320 thoughts on “Excuses”

    1. Dear Huff Post:

      This story just gets better and better.

      Christian Socialist

    2. This just might be the luckiest day of Doug Sehorne’s life. HuffPo’s readership is at least one million times Sehorne’s.
      (No exaggeration; here are the stats:)

      Yesterday, he was an obscure small-town preacher. Today, he’s practically a household name.

      There’s no such thing as bad publicity!

      1. Dear RobM:

        I hope they’re crediting Darrell for kicking the snowball downhill …

        Christian Socialist

    3. Actually, it’s a shame it got picked up by Huffington Post. Have you ever read the comment section on HP when they run any story about Christianity? He’ll just get lumped in with the rest of Christendom as a “smoking gun” that our faith is the root of all evil.

      1. Definitely, if Christians want to avoid that, they will have to start cleaning house. Sitting around and moaning about being lumped in with bad guys is not enough. We do need to start throwing out ignorant preachers and members/preachers who commit gross sins.

        1. Dear Bassenco:

          I cannot see why people don’t stand up to these huckster-charlatan ‘preachers.’ Sure, I get it on one level I get it. They’re socialized into it. Their value system, their accumulated experiences support it. But then, some assclown does something so absurd/sick/damaging that anyone with a functioning brain ought to recognize what’s happening. And still, the assclown is defended. If there at work some kind of malignant symbiosis entailing people who need to dominate [narcissists] and whose with a psychological need to be abused?

          Christian Socialist

        2. Yes, there is something at work that causes people to enable narcissists/sociopaths to take power over them. It’s called self-centeredness, indifference, and childishness. Interesting to note that in Rev 21:8, John includes the “fearful” right in there with the liars, murderers, whoremongers, etc who are doomed to the lake of fire. Many commentators believe that he is referring to those who were too timid to endure persecution. You have to wonder if those who are too timid to speak out against the abominations done to children in Christ’s name and the heresies preached from pulpits are also numbered with that group.

        3. Dear Bassenco:

          You have to wonder if those who are too timid to speak out against the abominations done to children in Christ’s name and the heresies preached from pulpits are also numbered with that group.

          What I have to wonder if whether you checked the lexicon for this, or are one of those disgusting people who have been able to retain all those finer points.

          I say this because Thayer states of deilos:

          ‘… to fear), timid, fearful: Matt. 8:28; Mark 4:40; in Rev. 21:8 of Christians who through cowardice give way under persecutions and apostatize.’

          John’s word in Re 21:8 is not particularly well attested; including apocryphal works, I got 15 hits in Bibleworks for ‘deilos.’ But the contexts in which it occurs are intriguing. These include …

          Dt 20:8 on the rules of warfare, Jdg 7:3 on the dismissal of the fearful prior to the attack on the Midianites, Jdg 9:4 [cf. 2 Ch 13:7] and the hiring of worthless followers, Mt 8:26 [cf. Mk 4:40] and Jesus’ rebuke to terrorized disciples in the storm.

          Then there is Re 21:8.

          On the other hand, the Louw-Nida lexicon produced 933 hits for the semantic domain to which ‘deilos’ belongs. The first occurs in Gen 3:10 where ‘fobeo’ [in the LXX] translates ‘yare’ in ‘I heard the sound of you in the garden and I was afraid because I was naked.

          How very telling that this motif occurs both in the Genesis prologue, where it describes our initial departure from God, and then again at the end of history where John addresses eternal separation from God.

          Given the role fear plays in their midst, it begs to be asked whether many fundamentalist churches have ever been touched by the gospel.

          Your use of Re 21:8 is nothing short of brilliant.

          Thank you.

          Christian Socialist

        4. I love you folks.

          A most excellent point, and it caused me to sit up and take notice of what I may be “fearful” of, which may be causing in action in me.
          Thank you both.

        5. I am reminded of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s lines:

          “We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.”

          This was a major theme for King. He said different versions of this thought over and over in his speeches and writings.

        6. Even before MLK so accurately diagnosed the problem, earlier Church thinkers and Christian writers had observed the same: the evil flourishes when good people (so-called) look the other way, are indifferent, or are too timid to speak up.

          ‎Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” – John Stuart Mill (1867, but often attributed to Edmund Burke)

          Even earlier, “The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” – attributed to Plato

          The earliest saints warned us against sins of indifference and insensitivity, arguing that they stemmed from a lack of desire for the life to come, a worldliness that is fixed on today’s needs and today’s events as a person’s greatest concerns (self-centeredness). They warned that the sin of “forgetfulness” (which we would call blindness to what is going on around is) stemmed from forgetting God and the life of love for Him and each other that He has decreed for His people.

