sins.

      1. I thought it was a pretty good article – a lot of stuff there that you ex-fundies would like.

        “Where a just law steps in the local church must step out. Restoration sometimes includes the judicial and penal system of our nation. If you do the crime you must do the time. However, this does not take the pain away. We are all hurt and hurting! …

        • Pray for the victims
        • Do not blame the victims
        • Do not guess at what you do not know”

  4. I couldn’t agree more. Some sins happen on the spur of the moment, in the heat of passion, etc. But for a married pastor of a huge church to actually get a girl to be willing to have sex with him and to get her in a private situation where it would be logistically possible and at least he felt he was safe from being caught displays a level of premeditation that takes this crime far beyond “looking at dirty magazines in the checkout” or letting a kiss with your boyfriend go a little too far.

    1. You are correct regarding the premeditation required to pull this off. Something tells me this is not the first time he has done this and there are more victims.
      The public response to the Penn State scandal (statues removed, monetary fines, loss of scholarships etc. etc.) needs to be followed here. There has to be public sanctions against an institution that fosters criminal behaviour, defends it and covers it up.

      1. well in the back of my mind I’m wondering what the girl’s motivation was for having sex with Schaap. He’s 54 and she was 16 or 17? And as far as his physique goes, he’s not exactly porn star material. What was he offering her, or telling her, or threatening her with, that made her go along with this (if indeed she was ok with it)?
        With all his bellowing about “safe sex” in the July 8th “sermon,” I sure hope he practiced what he preached in that regards. The world doesn’t need his DNA smattered around any more than necessary.

        1. Why would a girl do that, you ask? Same reason young women sleep with rich old men, or with politicians… to get close to power.

        2. I agree with Jason.

          Some women are greedy for power and find this a quick way to get close to those in charge and feel that they’re in the “in crowd”.

          But others have tremendous unmet needs: they long for a father figure; they long to be accepted; they feel unknown and unloved and think that if someone “important” favors them, that then it will prove that they themselves are worth something. They don’t understand that they are treasured by God Himself and instead seek out powerful men to validate them.

        3. The way it often happens is the one in power singles you out as “special”, “gifted”, set apart from all others. You understand and are understood like no one else ever has. What you say, how you look, how you behave, sets you apart and makes you worthy of special attention. It’s hard to resist, especially when you’re young and just starting out in womanhood, coming off years of feeling icky and awkward.

        4. {sigh} Teenagers aren’t exactly the smartest critters out there and they can be pretty easily manipulated. I was one and I did some pretty stupid things at that age, myself. Add to that the fact that she (and the rest of the kids at that church) had been hearing that you OBEY the pastor and don’t question his words or actions from the time she was in the nursery and you have a girl who will do what she’s told as long as the words “God’s Will” are used to back it up.
          I grieve for this girl who’s in for a long hard road getting her head and act back together. I grieve for Schaap’s family who have to endure more embarrassment from a man who doesn’t seem to care who he hurts as long as he gets his way. And I grieve for a church full of people who’ve been hurt right down to the soul.
          Yes, we are all sinners and we all need God’s grace but even Christ condemned those who harmed kids. And the breaking of civil law comes with a price. Schaap broke the law by having sex with someone under the legal age and he will face the consequences of it. Forgiveness is a personal matter between this girl and God not those who were not hurt.
          Just my .02 on the subject.

        5. If I may add onto pastor’s wife comment – And it is that need that this victim had that Schaap took advantage of. Taking advantage of anyone is the lowest of the low.
          And to think people are defending him. Or worse yet (in my mind) telling us not to judge him, we are all capable, we are all sinners blah blah blah. I say nonsense poopy-pants!

        6. For motivation, it’s hard to tell, but one the rumors is that she was being “counseled” by Schaap for issues relating to sexual abuse or assault.

          Many times, people in counseling or therapy will develop feelings for the counselor – it’s who there are ethics rules and sometimes laws against relationships between counselors and therapists and patients and one reason why, in many cases, pastors who counsel members of the opposite sex insist on having and open door and/or another person present as a safeguard.

          Also, sometimes people who have been sexually abused or assaulted react to it by either becoming promiscuous for a period of time or jumping at the first opportunity to have sex, in order to feel like they are in control of their own sexuality again. It could have been a case of counseling and feeling like she was finally being loved, cared, for, shown attention, and that feeling like maybe it would somehow help or fix things.

          Also, Schaap can be a hard person to turn down and somewhat intimidating to disappoint, especially if you’re still in that mentality where you look at him like he’s some great man of God and have been taught to obey the pastor and that the pastor is never wrong.

        7. The IFB puts the pastors up on such a pedestal. They are thought of like gods. This poor girl probably felt honored and special that Schaap chose her. (sickening) We were taught growing up (by the staff) to sing songs to the preacher. To always tell him we loved him. When he asked us to do something it was as if it was God’s voice telling us. They brainwash the kids to obey the pastor above all else.. even their parents. When we were called into his office, he would make us girls feel as if we were so important.. that we were loved. It’s all a game to them. Thankfully, Schaap was not my pastor, but I had one that was just like him. When my former pastor would walk into the room, grown women would act like giddy school girls. It is sickening. This goes on EVERYWHERE in the IFB. They need to be exposed for what they truly are.. a sick cult.

    2. and lets not forget that there are alleged pictures… who takes pictures of this kind of crap?? and leaves them on the cell phone?? ugh!

  5. It is important to keep in mind that the ‘cast the first stone’ passage is not original to the text of scripture.

    There is a lot of evidence that it is a later addition and that most modern translations will bracket it off because of this.

      1. It is with a touch of irony that you bring this up, Ben. Within the context of the IFB, there can be no doubt about its authenticity. The beautiful thing about the text is that it IS wonderfully captured and preserved in the King James Bible adored (supposedly) by the movement.

  6. (,the gays,)

    Kinda wondering how this fits in with (catholics, and calvinists) “The gays” sexual practices are called an “abomination” by the Creator, later, the same Creator destroyed entire cities because of the sin of homosexuality!

    How this would be linked in with the man-made theologies of catholicism and calvinism puzzles me. While homosexuality is a vile sin spoken about in no uncertain terms, by no less than the creator Himself, the other two, while desperately wrong, have sincere, God-fearing/seeking folks who trust in the Savior.

    1. It fits in the list because it’s a favorite group for fundamentalists to throw stones at.

      And according to their logic they shouldn’t be able to do that unless they themselves are completely sinless.

    2. I’m kinda wondering greg, what does your personal crusade against the gays have to do with the topic on hand and the news of yesterday?

    3. The inability to think logically shown in this comment makes me tired.

      It doesn’t matter what you’re view is of any of those things. It doesn’t matter what sin we’re talking about–it could be the genocide of millions. You’re missing the entire point of the post.

      1. I think if the pastor has run off with an older man we would have elevated him to a hero status and proclaimed him almost a god. Of course we all know that homosexuals are all victims of American society and we dare not do anything but bow down and lick their feet just to be honored enough to be allowed to be in their presence. All homosexuals are basically perfect people to begin with, but they are super heroes and almost like god because they all live horrible, persecuted lives in America and we need to bow to their every whim. If this pastor had run off with a man I’m sure many of these posters would seriously call him a hero.

        1. ^^ I love it when people like this one come on here and start to spout off what they think the other posters here must believe about something unrelated.

