# mcmahon/way controversy



## bigheavyq (Apr 6, 2006)

what is the status on the controversy? 
I happen to think pastor way is right in his assessment. 
however, I would like this to be settled and not forgotten about. 
We should hear something soon from mcmahon and his church.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Apr 6, 2006)

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=17420


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 6, 2006)

Thanks Gabe. I couldn't find that post.

Jonathan - I hope it is unintentional in doing so but you're question is a bit like:

1. What's the status?
2. I already agree with Pastor Way...

Do you want to know the status so you can see if Matt is able to defend his comments or because you've already made up your mind?

I happen to NOT agree with Pastor Way. If you follow the direction of the thread in question, Dr. McMahon was browbeaten by Pastor Way and others before he even fully explained or defended his remarks. People can attribute any motivation or spirit to his words that they desire and Pastor Way certainly attributed intent that I did not see in the original article and that Matt flatly denied.

I guess this is likely to open up  but you seem to have concluded the matter already and just want to determine whether others agree that Matt was wrong. 

Matt has even gone the extra mile of having his reply vetted by men of the Church to make sure his reply is well thought out. I've seen some blog entries by people who call themselves Christians making FALSE accusations agains Matt and other Christian men on this board that they are trying to "cover up" the episode. Such men are bearing false witness and will have to answer to God for such sins. Would that prior to charges of gross sin, many would have taken time to vett their charge among other Churchmen and not in open forum on the Internet where any armchair theologian with an opinion can weigh in.

[Edited on 4-7-2006 by SemperFideles]


----------



## bigheavyq (Apr 7, 2006)

I meant that I think that their is a problem in some of mcmahon's statements and pastorway was pointing it out. If one is going to post things on the board they will come under some scrunity. Everyone disagrees with things people say on this board. The attacks on the FV and doug wilson have not been done with brotherly love. They have not been given the benefit of the doubt. Many others have also been treated unfairly here on this board. But some are above any attack here such as the moderators of this board. If one disagrees on any point not only are you not allowed to call yourself reformed, you are a heretic and are going to hell. This attitude is found all over this board. And frankly I'm sick of the double-standard.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 7, 2006)

I don't agree but this is America so believe what you want.

All you have to do is read that thread to refute your contention that the Mods or the Administrators are above any attack. They, frankly, have big red bulls-eyes on them.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Apr 7, 2006)

Anybody know where I can read this?

Phillip Way wrote "A Critical Examination of Statements Published by C. Matthew McMahon"


----------



## brymaes (Apr 7, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> Anybody know where I can read this?
> 
> Phillip Way wrote "A Critical Examination of Statements Published by C. Matthew McMahon"



I believe that Phillip posted this at his blog.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Apr 7, 2006)

I did'nt see it there


----------



## brymaes (Apr 7, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> I did'nt see it there



Nathan,
That's weird, I couldn't find it eaither. I'll ask Phillip to point me in the right direction...


----------



## brymaes (Apr 7, 2006)

Here it is!


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Apr 7, 2006)

Cool thank you!!


----------



## wsw201 (Apr 7, 2006)

> _Originally posted by bigheavyq_
> I meant that I think that their is a problem in some of mcmahon's statements and pastorway was pointing it out. If one is going to post things on the board they will come under some scrunity. Everyone disagrees with things people say on this board. The attacks on the FV and doug wilson have not been done with brotherly love. They have not been given the benefit of the doubt. Many others have also been treated unfairly here on this board. But some are above any attack here such as the moderators of this board. If one disagrees on any point not only are you not allowed to call yourself reformed, you are a heretic and are going to hell. This attitude is found all over this board. And frankly I'm sick of the double-standard.



Jonathan,

I'm a super moderator on this board and there is no double standard. I have disagreed with Scott and Matt on issues such as EP and PR and so have others and neither I nor anyone else has been treated unfairly. If you believe that you or someone else on this board is being treated unfairly, notify the Admins or Mods.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 8, 2006)

> _Originally posted by bigheavyq_
> what is the status on the controversy?
> I happen to think pastor way is right in his assessment.
> however, I would like this to be settled and not forgotten about.
> We should hear something soon from mcmahon and his church.



I'm not sure I would call this a controversy. The Synod of Dordt with the Remonstrants is a _controversy_. If you read through the thread, and follow up talking with my Presbytery subsequent to Phillip's contacting them and talking to them as well, it is more characteristic of "venting" than a careful critique on Phillip's part - which sorely saddens me.

As I posted before, I have already written a response, and that response is in the hands of the Presbytery, who are proofing it. When they are finished, it will be posted here, and at A Puritan's Mind. Its quite detailed, so they are taking their time with it.

Take note of the Scriptures, especially on serious issues - Proverbs 29:20, "Do you see a man *hasty* in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him." Such is the case when critiques are sent out that are unfair, or hasty in response.

Bruce said:

"I'm a super moderator on this board and there is no double standard. I have disagreed with Scott and Matt on issues such as EP and PR and so have others and neither I nor anyone else has been treated unfairly. If you believe that you or someone else on this board is being treated unfairly, notify the Admins or Mods."

Most assuredly agreed.


Again, until the Presbytery is finished, this will remain at a close.

[Edited on 4-8-2006 by C. Matthew McMahon]


----------

