Sun, Nov 22, 2009
EURweb |
|
Back to the Article »
Click Here
|
|---|
| Click here to post your comments. |
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: "Let no man deprive you of the prize who takes delight in a mock humility and a form of worship of the angels, taking his stand on the things he has seen, puffed up without proper cause by his fleshly frame of mind," 1Cor. 2:18
Even though i opened with scripture, this is not a sermon. It is a warning to those that think that they can use the power of God to build upon the foundation of the Christ for their own selfish motives. I almost had to laugh when I realized in the simplest sense of marriage, that there is, nor probably has never been any real unity within this marriage. They do not even share the same last name. Luke 16:10 says, "he that is faithful in what is least is faithful in much"....
As a married couple, supposedly doing, not some but all things for the glory of the Father, can not even agree to use the same last name, that shows me that they did not understand what Genesis 2:24.
This looks like a marriage of conveyance. One that was set up so that they both could achieve prominence. There is no commitment here. Its all one big farce!
No one deserves to be beat down in this matter. He should be dealt with by his congregation if they indeed no how. "
"To whom much has been given, the rule is much more is demanded in return."
They are both responsible for what happened. As I understand it, when he tried to leave, she foolishly went after him. Subsequently he being a bigger fool let his emotions take over.
The irony is that these two idiots were never committed to a truly spiritual relationship in the beginning. ITS WHAT YOU START, and there will always be problems when you pretend to be something you are not.
For any and all of us who have deceived ourselves along these same paths, there is but one word, REPENT!
|
|
Name:
HarrisThomas
Comment: truly, there is nothing to add to MO's article and recognizelife's post . . . I do have a question: what is the chance of both being posted at streamingfaith.com
|
|
Name:
tsktsk01
Comment: Slim to none... Someone filed a lawsuit against them yesterday, I believe. God is not pleased. As for TD Jakes why would he respond publicly? Why should he? I'll never forget when Mike Tyson was accused of rape and a group of ministers held a press conference in support of him. There is little value on a black woman's life and we get mad at Imus while in our own communities we're treated like crap. Oh well...
|
|
Name:
Merd325
Comment: Hey Mo...I heard that he didn't preach and that he introduce a guest speaker in his place...But yes he was on the pulpit and thank everyone for their support and prayers...As a matter of fact they said he left the building after that.
|
|
Name:
romalynda
Comment: Why should TD Jakes make a comment? He is a mere man/human like the rest of us. Why is he being vilified just because he decided to make no comment. If Bynum's own family have asked for privacy in this public matter - who is he to come out and speak on it. Furthermore, it's still a shame that Michael Vick and his dogfighting debacle is still more important than the domestic violence epidemic that has been affecting woman for years, in and out of the church.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Romalynda...
To HAVE an a public statement on Don Imus for example which really has no "Christian " implications but NOTHING on Juanita Bynum a friend and colleague - which has WIDE ranging Christian implications is questionable. Domestic violence hits at the center of the christian dialogue. The patriarchal nature of the church and dismissal of women is at the heart of the church.
To not even offer a statement (in email either) that mentions Bynum by name is DUBIOUS and outright disrespectful.
If Jakes had a consistent history of not having anything to say on such issues...then fine. But he has a LONG history.
Don Imus?! Don Imus?!
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Merd,
I'm hearing conflicting reports on the nature of his "appearance." But as I said, I wasn't there.
But I was reciting what the Atlanta Journal Constitution had to say...
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: I think church leaders are treading carefully here because they are colleagues with both parties and because all the facts aren't in and there is no conviction. Really, Jakes has no obligation to comment on everything. It isn't his "responsibility" to do this just because you think so, Mo'Kelly. Sorry to tell you. At my church they didn't say anything either on Sunday. To me, this is between Bynum, her husband and the law. It isn't our business, really. We live in this electronic/paparazzi age when everyone thinks they have a right to know everyone else's business but it simply isn't true for everyone. Maybe he knows her enough to know she's hurting right now and for him to speak would bring even more media attention to her public humiliation. Maybe he wanted to spare her that. I don't know but as someone else said, everyone doesn't have to speak about everything. Sometimes silence is just silence. Sometimes it is a sign of respect for someone's privacy. The other day, they asked Payton Manning about Vick and he was classy enough to say, "I'm not gonna discuss that" and I was very pleased and impressed with that answer. Sometimes the best thing you can do is hold your silence.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: NO, when you beat your wife, PUBLICLY...then you've made it the public's business.
And again, to not even offer REAL words of healing and restoration is bogus. Couldn't even mention Bynum by name or acknowledge that she's specifically been hurt, irrespective of circumstances.
Yes, I'd want that of any legitimate Christian leader.
If we need to go Bible on this we can. It's not what "Mo'Kelly" thinks in terms of responsibility.
I don't want my "spiritual leader" with comments on Don Imus but nothing on the beating of a woman. That spiritually would trouble me as a member of the congregation.
"I pray for the healing and restoration of Juanita Bynum. Although this is a family issue and we're not clear on all of the circumstances involved, the healing power of Christ will make both of them whole and I wish Dr. Bynum a speedy recovery in the interim."
What's so HARD about that?
__________________
"BISHOP SENDS HIS PRAYERS?"
THAT is a joke.
|
|
Name:
HarrisThomas
Comment: so, some of what I am reading on this board is not explicitly stated and that is Jakes and others are waiting to speak out against physically beating down a woman in order to determine whether the beat down was justified . . . if this is true, shame on the ministers and the people who follow them . . . NO PHYSICAL BEAT DOWN SHOULD BE TOLERATED FOR ANY CIRCUMSTANCE OR SITUATION (umm, cornbread's influence?) . . . no minister should be waiting for more information to speak out against this travesty . . . the beat down happened and that is all that is needed to be known
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >HarrisThomas - If you are referring to my post, then no - I am not saying that they are waiting to see if it's justified. What I am saying is that they are treading carefully because at this point there is IN FACT no conviction. As such, it would be premature for them to say anything at all until all the facts are presented. Remember the Duke case? I'm not saying that she beat herself w/oranges. I'm not saying it didn't happen but a wise man will wait and see before running his mouth. Sending prayers is the right thing to do. Speaking out w/o all the facts is ignorant and makes you look like a soundbite chaser like Jackson/Sharpton/and company. Silence is golden sometimes. And, silence can prevent you from coming out your mouth w/ignorance. If Jakes were to misspeak at this point, he could mess himself up. I wouldn't do that, either. Stuff between a husband and wife is between a husband and wife. Period. I felt the same way w/the Clintons. I thought Bill C. was foul w/a capital "F" but that was and is between him and Hilary. This is between them and I think Jakes is using wisdom by keeping his mouth tightly shut. What is the saying, "It is better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're an idiot than to open your mouth and prove you are" and all that.
|
|
Name:
ImJustAsking
Comment: The fact that the facts aren't out shouldn't prevent TD Jakes from speaking out. He gave this woman her start. That means that he believed in her...at least at one point. Their personal relationship alone would require him to say something. If there's anything Jakes knows how to do is speak in qualifiers. He knows how to use "ifs" and whatnot as in "if" Bishop Weeks did that I think _____. He hasn't spoken out for reasons for personal gain, the same reason why he wouldn't speak out against the government during Hurricane Katrina but flew down there to get photo ops with the President. Jakes has made a point of having a platform encouraging women to shun physical and sexual violence, so silence is not golden in this instance. This just makes me further believe that he chose that platform not because he believes in it but b/c he knows there are a lot of Bynums out there with money to put in the plate.