          Because, you know, everything’s about the tribe and partisan thinking! “If you rejoice in seeing the sin brought to light, you must also love the gays, because that’s what my party’s platform tells me!” Yup, that logic holds up. /Nope

          Btw, stay on subject. This post and thread is about Jack Schaap, FBC Hammond, etc; it’s not about your theories about the gays, or about your theories about the various posters.

      2. Jason, I’m not sure whom you were referring to when you talked about “tribe thinking.” Maybe you were referring to yourself and most of the posters on this blog? Of course we all need to bow down to the tribal thinking of the crowds who don’t dare say one word against the Nazi-like, anti-free speech propaganda of the homosexual lobby. I’m not trying to go off topic. I just find it humorous that if this guy had run off with a teen twink boy, an older man, or both, then most of the posters on this board would have actually applauded him and elevated him to hero status for “having the courage to come out as a gay pastor” etc. The irony is too humorously rich and delicious not to notice………back to topic.

        1. Since you already broke this off into a subthread, i don’t think it does any further harm to address your funny logic.

          “if this guy had run off with a teen twink boy, an older man, or both, then most of the posters on this board would have actually applauded him”

          That’s what I’m talking about. See, I don’t know how you could possibly come to such a conclusion, other than this… Your party’s platform says “anti-IFB and Pro-Gay are one in the same, thus anyone who’s critical of the IFB must be rabidly pro-gay.” They would fall in rigid, partisan lockstep, you’ve presumed. And I estimate that you come to this conclusion because, everything in your world is an “us vs. them” attitude, where the world is divided into two neat camps (IFBers on the one side, and anti-IFBers on the other side who are pro-gay, etc.). Thus, you have presumed that WE are all just as partisan as YOU. When i really doubt that’s the case.

        2. I wouldn’t have cared if Schaap had run away with an adult male or an adult female. His life = his business. He’d also have to live with the consequences of his choices, and unfortunately, so would his wife and the church.

          But if he’d molested a teen boy? That’s every bit as bad as this, and you should know it. If you don’t, well … smh. That’s sad and scary.

      3. By the way, there’s actually a name for these kinds of funny thinking. We’ve had an appearance of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy, as well as the “Broad Brush” fallacy, in combination. One could also argue that there’s been a “Red Herring” thrown up, as the topic has been intentionally changed. In fact, I would suggest that this whole POST is a riff on the Red Herring fallacy, plus a healthy dose of the “tu quoque” fallacy. “When your world comes crashing down, blame everyone else and change the subject as quickly as possible.”

        1. “I wouldn’t have cared if Schaap had run away with an adult male or an adult female. His life = his business. He’d also have to live with the consequences of his choices, and unfortunately, so would his wife and the church.
          But if he’d molested a teen boy? That’s every bit as bad as this, and you should know it. If you don’t, well … smh. That’s sad and scary.”

          I’m not picking on you, but your statement is a perfect example of why I don’t take this blog seriously at all. From what I can tell, the majority of people on this blog hate Christianity and hate all Christians. Hey, be my guest. It’s your free will to hate Christianity all you want. No one is going to stop you from making that choice.

          It would appear that some at this blog might have a little bit of knowledge of Christianity, but apparently most don’t. The thing that is interesting is that Christians have a different moral standard than just the law. All you people care about is whether or not a criminal law was broken and if your god, the government, has been offended. The thing with Christianity and churches is that they hold themselves to a higher standard than just the law. For example, I know of a church where a few years ago a pastor was fired for simply having an affair. There was never even one second of thought of whether or not a crime was committed or whether there was the all important “victim” of some crime. The interesting thing about that story was that there were no “victims” involved and yet it was still a big story – because the pastor broke the moral code of a pastor: Namely – married pastors shouldn’t have affairs.

          Again, I realize that this is not a Christian blog and that most of the users on here hate Christianity. I just find it kind of interesting that the vast majority of people on here are completely naive and woefully ignorant of basic Christian, moral principles. To most Christian churches, the big concern is not over some legal issue. Believe it or not, most churches would fire a pastor simply for having an adulterous affair because that goes against the moral code of being a pastor. I just find it interesting that it completely goes above all of your heads that a church would hold a pastor to a biblical standard of not having affairs. A true Christian church would not ignore a married pastor who had an affair with a 60 year old just because there were not “child victims.” They would actually fire a pastor who had committed adulterous acts but yet who did nothing wrong illegally.

          Again, I realize that the owner of this site and the users all hate Christianity and probably don’t even know that much about it to begin with. I just find it sort of interesting how you only view things from a legal point of view and have no clue that churches actually hold pastors to a moral compass as well, even apart from the law. If this pastor had had an affair with a 30 year old then apparently it wouldn’t even merit a mention on this site because a 30 year old is not a “victim.” I just thought I would bring it to your attention that in a churches point of view, having an affair with a 30 year old is actually not a positive thing and would actually be an issue of concern.

        2. I realize that the owner of this site and the users all hate Christianity and probably don’t even know that much about it to begin with

          Reading comprehension fail.

        3. Jason, I’ve never heard of this church before, but my wife is from the area and she has. What I find interesting is that the people on this blog couldn’t care one iota about morality and whether or not people have affairs or not. The only thing they care about is whether or not their god, the government, is offended. I just find it funny that the people on this board apparently have no clue that a church holds a pastor to a higher standard than just the law. That you people have no clue that a church would fire a pastor for simply having an affair, whether or not any laws were broken, is a sign of the moral depravity of the day. I know absolutely nothing about this man or this church, but I’m sure that any Christian church holds a pastor to a standard that even goes above and beyond the criminal code of whatever state they are in. The fact that you people are completely ignorant of this is both funny and sad.

        4. I think it is none-sense when a preacher of the gospel abuses the followers. The question we should all ask is, where is god in all of this? Is he playing dead, or does not care?

        5. Ben Chung? Are you related to my good friend Wang Chung? I miss him.
          Everbody needs to Wang Chung tonight!

        6. Barry Mather,

          How could you possibly know these things you are assuming about me and many of the other posters? What if (surprise surprise) many of the posters here actually ARE followers of Christ? You’ve clearly seen things in posters’ words that simply aren’t there. Idolize the government? That’s flatly laughable. Are you a Poe?

        7. I’m going to work with the assumption that you’re a Poe, and that you’re intentionally developing a “No True Scotsman” line just for yuks.

        8. Barry, I don’t know if you’re serious, but this site has, FOR YEARS, been amused (and horrified) by the fact that the same church in question refused to remove its previous renowned pastor for plain, old-fashioned adultery.

        9. If your speaking of the late Pastor Hyles, he never commited adultery. I would like to remind you that the publisher for the Hammond Times was fired for all of the alledged information that he printed about Mr. Hyles. If you want to believe the speculative information that you read in the newspapers, that’s your business.

        10. Barry, good grief, pick on me all you want. I don’t care. Obviously, you missed that I was responding to another poster who stated that we would all have proclaimed Schaap a “god” if he’d run off with an adult male or a teen boy. Did you miss that? I was clarifying that *I* would not have cared in the least had he run off with an adult male but that once a man starts victimizing minors, there is a HUGE problem.

          It isn’t about legalities. It’s about basic wrong and right.

