ARCHIVE: Zakath is Genuine!

[drbrumley]

But all I have to go on is what I see on the net and what others on this board say. And you see here there are people divided into two camps, the Enyartians defend him, and are friends of him, and there are the others, who do not know Bob personally. A person who is a close friend of the accused would not be the most objective voice. However, the information I found on the net proved that the boy's back was beaten to blood, and that is not cool. If you can stand up and continue to defend the man after that, then so be it. As I said, I support corporal punishment, and all I want to see is someone to say that Bob isn't perfect, that he screwed up. Nobody has done that yet. But I'm giving it up, because this is not worth it anymore. I've spent over a week going round and round with Erin and the Enyartians, and I look bad now because of the angry Enyartian defense I see. Let's just agree to disagree and move on with our lives? I'm not going to be drawn into this any more. I stand on what I said.

I never "judged" Bob Enyart. I am calling him on a mistake, and just trying to get people to realize that he's not untouchable. If I had judged him, I would not even spend any more time reading this crazy thread. I am not a liberal either. I'm very conservative. I'm sorry this has gone on so far.

Are you that DENSE? In order to call someone on a mistake, YOU have to first JUDGE the MAN that HE indeed made one.

 

[drbrumley]

You stand on what you said? Even though it has been proven over and over how wrong headed you are?

If you want to stand in quiksand, be my guest. problem is you won't be standing for long.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Uh.... you might want to examine the members of the "camp" you are sleeping with. Their motives may be a good indicator of why the say the things that they say.

And frankly, it offends me that you have borrowed Zakath the athiest term "Enyartians" for the folks that are defending a friend.

Furthermore... none of the atheists that vilify Bob know anything about him. Whereas many of us that defend Bob know Bob personally and are closely aware of all the circumstances involved in the case. Don't you find it a bit odd that you would side with a bunch of left-wing atheists that have no knowledge of the case over your own Christian brothers who know about the case in great detail? Doesn't that strike you as a bit odd?

As for the term "Enyartians"....

I think you should apologize to me and any others that you are attempting to insult by using this term. Bob Enyart is my pastor. He is a normal guy, a guy any of you would love to meet and hang out with. He is a great dad and husband. He and his family and our family have shared many a meal together. Bob is also a great Bible teacher. There are many great bible teachers out there.... and I am lucky enough to know two of them, Bob Enyart and Bob Hill. But Bob Enyart and Bob Hill aren't the only bible teachers I appreciate, I like several other as well (some living some dead). I am sure you have your favorites as well. Wouldn't you be offended if I started calling you a "C.S. Lewis-ian" if I were using it as an insult as you are using "Enyartian" here?

I think you should reconsider your behavior on TOL. I think you have wrongly judged and wrongly sided with the God hating liberals.

But hey.... as Paul said....

But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant. - 1 Corinthians 14:38

 

[drbrumley]

Right on Brother.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

You know...I have my own opinion on whether the Edge "got it" [ the joke]. I believe that he does get it...that he may have actually got it a bit before his post of acknowledgement, but thought it was a bit childish in a way, so refrained from pointing out the fact that he got it. ...maybe to see how childish things could really get

Julie... truth be told my post #233 was not really a joke.

What I mean to say is....

Although my post was humorous to some (I appreciate those laughs) it was also posted to illustrate a point. The Edge actually had the gall to say this about certain posters defending Bob's character....

"And the fierce devotion to him is a little creepy. Nothing I can do about it, you all follow who you like. I personally don't like to consistantly say I'm a follower of a man."

Oh the irony!!!!!

Now to me... there is NOTHING "creepy" about defending your friend who is being wrongfully accused. But the funny thing about this coming from the Edge is that the Edge does indeed seem to have a "creepy" devotion to the guitarist from the rock band U2. His username is... "The Edge". His avatar... is a picture of The Edge. His signature is a dedication to The Edge and he has started at least a thread or two about the band.

Anyway.... just to clarify... my post 233 was meant to be funny but also to point out a glaring bit of hypocrisy.

 

[wickwoman]

No wonder your so messed up. Do you even read what you post?

What is your actual criticism of the post? I only see you saying it's not good, but what do you have against it? If you have a point, why don't you argue it?

 

[Berean Todd]

Unless of course you are eternally secure, but we don't even want to get into that. :box:

To be eternally secure you would have had to actually been saved, I don't know that could be said of Mr Zakath frankly.

 

[Berean Todd]

Edge,

If you don't warn them that what they are doing is sick and perverted, they may go to Hell because of YOU, because you looked the other way and washed your hands with disdain by saying you love them but you won't judge them to save their lives.

Sleep tight big man

Did Jesus scream at prostitutes and tax collectors "YOU EVIL SCUM< YOU ARE GOING TO BURN IN HELL IF YOU DON'T TURN!!", or did He eat with them, heal them, minister to them, and then tell them to go and sin no more??

We do need to call sin, sin, and to stand for truth, but we are commanded to present our truth IN LOVE. Too many schmucks in our churches today forget that last part.

 

[Caille]

Well for one thing the article said that " He held his toddler daughter in his lap". He does not have a daughter and I should think you would be willing to take Bob's word for that.

Excerpt from the article:

April 10 - Denver Christian radio talk-show host Bob Enyart was handcuffed in a Jefferson County courtroom Friday and led to jail to begin serving a 60-day sentence for beating his stepson with a belt.

Enyart was convicted in 1995 of misdemeanor child abuse resulting in injury for inflicting bruises, welts and broken skin on the buttocks of his stepson, Stephen, who was 7 at the time. The misdemeanor case took two trials in Jefferson County and almost five years to play out.