|
|
Name:
BigSexy
Comment: MO - Maybe TD is not saying anything because maybe, just maybe, what Weeks did - Jakes can see a little of himself in that act... Now I don't know TD at all. But I thought Juanita was a friend of his. I spoke up to my friends husband that was hitting her. I just though TD and Juanita were friends and he would have something to say about what happened to her. Or maybe TD knows Juanita very well and thinks something shadey is up on her side of the camp and so he will not comment because he knows something about her that will taint her current situation. I don't know...
|
|
Name:
Stephanie
Comment: Mo, did you ever think about TD maybe knows Juanita better than any of us and therefore since he, you or any of us wasn't there he can't comment on what really happened? All we're going by is what was put in the media, NONE OF US were there and 90% of the time, the media puts dubs on it. My grandmother always says, there are 3 sides to every story, his side, her side and the truth and since you, TD or any of us don't know which side of story is the truth, why comment? We can voice our opinion on what we think happened but again, we're selling this story like we bought it. By the time the bell guy that broke it up tells his friends what happened and his friends tell other people, there will a thousand different stories to what really happened. It has been said that Juanita has suffered some type of mental illness and therefore she can be off the chain. A man should never hit a woman and I truly believe that if Bishop Weeks had been beating Juanita's azz with regularity, it would have come out long before this. Maybe he walked away to keep from making a scene and she might have followed him out to have the last word and she might have been all up in his face and he simply just shoved her out of his way and from there it may have escalated. None of us know...but to say Bishop Jakes is wrong for not making a statement, I don't agree. He's probably letting this matter be settled in private. I personally think that God just exposed her for the person she really is. She just seems like she will take you there if you don't listen or agree with her.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: I did...he didn't have to comment on the "particulars" but he could've without prejudice offered words of healing and restoration...which were in order.
He didn't.
That's about as an unbiased thing a minister can do...and he didn't.
This was an important moment in a Christian sense.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Guys, I clearly said that Jakes didn't have to "judge" Weeks...but he have still come out in support of HEALING for Bynum.
He hasn't. THAT is the point.
You can support the healing and STILL have nothing to say on the beating. He did neither.
|
|
Name:
DoctorSmooth
Comment: I found it questionable when Jakes decided to comment on the Imus situation. I mean, I don’t think the public as a whole was sitting around thinking “hmm.. I wonder what TD Jakes thinks about the Imus situation” . So for him to even make a comment was a bit surprising. So to not make any comment on this situation is not a good look. He certainly has the right not to comment.. but when he figured the Imus think was important enough to comment on, and this situation is not, it doenst look good. For all we know, he may have already called her privately and offered his support. But publicly, this is still one of those things that has a bad look to it. If he decides to issue a statement the next time theres some other public, non church-related issue, he might want to think again, cuz people are just gonna say “if he couldn’t comment on Juanita’s situation, why is he commenting on this?” . Frankly, he might want to consider not making any more public statements. The fact is, appearances do matter, and the way he handled this situation just has a bad look to it.
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >Mo'Kelly - I think your time as a writer would have been better spent speaking to men about this type of abuse instead of criticizing Jakes. You had a prime opportunity to speak out against a man laying his hands on a woman but instead you chose to go after Jakes. YOU wasted an opportunity, not Jakes. You could even have added sensation to it by bringing back up all the ballers, singers, rappers, etc. who beat down their women. Statistics of spousal abuse, police reporting could have been brought in. I don't exactly get this attack on Jakes, to be honest given the severity of the issue and the opportunity to do some good in our community...but that's just me...
|
|
Name:
BigSexy
Comment: I'm with you MO. He should have said something - to support his friend. He doesn't have to say Weeks is a so-and-so for what he did. He just should have said something supportive for his friend. But like I said above, now I'm suspicious as to why he hasn't said anything... Makes me wonder...
|
|
Name:
BigSexy
Comment: And knowing you MO, I'm sure you have thought about writing a piece on spousal abuse, celebrities and spousal abuse, or ministers and spousal abuse, or whatever. Referring to what queenie said above.
|
|
Name:
Snicker
Comment: --->stephanie so if a man was beating your azz and stomping you in to the ground would you still have this same outlook....black women are so hateful of each other that they would even try and justify a man beating one up.....there are plenty of women who get beat up on the regular and no one knows about it so just because no one knew about it doesn't mean he wasn't beating her......you sound like you are a little jealous of juanita bynum by some of the comments that you made about her and black women are very jealous towards each other.......you sound like a jealous high schooler who doesn't like the prom queen or something.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: I co-sign with Mo’Kelly here. Its obvious he and a whole bunch of folks are embarrassed. People placed Bynum’s husband on a pedestal so for this to happen its very very embarassing. Also co-sign with Bigsexy's post.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: The subject of domestic violence popped up in a conversation last week and my friend was like ‘victims are stupid for not speaking out’, and that they should either attack the man or get male members of the family to beat him up’. Firstly domestic violence messes with ones dignity. Think about it - its easier to tell someone your partner cheated than you got beaten up or raped.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Secondly retaliating with violence does not offer a permanent solution (but guarantees a criminal record). Anyway my friend went onto say all women beaters are non believers and need the lord, so you can imagine how quiet she’s been since Bynum’s story broke, suddenly she feels it’s a private matter between husband and wife. It’s a shame she did not apply the same theory to Whitney and Bobby, cos she was constantly on their case from the day they got marriage to their divorce. lol
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: My cousin called me up three weeks ago telling me her boyfriend lost his temper and kicked the door down, the first thing I asked was ‘did he put his hands on u?’, she said she didn’t want to talk about it. When I wore her down she confessed to being beaten up on a number of occasions, and the most recent incident involved him dragging her by her head in front of their child. I confronted the negro and he said well, ‘a woman should know her place in society she deserved it’. As I sit typing those words I’m still in shock.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Something good has come out of this Bynum beatdown and that is, it has blown the lid of domestic abuse and in the christian community (where I’m sure its rife). It has us all talking, somebody somewhere (victim) will be affected by all this and draw strength from it by going to the authorities and some abuser may finally change their ways.
|
|
Name:
arenaissancemind
Comment: I cosign everything that Recognizelife had to say. This marriage was a joke from the beginning. They are both obviously guilty of hurting each other physically, emotionally or psychologically, or all of the above.
Yes, he should have addressed it. Any real man would. Don't be naive. He claims to be a man of God, for Christ sakes. Its obvious that he is not. Its not always the things that we do that tell who we are. Sometimes its the things we don't do!
|
|
Name:
ImJustAsking
Comment: Snicker< cosign. I think Juanita Bynum is a scam artist HOWEVER she is no worse of a person than Jakes or her husband so why the venom toward her? That woman has a right to go about taking people's money in the Lord's name without getting her tail beat the same way prostitutes have a right to sell their bodies without being raped. lmao. Okay, maybe that was a bad analogy. Point is, there is no such thing as a woman "taking someone there." Where is there? Shoot. Bigsexy< After I posted I began to think the same thing you said. For all we know Jakes is protecting Juanita by not speaking out. She may have asked him not to say anything. Now, he's still wrong for putting that above the message he so-called believes in, but that could be a reason. I mean they are all in this together anyway.
|
|
Name:
Snicker
Comment: --->ImJustAsking i have a lot of mouth myself and i talk big sh*t to my husband on a regular when we are arguing but i don't touch him and i would advise him to keep his damn hands to himself too.....no matter what i've said and trust me i hit below the belt when i'm angry, he still hasn't hit me while we were arguing.....when i hear people try to justify it by saying "she must have said something to tick him off" or "she followed him out the restaurant" it pizzes me off something fierce.....that man does not love that woman because a man that loves his woman would never stomp her in the ground.