          Jesus Himself, in narrating the account of the Rich Man and Lazarus, lays no other sin to the Rich Man’s charge except for indifference to the plight of Lazarus.

        7. “Jesus Himself, in narrating the account of the Rich Man and Lazarus, lays no other sin to the Rich Man’s charge except for indifference to the plight of Lazarus.”

          Wow! What a powerful statement! May I use it?

          That is very significant. It is not an indictment against being rich, just indifferent toward the condition of others.

        8. Certainly. I doubt that I am the first person to observe this about the story of Lazarus, but I never heard this mentioned from a Fundamentalist pulpit.

          BTW, the Lord Jesus DID remark that riches are a curse to faith. The Bible does warn us about the peril of being rich.

    4. Kind of reminds me of the SFL post about the pastor at Skiatook Immanual Baptist. Mmm. Good times 😀

  1. Yes I posted the first review on Amazon. Although I have to share the credit with NotAnIfb lol. Is the review what started all of this? His daughter “went out into the world” ie: wanted to live a normal life.

    1. That quiz, slightly modified, might shed some light on “Are you over Fundamentalism?”

  2. You people really need to read his Modesty book!!! RB can witness, it’s pretty freaking awesome. I have a free copy PDF style if anyone wants a laugh/vomit, depending on your take.

    1. I might be interested in deconstructing it & posting it on my blog as a review.

      😕 I’m just not sure I could get through it without copious amounts of alcohol or smashing stuff. 👿 I was already yelling at my monitor because the description said God gave us modesty rules since *man* is so evil – a must-read for *ladies*. 😡

        1. It concentrates a lot on a) the female responsibility to protect men from lusting and falling into sin and b) hiding the curve of said female body.

        2. So basically, “God ordained men to be big, strong leaders, but they can’t lead if you feeble females keep distracting them with your luscious curves.” 🙄

        3. Well, since some of us simply cannot hide our curves, I suppose we have to be whores by default since men are clearly unable to control their own thoughts.

        4. Not at all, my dear! De fault is in the men themselves. We so do love a good looking woman.

          Sigh. I confessed this to my wife once. She told me I could look, but not stare. And I couldn’t look twice. After all, the thought, the vision may come unbidden, but it our choice as to whether to act on it.

          And besides, she reminded me, I belong to *her*.

  3. It’s always important for authors to check for copyright in images they are using. This chap failed to do so. Making him a twit.

    1. He didn’t just not check on it: He said he assumed Google images weren’t copyrighted, which is the opposite of how intellectual property works on the Internet. Everything original someone publishes comes with an implicit copyright. It’s one thing for the average person not to be aware of the law, but, seriously, how hard is that to look up if you’re planning on publishing a book?

      1. It would seem that he put the same level of work and effort into the publishing process as he did into the writing process.

      2. I don’t even know how the average person doesn’t get that it’s not ok to just c and p things.

        Waaaay back in middle school when I first began to write real research papers — in fundy school, no less — we were given clear instructions regarding what plagiarism was and why and how we avoid it. Even if someone is unaware their actions are illegal, they should at the very least understand that stealing content — on or offline — is immoral and unethical.

        Particularly when that person is a minister.

  4. Huffington Post is one of my favorite news sources. This is a great promo for SFL.

  5. I think I will refer my HR person to this current example of how some Christians will knowingly talk about the Bible, and when you ask them to stop or even question their beliefs, they get all angry and defensive and it just turns into a “this is great for me that people don’t like me because of bonus miles in Heaven” deal.
    Seriously, my HR lady wasn’t sure that some Christians are this way BECAUSE of the Bible.

    1. It’s hard to show that it’s BECAUSE of the Bible, but people certainly do find support in the Bible (if they look hard enough and read selectively enough) for almost anything they want to do.

  6. Isn’t it possible that these Fundies will start their own attack blogs and Facebook pages to expose your attacks on them?? Well, it won’t be rationale or logical or reasonable–just a lot of ad hominem and other “NUTS” fundie stuff that will get a lot of hearty, glory shoutin “haymens” from their followers. I would ask, is it worth having to deal with all that “NUTS” garbage by stimulating even more of it by “persecuting” them. Why not just leave them to themselves and let them implode on each other?

    1. as sure as their impending implosion most certainly is, that’s not the reason many of us are here. We’re here to cope with life after the insanity.

      1. Yes, I think the assumption that Fundies don’t already lash out at their critics, and haven’t always done so, is a faulty one.