          You also seem to really miss the fact that we aren’t just talking about a random 16 year old girl here (your “victim” for our “god” government) but one who was in counseling for being sexually abused. Talk about violating Schaap’s office — could a man be more evil?! And you say *I* don’t understand the principles of Christianity? Give me a break …

  7. actually, if I viewed the leadership as a god, I wouldn’t acknowledge their sin, and then the “cast the first stone” comment would not apply. It is because I view the leadership as human, that I don’t expect them to be perfect, and that’s where that comment comes in. So I don’t see the logic here at all.
    The second reason I made the comment is that I’m more than aware of my own sins, which is what Jesus was getting at when He made that comment – He was saying, go ahead and throw the stones, if you’re hypocritical enough to do so.
    It was not meant to be a battle cry. It was meant to acknowledge that one sinner is just like all the other sinners, especially when compared to the depth of my sin, which God has taken special measures of the past years to show to me. I want to measure with the measuring stick that I want to have applied to me. So snicker away, although it hurts. Is there room here only for one point of view?

    1. Many people here have expressed sadness. But righteous anger is the first and primary appropriate response when a wolf in sheep’s clothing is unmasked. This is not a private sin, which one person can go talk to him about. This is a man publicly disgracing the Lord Jesus Christ, and making a mockery of His Church. This man has proved himself to be the very definition of a Pharisee–and Jesus had very few kind or sad words to say to the Pharisees if you’ll recall.

      As to the logic of the post, I appeal to you: Can you really not see how hypocritical it is for a man like Schaap–who railed at sinners of every type, (including many who did things the Christian world can’t even agree are actually sins, such as go to a movie, let alone adultery as he himself has) from his public forum every week–to now be defended in this way? To say that no one is allowed to do the very thing he himself did every week, and over far less serious matters? That is the main point. It is perfectly logical.

      1. I agree, Miriam. He taught that preaching and calling out sin was the ‘right thing’ to do. So now that the community at large is doing as Schaap said, it’s ‘wrong’ because it’s directed at him? People don’t want to show grace to anyone until the shoe is on the other foot. 😐

  8. reading over my last sentence, I realize the naivete of that question. Of course there is only room for one point of view. Anger is acceptable, sadness is not.

    1. I’m sorry that you do not feel that your sadness has been validated. I think there is sadness aplenty here, but mainly for the girl who was duped, her family, and the parishioners, whether those with good intentions or those with blind faith in someone who has proved to be just another human who let his power go to his head. The anger that is being vented is healthy, especially for those who may have wasted years of their life with this man.

    2. I’m friends with several people who attended HAC. They are sad, but they are also thankful for truth to be revealed. They are also afraid that someone who spent years week after week saying crude, malicious, foolish, and sexually-charged things from the pulpit is now going to receive nothing more than, “He was bad. Bye-bye. Now move on.”

    3. I was so mad yesterday, I didn’t even comment after I read about Schaap. I wanted to say stuff like…may Schaap get a cellie that will make him his bitch but didn’t feel if that was very Christian.

      That poor young lady to have her life ruined like that. I just makes me sick to my stomach.

  9. Do we now have to be 100% Schaap, or can we just still be 100% Hyles? If we are 100% Hyles does that cover all the sex perverts from HAC, or just the two pastors of the church?

      1. I was being sarcastic. If you are familiar with Jack Hyles you know they published a bunch of stuff including buttons that said 100% Hyles back in the 90’s. So now do I need to be 100% Schaap or is 100% Hyles still in effect??? And does being 100% Hyles cover all of the pervs from HAC or just the two perv pastors?

        1. I did figure you were being sarcastic. Sorry if I made it seem like I was pushing back on what you said.

          It just bothers me there are people who actually care more about exalting the man/ministry/family in order to prove their allegiance than they do exalting the Savior.

          I really do not know if either men were (are) guilty, the entire situation sickens me. I do not care if you have a church of 14 in the back woods of East Nowhere or run 15,000, 20,000, etc in the middle of Chicago. If you do actions like this, you hurt the body of Christ, you cause havoc on many fronts. You hurt people.

  10. I am so glad the men of the Church are coming forward and doing the RIGHT thing and not sweeping this under the rug. If he broke the law he is accountable to the law. I just wish someone in Mark Chappell’s past would come forward from CT and Long Beach…he still pastors in Phoenix??? To many of these cases are “handled by the church” and by Dr. Gibbs??? Then they are off to do the same at some other place saying they are called by God? Really my bible and God has set qualifications for a pastor. And no we are not all perfect but these sexual addictions must be addressed, not all men have these issues. There needs to be more accountability. I’m sure there will sadly be more to come out of the woodwork so to say, because if there is one…there are ususally more. So sad for his wife and family and his victims….him not so much we all face temptaions and sins……most of us don’t act on them he had a choice to say NO!

    1. Not so fast. I am sure rugs and brooms for sweeping under them are being hastily assembled as we speak. Don’t kid yourself that only the TRUTH will be told and that only RIGHT will be done. If their first salvo was “There was no sex,” sorry Charlie, no sale. If Gibbs is even now flying to the scene, I promise you there is a crate of varnish in the baggage hold. Trust me: The whole thing’ll be glossed over at least to some extent. How much is anyone’s guess. The real victims here are the women who trusted Jack with their lives, their honor, their reputations, and their safety: Cindy, Jaclynn, the poor girl(s) he molested, and only God will ever know the rest. The men — including Jack’s own son and son-in-law, and the deacons, assistant pastors, hangers-on, sycophants, et cetera — who have for years pretended they didn’t comprehend the seriousness of Schaap’s borderline psychotic tendencies in preaching and writing — thereby granting tacit approval of same — are FULLY to blame for the inevitable fallout. There is such a thing as “gut feeling” and then there is common sense. We ignore them both at our peril.

  11. I have a few tidbits from friends that are very much in the ‘know’ at FBC. I trust these reports but I wasn’t there to confirm (thankfully):

    1. Jack Schaap’s assistant (who is a stand up guy ironically named Jack) found the phone.
    2. He (his assistant) did the right thing. He didn’t do what was right for his job or for the church, but he did the morally right thing by taking the phone to several other pastors or deacons.
    3. I find his bravery admirable. In that world, what he did – knowing the consequences and that it could bring down the church – should be commended.
    4. The pastors and his assistant then informed Mrs. Schaap.
    5. The pastors then flew to where Jack Schaap was preaching in Maine and approached him about this issue. Apparently he didn’t handle the accusation well.
    6. Overall, I applaud the pastors and his assistant for handling this matter the way that they did.

    1. I agree. I’m surprised, knowing the history of the church, but I’m very thankful that some men in that church actually behaved Biblically instead of allowing idolatry to cause further disobedience.

    2. Imagine for just a moment how Mrs Schaap is having to face this…alone. I mean, she has her own family, but who does a mega church pastor’s wife go to for counsel in a time like this? Her husband is her pastor. :O(

      1. And you could just cue the music by Patsy Cline’s “Stand By Your Man” here too because she’ll be told that divorce is wrong.

        How old are their children?

        1. Both childrenare grown and married.
          Jaclynn’s about 31 (a year older than me, we were at HAC together), and Kenny’s in his mid-late 20s

      2. I’m feeling pretty bad for Mrs Schaap; first, her father, her brother, her in-laws, and now her husband.

        Poor woman!

        1. Wait a minute. Are you saying her brother did this and her father in law did this? I know the rumors about Dr Hyles but are you saying that all the men in her life have been involved in scandal?

    3. Wait…Schaap was in Maine but his cell phone was in Indiana? Oops!! Did he have more than one and that was his Naughty Phone?