|
|
Name:
shell72
Comment: I was in an abusive marriage and so were so many other women in my family. You know what advice we got from the church, "Pray for him and get'll better'. Needless, to say we all left our churches, our spouses, and all gone all to better lives. The black community has a history of turning its head away from abuse towards women. I know several women who stay in abusive marriages, because the church told them if they divorce they can never marry again. This is the mentality of so many black church women.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Shell72 I hear what you are saying right there, the black community are known for turning a blind eye and its very wrong. My friend's cousin was getting beaten up by her husband on the regular (even when she was heavily pregnant) and when she finally left and went back to her parents house, they sent her back and begged the man to take her in 'because of the stigma of divorce & single parenthood. (sigh)
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >shell72 - the view you speak of is prevalent across racial lines. All races have spousal abuse and the Christian faith has failed women in this area. You see it constantly in the movie of the week on Lifetime network where the minister/priest tells the wife she must stay w/her husband. It is not just a black issue. I think the problem lies in the interpretation people have of women. What does submission really mean? Everyone interprets it differently and usually incorrectly. A man is supposed to love his wife as Jesus loved the church. He is supposed to love his wife as he loves himself. Unless Weeks gave himself a beatdown before he gave Bynum one, he wasn't in line w/Scripture BUT people - men and women thru the years have been silent on this topic. I am glad this happened because hopefully it will cause dialogue and resolution and a new, CORRECT interpretation of scripture/doctrine when it comes to marital relations. It has to stop. I am sorry for your troubles and those of your family. I lost a coworker 4 years ago to abuse. It is a very real thing and I will say a prayer for you and your children. I hope your strength in leaving your situation translates to your children that it wasn't right to abuse you and they do not become abusers/abused. That is what tends to happen in families - the mentality of abuse gets passed down thru modeling. If a boy sees his dad beat his momma down, he beats his wife. If a girl sees momma get beat down, she thinks that is love. I hope it stops w/you. I pray it does.
|
|
Name:
SaintAlbansGirl
Comment: i have read some interesting posts, but none have mentioned the money in church. I don't know Bishop and Mrs. WEeks, but Church is a business and the amount generated in some of these institutions is incredible. I must admit I was stunned at the cost of their wedding a whopping 1 million dollars to get married? And the size of the wedding party 80 people. I am willing to bet most church members don't have that kind of money for the building fund let alone a marriage ceremony. This is ridiculous when there is so much suffering in the world to go to that extent for a wedding. I think Jesus blesses you, but his blessings should never be abused to this degree. There was a time when the church was a place you went to with all your troubles, political, social even legal issues and the preacher would be there for you, nowadays the tax exemption status drives some ministers to gauge the tongue by the effect of the dollar.
|
|
Name:
ImJustAsking
Comment: Snicker< exactly. That's all I'm trying to say. Trust me, if there was a dark place you could take a normal man that would make him try to kill you, I would have been dead by now.
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: SaintAlbansGirl - I actually addressed that in discussing Creflo in another article. I agree with you. I think the business aspect of the church industry is weakening the message. But it's really simple. You have a Rick Warren type who I admire. He made millions off his book and not only doesn't collect a salary at his church anymore but he lives in a modest home, paid back the total of his salary he used to make before "Purpose Driven Life" and he uses his millions to support the spreading of the word of God. Then you have these folks who make millions off their flocks and use it for themselves. They come on television in $5000 suits, the women are dripping in diamonds, and they fly around in jets, they drive around in Bentleys and they preach mostly about money being what it's all about. Clearly they are the clearest depiction of the devil tempting even the called. It's pathetic and difficult to watch and difficult to understand if you have a brain in your head how people can fall for it but they do. Why? Because this world teaches us that money is everything - it should be put before your family, your integrity, your religion. And that is what the enemy wants. He's sitting off to the side laughing about how easy it is to tempt people. And it's a shame.
|
|
Name:
Stephanie
Comment: Snicker, did you actually see what happened? So if you didn't how can you say he beat the shyt of her? Yes, she had bruises and what not but from what the media described of her injuries, him stomping her and whatever else, the injuries would have required more than an outpatient visit at the ER. I'm only saying before we take sides and start pointing fingers we can't just take the word of one person. By all means no man should hit a woman but I'm simply not buying he beat her azz to the extent she or media claims.
|
|
Name:
SaintAlbansGirl
Comment: To: queeniebunz
sister, can the church say amen! Our Lord came from a working family. I didn't see anything in the bible about Mary and Joseph's million dollar wedding. Truth is those folks could have jumped the broom with family and friends for a few grand. I don't want to seem like I am attacking her, her husband already did that and I don't want to pile on, but the thought process here is not right. Bishop Jakes should have addressed the issue of domestic violence, he does not have to take a side but for crying out loud a hotel employee had to pull this man off of her, why would he lie and where did he think all that bruising came from? She didn't fall down a dark staircase, she has witnesses.
|
|
Name:
ImJustAsking
Comment: Creflo Dollar and TD Jakes, AGAINST all biblical scholarship claim that Jesus was rich. That's how they justify their monetary trappings. AJC did an article on it a while back.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Actually it was a witness (the hotel worker) who made the complaint after he pulled Weeks off Bynum. At one point folks were not sure if she was even going to press charges. She probably just confirmed what was already said. Left to her she probably wanted to save face and sweep everything under the carpet.
|
|
Name:
SweetieDarlin
Comment: IJA> Some of the reasons I would expect TD Jakes to make a statement would be because, he was the one who mentored Ms. Bynum and brought her to the forefront, TD Jakes has made a point to disuss women's issues in the past to the extent that he has written books pertaining to women's issues (Woman Thou Art Losed to name one book) TD Jakes is a minister who has a far reaching ministry and has set himself up as a religious leader to the masses. His comments condemning Rev. Weeks actions would go far to let everyone know that domestic abuse is not tolerated and is never the answer. People are still saying we don't know what happened but the only answer that would be acceptable is documented proof that Juanita turned into a straight up devil with horns and said she was here to destroy mankind unless Rev. Weeks beat her down. Now I'm not trying to give Rev. Weeks his alibi for the beating so I am requiring documented proof and many unbiased witnesses to that fact, other than that, there is no excuse.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: We don't need to know the "facts" to know that hitting a woman under any circumstances is unacceptable.
And so is kicking, choking and stomping.
"Christian Leadership" must be and do exactly that.
Be "Christian" and exhibit "leadership"
Even when it's not popular, safe or convenient.
|
|
Name:
shell72
Comment: Thank you Morris,
Why are people putting the blame on the victim? My ex-husband use to tell me I shouldn't provoke him. You mean, I can't say what I want say? Heck, even Jesus said turned the other cheek.
|
|
Name:
Stephanie
Comment: Yes, you do need to know facts before you make statements. What if the facts turned out that she started hitting him and he turned and walked away and she kept coming at him and he merely pushed her off him. If he had done all that kicking, stomping and choking, it would require a minimum 3 day hospital stay. That's a serious arse kicking. I'm not in any way trying to justify a man hitting a woman, I just don't think its fair to say it was all his doing because we don't know all the facts, we're simply going on what the media is telling us and most times their wrong.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Thank you Stephanie for proving my point.
There's never a reason to hit a woman. He's in a public space too...I'm sure he could find safety before Juanita "beat him down."
