Comments on: tedmercer.blogspot.com — Post #3, 1954

By: cklewis

cklewis — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:58:06 +0000

Yes, Jackson. That is the standard response within a certain ethic that automatically defers to authority. “How could you?” “Why would you say such things?”

At the root of that is a misunderstanding of the nature of sin. None of us edifies by covering up past sins. That is a pagan practice, not Christian. We Christians know that by exposing our sins, Christ is honored.

I know “those currently associated with BJU” are “dismissive of evidence.” Dan Turner’s book proves that.

We build up the Church by foregrounding where our true Strength lies. And it’s not in protecting the Powerful.

By: Jackson1864

Jackson1864 — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:16:19 +0000

You have worked diligently to bring up past injustices (if Mercer is to be believed), but for what edifying reason? You fail to question if Mercer used hyperbole or innuendo in his statements, but you have done so in your posts. You have not shown charity to those currently associated with BJU by assuming that they would be dismissive of evidence. And you have linked to a site that makes belittles other believers (even if they are wrong in many areas).
So, enough of my thoughts. In what way are your actions and content “good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear?” (Eph 4:29)
A humble reading of Proverbs 6 might be in order. And for the record, I don’t work at BJU nor do I attend a IFB church.

By: timf

timf — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:30:19 +0000

Wow. I guess being a member of the alumni association is good for nothing more than the hotel discounts. I guess all of this alumni networking stuff that the university has been working on is purely cosmetic. I wonder if they lie about the membership numbers…

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:01:18 +0000

Oh, Will! Withdrawing your AA membership?! In the middle of the year?! Horrors! I mean, you might as well have drawn up a petition for better food in the Dining Common or grabbed a girl and had a make-out session in front of the Dean of Men’s office (or over BJSr’s grave!). You should have waited until the day before graduation so you didn’t have to deal with their antics…

Camille — I learned very well from personal experience how the powers that be at BJU truly THRIVE on innuendo. It took a personal intervention from Dr. Gingery to get me a spot to sing in chapel as a senior voice major. Ironically enough, I had been bumped off the schedule my freshman year because an upperclassmen wanted to sing, so I didn’t catch the flack for singing one of your husband’s songs….

By: Mel

Mel — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:12:02 +0000

Change the names and it could have been written in the 90′s. The practices are the same, the personalities not dissimilar enough.

From Alice’s letter, this statement sums things up pretty well: “Your definition of loyalty is different in that it does not admit of any difference of opinion or real acknowledgment of imperfections…”

By: Camille

Camille — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:12:18 +0000

I do agree. On a civil case, Judge-Judy level, the preponderance of the evidence goes with Mercer.

By: The Bard

The Bard — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:09:13 +0000

I did read the chapter on Turner’s book, which I found utterly non-responsive. Besides the innuendo of homosexual acts with students, Turner dismisses Mercer’s later letters by saying that if Mercer got his way, BJU would have been a more academic and less spiritual place.

Even if there was evidence that Mercer was guilty of homosexuality (there isn’t), the Administration hasn’t offered much evidence that Mercer was lying about everything else.

By: cklewis

cklewis — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:27:09 +0000

I *think* they would say that they did answer it in Turner’s chapter on the issue. Have you read it? It keeps the homosexual innuendo completely intact and simply on the level of innuendo. I find that deplorable, disappointing, and unprofessional.

By: Will

Will — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:17:17 +0000

“So the question becomes why does BJU work so hard at proving that the alumni and faculty are irrelevant?”

And they couldn’t figure out why, my senior year at BJ, I withdrew my membership from the alumni association! (In fact, they not only couldn’t figure it out, they called me into the Dean of Men’s office to make a “spiritual” issue out of it.)

By: The Bard

The Bard — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:16:20 +0000

Powerful stuff, and thanks for taking the time to locate as post all this stuff. Many of Mercer’s accusations sound all too familiar. At the very least, Sr. and Jr.’s diabolical slander and gossip-mongering, hidden behind their veil of supposed concern, smells like sulfur, not grace.

I still wonder about Mercer a little bit, whether he has any other evidence for some of his accusations and whether he (understandably) got too carried away in his own crusade. But if Mercer is wrong about something, let the Administration, or someone else, come forward with *real evidence* and prove it. Somehow, I think the arrival of Godot is more likely.