    4. “Apparently he didn’t handle the accusation well.”

      Hmm, that would have been interesting to witness.

      I agree – those were brave men that confronted him, and I applaud them for doing so.

    5. Not doubting what you’re saying at all. However, here is some of the spin that is coming out. This copied and pasted from the Fundamentalist Forums.

      “I just got off the phone with one of the men who is involved in the handling of this situation and thought I should pass on some things:

      1. No sex took place.

      2.It was not discovered by a picture on a cell phone but by the internal policies and procedures that Jack Schaap had set up and told his staff to hold him to. The picture on the phone came out later… A secretary was fired today for not following church policy.

      3.He did not drive off with this girl…the fired secretary took her to meet him in Ill and Mi.

      4.Because there was no sex and it is obvious there are no others (Schaaps on policies brought this to light) Schaap did not feel he should resign and was trying to keep the church and take a sabbatical. The Head deacon felt otherwise.

      5.They are strongly considering live streaming the church service Wednesday night to show they have nothing to hide.

      6.David Gibbs is involved and will be conducting the Wed night service.

      7.Anyone can call anyone up there and they will gladly answer any questions.

      8.Schaap has called all staff and apologized.”

      1. That is great spin job. Of course someone just happens to be able to talk with “one of the men”. Unless that man is with the police, I don’t care what he has to say.

        If #1 is true, why are the police and FBI involved?

        #2 – What policies and procedures brought this to light? So what if a secretary got fired.

        #3 – Now we have someone to blame. the fired secretary who obviously doesn’t follow rules.

        #4 – How is it obvious there are no others?

        And the rest says nothing worth while.

        1. Well, you do have to find a woman to blame. After all they are completely and wholly to blame for a man’s sin. OF COURSE they found a staff woman to blame and fire. And it goes without saying that the evil temptress of a 16 yo was totally responsible for Jack Schapp’s failing. Have we not learned anything yet?

        2. the secretary was an adult & regardless of ‘faith in a man’ had the opportunity – & duty – to refuse to honor the request. she was fired for her actions & bad judgment – she COULD be charged as an accessory or any number of illegal actions if legal charges are filed! and, she was not the only one fired – the pastor was fired also. just doesn’t look like scape-goating to me.

      2. BTW, if the secretary drove an underaged girl across state lines to meet Schaap, then the secretary can be charged with statutory rape. Even if he never laid a finger on her, that’s irrelevant. The act of taking her across state lines is sufficient.

        Now comes the pure speculation on my part: How much do you want to bet that Schaap knew that? 👿

        1. As I stated above, the secretary is in perfect position to be setup as the scapegoat.
          I think Schapp had everything calculated out to cover his tracks.

        2. Actually, the secretary would be charged with conspiracy to commit a felony, if/when the states of illinois and Michigan and/or the FBI have evidence to charge him with a crime. It’s already clear by Indiana statute that even if Schaap had sex with this girl, He would not be charged with a crime because she was of legal consent age to engage in such acts according to Indiana law. That doesn’t mean he’s not already guilty in the court of public opinion or that what he did was shameful and just down right wrong.

  12. Am I the only one that sees the similarities between LDS leader Warren Jeffs and Jack Schaap?

    1. No, I thought the exact same thing last night. He’s got his own personal harem of underage girls at his disposal thanks to City School or whatever it’s called and slightly older but still very nubile young women thanks to HAC. *shudder*

    2. This made me think of Warren Jeffs too! I read the biography “Stolen Innocence” by Elissa Wall a year or so ago and the similarities between Jeffs and Schaap are so eerie and sad! 🙁

    3. I knew this reminded me of something else.
      I have no connections at all to Schaap, FBC, or HAC, but I had this nagging feeling that I had heard all this before.

  13. Darrell, I wish I could disagree with you, but I believe your statements are dead on. As I stated yesterday, I am afraid this is going to open a flood of victims who never came forward because of threats, perceived shame, or both.

    I am really bothered by the blind defense he is getting, especially from people like Bob Gray who should have learned better. What is indefensible is to come out without any facts and say we should say or believe nothing, no matter what comes out. Quit blaming the devil or “evil men trying to take you down” for your sins. Jas 1:14-16 tells us But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death. Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren.
    According to scripture, we have our own sinful desires to blame.

    And also, This isn’t a small indiscretion, “Dr.” Gray. It is a CRIME. With victim(s).

    1. Bob Gray should really recognize this pattern of predator by personal experience. He had a church staff member, think it was a principle of LBT’s Christian School, arrested and sent to prison on a Life term in Texas for sexually molesting, not fondling or kissing but sexually assaulting, underage girls. Believe it was a 12-14 year old girls, and several of them. Not only that, but defended this POS and payed for his defense attorneys while pressuring his congregation that they were not right with God if they didn’t defend this man. The church never tried to be forthcoming with law enforcement, but rather tried to hide this man’s crimes. Gray and LBT stood by this man until the police investigations had so much evidence against him, it couldn’t be denied anymore. By the way, these investigations were done on the behest of the victims parents and law enforcement obligation to look into it. The church did NOTHING. This man had been through allegations for inappropriate conduct with young girls before, but was given the benefit of the doubt and said the girls who made he complaints were lying and made to look like “rebellious, lying heffers” I believe the term Gray used, in front of the entire church congregation.

      So sounds to me Bob Gray has no buisness to give an opinion on how men who prey on young girls should be treated. He has proved in the past he doesn’t know how to handle these matters. He hides behind the belief that the church is the final authority in all matters and that the preacher is the be all end all of church members and their personal affairs. I want to know where in the Bible it states that.

  14. Could you please tell me where he was preaching in Maine? I can’t imagine any church in Maine prestigious enough for Schaap, unless he just happened to be vacationing or something.

    1. Sorry, that post was directed to Shaft. I’m just questioning what he was doing in Maine. Some posts yesterday suggested he had been in hiding, and there really are no churches in Maine that would command his presence, except maybe Mid-Coast Baptist, which I’m pretty sure is opposed to Schaap.

  15. I know this will reveal me for the idiot that I am, but what are we talking about? Who/what was this article about? What happened? I’m lost.

  16. To me, the Jack Schaap fiasco is just another in a long line….I graduated from a Christian high school where the “mother church” changed pastors and the man who took over, Preston Bunnel, blew the church up by having an affair or affairs with one of the church ladies. I’ve heard that the incident destroyed the faith of many people in the church, though it was a bonanza for a few of the other IFB God shops in the area.

    The church building now houses a black church.

    1. Why is it important to mention that the church building now houses a black church? What an odd thing to say.

  17. Everyone is calling the girl the victim and are trying to justify what she did….she could be at just as muc fault as Schaap. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending him, I never cared so mch for him after hearing some of his sermons…I attended the college and church. But you say how did he get her to agree…maybe this girl isn’t so innocent…maybe she seduced him…ever think of that? No one knows the whole story and for those who do, they aren’t speaking right now. But obviously she was on board. To me, it sounds like they had an actual relationship…him allowing her to photograph their encounters and texting them to him. I’m sure that wasn’t the 1st picture. And for the one who said who does that…lol…I do…but I send them to my husband and he is the only one who sees them. I know of quite a few women…and men…who sends sexual pictures to their spouses…its not a sin.
    But as I was saying, for everyone who is victimizing the girl…maybe u should hold ur tongue til u know the whole truth. I’m not trying to b rude, mean or defensive cuz whatever the reason, Schaap is married and waaaay too old for a teenagers, but it could very well be her doing. Maybe she came to him for “counseling” and seduced him? Its a possibility. And I’ve personally met Schaap and he is decently attractive and him being so “powerful” (as in a “great man of God” and the head of one of the biggest, most famous churches in america), he would be a great catch. I just think u should look at it from all angels…not just one…the obvious one..the obvious one isn’t always the most accurate one.

