Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Where is the Statesman?

In 1979, I was a seminary student, and travelled to the Southern Baptist Convention in Houston with my dad, an SBC pastor and former missionary. It was a moment that has defined our convention for nearly 30 years now. I voted for Adrian Rogers for president and stood to my feet when it was announced that he had won. I returned to the convention as often as possible in the 80's and 90's and voted to keep the conservative resurgence alive and well.

I remember the defining moment when Morris Chapman faced Daniel Vestal in 1990. Vestal was an undeniably conservative pastor who would not identify with the SBC conservatives for whateve reasons, and he mounted a strong campaign. As you approached the arena, the Vestal campaign had workers with flyers touting his conservative credentials. He was probably a bigger name in the convention than Dr. Chapman. My dad was in the bookstore when they announced the results. Dr. Chapman got nearly 60% of the vote. My dad wouldn't believe me that the vote was that big. That was the decisive moment, and the moderate groups gave up the fight at the national level and took it to the state level, and then formed the CBF.

I know that Dr. Patterson and Judge Pressler were the architects of the resurgence, but they had something that day that we don't have today. They had Adrian Rogers. He was the face of the SBC. He had a voice like Moses must have heard on the top of Sinai. He was a man of conviction and was unwilling to compromise. He was also a man of grace. Under the most intense scrutiny and heat, he was always gracious, calm, well-spoken. He had that knack for saying things that made you think, "Wow, I wish I'd thought of that."

The SBC is a splintered group today. There are a few "head-in-the-sand" folks who refuse to see that there is a problem, but most will admit that we have issues we need to deal with. We disagree about solutions, but most admit the problems.

What the SBC needs today is a new Adrian Rogers. I know, I know, the SBC is about every one of us and not one man. I agree. But look in scriptures. When God was ready to do a work, He often called and prepared one man. The human race needed to preserved; it was Noah. God determined to save Israel; Moses saw a burning bush. The Philistines were oppressing Israel; David. The Judges. Elijah. When God is going something big, He often raises up a leader, one man to show God's people the way.

We need such a man today. We need a man of God who will come to the forefront and be the SBC statesman. Maybe, without the unifying force of the liberal threat, such a statesman is hard to find. But we need one still.

There are several characteristics that must be found in such a man.

1) He must be raised up by God. This is not a job you volunteer for, or apply for. God raises up the man at the right time.

2) He must be a man of conviction. A finger-in-the-wind leader will never get the job done. This must be a man of deep passion for the Word and for the convention.

3) He must be a man of grace. There were a number of vocal, very aggressive spokesmen for the conservative resurgence. They played their part but they could not be what Adrian was. He was able to gracious in the face of a campaign of insults and attacks. When he moderated a convention, he was firm, but gracious. He responded to personal attacks with grace.

4) He must be a kingdom man. I never got the impression that Adrian was defending himself or advancing his own cause. He was already at the top of the denominational ladder when 1979 rolled around. It never seemed like he was out for himself. He served the Kingdom of God and the Convention. You might disagree with him, but it was hard to cast him as a man of selfish motives. (Some tried, but they seemed, to me, silly in the effort.)

It may not be possible anymore. In 1979, we were united by a common goal - restore biblical orthodoxy to a denomination headed in the wrong direction. We did not have time to quibble about calvinism or PPL. If you believed in inerrancy, that was enough.

And this is certainly not an attempt at hagiography. I am sure Dr. Rogers had his failings and foibles like anyone else. I saw him leaving the Orlando convention after Jim Henry was elected and he looked like you could fry an egg on his forehead. (Don't know why, but I know that look!)

I believe the SBC needs some reforms. I think we need to refocus. The onus is on each of us, each person, each church to do our G0d-given job.

But, I believe we need a leader. "Moses" Rogers led us very well. But, where is Joshua?

42 comments:

Luke said...

Dave,
I've thought of this quite extensively. I had often thought of writing about this because, to me, it seemed that the major rise in volume of dissatisfaction occurred after he went to be with the Lord. I have not checked it out scientifically but I think you have made a great case for your point.

