You may also like...

21 Responses

  1. Jean says:

    “SBC Executive Committee Balks at Directive to Open Up to Abuse Investigation”

    “Still up for debate is whether the Executive Committee (EC) will comply with the convention’s directive to waive attorney-client privilege to allow investigators to obtain relevant documents from EC members and staff.

    “The majority of the EC voted against doing so, with several citing the “fiduciary duty” to protect the entity and the denomination as a whole.”

    Basically, the “entity” and “denomination “ take precedence over truth, repentance and justice for the victims. Does this strike you as even remotely Christian?

  2. Michael says:

    This is standard operating procedure in American churches…and no, it’s not even remotely close to Christian.

  3. JD says:

    ChristiInsanity Today

  4. Officerhoppy says:

    Worship is broken—couldn’t agree more. While the author makes several points, I think he misses the main point of “worship” the best standard for understanding worship is the song in Revelation ch 4 “Hoy, Holy, Holy Lord God almighty Who was and is and is to come”. While singing songs about justice and the poor or the character of God are important in a corporate setting, true worship is about exalting God. As the worship director of my church I have three values: Exaltation—giving glory and honor to God; Invitation—people invited to participate not be spectators, and Encounter—Christ i encountered. There also needs to be more of an awareness of “us”. Most songs sung in a corporate worship context seem to me to be more of a transaction—I’ll give you something (God) as long as I get something (a feeling/a blessing) out of it. My thoughts

  5. Thatoneguy777 says:

    @JD You have struggles with Christianity Today?

  6. JD says:

    I coin a phrase, so now I have issues.

  7. JD says:

    @666 Hupago Samael

  8. CM says:


    Since this blog and yourself covered the Saeed Abedini story (both the imprisonment and his abuse of his wife), Julie Roys has a 2 part in depth interview with his ex-wife Naghmeh. Part 1 is linked below (part 2 to follow shortly):

  9. Thatoneguy777 says:

    @JD All I did was ask a question. I was also unaware apocryphal fallen angels frequented this board. I hope the response you got from him was worth it.

  10. Em says:

    Officerhoppy understands worship

  11. Nathan Priddis says:

    Informative to listen to the Naghmeh interview.
    If Driscoll was another brick in the wall, then so was the events surrounding Saeed and Naghmeh. Driscoll contributed towards any angry white male grievance Christianity. Graham and Seckulow increased their social media influence, via Neghmeh. That influence contributed towards Trumpism.

    I expect the Kingdom of God to eventually have Christian “kings”. That is not a reference to historical royalty with believing monarchs, a la Europe. Rather, I predict human Messiahs or Christ, that will rival Jesus of Nazareth. Brick by brick, the foundation is being laid.

    The respective timeframes surrounding Driscoll and Saeed seem so distant in relation to where we are today.

  12. Michael says:

    I’ll be blunt…I’m not real interested in anything she has to say.
    I still have a lot of unanswered questions , but she has become beyond questioning.

  13. Nathan Priddis says:

    What do you think of her credibility? When the narrative changed circa 2015, her position was not as defined as today.

  14. Michael says:

    That depends on what she’s talking about.
    Was she subjected to abuse?
    Is Saeed a a lying sack of crap?
    Was she used by Graham and Seculow?
    There’s more to the story…but for me, the story’s over.
    It’s like questioning the Virgin Mary at this point.

  15. Muff Potter says:

    Naghmeh’s testimony is horrific.
    Fundagelicalism is as toxic as any chemical weapon in the U.S. arsenal.

  16. The New Victor says:

    What MacDowell said was certainly inelegant and an undeveloped point, but I’m not sure if it was the “sin of racism.”

    If only there were a cancel culture focused upon pastoral emotional and sexual abuse.

  17. Nathan Priddis says:

    Muff Potter. Along with Michael, I think something is missing.

    I don’t recall an apology, unless I missed it. I’m pretty sure there was major fundraising of the back of this story. Fundraising which in hindsight was misrepresented.

    The connections and speed by which they emerged don’t seem plausible. How did Naghmeh find so many willing allies?

    Why did the Iranian government suddenly feel the need to crackdown on Saeed’s activities?

    You could just keep going.

  18. DavidM says:

    I had to chuckle at Josh McDowell’s comment about CRT being one of the “five greatest global epidemics”. It reminded me of when the book The DaVinci Code was published. I received a copy of his book about the novel and a letter that he sent out to thousands of pastors, saying that the DaVinci Code will cause the greatest crisis ever among Evangelical churches. He suggested that we all (pastors) purchase enough copies to give one of his books to every family in the congregation. The whole thing was little more than thinly-veiled marketing of his product. I promptly tossed the letter and his “book”. So, now when I see what he is saying, it makes me wonder what he is selling now.

  19. Dread says:

    Well, I listened to Julie Roys with Naghmeh hearing both podcasts. Roys missed with me. Somehow I do not think the church can legitimately be branded as failing Naghmeh. She asked for help with his release and got it. She was showered with financial support and emotional succor. She parlayed the powers of public Christian voices to great personal advantage.

    The complexities of her abuse, and her public revelations of that abuse and her reactions are not terribly surprising. Abused people protect their abusers until they get their voice then they powerfully turn against that abuse and Naghmeh navigated that rather amazingly.

    Those of us who were active lobbying her cause and offering support were confused but were pretty consistently supportive of her changing story. Saeed has been exposed — I don’t know his present status but he is not a public celebrity to my knowledge.

    I also agree with Naghmeh’s aversion and rejection of public christian celebrity culture…. at least until it is bestowed upon me… check back then.

    Here’s the thing; Why the hit piece on Franklin Graham? He acted according to his nature and according to his understanding of marriage and poor understanding of abused women. One thing is for sure… HE DID NOT ACCUSE HER OF BEING UNFAITHFUL. Nothing in that audio evidenced that claim. He asked her about it. That was not inappropriate for those who were advocating her case with funds and public pressure and kindness. Asking a question is not making an accusation in my world.

    The repartee from Anne to Franklin is as most of us know it to be by their personalities.

    Julie seemed rather focused on making things public that had no real purchase and not nearly enough context.

    I support Naghmeh and supported her in many ways but those podcasts troubled me … I don’t think I have expressed it well but for me it was …. at best unhelpful and perhaps damaging. I am glad Naghmeh is free and apparently doing well. The second audio was unnecessary and diminishing of the impact of the first IMO

  20. Michael says:


    Thank you for saying some things I’ve avoided saying.
    It’s not worth the blowback.
    I find the whole situation troubling and have already given as much space to her and the snake she was with as I intend to.

  21. josh hamrick says:

    She did what she had to do to get Saeed free, and of course, she was free to discontinue their marriage for any reason she saw fit. However, in the process she has become an unreliable narrator. I hope she and the kids are well, but I have no desire to hear from her.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.