    To the one who said Cindy will stay by his side cuz that’s what they say is the right thing to do…they believe there is one thing that has grounds for divorce according to the Bibl an that’s adultery…and Adultery is one of the great sins that the Bible says he Lord HATES. So even if sin is a sin…adultery is named as a worse sin.

    1. maybe this girl isn’t so innocent…maybe she seduced him…ever think of that?

      I was wondering when this line of questioning would surface.

    2. Another Chuck Phelps Defense Strategy™. “I didn’t rape the underage girl, we were just out on a date.”

    3. It’s funny that Joseph, a spoiled favored son who became a victimized, ostracized slave in a foreign land, when seduced by a beautiful and powerful woman had enough honor and courage to stand by his convictions and RUN AWAY FROM HER. Why couldn’t a pastor do the same?

      The Bible is clear that those who stand in positions of authority have more to answer for: “Jesus said to his disciples, ‘Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted in the marketplaces and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely.’” (Luke 20:45-47)

      “From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.” (Luke 12:48)

      “Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.” (James 3:1)

      1. Exactly. The girl’s behavior is a different issue. If she was a willing and eager accomplice, then her sin also has to be dealt with. But that is completely aside from Schaap.

        He’s the adult; she’s the child. He’s the pastor; she’s the member. He’s the counselor; she’s the one who needs help. As much as high school and college kids would like to be thought of as adults, they are not–with only a few, isolated exceptions. 17 is still a child. She is not old enough or mature enough to make wise decisions, which is why the adults in her life–particularly those responsible for her–have to help her make wise decisions. It is utterly immaterial to the issue with Schaap and what he did whether she walked into his office naked and tried to give him a lapdance, or if he assaulted her and she resisted the whole time. He has no excuse. He is equally guilty either way.

        I also fail to see how it is more insulting for us to assume that Schaap is a predator, than for you to assume that he’s so stupid, incompetent and utterly controlled by his flesh that he could allow a 17-year-old could to seduce him. Either way…he’s not qualified to be leading anyone. And finally, no one “seduces” anyone. People ATTEMPT to seduce. No matter how strong the temptation, the decision lies with the other party. If she did attempt it, ultimately the correct phrasing is not “she seduced him,” but “he allowed himself to be seduced by her.”

    4. Krista, it is absolutely heart BREAKING this is how you are choosing to rationalize/cope with what JS CHOSE to do. Pastors Wife gave a great example with Joseph. Even *IF* the girl seduced him repeatedly JS is responsible for his actions. He could have stopped counseling her, how Joseph would not go near Potiphar’s wife and completely avoided her. JS could have told a friend, his wife or another pastor what happened and how he should handle it… and the list goes on of the millions of things he could’ve and should’ve done *IF* he was “seduced”.

    5. “…most famous churches in America…”

      Sorry, this part made me snort. I grew up in fundy circles (although much more moderate than a lot of the places discussed here), and had never heard of Schaap, Hyles, the church or HAC until I started visiting this site. 🙄

      1. My parents had some books by Hyles from the 60s or maybe 70s, but nothing newer. I didn’t even know there was a college. I’d never heard of Schaap either until I heard about him on SFL.

        1. Whenever I mention it to any of my friends now, nobody has ever heard of it. Funny, because back then we all thought we were so RELEVANT!

      2. I challenge HAC and Schaap supporters to ask 5 non-church members if they know who he and HAC is outside of the latest scandal. How much do you want to bet that most people have no idea who any of this is?

    6. it stretches the limits of credibility to suggest that a 16 year-old minor “seduced” a 50-something year-old Big Powerful Pastor. Did she get it in her head to entice him? Apparently. But did she come up with that idea all on her own? Did she just wake up one morning and think, out of the blue, “Hm, I wonder if I can seduce the pastor?” No. Obviously, as in all interpersonal relationships, there would have been some give-and-take. It crosses the line when the GROWN MAN, who should know the law and biblical ethics, doesn’t take care of this problem IMMEDIATELY with trusted elders and friends.

    7. The legal term for this argument is “immaterial”. If sex happened, then Schaap raped a minor, no matter what she did. Even if she walked in to his office stark naked and demanded sex right then, Jackwagon still had the responsibility to say NO.

  18. What part of adult men should not have sex with underage girls do people not understand? 👿

  19. Right, the only way it’d be only his fault is if he black mailed or coerced her or if she was under age. But from articles I’ve read, she’s a college student.
    Sisterlisa, he is a human…sounds like ur putting pastors on a pedistal too. Maybe she was too tempting. Maybe she showed him something he couldn’t turn down or like someone else said, it was the heat of the moment…I don’t see that being likely if she was taking pictures tho. But like I said, no one will know unless he or he tells the whole truthful story…so don’t be so quick to victimize this girl. To Phatchick…if she uses the excuse that he’s a man of god and what he says is right…she should know better than to believe him if he told her that. So, if obama comes over and says have sex with me, its ok cuz he’s the president? No…its still wrong and u would know that. Like I said, the only way she wouldn’t be at fault is if she was under age or if he said if u don’t sleep with me I will kill you.

    1. “The girl in question was 16 when the alleged affair began in April, said a source, and was affiliated with the church’s Hyles-Anderson College near Schererville although not a student.”

      “So, if obama comes over and says have sex with me, its ok cuz he’s the president? No…its still wrong and u would know that. ”
      Krista, you are a moron.

      1. hey, folks – how about keeping the comments to the original subject: i.e. the alleged transgressions of Jack Schaap. sniping at one another does not do the Lord justice.

        1. Making the victim out to be the seductress does not do the Lord justice. Given the definition of moron, “a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment”, I felt it appropriate. 😀

      1. If I may add to that:

        1. Pastors shouldn’t be having sex with girls they are supposed to be couselling.

        2. Pastors shouldn’t be having sex with someone that isn’t their wife.

        3. NO married man should be having sex with someone who isn’t their wife.

        I think that about covers it.

    2. Good Lord, use your brain. It exists for a purpose. Use it to think clearly. You seem to be getting two ideas mixed together, and it would be of profit to you if you dealt with them separately.

      First, “what if she tempted him?” Again, this would not have come out of the blue, it would have had some antecedent thought of some sort, probably from both the girl and from Schaap. In other words, the question “who started it?” probably has NO answer. But the question, “who had a legal responsibility to put a stop to it?” emphatically has an answer: Jack Schaap. Not only that, but the girl certainly should have put a stop to it. But, again, being a minor, she is legally considered incapable of giving consent, therefore she is a VICTIM (legally) and not legally responsible for putting a stop to it.

      Second, to your infelicitous question, “what if Obama came, etc.” Again, use your brain. This is ridiculous given the circumstance. 1. Clearly there was a pre-existing ‘counseling’ relationship. It didn’t happen out of the blue. 2. Any grown man should be self-aware enough to know the law and not to approach a minor in such a way. Schaap apparently didn’t. Your question is ludicrous because such a thing NEVER happens so bald-faced.