    2. Fundamentalists have had their hate blogs up as long as there has been an internet. They are very active in warning the world about how wicked people who aren’t them are.

      Sites like this relieve some of the pressure and allows us to laugh at the things they are so very serious about. And since most of us were fundies in our past, we have a lot to talk about!

    3. So are you saying we should all just shut up?

      I don’t go to fundy blogs because I’m not interested in what they have to say. What they say is irrelevant. I’m not going back there and whatever threats or hate they spew isn’t going to make me go back.

      They are just as entitled to their blogs and freedom of speech as we are.

      Remember, if they are not hating the people here they are hating someone somewhere else. The persecution complex is alive and well in Fundystan and our online absence isn’t going to change that.

  7. “Thanks for the friends who warned me.” And are these the same wicked friends who have said sinful TV device? 😀

    1. Oh, Darrell, I think you’ve hit the big time 🙂 Can we say that we “knew you when”?

    2. Zowie! Now it’s in TV Guide!

      Back in the pre-Internet days, TV Guide was the biggest-circulation magazine in America.

      TV Guide didn’t give Darrell credit for breaking the story, though, which I think is an injustice.

  8. Don’t mistake ridicule for persecution. Persecution comes while one is doing the right thing. Ridicule comes when one does something ridiculous.

    1. Yes, I believe that principle is somewhere stated in the New Testament by someone led by the Spirit. I could be wrong.

    2. This might be what you are looking for:

      I Peter 4:14-16: If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified. But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men’s matters. Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

      It even talks about suffering as a thief! There is a difference between bringing suffering upon ourselves, because of sin, and suffering the reproach of Christ!

  9. Sorry guys, but I posted the 1st Amazon review a full day ahead of Darrell, so NotAnIfb and I will be taking the credit for this one 😉

    1. Dear R.B. (mom of 3!)

      What matters is that you’re here … Glad to have you with us.

      Christian Socialist

  10. The sad thing is, none of this makes a difference. He is thoroughly enjoying all this worldly persecution, because it means he is doing something right and the jewels in his Heavenly crown are multiplying as we speak.
    Blugh. 🙁 😐

    1. I never expected the flap to bring him down or anything like that.

      All I wanted out of it was a few laughs, and I got that and more.

      1. I know. I was wishing to crush some of the arrogance out of him. Wishful thinking. At least I was able to laugh long and hard at it all.

  11. :bowing: Thank you, Thank you! 🙂 I like to think of it as a public service lol It does make up a tiny bit for what we had to grow up around though.

  12. I gotcha. They have had their platform for years to pronounce their judgments upon all who dare to disagree with them and how all who disagree with them are headed for hell. The flames of their arrogant egos are fanned because the people who sit at their feet shout out their glory hallelujah, preach it brother haymens as they scream and wave their Bible around–which have rarely been opened or read. It must be in there somewhere or their “pastor” would not have said it–no need to check it out for themselves. Blind leading the blind and both are falling into the ditch. Wrong nuts don’t get screwed on the right bolt without stripping the threads so that rationale is nonsense too like most a lot of the other clever stuff they come up with to make themselves look like nuts so they can say they are being persecuted. 🙄 This stuff is so funny. I can’t laugh without feeling guilty like maybe I am not really saved or something . . . . :mrgreen:

    1. “This stuff is so funny. I can’t laugh without feeling guilty like maybe I am not really saved or something . . . ”

      I know what you mean. But to be honest, I have been thinking in something of this kind of direction for a long time.

      “Saved” is the brand fundamentalists use the most. “Are you saved?” is the question. The promise is that salvation changes everything! You are God’s, guaranteed! The Holy Spirit lives in you. You can’t ever be lost (well, from the once-saved-always-saved position I grew up in).

      The problem is that “salvation” doesn’t seem to be what it is cracked up to be. For many MOGs, “saved” means they can sin and get away with it. “Saved” is used as a “we are better than you are!” modality. “Saved” is an excuse to break the rules while condemning others. “Saved” is used to disparage the attempts of others to make life more meaningful and secure.

      One would think that those in authority would exhibit the best qualities of “salvation.” But they usually don’t. And under the guise of “salvation,” hate and prejudice are taught and practiced freely.

      If that is “saved,” I want none of it.

      That said, I am a Christian. I want to follow Christ’s best example. I want to be humble, grateful, and work to make life and future for others better. If I can demonstrate God’s love by action, I don’t think I would need a Romans Road or a magic prayer.