"It's been a very long process, it's been very hard on Stephen," said John Mayns, the boy's father and custodial parent. Through the lengthy process, Enyart claimed that he did nothing wrong, saying in 1997 that "taking a boy to the woodshed" was once "politically correct." Enyart did not address the court Friday. But Mayns said the discipline was more than a mere spanking.

"He did not spank him, he beat him," Mayns said. The beating with a belt, for which Enyart was sentenced to jail, happened in the boy's mother's Arvada home. Enyart disciplined Stephen, at the behest of the boy's mother, Cheryl, for refusing to take a shower. The couple was dating at the time, but was not yet married. He was also accused of beating his stepson another time on a camping trip in El Paso County but was later acquitted.




Did Enyart use a belt ?

Was the the child Enyart's stepson at the time of the incident ?

Was the father convinced that abuse had occurred ?

Was the judge convinced that abuse had occurred ?

And, just for fun, whose little girl was he holding on his lap ?


BTW - why would you think that I would be willing to take the word of a convicted child abuser ?

 

[Zakath]

To be eternally secure you would have had to actually been saved, I don't know that could be said of Mr Zakath frankly.

Well, if I'm wrong and your deity exists, I am saved, but deluded.

If I'm right, your deity doesn't exist. Then you're right that I never was saved... of course neither are you... :nono:

Isn't it fun playing Pascal's Wager with OSASers? :chuckle:

 

[Berean Todd]

Well, if I'm wrong and your deity exists, I am saved, but deluded.

If I'm right, your deity doesn't exist. Then you're right that I never was saved... of course neither are you... :nono:

Isn't it fun playing Pascal's Wager with OSASers? :chuckle:

You know Zakath, just because you preached from a pulpit (in a liberal church) and started a school or whatnot, does not mean you were saved. I have led deacons, who had spent all of their lives in church, and thought themselves fine, to the lord. Doing church things, no matter how much responsibility you had, and truly walking with God, are two different things my friend.

 

[Zakath]

You know Zakath, just because you preached from a pulpit (in a
liberal church) and started a school or whatnot, does not mean you were saved.

Liberal church!!!! :darwinsm:

• Do you know my actual name?
• Have we actually met?
• Did you interview the board of seasoned pastors who ordained me?
• Did you listen to my radio program when I was a pastor?
• Did you attend one of the churches where I preached or taught over the years?
• Did you attend a single one of my bible studies?

No? :think:

Then why, in blazes, should I or anyone else believe your baseless assertions?

 

[wickwoman]

Zak they don't base their assertions on actual facts about you. They base them on their own theories about how being saved is and how one would "feel" and how one would never, ever turn their back on something so wonderful. Unfortunately, this is all subjective, feelings and concepts that have no actual basis in reality. The entire concept is based on ignoring reality. When one stops ignoring reality they stop with the belief system.

Anyway you probably already know all that but just a reminder.

 

[Berean Todd]

Liberal church!!!! :darwinsm:

• Do you know my actual name?
• Have we actually met?
• Did you interview the board of seasoned pastors who ordained me?
• Did you listen to my radio program when I was a pastor?
• Did you attend one of the churches where I preached or taught over the years?
• Did you attend a single one of my bible studies?

No? :think:

Then why, in blazes, should I or anyone else believe your baseless assertions?

my understanding was that you came from a charismatic background, all of which tends to be liberal, or at the very least, pooly exegeted theology.

 

[Zakath]

my understanding was that you came from a charismatic background, all of which tends to be liberal, or at the very least, pooly exegeted theology.

Assemblies of God in the mid-west, to be precise. Generally pretty conservative and heavy on the "holiness" tradition. They're not all like Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker.

 

[godrulz]

You know Zakath, just because you preached from a pulpit (in a liberal church) and started a school or whatnot, does not mean you were saved. I have led deacons, who had spent all of their lives in church, and thought themselves fine, to the lord. Doing church things, no matter how much responsibility you had, and truly walking with God, are two different things my friend.

Assemblies of God is not a nominal, liberal church. His other church affiliations may have been.

 

[godrulz]

my understanding was that you came from a charismatic background, all of which tends to be liberal, or at the very least, pooly exegeted theology.

The statement of faith of most charismatic churches is very evangelical and not at all liberal. If you mean non-Calvinistic ('poorly exegeted'), then they are usually guilty. The Pentecostal hermeneutic and exegesis is more biblical than you realize.

What specifically is liberal about their beliefs: Deity of Christ, resurrection, Word of God, salvation by grace through faith, Trinity, etc.?

 

[wickwoman]

I'd like to hear how A of G is liberal. That's a new one on me. I was a member of the A of G for 20 +- years.

 

[Zakath]

I'd like to hear how A of G is liberal. That's a new one on me. I was a member of the A of G for 20 +- years.

:chuckle:

I recall that at a general council gathering, men and women were not permitted to use the hotel swimming facilities at the same time... that's why I chuckled when BT called them liberal.

 

[wickwoman]

:chuckle:

I recall that at a general council gathering, men and women were not permitted to use the hotel swimming facilities at the same time... that's why I chuckled when BT called them liberal.

Yes, we called it "mixed bathing" in the south. And this was never allowed, even with the very young but I was always thinking "we're not taking a bath, we're swimming!" Also, the membership form for my church said you agreed never to attend movies.

That picture Lovejoy has as his/her avatar, I've been through that more times than I'd care to remember! Ohhhh flashbacks, "O.K., think of a nice green field with a bunch of soft, white fluffy bunny rabbits hopping around." O.K. I'm better. Carry on!