    3. That is a very prudish.
      Think about this. Why was the young woman/girl seeking counsel in the first place? It has been stipulated she is already the victim of abuse. She is/was probably looking for love, acceptance and all she may know is that men will show her affection if she is physical with them. Is she to blame for that? If it is all she has ever known do we fault her for that?

      That is where the so-called counselor is to blame. He took advantage of the situtation and exploited it for his personal gratification. It doesn’t matter if it was consentual or if she did the dance of the seven veils… he was the one who was to blame. He took advantage of his position and her vunerability. The same would hold true if she would have been in her 20’s, 30’s or even a grandma… he is responsible for both the situtation and his actions… p-e-r-i-o-d.

  20. Eliacus…ur right and if u read my post right, I said I’m NOT. Defending him. I’m only saying its not just him. My post was directed to those who were calling the girl a victim and feeling sorry for her…schaap was wrong, but how do u know the girl was a victim? That’s all I was saying.

    1. Well, Krista, she was 16. Legally, she’s a victim. She could have been the most promiscuous teenager on the planet, and she would STILL be a victim. When you take into consideration the fact that she was in counseling with this man (a PASTOR) AND she was a previous victim of sexual abuse, well, I think we can all agree that THIS GIRL IS A VICTIM. Except apparently you. You seem to have some kind of trouble believing that a man is responsible for the actions of his penis.

      That should serve you well if your husband ever cheats. It wasn’t his fault. His penis made him do it. *shrug*

  21. Krista, anyone under the age of consent is a victim.
    Ever hear of coercion? Adult male, makes young vunerable girl feel special, who was there for counceling.
    Yep.. poor poor J.S. <—- sick.

    Shame on this man.

  22. Jason Little…u say both perv pastors…Hyles didn’t have an affair. It was proven to be a false rumor.

    1. I suggest that Google is your friend. Jack Hyles’s indiscretions with his secretary were well-known and not a rumor. So were his son’s, Dave Hyles.

  23. Omg, can u people not read? I said I’m not defending jack schaap! I’m simply saying how does anyone know it was him who seduced her or made her have sex with him??
    U hope I don’t have daughters? Cuz I will teach them even if someone says its ok for whatever reason to have sex, its not? I’m not making excuses to why he did it. I’m just saying everyone is victimizing this girl when no one knows what happened. Last I heard she was an 18 year old college student. If she wasn’t a college student, why are they investigating the college? And to the one who said she was 16, therefore a victim…I DID say unless she was under age or if he threatened her. I’m looking outside of the box, ppl…its new news and still under investigation so I’m looking at all points of view. Its possible it was all her doing…its possible that it was his…so I say something u don’t agree with so u call me names? That’s very christian of you….and yes, Phatchick and others said the reason she went along with it was because he is a man of god and what he says is right and if he says its gods will…I compared that to the president…maybe it was a bad comparison but who cares…who made you the master of being politically correct? And to judge how others word things. Maybe u should go back to church and learn to stop judging people who don’t agree with you…just like everyone lse, I was stating my opinion and letting it be known that its possible that it wasn’t just schaap.

    1. I can read quite well, thanks, but I will confess to difficulties when people take liberties with their spelling and punctuation. I get that there’s a certain casual style to blog comments and posts, but random periods, commas and misspellings spattered throughout comments DO make them difficult to understand. If you tend to be on the more creative side when it comes to spelling and grammar, you should be more understanding when people DON’T understand what you are trying to say. 🙄

    2. You say “we don’t know all the facts” and neither do you dear. Your comments are incredibly unloving and insensitive toward the people who regularly read this blog, post & discuss who have experienced all forms of abuse and were told by their pastors they were somehow responsible or shared in the blame. Please consider working out your opinions and theories on another site or forum because there are victims that come to this blog as a place of solace.

    3. Krista – I haven’t seen anything unloving or insensitive that you have written. You have an opinion that is not a popular one at SFL and have expressed it, I for one, enjoy looking at issues from various points.

      Pay no attention to self-deputized SFL police, the one you need to pay attention to, is Darrell.

      1. “I haven’t seen anything unloving or insensitive that you have written”

        Other than blaming the victim. As a former police officer greg, you should be ashamed of yourself for NOT calling her out on this. Is that how you handled rape cases during your career? “No problem Mr. Predator Pedophile Rapist, she was wearing a very short skirt. You go about your day. Would you like to buy a ticket to the police benevolance dinner?”

        1. Scorpio, Kinda coming unhinged aren’t you? Last I checked this was a blog where Darrell gives anyone lots of leeway to share their opinions. Schapp is lower than whale you-know-what, but last I checked this isn’t a courtroom and he hasn’t been charged with anything!

          Do you really believe that 17 yr olds can’t seduce someone? If so, you really need to get out more! If she did “seduce” Schapp it is reprehensible that he would allow himself to fall for it, and I beleive it to be outrageous behaviour. Because he was in a position of “authority” over her it would make any inapropriate actions even more egregious.

          If Schapp is guilty of anything I wish him the harshest punishment possible.

    4. “I’m simply saying how does anyone know it was him who seduced her or made her have sex with him??”

      If the girl is/was 16 as the reports seem to indicate, then I can say with 100% legal certainty that, IF any sex (or related activity) occurred, it makes her a VICTIM. Seriously, just read the law. This isn’t complicated.

    5. Krista, you claim you are not defending Jack Schaap. What you ARE doing is actually a favorite trick of abusers–it’s called “spreading the blame around.” By spreading the blame to the underage girl, you are taking some of the heat off of Schaap, and that makes it look like you are defending him. The stark truth is that 100% of the heat SHOULD be on him. She doesn’t get even 1% of it, because she is an underage victim.

      Why is she a victim and not a seductress, you ask? There’s a reason why each state has an age of consent. It’s because young people don’t have the mental development to make wise decisions regarding sex. That’s why she is a victim.

    6. “Its possible it was all her doing”

      You mean he tripped, fell, and landed dick first in to her vagina?

  24. I knew some people who really worshipped him. A lot of people took everything he said as gospel including his weird conspiracy theories about russia. He wasn’t a good preacher at all either, he would take a verse out of context and then take each word individually and explain that it really means something else.

  25. I hope this man goes down for what he has done. Remember, the victim is the girl, not him, he is in a position of power and authority. He knows better and I feel for her. I have been through this type of thing in other churches and rarely is there only one victim…

    It appears that the “schaap has hit the fan…”

  26. I think a good Friday challenge would be to take the picture of JS from the video in the preceding post (with his hands extended toward the camera) and see who can come up with a good caption for it. Just a thought!

  27. I am a public school teacher (substituting, but still a teacher). We are repeatedly and annually reminded that ANY inappropriate contact in this state is a breach of ethics, as well as illegal. Any supervisory position with the school district from volunteer coaches to administrators, is considered to be in a position of authority over any student, including the 19 – 21 year olds in various special programs. Age of consent is irrelevant. In other words, a 22-year-old volunteer coach for the middle school track team can be fired for dating an 18 year old high school student who is not even on the team being coached. If this is the code of ethics for public school employees, should not those in the church have greater expectations?