Call a bell hop, call the police...but kicking, choking and punching AND threatening her life?
No...never an excuse to hit a woman.
Nobody said that Bynum didn't have a "role" but the moment a man hits a woman, he's in the wrong...period.
And since Weeks isn't turning up with any wounds, your point is moot.
No charges were filed against Bynum either.
So we can speculate all day, but the facts are that only one person was charged with aggravated felony %*$ault, pictures to prove it.
Never a reason to hit a woman.
NEVER.
|
|
Name:
Stephanie
Comment: I'm not trying to prove a point. I simply believe there is more to the story than we know. If he did in fact jump on her, he should pay because he was dead wrong. He was charged but has not been convicted of anything yet. So we'll just wait and see what happens.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: You're making one fundamental flaw. I NEVER said that Jakes should rain "judgment" upon weeks.
But that's different from coming out and condemning violence against women.
Waiting for "the facts" is a farce.
There's never a reasonable explanation for beating a woman.
With that as an absolute, a person can have a statement against domestic violence and ALSO in support of Juanita...
The fate of Weeks is to me irrelevant. He had no business EVER putting his hands on that woman.
To open the door to "circumstances" just put all women in jeopardy.
Conviction is about legal maneuvering, we're talking about life as a Christian.
Beating your wife is unacceptable...period. The moral "law" supersedes "Caesar's" law in terms of the Christian debate.
Some things are just right and wrong and given Jakes' public stances on WOMEN'S ISSUES specifically, this is REALLY egregious.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: I'll say it again...
"I pray for the healing and restoration of Juanita Bynum. Although this is a family issue and we're not clear on all of the circumstances involved, the healing power of Christ will make both of them whole and I wish Dr. Bynum a speedy recovery in the interim."
What's so HARD about that?
He couldn't even mention her NAME in the one-sentence "Bishop sends his prayers".
It's a cheap cop out. It's clear, it's obvious he's not above acknowledging this event to specific members OF the media, so why not do it right?
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Whenever I get hate mail like this...I really enjoying sharing it in all of its glory. THIS is the type of ignorance I've been getting today...on a CHRISTIAN issue of all things. This email is unedited...
____________________
Mo Kelly" what are you some Type of Closet Faggot, who cares If The
Bishop Jakes, Doesn't issue a statement about what happen to Bynum, If she
ends up back with her Husband Bishop W. then he would look like a fool
for trying to break up there mirrage. If I was Bishop Jakes I would
keep quiet to, For him to speak is like causing a RIFF in the Kingdom Of
GOD..... And beside junita Bynum has a Brother Preacher in Chicago
Name Bishop Tom Bynum, Have you seen a statement from HIM. You Idiot mind
your own Business, I think your Colum is waste of time on that subject.
Mike Johnson, 708-825-3877
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: I mean, after a well-argued and presented email like that...I think I'll just quit writing altogether and retire. He sure told me.
I'm not sure who've I've received more hate mail from...the hip hop heads when I slam hip hop or the evangelicals like Mike Johnson. In fact, some hip hop heads have written and COMPLIMENTED me for being FAIR and evenhanded in terms of this issue.
It's funny how the people who usually hate me are coming to my defense.
But such is the life of a writer. :)
|
|
Name:
ImJustAsking
Comment: A riff? You mean like a guitar riff?
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: No, he meant a "mirage" like in the desert, not a "marriage."
I couldn't stop laughing at that email.
And what the heck is a "colum"...?
|
|
Name:
Marlin
Comment: I agree totally. T.D. Jakes should speak up and say something about the woman he introduced to the world.
|
|
Name:
BigSexy
Comment: When I learned my friend was being hit by her husband, I didn't ask her what did you do to him/say to him to make him hit you. Forget that mess!! I went straight to him and asked what the he!! is the problem. You don't put your hands on her like that. There is no way she can defend herself from you. But I let both of them know this treatment had to end. Of course it ended alright, three long years later. Now she says how could I have been so wrapped up in him to stay with that kind of abuse. We live and learn. She's blessed that she did live a learn because a lot of people only get away from their abuser by death.
|
|
Name:
Marlin
Comment: some of the comments made really bother me. God will not 'strike you down' for speaking your mind about an individual that most black christians hold in high regards. who cares that the black leaders are friends and collegues of both? WEEKS needs the bible AND therapy. i have a cousin with a hitting problem and told him that his children are welcome and so is his ex-wife, he is not.....and i love him...he is blood. HOWEVER, to look at those babies faces and know they have seen their mother beaten and disrespected like that sickens me. More family members, churches, communities should stop saying 'this is not my conceren,' while knowing what's going on behind those closed doors. It is up to my cousin's ex-wife, her family, my family, and heck the whole village to show her little boy (one is a boy) that what daddy did was wrong and will not be tolerated. my cousin needs help away from all of his stimulants. he will figure out what they are for himself, but right now, his family does not need him around. Weeks is bold and his congregation should not support him. I would demand a new pastor. the thinking here is warped.....really bothers me.
|
|
Name:
TMaria67
Comment: MO, I totally agree with you. Bishop Jakes needs to show her some type of love and support, even if it is the simple deal you stated. All it will do is show others (read: non-Christians, black folks etc.) that we do that an interest in what happens to each other. I mean, dang, even a stranger when they see you are hurt in some way is willing to give you help and support, but someone who states that they are your 'Spiritual' brother or sister can not even give you, at least, one word of encouragement. Wow. That is one reason why so many people leave the church: Not enough real genuine love shown to each other-more religion than relationship. It is just sad.
|
|
Name:
Winn30344
Comment: Uh uh..looks like TD Jakes is trying to straddle the fence and it ain't working!!
|
|
Name:
SaintAlbansGirl
Comment: Mo Kelly,
Watch out for some of these "Christians" they are meaner than the Taliban. Oh they act out in the name of God too.
|
|
Name:
TMaria67
Comment: And that miscanellous man that sent you that email...Too bad he did say what church he went to, so I can stay WAYYYYYY clear of it....
|
|
Name:
MrsPhoenix
Comment: Somebody call that man's phone...what idiot gives out his phone number in an email to a columnist??? And TD Jakes would be wise to read some of Minister Farrakhan's articles regarding spiritual leadership standing up and the VERY important fact that a nation can rise no higher than its woman!
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: I don't agree with you on this one, Mo. This situation really is far more public than it should be, and by you expecting a comment from Bishop Jakes makes it seem as though you're putting him on a pedestal of sorts. We all know Bishop Jakes is placed in a leadership role for many of today's spiritual leaders, but that doesn't mean he needs to comment on every topic, especially one that needs no comment. What is he going to say? How do you know he hasn't called Bynum personally instead of being in the limelight? If I were Bynum, I would appreciate that far more. Do you know how many people are going to try to gain attention from this debacle? This is exactly how people get placed on pedestals in the first place. My conclusions are already drawn. I don't need another illustrator to help me.
|
|
Name:
Calidee
Comment: Assuming that T.D. Jakes should make a statement (I don't think he has to) it is possible that he isn't saying anything at the request of Juanita Bynum.
|
|
Name:
SaintAlbansGirl
Comment: Maybe the Bishop did call Juanita personally (now that we have no proof ever happened but we can hope) however,TD Jakes does not have to make a statement about Juanita pubicly, but he should take the time now to address domestic violence issue and the effects on the Black family. It is not a new subject and every one who calls themselves a person of the cloth or man/woman of God should be on this in a big way. Maybe God is testing them to see where their heads are at? hmmmmm
|
|
Name:
SaintAlbansGirl
Comment: My apoligizes on the typo, no disrespect intended Mo Kelly, I meant Publicly.
|
|
Name:
PRTYBLK1
Comment: Anyone that would try to justify Bishop Weeks behavior is a hypocrite. As a community we are hypocrites, to speak out so vehemently against Don Imus and fall silent when one of our sisters is beaten in the streets is reprehensible. At a very young age I was a victim of marital abuse, so much so there were days I feared for my life. My pastor at the time, counseled me to pray and trust God. I remember asking him with tears in my eyes, that as a father of two young women one of them my age would he give them the same advice. You know, if his daughter called him and said that her husband had just hit her, if he would tell his own child to just pray and trust God in the face of abuse. Mo has it right and Mr. Jakes should stand up for his friend.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: I would settle for Bishop Jakes addressing "domestic violence"...but to do so and NOT acknowledge the largest issue in the history of the Black church in regards to the issue is questionable.