I wonder though why "Moses Rogers" did not have a "Joshua" to which he would "pass the torch". Failing or foible, quite possibly. Or, perhaps, did a plan not materialize. Our convention is blessed with a tremendous amount of leadership capable people. Perhaps, it was simply left up to the hand of God. And if that be the case, then it could well be said that that actions of Adrian Rogers were not that of "southern politics" at all but rather a genuine desire to see that God, not man, is honored in the SBC.

Never-the-less, the clamoring and the jockeying for position does reveal a lot about those who would see such positions of influence. May we be wise enough to pick up on those revelations.

May God's Spirit unite us as never before to gather at the cross, to celebrate at the empty tomb as we head out to the uttermost.

WatchingHISstory said...

Perhaps Rogers like Moses struck the rock when he should have spoke.
Could it be while Rogers and Moses had a meek spirit they possessd a silent rage when things did not go as they wanted? (per the Orlando observation)
Their deaths were premature in a sense. Unlike Moses Rogers died only to discover in heaven the extent of his mess at Bellevue. ie. Paul Williams' moral failure.

The pulpit that Dr. Gaines fills cannot address the "moral failure" of homosexuality in America because of the mess that Dr. Rogers left him.

Charles Page
Collierville, Tennessee

Dave Miller said...

I am not interested in a discussion of the issues at Bellevue Baptist Church which I have seen you pursue on other sites.

I am not a member of Bellevue and have no knowledge other than what people say. I am dismayed over the tendency of people from there to think that issues will be solved by public criticism of the leaders of the church.

Talk to the leaders of Bellevue. Leave the church. But this is not a forum for Bellevue bashing.

My point is about Dr. Rogers' influence on the SBC, not his pastorate at Bellevue.

I am sure he had his failings like anyone else. I am just not interested in providing a forum for gossip about this man whom I admired.

Dave Miller said...

Mr. Page,

It is incredibly easy to delete comments. If you continue to leave hate-filled rants on this site, they will continue to be deleted.

WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dave Miller said...

Again, Mr Page, if you continue to leave these on my site, I will continue to delete them.

WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dave Miller said...

Charles, you are obsessed. Why don't you reinvest the time you are spending tearing down Bellevue into evangelism, or work at a soup kitchen, or something. Determine to use your time loving, giving and serving rather than attacking.

I have dealt with people who are homosexual. I have tried to hold up the standard of righteousness without being condemning or cruel.

I hope I never have to deal with a pedophile in my church, but I would try to balance grace and righteousness. I hope I never have to find out.

But you are a man obsessed. Since I don't know you, I can't tell if it is just a sinful hatred for Bellevue's leaders or some kind of pathological emotional disorder. You should probably seek counseling.

However, you should stop your campaign of slander. Go to the leaders of Bellevue and bring your complaints. Then, if they do not hear them, go to another church.

Worship God. Serve Jesus. Lay down your hatred, your bitterness. It is evil. It destroys your heart and spirit.

In the name of Jesus and for the sake of his kingdom, I admonish you to stop.

WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Luke said...

Dave,
My compliments to you for trying to keep your blog from becoming a place where people are trashed. I have never once entertained the idea that men like Rogers, Stanley, MacArthur and the like are perfect in all their ways. I have no doubt that on many occasions, they would confess to having done/said things in ways in which hindsight would have prompted them to do it all differently. But the illustration is not one in which God calls perfect men, but instead, He uses the willing and the available, imperfect though they be, and I thank God for these men, their teachings and their willingness to be public targets of intense scrutiny.

As I stated earlier, I do not think the SBC is void of capable leadership. I am puzzled though that we are enduring this present struggle though I trust that God is in control and that He will accomplish according to His plan His desire for the SBC.

Dave Miller said...

I am constantly amazed at people I have dealt with who cannot get it through their heads that the venting of their bitterness somehow accomplishes the purposes of God.

Luke said...

Dave,
I think the answer for bitterness is forgiveness. Bitterness is what takes root and grows when forgiveness is not exercised. It all comes back to that old saying, you know, something about loving your neighbor as yourself. Could "WE" withstand the scrutiny under which we place others?

Encouragements to you Dave.

WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dave Miller said...

Charles,

It's magic. You write an angry screed. I make it go away.

WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dave Miller said...

Charles,

1) The SBC does not ordain anyone. Churches do.

2) If a minister is ordained by a church, then falls into sin, that church should discipline him and even, if the offense is serious, revoke ordination.