      If the doctrine of “salvation” is true, then I too am “saved.” I don’t have any doubt that Christ died for my sins. I prayed the prayer and meant it. But a doctrine that doesn’t work has to be wrong. “By their fruits you shall know them,” Jesus said. He also said that many would go into outer darkness who were absolutely certain they had done wonderful works in His name.

      So right now, for me, “saved” is something I am going to leave up to God. I will do my best to do the right things because they are right and trust His grace where I fail. But I want my faith to “work,” not be worthless.

  13. rtgmath: You hit the nail on the head. I believe salvation is faith in Christ. Paul told the jailer to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved . . .and thy house. In Scripture you don’t see people responding to an altar call or even praying a prescribed prayer. They believe in Jesus Christ for who He is and what He has done. That’s salvation. We should do good works after salvation, but the error so many make is to use the good works as evidence of salvation. Even after salvation all my good works don’t curry God’s favor. They can’t because I am still a sinner, but saved by His Grace. So it is by the grace of Christ and His holy life on my behalf. It is all and only about Christ.

    Fundamentalists keep adding works to the mix along with other made up conditions to judge the spiritual experience of others in comparison with their own. If others do not measure up to the standards of their experience, then they are not really saved ….or as they say “right with God.” ➡ Their whole system at the same time they teach salvation by faith alone, everything else about being Christian is based on works. They judge everyone one except themselves on the basis of works. Of course when they sin it is only human. When someone else does, they are reprobates.

  14. And just think how widely know he is. Not for being Christ-like; not for his Christian love; not for his wisdom; not for his compassion; not for his credibility; and not for his character. But for his anger, contempt, hatefulness, hypocrisy, excusing his own sin. In all of it . . . anywhere–in any shape or form–is there any gospel at all? Anywhere in all this? He has shown his stupidity and dragged the name of Christ into the filth of his own sin and hypocrisy. As everyone laughs at him and the “gospel” he preaches, he is proud of it because he is being “persecuted.”

    1. Exactly. What “salvation” is shown in that? What work of the Holy Spirit on the conscience? What fruit of righteousness bears witness to the root?

      A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit. This is not to say that Christians cannot sin. We do. But walking in sin, having pride in it, calling evil “good”, … I just don’t see it.

      A “gospel” that has no power to quench the hate and deviltry in the heart that has received it has no power.

  15. If you are going to use a photo or piece of art, especially in a published work (and for profit), you need to check on copyright and get photographer/artist permission to use the work.

    Even Google Image searches say, “these images may be copyrighted.” 🙄

  16. I think Sehorne has disabled his Twitter account. His last tweet said something about being off Twitter for a few days; now, he seems to have disappeared altogether.

    Guess it’s difficult to be held accountable for one’s actions.

      1. What’s the other one? A parody one I hope????

        I think he might’ve actually deleted his facebook & twitter accounts. Initially had left them pretty public, then protected them and now they appear to be deleted.

  17. In some professions, public missteps and a refusal to come cleanccould be a career-damaging move. In his line of business, it will endear him more to his target demographic.

    1. You are right. The people in his camp will just circle their wagons and play the martyr card.

    2. Yeah, when you have a whole flock trained to baa that the preacher can do no wrong, it’s easy to get persecution points from being caught actually doing wrong.

      He is no different from that pizza parlor owner who used the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on his sign without permission. Or that publisher who filled her ad-supported checkout stand magazine with articles surreptitiously clipped from hither and yon.

      Hey, wait, who ultimately owns the rights to Modern Family? Is it one of the big companies? Should I make some schadenfreude pie?

  18. On FB page was his personal page, and the other was his ministry page. I remember one status he posted letting any women who had sent him friend requests know that he would not be accepting them. I’m assuming because of the wickedness of having an opposite sex friend.

    1. Even if you buy the idea that it’s not good to have opposite-sex friends,* there’s a basic failure there to understand the difference between a “Facebook Friend” and a friend.


      * (Which I don’t.)

  19. Is “being persecuted” the same thing as “knowing you’re being laughed at no end”? Especially when it’s your own stupid mistake? 😆
    Doug’s going to have to take his fingers out of his ears eventually. 😛

    1. If his fingers are in his ears then he only needs to flex his elbows upward and it will help dislodge his head from where it seems to be stuck. 😯 😉

  20. This has also found its way into the New York daily news, and MSN. They talked about it a little in the fighting fundamental forum, also.

  21. Weird. You’d think he’d know that deliberately isolating yourself from society is going to result in committing a faux pas now and then. After 25 years without a TV, this can’t be the first time he’s botched a pop culture reference, can it?

    Should have just admitted his mistake and changed the cover.

Comments are closed.