This elephant in the middle of the room can't be ignored.
Do you actually think that Jakes giving words of encouragement and support would be in direct contradiction to Bynum saying this is a "private" matter?
I will say this. Jakes loses all credibility on women's issues if he has nothing to say about the most important one in the history of his church and those churches associated with him.
To be a "Christian leader"...you must do and be both.
You must be "Christian" in your approach and be a "leader"...even when it's not convenient or safe.
In fact, a "public statement" acknowledging that he's reached out to Bynum and wishes her healing and restoration would've done the job too.
My points are two-fold. He hasn't publicly supported Bynum or offered well-wishes, when CLEARLY they were in order (which has nothing to do with condemnation of Weeks).
And as a spiritual leader, you can't have those other leaders in your employ and in your spiritual circle beating the crap out of each other and being charged with felony aggravated %*$ault with terroristic threats and THEN act like it didn't happen.
If I were a newbie in Christ I would be disturbed beyond words if I were in any of their congregation.
Spiritual leaders present clarity, guidance and understanding. The lack of all three are well within my right to point to as being "questionable."
"No comment?!"
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: More from the hate mail bin
_____________________________________
This is the most disgraceful ignorant journalism that
I've seen in a long time.
First of all you need to get your facts straight.
Bishop Weeks did not preach on Sunday he had a guest
speaker. FYI, he greeted his congregation and
introduced the speaker and left the pulpit!!!!!!
Bishop Jakes does not owe you or no one else a
explanation of what he said to Prophetess! You better
believe he did have a conversation immediately after
it occurred.
Everyone is not into negative journalism, get a life
and find something else to do!
pg
Pamela Gaines
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Prophetess? I know that's how she's sometimes referred to as...but whoa.
Scary.
|
|
Name:
pfree
Comment: Dont't you think we should be praying for this couple or speaking out on domestic violence, instead of assuming why the Bishop did not comment on such an unfortunate incident. Why should he comment....to put more fury on the fire.....this is a man of God, not a commentator or a columnist. He knows this couple, Bishop Jakes is one of her spiritual fathers...it would be inapproriate to comment on such a personal matter. MoKelly can you focus on something that matters....pfree
|
|
Name:
pachwi31
Comment: I'm sorry. Mo'Kelly you are acting like the Pharasees in the Bible days. The Pharasees would ask Jesus questions not because they wanted the truth, but to entrap or pass judgement about Him according His response. Just because a man does not comment, or chooses not to comment on a matter does not mean that a whole article shouldn't be dedicated on the fact that he didn't. Why should he comment? All the media wants to see is two Bishops battling. And brow beat Bishop Weeks. No I don't condone Bishop Weeks behavior, but what is Bishop Jakes commenting on the situation going to accomplish. People gonna do what they want to reguardless.
|
|
Name:
pachwi31
Comment: My Bad. My sentence should read "Just because a man does not comment, or chooses not to comment on a matter does not mean that a whole article SHOULD be dedicated on the fact that he didn't.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Hey, you're saying DON IMUS matters? DON IMUS matters more than domestic violence...a woman was kicked, stomped, punched and choked...and THAT doesn't matter?
And no, it's NOT a private matter when it involves TWO public figures, a double-felony charge and a beating in the public view.
All "private matter" bets are off. When it moves into the public forum, the public media is well within its right to editorialize.
When Bishop Jakes has "no comment" on Don Imus...then and ONLY then should you attempt to chastise me on what I "should" be commenting on.
I as a member of the media and a radio industry professional have more business commenting on Don Imus than Bishop Jakes...and that's a fact.
Domestic violence...that's a Christian issue if there EVER was one. But thank you for both reading and responding.
|
|
Name:
HarrisThomas
Comment: it took many years too long for the Catholic Church to proactively deal with the problems that its priests were creating with sex abuse . . . it appears that it will take many years too long before the Protestant Church deals with spousal abuse among its leadership and congregations . . . people might not remember what anyone said or did on this issue but they will remember that the church didn't respond in their time of critical need
|
|
Name:
Kofi
Comment: MO the article is on point and exposes the hypocrisy of TD Jakes. All these TD Jakes apologist are doing mental gymnastics to defend his actions. Your silence is complicitiy. For the women who defend TD Jakes actions, I hope and pray that domestic violence does not come to your home. Who will speak up for you??
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Mo, your %*$essment is totally wrong and waay off base. Here's why.... no one yet knows what REALLY happened that night. All that we've heard from is Juanita Bynum's publicist and a statement from a hotel bellman via a newspaper (Atlanta Journal Constitution). To expect a comment when NONE of us don't know what really happened is so off base that I can't believe that you could possibly mean what you're saying. Three of the four examples that you cited DIED. There isn't much to talk about after someone dies... except their life while they lived. It's appropriate to comment. Don Imus.... there was VIDEOTAPE... He said what he said on National TV (and radio). Again... the "facts" were already out there. The Bynum/Weeks situation is quite a bit different. Bynum has not made a public statement about what apparently happened. Weeks has not made a public statement about what really happened. The police are STILL investigating. Why would you expect Jakes to make a statement? You have got to be kidding me?
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >kofi - If Domestic Violence came to live in my home/marriage once I am married, I'd send it and him packing in handcuffs with my foot up his a--. He'd only be dragging me out the door because my foot is stuck...
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: I don't really think this topic should even be compared to the Imus topic. We are talking about very separate things - shock jock-ism and domestic violence. The overall topic of how black women are perceived and portrayed in the media is a very loose tie between these very different topics. Call me a ho every day of the week and twice on Sunday but lay a hand on me and grab an axe and chop it off. No, of course I don't condone name-calling and mental abuse but Weeks is accused of aggravated as*sault and terrorist threats for saying he's gonna kill her. All that keeps running thru my mind is "I wish a nucca would!!!"...
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: Correction: Call me a ho every day of the week and twice on Sunday but lay a hand on me and I'LL grab an axe and chop it off. No, of course I don't condone name-calling and mental abuse but Weeks is accused of aggravated as*sault and terrorist threats for saying he's gonna kill her. All that keeps running thru my mind is "I wish a nucca would!!!"... And again, I am not defending Jakes decision not to say anything necessarily. I am just saying it is not a requirement for him to say anything. Think about it this way - somebody at your office gets fired. You were that person's mentor. Do you say anything or do you hold your silence because there's really no point in commenting? They are colleagues. It is bad form to speak publicly about a colleague. It's just not professional. Sending prayers is appropriate. I will say that since Jakes' whole ministry seems to be aimed at the "po downtrodden broken damaged black woman" so I am surprised he hasn't said anything but I don't hold it against him. It's his mouth. He has a right to use it or zip it...