3) No one I have ordained has, to my knowledge, committed gross moral sin.

4) You should take your rants to the church that ordained him.

5) Or, just serve Jesus. Stop trying to smear Dr. Rogers and Bellevue. Read your Bible. Share Christ. Do something productive.

Devoting your life to hatred is a waste!

WatchingHISstory said...

Now am I smearing Dr Rogers personally or his theology and methods of ministry? If you want to leave the impression with your readers, after you have deleted me, that I am smearing his person then you are smearing me. I am serving Christ, confidently, by attacking Dr Roger's theology. Paul Williams is proof positive that something was severely wrong with Bellevue under Adrian Rogers.

Now you are smearing me by telling everyone that I am not following Christ. Does that imply that you are following Christ? Do you make these blatant comments often in your ministry?

Your tactic is delete and slander.

Charles, a dear brother in Christ.

Luke said...

Charles,

You seem to be "SO IN TUNE" with the Holy Spirit, why didn't you warn them before they hired him?

Secondly, for you to come on here and make accusations about Adrian Rogers without 2 or 3 witnesses that he knowingly and willfully allowed sodomy to happen under his pastorate is not Scriptural.

Third, this blog is Dave's venue and ultimately, it is HIS decision what he allows to stand and what he does not. Print it on your blogs all day long if you want. But this is Dave's Blog and it is his privilege to run it the way that his heart leads him.

"a dear brother in Christ?" surely you say that tongue in cheek?!

Dave Miller said...

Are you saying, Charles, that if Dr. Rogers had been a calvinist, that Paul Williams would not have been a pedophile?

You are so blinded by hatred that you do not use simple logic.

Are you saying that Dr. Roger's bad theology caused a man under his ministry to commit pedophilia?

Are you saying that even though he knew nothing of the sin of this man, that Dr. Rogers' theology and ministry created this sin?

Are you saying that NO calvinist churches have ever had someone commit pedophilia or molest a child?

Are you saying that there is a causal link between non-calvinistic Baptist theology and pedophilia?

NONSENSE. Sinful, slanderous, ridiculous - NONSENSE.

I don't imagine anyone is reading this but you, me and Luke, so I will leave your last comment up. If anyone else comes by, they will see that the fuzzy thinking you employ leads you to make ridiculous statements that any rational person will see as bizarre. A sinful heart clouds the rational mind.

As Luke said, I will delete any comment that you make on this site that I feel should not be read by others. They have your blogs they can go to if they want to read your unchristian, unholy rants.

I believe you have a sinful, angry heart. I believe that you justify your sinful heart with an appeal to theological correctness to mask and justify your unchristian behavior.

Jesus would not behave the way you do. He is not pleased with your behavior. You bring shame to the name of Christ and you damage the cause of Christ in this world.

You need to get a Bible, get alone with God and get your heart straightened out. You need to let our Lord take away your anger, your hatred, your ungodly way of relating to people. You need to stop justifying your sin because someone else did something evil two decades ago.

You need to repent.
You need to repent.
You need to repent.
You need to repent.

If you continue to leave comments on my site of this nature, I am going to continue calling you to repentance until you either repent or get tired of hearing a call to repentance.

WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
WatchingHISstory said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dave Miller said...

Charles,

Since the last comment mentioned Dr. Rogers' wife and continued the silliness of your comments, I removed it.

Dave Miller said...

Charles,

my church website is www.shillsbaptist.com. Feel free to browse at your convenience. It even has a picture of me. You can listen to my sermons if you have time and desire.

You are welcome to comment on this site at any time, as long as it is not slanderous and it deals with the subject of my post.

Know that if you continue to exhibit sinful behavior, I will continue to point it out.

Dave Miller said...

By the way, Charles, if you are going to continue commenting, how about answering this question.

Are you saying that if a church is calvinist, no one will ever molest a child?

There has NEVER been a calvinist church which had a staff member molest a child?

If you are going to blame the abuse that occurred in Memphis on the lack of calvinism, then you must assert that abuse CANNOT occur in calvinist churches.

Right?

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave

Joyce Rogers went on a local talk show in Memphis to state publicly that AR was not aware of PW's crime. Dr Rogers did not know and it was not public until after his death. Just to clarify that for you.