  28. Eli…my bro in law who is a pastor’s son, was accused and prosecuted for this same story. He was 18 and his gf was 15 (only a 3 year diff). She wanted t mess around and he started to go along with it but decided he didn’t want to so he stopped, they didn’t have sex and he barely touched her, but she got mad and told her parents he tried to have sex with her and said he touched her and he went to jail for it and recenly, over 12 yrs later, he finally got the record dropped…he was a registered sex offender for 12 years for something he didn’t do…he was trying to do right and not have sex with her, yet he’s the one getting punished…so, I know that part of it…apparently you don’t! And for as my spelling and puncuation, are ou an english teacher? I’m using my phone and for one, can’t see entire screen after it gets beyond a certain point, and the keys stick. I’m poor, I can’t afford a nice phone, or a computer or internet service like you! I have a $45 metro pcs plan! I am a single mother…so I ‘m sorry that I can’t afford nice thins like u can…and who gives a damn about my punctuation…apparently people understood what I was saying.
    Greg, thank you! At least there are a few that are smart enough to view all sides before judging.

    1. You don’t think there’s a difference between an 18 year old boy and a 15 year old girl and a 54 year old man and a 16 year old girl?

      Even the law in most states differentiates between these situations, which is why most states have more than one “age of consent” that allows for young couples to not be prosecuted for normal behavior.

      (BTW– nice lot of assumptions up there on who we are and what we can afford.)

    2. Krista, you are spitting into the wind. I’ve read all of your comments and I must agree with Persnickety Polecat: It is very difficult to understand what you are saying when your grammar, spelling, and usage are so poor that your thought process is all but unintelligible. I didn’t make the rules but you must realize that hopelessly garbled syntax does not make for intelligent discourse.

      I’m sorry if you don’t like people pointing that out, but you know, I’m just about as fed up with semi-literate people holding forth at great length on the Internet as I am with celebrity Baptist preachers who prey on the disadvantaged, the vulnerable, the abused, and the unprotected.

      And please do not use the excuse that you’re on your phone, you’re poor, and you’re a single mother. It’s no wonder you seem to want to explore the possibility that somehow this girl may have asked to be abused, or deserved to be molested. You have a sad story about a brother-in-law but honestly, nobody here knows the facts of that matter — perhaps not even you — and even if they did, you are comparing apples to oranges.

      When I was 12 years old my mother’s boyfriend, on the ruse of taking me to school, instead took me to a coffee shop and fed me breakfast, then took me out into some woods and molested me. It was not the first time he touched me improperly and it would not be the last. I was powerless to defend myself and I still remember how that felt.

      The person who molested me is dead now and in Hell I have no doubt, because he had no Christian testimony. By God’s grace I later married a precious Christian man who I met while I was a student at Hyles-Anderson College. We’ve been married 33 years and I thank God for His faithfulness.

      But I remember distinctly being told by Jack Hyles, while being counseled in his office (and he was always a perfect gentleman to me, and I considered him my friend) as a college student, that I was a “second line girl.”

      In identifying and categorizing me thus, he was making the point that I, a child of a broken home who had been abandoned by her father and whose mother had been married three times, and who wasn’t on the “cradle roll” at a Baptist church from the day I was born, was not as good as, for example, Linda Hyles or Cindy Hyles or the Lewis sisters or any other of the endless supply of “first line girls” who filled the rank and file of born-and-bred First Baptist kids.

      I believed that label he put on me for a long time and I will tell you, it makes you wonder if, when a man puts his hands on you in an improper way, you are the one who misunderstood or misjudged or is wrong. At least two other men in power at HAC or FBC touched me improperly — albeit casually — over the ensuing years until I was married. I never felt I had the option of telling them to get their filthy hands off me, although now I realize that’s what I should have done and I certainly wish it is what I’d done.

      What I am getting at is that for you to even hint — and you’ve done more than that — that the victim might have been complicit in the immorality and wrong that was done to her, is repugnant and honestly, I hope you think long and hard about what you are saying before you even wonder out loud about something like that again.

      In this situation, given this girl’s age and situation in life versus Jack Schaap’s age and situation in life, it wouldn’t matter if she threw herself at him in the most unabashed and salacious way one could imagine. As others have pointed out, HE is the one who is older, wiser, stronger, and supposedly more spiritual than basically anyone he meets (to hear him tell it).

      Therefore it is HIS responsibility to never allow himself to be caught in a situation where his conduct can be misinterpreted or his reputation compromised. For me, that would involve never counseling a female without another female present. I don’t care how inconvenient it is. To do anything less is asking for trouble.

      And that counseling, with another female present, should only take place in an office or area that is completely glassed and with people walking by outside, so that there is NEVER any question of what is going on or what is being said.

      I have gone on too long perhaps but this story has hit a nerve with me and there’s lots more I cannot say but I am not going to sit here and let someone intimate or even muse aloud that maybe the girl asked for what she got from Schaap — even if they are not trying to say he’s been falsely or erroneously accused — without standing up to them.

      Jack Schaap is a vile, arrogant, egotistical — and I believe psychotic — individual who needs to be removed from any and all responsibility and purview over others. And I mean now, and I mean forever. I have been saying this for a decade and I am not glad this has happened but I am relieved that finally he has been exposed.

      God help us all.

      1. Angel, I am so sorry you were labeled as “not quite good enough.” How contrary to the message of the Gospel! What a travesty that people who claimed to be representing Scripture so accurately were actually communicating such twisted and damaging accusations.

        I praise God that in Christ we are redeemed and cleansed. There are no second-class citizens, no children who are less treasured in the eyes of the our Father.

        How dare they try to shame you?

  29. Well, obviously you own a working, error-free electronic that I can’t afford.
    Also, you want to bring up men of the Bible o state ur case, well, what about David? He was a man of power and saw bathsheba and committed adultery with her and had her husband killed…yet, God calld David a mans after His heart. Like I said 3xs now, I’m NOT defending Schap, I’m just being OPEN MINDED!! Yes there’s a difference, but they’re determing her age…some said she was 16 sme say she was over 18…what about hugh heffner (sp) he’s in his 80s and dates 25 yr old women but anyway, I stated my opinion and that’s what it is…MY OPINION! Thank you…

    1. David publicly repented of his sin with great grief and no excuses. He also suffered some serious consequences for the rest of his life with repercussions after that affair.

      I really don’t think I need to point out that Hugh Hefner is not the shepherd of a church that claims to be following Christ.

    2. Your logic is astounding. I’m on my work laptop, fwiw. And I don’t even have a cellphone, much less one with Internet access, lol.

      At any rate, nowhere in the Bible did it say that Bathsheba was a child or a sexually abused teenage girl. She WAS another man’s wife, which implied that she was an adult WOMAN. Hugh Hefner’s creepy, but he’s dating women who are legally of age.

      I don’t call it open-minded when you blame a teenage girl for a predator’s actions. I call it an obscene representation of our rape culture. And it horrifies me that it’s coming from a woman, although perhaps it shouldn’t.

      We may all be entitled to our opinion, but that does not mean all opinions are created equal or are due equal respect. They aren’t. Some opinions are just wrong.

    3. Opinions are fine, we all have ’em, but you can’t have an opinion about facts, namely, IF the girl really was 16 (which it seems she is), and IF there really was inappropriate/sexual contact (which it seems there was), then LEGALLY, Schaap is FACTUALLY guilty, and LEGALLY, the girl is FACTUALLY a victim. There’s no opinion about it.

      Of course, at this point, this is all alleged, and the facts will be verified. But if -IF – it’s actually as the reports indicate, then there’s no “Opinions” left to be had, and only facts.