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Some of you guys didn't read my column all that closely.
T.D. Jakes doesn't need to "wait to hear more" to come out against domestic violence.
TWO SEPARATE ISSUES.
Otherwise, you're opening the door for "circumstances" in which domestic violence is 'sometimes' acceptable.
Also, Jakes doesn't need to specifically address the innocence/guilt of Weeks to have a public statement in support of Bynum's healing and restoration.
Given his history on "women's issues" to have NOTHING to say on the biggest women's issue in the history of his church is incredible.
But I'll bite at your argument...
So if/when Weeks is convicted of some degree of aggravated %*$ault and Jakes STILL has no statement, what would you say THEN?
Because Weeks is not getting off Scott Free.
I'm beginning to think that Jakes should return every dime he's made from "Woman Thou Art Loosed."
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: Plus, you don't know if Bynum requested Jakes to keep silent this time. And, I don't think the second email can be considered hate mail. You really don't know all of the facts on this one, Mo (none of us do). This is why God tells us to not gossip. Be careful of what you say about the whole private vs. personal matter. You have some popularity to your name, and God forbid something happens to you that could change your status in our eyes. I bet your tune would change then...I know mine would. But I pray that we never find out.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: This isn't gossip. A woman was beaten in plain view. An innocent bystander had to step in.
The woman involved filed charges that were bumped UP by the police because of the terroristic threats made during the act.
It's not gossip when it's in the police report. This is NOT he/say, she/say...
There's a police report.
But again, there's NEVER a reason to hit a woman...EVER. We can agree Bynum didn't have a gun, so all this speculation stuff is a joke.
And it's not about Weeks' innocence or guilt...it's about that Jakes won't come out AGAINST domestic violence.
Weeks' guilt/innocence has nothing to do with that.
But now it's turning into BLACK hypocrisy.
None of us were waiting for the "verdict" after we saw the tape of Rodney King getting beat...
Hmmm...
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Queeniebunz, I cosign...plus there are different elements to this that Mo is 1)unaware of and 2) not highlighting in his article. First, neither Mo' nor anyone else know what Jakes has said to either Bynum or Weeks privately. Who's to say that his comments have to be made public. He doesn't speak on all things in popular media. Second, Jakes knows both of them personally. It's one thing to speak to the "po downtrodden Black woman" in general, but it's an entirely different situation to speak publicly about a situation involving your friends where NO ONE KNOWS what (completely and really) happened! Mo' is seriously off his rocker with this article and I agree with your earlier comment that MO WASTED an opportunity to speak to the very issue that he's berating Jakes for Jakes' silence on.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Mo' your lack of responsibility in throwing out allegations as fact is mystifying. You talk about statements made (or allegedly made) and charges as if they were fact. The situation happened at 10:30 at NIGHT in a parking lot. The "victim" didn't apparently wait around in the hospital to let the hospital or police take photos. And she has not personally released a statement, written or otherwise. You're wasting a golden opportunity and everyone's time trying to stir up the nest with a B.S. attack on Jakes. Man up and stop this charade of an article and discourse.
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: >exmun - THANK YOU! This whole Jakes thing is really irrelevant. My favorite line from "Roseanne" (of all shows)was said by the very deadpan Darlene, the younger daughter. I use it all the time. She said, "there is such a thing as an unexpressed thought." It applies perfectly here...
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: It is gossip if you don't know the truth. You don't know if Bynum ever laid her hands on him. Still doesn't justify his retaliation, but it does change the game. You should do a study in Proverbs and see what the Word has to say about opening our mouths. This article is the perfect example of when not to.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: No, Mo didn't waste any opportunity because I have an article coming every week. I know that I'll be talking about domestic violence but the church/T.D. Jakes has to be the pretext for it.
Also, y'all want to argue the merits of the case and whether privately Bynum told Jakes to hush.
The issue of domestic violence in the church is bigger than a request to hush. That's the whole point.
Thank you for speculating right into my point. The issue is so much bigger than the 3 people directly/indirectly involved.
THAT'S THE POINT. And the NEXT time a woman in the church is beat, you'll remember this conversation.
Oh, and when Rodney King got beat, we were out protesting, asking for the police to come out AGAINST police brutality.
EXACT same thing. This hasn't less to do with the specific case and more to do with the larger issue.
Lastly, nothing prevented Bishop Jakes from saying this (reminding you he DID send out emails to select people IN the media about sending his prayers)
"I understand that there is a lot of controversy surrounding this issue and I'm not in denial of it. Dr. Bynum has requested that this remain an internal issue and to that end I will not comment beyond praying for her speedy healing and restoration. But I will say that under no circumstances should a man put his hands on a woman."
THAT is how you handle it...PERIOD.
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: Go to dictionary.com and look up the word gossip.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: I don't care if Bynum kicked and punched Weeks...you don't punch, kick and choke and stomp a woman.
Boy, you sound like the police justifying beating the crap out of Black folk...same Rodney King argument.
There are some things completely unacceptable.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: I gotta give Mo this, the man could have said or done something to indicate he was against the "wrongdoing" itself. It could have been discreetly, with dignity in good conscience without adding fuel to the fire. After all he is an alleged minister. Its simply not too much to ask...
|
|
Name:
PastorMarc
Comment: MorrisOKelly: Accuse us of bashing the poor guy just trying to write a column; but as you are 'constructing' images through your words, which do seem to have been, even from the title, intended to be a bit provocative--going for the shock value just to get a read--as I was saying, your words are not exempt from the axiom: Form Follows Function. You're getting exactly what you intended. So what's the beef? Even my children understand that you can't do a 'God Thing' in an ungodly way. How can you castigate someone for not 'offering a word' and then simultaneously hold yourself up as an innocently victimized voice of the people?
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Mo' Rodney King beating was captured on VIDEOTAPE. There WASN'T A QUESTION about what happened. Can you honestly say with any certainty that you KNOW what happened? No... not really. But yet you're throwing out "punch, kick and choke and stomp a woman" as fact when you don't know it's so. It is not clear what the bellman saw or didn't see. It is not publicly known whether he saw the entire thing or the aftermath. So stop talking about stuff you know little about. It makes you look silly. And to add insult to injury creating an entire article to berate a man (who also didn't see the situation occur) about his failure to make a public comment or to not take the moment to highlight domestic violence. You are just circling the wagon banging on pots this week. Stop it.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Oh, I don't hold myself up as the voice of the people...but I can offer you hundreds of emails in agreement. I clearly said in the piece to meditate and pray to come to your conclusions to the questions I posed.
If you read my work consistently, you already know I don't hold myself up as any "victim." I simply defend the merit of my work accordingly.
This is a place to voice your views and support them accordingly.
If you thought I was acting as the voice of the people, that's a supposition you made...not me.
If you thought I was holding myself up to be admired in some way...that's a presumption you made...not me.
The bottom line is, you're focusing on 'me' and not the issue.
You're evaluating the value of the issue based upon your evaluation of me...and have missed the point.
|
|
Name:
queeniebunz
Comment: I still don't fully understand why it matters so much to you whether Jakes comments or not, Mo. I just don't. He ain't the only mega preacher in town. What about the others? Creflo? Long? Price? Or even the white ones?
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Man, y'all don't read too closely. I indicated in the piece that Eddie Long has already spoken out...
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: And I also said (paraphrase) that given the proximity of the individuals to Jakes, his public stances on women's issues and his proclivity to release "official statements" on "issues" of marginal Christian connection makes there be a glaring contradiction...