Charles

WatchingHISstory said...

absolutely not! I don't know of a Calvinist Church that had a child molester, however that doesn't mean that Calvinist don't have molesters.

Now isn't this the kind of straw-man arguments that Dr Rogers used. "God takes a little child and says to it I am going to send you to hell..."

No, dave, there is no connection between pedophilia and Calvinism/non-Calvinism Churches.

My assertion is there is a connection between Dr Roger's theology and Paul Williams sin. There is a logical proximity that cannot be ignored. 17 years is a long time to keep a secret from such a man as Dr Rogers. It bears the signature of providential oversight.

Charles

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave

signing off... I've got to go to bed.
I'm old and work for a living.

Charles

Dave Miller said...

I'm getting old. I'm a preacher, so I only work Sundays.

I am leaving your recent comments up because in my opinion, they are stated in a more reasonable fashion.

However, it still seems clear to me that you operate from anger not logic.

I heard Adrian preach. There was NOTHING in his theology that would ever encourage pedophilia. That is an absurd idea.

You have some sort of grudge against Adrian or Bellevue which I don't understand. But the sin of one man does not in any way undermine the integrity or power of Adrian Rogers' preaching.

If you are saved, you need to give this idea up. Dr. Rogers is in the hands of the Lord. I think he heard "Well done." You are entitled to your opinion. But there is no reason to go from blog to blog trying to make people think ill of Adrian.

Deal with theology if you wish. But do not use the sin of one man two decades ago to try to fight a theological battle.

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave

There you go again! Please stop trying to misrepresent me, I deserve that much. I am not trying to make folks "ill of Adrian" rather ill of his methods and theology.

Is God angry with folks in heaven? I Cor 3:12-15 Will he have to wioe tears from their eyes?

I have no ill feelings toward Dr Rogers nor anyone at Bellevue rather I have strong feelings toward their theology and methodology. Is there anyone beside me that you disapprove of their methods and theology?

Do you have a right to address those issues? Certainly!

your brother in Christ
Charles

Luke said...

Charles,

Would you consider for just a moment that people can easily draw this conclusion about you precisely because of the way you present yourself on this and other blogs? If you do not wish to come across the way that you are being seen for then you certainly need to change your approach/tactics.

Secondly, it is futile for you to argue that you are not trying to make people ill of Adrian Rogers when that is exactly how you present yourself. If you do not like his theology, then address that on your blog or if Dave blogs about his theology then certainly you would have every right to try to pick at it should you so choose. And might I also add that it is entirely possible for any of us to discuss OUR theology without having to appeal to the theology of others. This post of Dave's was not about the theology of AR.

No, sir. It is not you being misrepresented. Dave has simply pointed you out for what you are presenting yourself to be, at least here on this blog.

Dave Miller said...

Charles,

For you to say you have no ill feelings toward Adrian Rogers, just his theology, is ridiculous.

A preacher and his theology cannot be that easily separated. You are saying that his theology and preaching led directly to a subordinate molesting a child. You made that connection. You said Adrian's theology and practice as a pastor precipitated the molestation.

You cannot say that and then say, "I have nothing against Adrian, just his theology." Many others in the SBC have the same theology as Adrian did. You never rail against any of them. I have never seen you talk about Jerry Vines, or Johnny Hunt, or Frank Page.

Why Adrian?

You need to be honest with yourself and realize that this is not some noble quest to defend righteousness and truth.

You are on a campaign to besmirch the reputation of a man who is now in glory.

Too many of us knew Adrian Rogers personally or professionally to believe what you write.

WatchingHISstory said...

I remain with my assertion that there is a connection between Dr Roger's theology and Paul Williams' sin. There is a logical proximity that cannot be ignored. 17 years is a long time to keep a secret from such a man as Dr Rogers. It bears the signature of providential oversight.

It is my assertion that God withheld the information from Dr Rogers. Within just a few months of Dr Rogers' death it was all out in the open. Toooo much coincidence here to not think that God has a hand in all this.

I have said I have no ill feelings toward Dr Rogers nor anyone at Bellevue rather I have strong feelings toward their theology and methodology. You have only my word for that, there is no personal reason for me to feel hard at Dr rogers. Many otheres have accused me of that time and again and it is just not true.