  30. Here’s my question. For those saying that Jack Schaap’s sin is a sin just like anyone else’s. Is anyone considering the domino affect that one in such a large leadership position would have when such a sin is committed? When an ‘average Joe’ does something like this, his accountability factor to me would seem as if it’s on an a smaller scale then someone like Jack Schaap. I thought the more responsibility, or at least the more knowledge one has, the greater the sin may be.

    James 3:1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.
    Luke 12:48 b For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

    Let me also add, I’d have this question whether it’s about Schaap or not. I’m not here to slander or defend and I am so extremely sad for the family of Jack Schaap.

  31. Krista: In your original post you stated that you send pics to your husband. Your most recent post states that you are a single mom.

    1. Glad to see I wasn’t the only one who noticed that.

      She mentions a brother-in-law, too. Oops again.

  32. I think this tawdry event can be made into a made for tv movie. What actors and actresses would the casting agent employ?

    For the protagonist, we will need an arrogant and puffed up man full of grace and glory on the surface.

    This is better than fiction, and much more interesting. This can be a psychological drama as it unfolds gently with a dramatic ending.

    My initial vote is for Jon Voigt as the Elmer Gantry like character, updated with a Hoosier accent.

    I’d like to hear other ideas for casting.

    Also, you must make some space for all the camp followers, some of which are present in these blogs.

    This is all too dear to let this one go.

  33. Rght, we’re talking about sin…”he who is without sin…” not legal stuff or age or whatever…I didn’t say he didn’t do I and he wasn’t to blame. Everyone is calling her a victim…I’m simply saying how do you know she’s the victim…according to th latest news the thought she was of legal age…

    to he guy with a work laptop…here in florida, you can get a phone service from a place called Metro PCS which you can get unlimited everything for $45…including internet…

    And for the one asking about my marital status…I’m going through a divorce…I support myself and my son…therefore, I consider myself a single mother…oops!

    In any sense, it is possible that she was of age and seduced him…its also possible that he is a dirt bag who threatened her into doing…however…seeing the photo only showed them making out…who’s to say he even did nything more? Like I said before, no one knows the full truth yet…if ever…no one has a right to judge anyone but God…judge not least ye be judged…are you all better than or equal to God where u feel u are in the position to judge? Especially not knowing all the facts? Whether it be more or this gir or Jack Schaap. Wait til u get the full story before u place judgement. That’s what my point was!

    1. You keep wanting to ignore the possibility she was underage, but the first and most reliable report indicates that she was underage. . This is really relevant to the discussion, and you can’t ignore it.

      But, that said, even if the report is wrong, and she was 18 or older, in most states (if not all…) there are specific laws prohibiting relationships between authority figures and those under their authority- Particularly, in formal counseling situations. In other words, in most states, it is ILLEGAL for a counselor to have any kind of physical relationship with the person he is counseling – EVEN IF the counseled party expresses the sentiment that would pass for consent in a different circumstance. The reason for this – again – is Power. The counselor is in a position of authority & power over the counseled, and (thus the legal reasoning goes), he can be seen to have implicitly and inappropriately influenced the counseled into entering the relationship. So, yeah, it’s illegal in many states (not to mention simply immoral) for a counselor to have a relationship with someone he is counseling. And again, in that situation, the COUNSELOR is “guilty,” and the counseled is a “victim.”

    2. From the American Association of Pastoral Counselors, which could be used in a court of law depending on whether or not Schaap was officially considered a pastoral counselor.

      “G. All forms of sexual behavior or harassment with clients are unethical, even when a client invites or consents to such behavior or involvement. Sexual behavior is defined as, but not limited to, all forms of overt and covert seductive speech, gestures, written communication, and behavior as well as physical contact of a sexual nature; harassment is defined as but not limited to, repeated comments, gestures, written communication, or physical contacts of a sexual nature.

      H. We recognize that the therapist/client relationship involves a power imbalance, the residual effects of which are operative following the termination of the therapy relationship. Therefore, all sexual behavior or harassment as defined in Principle III G, with former clients is unethical.”

    3. For someone claiming to not be defending schaap, there’s very little evidence other than the incorrect claim that you aren’t, to prove that in a court.

      If you have to repeatedly declare you aren’t doing something, maybe you actually are???

    4. Yeah, that “judge not that ye be not judged” isn’t going to hold water here. First, the Bible also says that a bishop must be blameless. Yeah … Schaap’s anything but blameless once he starts committing adultery, even if he was seduced by a 40 year old stripper. (um. moving along.)

      Second, the Bible says that by their fruits we shall know them — Schaap’s fruits are looking pretty rotten right about now, don’t you think?

      Finally, check out that WHOLE passage the next time you hurt “judge not” at someone. It doesn’t tell you to never judge anyone. It says to make sure your own house is in order before you start in on someone else’s. Since I’ve never abused, molested or raped anyone else, I think I’ve got that part pretty well covered and am confident I can call a spade a spade.

      “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

      1. Not to mention that the whole context of that phrase (as well as most of the commandments in the bible) are aimed at the reader, in the first person. They are not weapons to be wielded against OTHER people who I disagree with, as if I should use Jesus’ words to bludgeon someone into no longer “judging”.

  34. Also, to the lady who was molested, my mom (rip) was too. Also, I was one of the “1st girls”…I grew up in church and now I’m going thru a divorce with a 1 year old boy. My ex was never in church and was an alcoholic and I don’t go to church as much as I should either…and I smoke cigarettes…th way u grew up shouldn’t effect who u turn out to be…I went to a christian school since 1st grade and attended church at every service til I was 25 (I’m 28 now)…for those of u who complain about my bad grammer and spelling…christian schools…that must be why I’m so illiterate!

      1. I did too! And, technically I guess I would be considered one of those “first string” girls, although I never knew it. I also felt never good enough, so I guess going to Christian Schools and attending church from the cradle on up wasn’t what did it. I think it had to be who you were related to… or friends with… or something else. Either way, I am SO GLAD I missed all those “first string” guys (like Jack Schaap) and got a GOOD husband (one of the few) while at HAC. One who didn’t get all sucked in to that preacher-boy power and crap. He has been a good husband for over 35 years and would NEVER have looked at another woman, even if she walked into his office naked for counselling. And he had his share of women making passes at him. He was always oblivious to it. Men don’t HAVE to respond if women (or girls) throw themselves at them. But safer to not let yourself be in a situation where anything *could* happen. Hey! Weren’t we taught that all through school? I think we were.

  35. I find it troubling and problematic that the girl had his cell phone number. What IFB senior pastor gives his cell number to a teen? Just asking for trouble, IMO.

  36. I’m just afraid that if a 54 year old man seduced my 16 year old daughter and had sex with her, she’d be a survivor and he’d be a corpse. 🙁

  37. The sexual harassment/misconduct seminar I had to attend yearly as part of my lay employment at a non-fundie church drove home this simple fact:

    Pastor is in a position of authority and trust. Because of that position he is in, ANY relationship with someone within the church is at least misconduct. Didn’t even matter the age, either, the woman could be in her mid-20’s and it would still be misconduct because the pastor is in a position of trust, and by entering into a sexual relationship, that trust is betrayed.

    What’s so freaking hard to understand about this?

    The fact that the woman is high-school aged just makes it even more sick and depraved.

Comments are closed.