C'mon Queenie...you can't say (and others) I wasted an opportunity and then talk about stuff that CLEARLY was contained in the piece. You half read it and then came off half-cocked.
You're asking questions that are already answered in the piece.
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: Exmun, I'm with you all the way. Mo, if I smack a person around for a long period of time without them retaliating, sooner or later that person is going to snap in some form, shape or fashion. How do you know if Juanita wasn't taking advantage of the "Man-should-NEVER-hit-a-woman" philosophy and abusing her husband for a long time before this instance? And he may not have been able to take it anymore? I doubt it, but you never know...and that's the whole point YOU DON'T KNOW!
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: 6footah...you walk away.
There's NEVER a reason to punch, kick, stomp a woman.
If he can't walk away from a woman who "hypothetically" is abusing him, that's a him problem.
There is no moving line in the sand.
You never hit a woman. And I've been in that situation and know exactly what I'm talking about.
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: Mo typed: "If you thought I was acting as the voice of the people, that's a supposition you made...not me. If you thought I was holding myself up to be admired in some way...that's a presumption you made...not me. The bottom line is, you're focusing on 'me' and not the issue. You're evaluating the value of the issue based upon your evaluation of me...and have missed the point." Isn't this the very weight you've placed on Jakes?
|
|
Name:
PastorMarc
Comment: MorrisOKelly: I don't do this--arguing--because it's not pleasing to God. But you go right ahead. I don't know you or your relationship with the Savior. I do know, however, that the Apostles warned us to avoid "foolish and unlearned questions". I didn't miss the point to your question, I avoided it. I've been married 22 years. Fell in year 2. By His grace was restored and haven't fallen since. By His grace. I, too, was 'looking around' for somebody to 'say something' in my pain and confusion. HE did.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: recognizelife, the reason why Jakes (or anyone for that matter) cannot just make a 'discreet' comment that they are against the wrongdoing without 'adding fuel to the fire' is that Mo... and other media people will sieze upon his words and make his seemingly neutral comments into something that he didn't mean. And you'll see ridiculous headlines like "Jakes Backs Juanita" or "Jakes says Juanita is 'Loosed'". This is why in a situation like this where it's still developing a smart public figure should hold their tongue until they know what exactly they want to say. If Jakes has nothing public to say, I don't see a problem with it. This Jakes bashing that Mo has taken to is a bit ridiculous. (the term "Jakes bashing" done intentionally to provoke and demonstrate what Mo' and his media compadres would do to his comments.) Give this up Mo.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: i don't think Mo is speaking only about just Jakes, however Jakes just happen to be an associate of both these people, or have some kind of connection or relationship with them, its only natural as the head of a large organization that he speak out, if only so his congregation knows his stand and as a alleged pillar in the community. It may not be the absolute thing to do, but it is the righteous thing to do...
No, Jesus did not speak on every subject but he spoke up when it was necessary and on the behalf of the afflicted one countless times.Jesus didn't speak out when he was accused because he knew what his course was; but on behalf of the flock he spoke boldly DON'T GET IT TWISTED. He has spoken against violence throughout the Bible, were he still on earth he would do so NOW...Jakes is not Jesus so please don't make the comparison....
|
|
Name:
Snicker
Comment: a lot of stuff happens that people didn't see with their own eyes but they still say it happened so why is this situation so different? now all of a sudden because he is a minister then apparently it didn't happen....i guess the hotel worker broke up an imaginary beatdown and juanita had imaginary bruises on her body too....the crackpot stood up in his church and said the devil made him do it so apparently something happened so until one of them says otherwise i will go with what the witnesses said.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: If Jake is persecuted because he spoke out, then I ask you, "Is he any better than the Christ?"
Jesus clearly said, they persecuted me so they will persecute you..however, he also said if you are ashame of me(or in this case ashamed to do as i would have done or carry my torture state) i will be ashamed of you.
Where is his courage! Do you think for one minute Martin Luther King would not have made a statement had one of his colleagues done this? Don't kid yourself....
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: recognizelife, I simply don't agree that Jakes is compelled to speak out publicly. We also don't know what he's said or not said to his congregation. Mo's article didn't deal with that. Mo's been talking all along about a public statement released to the media. Personally and opposite to your thinking, I think Jakes personal relationship is an even better reason NOT to comment one way or the other until the story is more fully developed. I don't know what Jesus would do if he were here now. And I don't see a Biblical principle or mandate that requires making a statement on every public issue.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: that should read, "carry my torture stake"...
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: recognizelife: After Jesus dealt with the woman caught in adultery privately, he didn't make a quote on the severity of adultery with the "Disciple Dispatch". It was dealt with in decency and order which is how God desires of us.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Snicker, you're misquoting and misreading what the alleged "Crackpot" said. You say "the crackpot stood up in his church and said the devil made him do it." The articles that discussed what he said DID NOT SAY THAT HE BLAMED THE DEVIL... the sensationalized "title" of the article did but the substance indicated that Weeks contested the allegations themselves... that he "beat" his wife in that parking lot. Read carefully at what the Atlanta Journal Constitution article really said (and what EUR copied... I mean reported): "Weeks ... blamed the devil FOR THE ACCUSATION that has him facing ... charges." If you really read that he's apparently denying that a "beating" took place... perhaps he's implying mutual combat... that they were both fighting and he won... WHO KNOWS? And that's the point... We don't know. And Mo' don't know any more than we do. And Jakes don't know any more than we do.
|
|
Name:
PastorMarc
Comment: The validity of the statement that Bishop Jakes should make a public statement is presumptuous. Mo says he should, which was nothing more than a seedbed for opinionated speculation and debate. He stirred the pot. I guess that's what he's supposed to do. I'm just trying to figure out, if you're so disgusted by Bishop Weeks' "the devil made me do it" then why be the devil's advocate here? Why tempt everybody with, "Yeah, to hell with Bishop Jakes for not speaking out!"?
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Exxum, the Bible does not give you specific laws to cover every little thing, the Bible is a book based on principles. Jesus did away with the law of the Pharisees when he came and thereby instituted the new and greater commandment which happens to encompass this encounter which is to "love your neighbor as yourself".Matthew 5:43 Try also reading Luke chapter 18....
If this were a white man beating down a black man people would be outraged that he said nothing, but because it tears at the fabric of the church itself people take on the "hush hush"....Some things are WORTHY of accommodation or castigation...come out of the closet!
The main thing here is, is that it is simply the right thing to do. The fact that he is friends with both of them serves more to that purpose of speaking out, so that people know he speaks impartially and by God despite who his friends are and their actions.
I would think every man would be courageous enough to let the world knows where he stands on such a thing! It is simply not too much to ask!
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: It is never presumpteous to speak out against violence no matter what shape or fashion. he did not have to condemn him as a person, not even deny that all the facts have not come out yet, however, he as an alleged minister could have spoken against the ACT! Plain and simple! God condemns the act not the person if they are repentant. He could have done the same.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Recognizelife, I don't doubt that the issue is worth of public discussion in the Church. I just don't see the point in creating an article berating some else from speaking about it. PastorMarc's comment that Mo's statement is "presumptuous" is what I'm cosigning to. And despite the fact that we need to talk about the issue doesn't mean that we need to be "talking about the issue" in the media. I know enough to know that the media is the LAST place that I will try to have a coherent discussion about anything that means a lot to me. Today's media isn't even trying to get the story right. They are totally beholden to whatever sells... and that means sensationalism to no limit. Why Mo' would choose to ignore this reality speaks volumes as to which master (the 'issue' or his livelihood) he really serves.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: 6footah please give me the passage that you are speaking about so i can reference it and read the entire text. The I can get back to you.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Exxxum I see your point and I am not fond of the media in many and most cases however, I am not saying that he should call a press conference, but if asked about it since it is already in the media what is the harm in making known his stand. That is not too much to ask, he bears a responsibility to the public he reaches through the media. The media can not only be used when you have something good to say, you have to take the good with the bad like everything else.