Dave, true, a preacher and his theology cannot be that easily separated. You said that I said his theology and preaching led (directly - not my word) to a subordinate molesting a child. You said that I made that connection. You said that I said Adrian's theology and practice as a pastor precipitated the molestation. Given the logical proximity it is difficult to not say there is a connection. However it is hard to say something like that given his charisma and personality. He was a very likable fellow.

I believe that I have it from God that he is angry with Dr Rogers. Is Dr Rogers, you or myself beyond God being angry at us? I feel the same way about Jerry Vines, Johnny Hunt, or Frank Page. However I have not heard from God about Him being angry at them.

Why Adrian? Well you need to ask God about that. And believe you me I hope you are moved to honestly ask God about it. However if you let your feeling about Dr Rogers get in the way, thinking that he was above reproach you will not hear from God but only the god within you.

Perhaps one of the problems is that Dr Rogers allowed this adoration of himself to take on a life of it's own thinking to himself he had no control if others idolized him. His followers have told me they are willing to take a bullet for him!
There is unquestionly loyalty for him.

your brother in Christ who dearly loves His kingdom

Charles

Dave Miller said...

So, Charles,

If I understand you right, God is mad at Adrian Rogers. The standard of that is a feeling you have.

So, now, the standard of right and wrong is not scripture, but Charles Page's impressions and opinions.

You cannot really expect me to go there, can you?

Support with SCRIPTURE your assertion that God is angry at Adrian, or the comment is going to internet nirvana with the rest of them.

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave
The only feeling I had was getting my dog to do his bizness so I could go back in the house. There was no feeing but shortness of breath after the vision. It left me in amazement. I had heard from heaven!

Acts 2:17-18; Joel 2:28 (I prefer the Joel reference because I am a young man there, in Peter's reference I am an old man)

You said: "Support with SCRIPTURE your assertion that God is angry at Adrian, or the comment is going to internet nirvana with the rest of them."

Now Dave, you know the SCRIPTURE probally better than me. Get a Strong's concordance and look for the word 'Adrian' and you can read for yourself.

While you are there look up 'internet nirvana' and read what SCRIPTURE says about that.

You said: "So, now, the standard of right and wrong is not scripture, but Charles Page's impressions and opinions." With due respect to you our (yours and mine) impressions and opinions are not all that important. I sat here and listened to your sermon from last Sunday and you have plenty of impressions and opinions, used without scripture references.

You rise above me in marathon endurance!

For which I close as I have to go to work.

friends in Christ's love
Charles

Dave Miller said...

Charles,

There is no question that God has spoken in scriptural days through dreams and visions. And I have no reason to believe that he cannot or will not do it today.

But extrabiblical illumination must be judged by scripture. Anyone can have a vision or dream. Those that are from God are 1) completely in line with scripture and 2) designed to bring the church in line with God's ways, will or Word.

1) Your vision does not match up with scripture. God's anger against Adrian's sin was satiated at the cross. If Adrian sinned during his lifetime, God might discipline him. But his anger was poured out on Christ.

So, no, God was not angry with Adrian Rogers. Your vision does not meet that test.

The only way your vision could be biblical would be if you assert that Adrian Rogers was a "wolf in sheep's clothing" - a false brother who was not truly saved.

2) What possible purpose could God have for giving you a vision that he was mad at a dead person?

How does that build the body?

If Adrian was teaching falsehood, God could have given HIM a vision. Or he could have moved on someone's heart to go to Adrian and confront him.

But why give a man a vision of God's anger against a man in heaven?

So, here are my two conclusions:

1) Whatever vision or idea you had, it was not from God. It does not meet the biblical tests of visions.

2) It is strange to hear a calvinist say these things. Most hard-core, five-pointers (by the way, I believe in God's sovereignty in salvation) reject things like visions and dreams as a means of God's revelation.

It is odd to talk to someone who is as passionately calvinist as you are who also relies on visions for the revelation of truth.

Nothing wrong with that, just odd.

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave

I sincerely thank you for a thought out response. It lacked the emotional response I usually receive.

Something happened about 2001 when I went with friends on a wed nite to Bellevue (they were regular attenders- members) We ate dinner at the Church and discussed the difference between Pentecostalism, which I had been and the Baptist faith. I could not give a good answer as it was a meal occasion and hard to converse deeply.

We went on to the service and Adrian Rogers was speaking. It was rare that he ever spoke on Wed nites as his health was failing.
He spoke about Church growth right out of the Fuller Theological Seminary 'textbook' with all the emphasis of their church growth programs.

He mentioned how many people had been baptized the previous year at Bellevue, abt 600, and a lady started spontaneous applause. She was the only one and no one joined her. Dr Rogers gestured her both of his palms and said: "now listen to me, you didn't hear what I said."

I was personally embarrassed for the lady and knew she would go home feeling pretty stupid for interrupting Rogers.

After the service as we loaded the car, I said to my frienf that Dr Rogers had "goofed". The difference between a Pentecostal service and this service is that that lady would not have been embarrassed, rather the speaker would pause and expect others to join her expression or else encourage everyone to join her praise as directed to the Lord.

I witnessed principles placed over individual expression, an error of people movement 'mass' evangelism.
I witnessed the need of a man to make his sermon point at the expense of a lone woman's esteem.
I could not get that lone hand clap out of my mind.

You said: "The only way your vision could be biblical would be if you assert that Adrian Rogers was a "wolf in sheep's clothing" - a false brother who was not truly saved." Absolutely not! He is truly saved! I say that as my opinion.

However as good a man as he was he was unapproachable, with exception of a few people. He was extremely busy and constantly on the go. The mess after his death and the fiasco of Paul williams and the ensuing arguments with Steve Gaines has revealed the lack of access people had to him. Paul Williams didn't have the access he needed. Thoes who suspected the sin of PW could not approach AR. PW's son who desperately wanted to go to the church could not approach AR. The few who knew about PW could not approach AR.

Steve Gaines finally gave an interview with some of the opposers and it was revealed that even AR's secretaries said that while SG was accessible AR had not been.

Dr Rogers left the day to day affairs to other less capable men who I believe grew to resent the fact that they did all the 'work.' JMO

I believe that God arranged for me to witness that service and to see what God sees. That belief grows every day. It does not diminish.

Dave, I believe that all believers are disciplined for their sin. I can attest to that personally as I am sure you can as well. There are those who do not respond properly. In fact God may take their life so as to save them from futher dishonor. (perhaps Ar could not have handled the PW fiasco) I Cor 11:30; 15:20; I John 5:16 Perhaps AR was beyond James 5:20 and no one could turn him away from his error. No one can escape judgement for sin II Cor 5:10.

Dave, the reality of this scared me to the point my wife thought that I was having a reaction to some medication. I was begging God to take me right then. How could any of us stand, if this was true for AR. The best of our righteousness is as filthy rags.
True our sins are satiated at the cross, however that means we can so easily trample the blood that sanctifies us. We who are redeemed can grieve and insult the Holy Spirit. Heb 10:26

Yes I am a five point Calvinist (I deny the free offer of four pointers and some five pointers) I am bold, Spirit filled, evangelistic (I witness more than ye all) and I am non-cessationist.
I am pan-mill!

However my reliance is not on dreams, visions and revelations but the revelation of God's Son who is heir of all things. Heb 1
Scripture attest to Him in His fullness.

WatchingHISstory said...

Charles

You need to get a Bible, get alone with God and get your heart straightened out. You need to let our Lord take away your anger, your hatred, your ungodly way of relating to people. You need to stop justifying your sin because someone else did something evil two decades ago.

You need to repent.
You need to repent.
You need to repent.
You need to repent.

If you continue to leave comments on my site of this nature, I am going to continue calling you to repentance until you either repent or get tired of hearing a call to repentance.

Dave

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave

Since we have become good blog friends I would like your comment to my last posting, today.

As I have said before I am not attempting to attack AR's character rather his theology.
I feel that I have addressed a real problem in that theology today. One worth consideration.

Charles

Dave Miller said...

My comment in this: I have no idea what you are talking about. You pulled a quaote from one of my previous comments and re-posted it.

I was befuddled when I got it and still am.

I stand by what I said.

WatchingHISstory said...

Dave

I just didn't want you to forget to rant at me to repent! It's nice to be recognized.

Charles