Everything can not be blamed on the media. People thought the media was exxagerating Bobby and Whitney til they saw them on TV.
I agree, it is the last place any one wants to discuss it because it can be jaded, but sometimes you have to do what you have to do when you are in the public eye. That is the cost of doing business....
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: John 8.
|
|
Name:
Snicker
Comment: --->Exmun whatever! whenever a person is on somebody's side it's "i wasn't there so i don't know what happened" but if this was somebody's side you didn't want to be on you would condemn that person to no end whether you saw the act happen or not.....for instance nobody has ever seen bobby brown give whitney drugs but everybody and their mama says that he turned her into a drug addict and it's because a lot of people like whitney so they will say stuff without actually seeing it......it seems like a lot of people don't care for juanita bynum for whatever reason so they don't believe this happened because they weren't there....WHATEVER!!
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Thank you recognizelife...
Thank you. And this is a perfect example of someone who often does not agree with me on other issues, but for us, this issue is simply clear and distinct.
There are some things in which there is no middle ground. There are some things that are simply right and wrong.
You can I can wait for Bishop Weeks to render Caesar what is due Caesar in terms of the pending charges...but that has nothing to do with the church itself being clear in its stance on spousal abuse.
This is a 'public' issue because it was a 'public' incident.
The issue is so much bigger with so many more CHRISTIAN implications than just the specifics of this case.
Jakes speaking out has to do with the thousands of other 'non-public' cases as well. It's about the church taking a stand...as it ALREADY has on non-Christian issues such as Don Imus.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: 6foota, I think that you need to go back and read that chapter again, this conversation Jesus was having was in public and this woman was about to be stoned before the congregation...Jesus thereby having the ability to read her heart saw that she was truly repentant and even though she committed this gross sin she was forgiven because of her repentance. This was public and he dealt with her before the men that came to take her to stone her.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Mo, U know me and U go at it, but "I'm wit U when U R Right!"....U definitely right on this one man....but when U wrong, "I'm long gone!" lol
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: No, Recognize...I beg to differ. He dealt with it with the people who came to cast stones; those who wanted to persecute her. Pay attention to the fact that he bent over and started writing something in the sand. No one but those who were there knew what he was writing, and check this...whatever he was writing wasn't even published in the Word for you and I to know, which goes to show that it isn't any of our business. Its a perfect example of how the church can deal with a crisis involving the necessary parties without letting the whole world know stuff they really don't need to know. But Mo, this is what I don't get...if T.D. has always made a stand for women in his series and sermons, why does he need to start blasting his horn now. Because he isn't saying anything at this moment (and who's to say he won't in the future), it doesn't mean he condones it. Besides, if he is truly her spiritual "father", then I wouldn't want my daddy making any comments to the media about my personal biz.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: the point is 6foota; he dealt with it right then out in the open before these men, they didnt have the media that we have today, but dealt with it right outside in the open....the Bishop could have done the same. that is the point.
what he was writing in the sand had nothing to do with her sin, he was doing so to show them that they were not getting to him because that was their real reason they could careless about that woman they were trying to trap him into saying something blasphemous. If what he was writing in the sand was of significance he would have drawn attention to it don't u think? Of course he would.
He was being cavalier and playing down their presence, but what you should pay attention to is verse 9 when it says they left one by one, indicating that there was a public audience there in the square. it was dealt with in the public!
|
|
Name:
dcdouglass01
Comment: I'm in agreement with you on this one, Mo'Kelly. T.D. Jakes has been an important part of Juanita Bynum's development, and is more than just an acquaintance in her life. So it is puzzling that he hasn't made a statement of support (for both parties, if he likes) concerning this sad affair. Could it be because this whole thing exposes the hypocrisy of these money-hungry super churches?
|
|
Name:
arenaissancemind
Comment: Finally some one with the guts to bring up the mitigating factors. Both of you are right dcdouglass01 & Recognizelife, sounds like some one is scared to come out of the closet!
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: U Darn Skippy, when U live in glass houses you don't throw stones....."I'm just sayin'"!
|
|
Name:
GodsChild
Comment: MorrisOKelly, and how would you expect Bishop Jakes to respond? I just can't understand why you would spend so much time writing a diatribe about why someone didn't respond in a manner in which you thought necessary? I think we all understand and know the very personal realtionship he has with sister Bynum, but your article suggest he taking on a huge burden. What burden you ask? The burden of addressing the situation in a public forum and articulating some response that appeases to the needs of the masses. BTW, how do you know that he hasn't addressed the issue to his flock, and perhaps Juanita and Thomas in private. One thing I would ask you to not do, and that's to sale the accountability of this situaion off Bishop Jakes. I think he's a vessel that God may use to provide wise counsel, and his counsel will happen how and when God sees fit. So before anyone rushes to judgement, let's forget about trivial matters, such as how someone did or didn't respond, and address the real crux of the matter. At least two studies have concluded that there is regular and repeated violence between spouses in 10 to 20 percent of all marriages and that at least one incident of physical violence occurs in 50 percent of all marriages. I've done my fair share of research on domestic violence, and this statistic was taken from a article I received in Feb 2007 from the Virginia Department of Human Services. I know it takes work and effort on the part of many to eradicate this issue, so I'd say let's focus our attention on mitigation and resolution and not the trivial like how jakes didn't respond in a matter that you saw fit.
|
|
Name:
6footah
Comment: See recognize, I don't look at it like that at all. I personally believe something different, if whatever He was writing wasn't important, it wouldn't have been put in the scriptures at all. Also, I believe the people who walked away were the ones who were casting stones, which means the people who were involved in the whole crisis, not just anybody in the town...but its all good. You see it one way, I see it another.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: isn't speaking out on these matters a part of exposing and ridding the churches, nations and communities of this problem. I do not see this as just a personal attack on the Good Bishop, it is a relevant question and an important one...If our leaders side step these events what is the congregation left to do; except wonder?
This is an indictment of anyone that witnesses this monstrosity to stand up and speak out against it, just as the hotel worker did that stopped the initial violence.
If the Bishop slept on this one, just admit that he slept. He can be forgiven turns around and does works that befit repentance.
I have also done extensive research on this matter with my sister who is a professor at USC in Black studies....and like her i believe when it happens you have to speak on it because the statistics also show that this has been hidden for far too long. Over looked far too long. Women are empowered by their ministers, are they not? The role they play is an significant one.
The responsibility is great so much is demanded according to the Apostle Luke.Moses was a vessel of God but he was reprimanded for failing to speak in a way that befit his position as God's prophet, is the Good Bishop any greater or less than he was. I should think not!
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: 6footah even if what u say is true. it was handled in the public...he didn't take them in a room....he spoke up right then and there and that is the point.This woman's life was on the line...perhaps Juanita's was too if someone had not stopped him right then when it was happening. that is also the point. but we can agree to diagree...no mas.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Ah huh! read all the posts n' still agree with Mokelly. The way I see it is 1)TD Jakes champions womens issues so this would have been a perfect opportunity to say something (without condemning either of them of course), 2) TD Jakes has a major influence on millions of church folk, imagine how he can affect some abused woman who is desperately in need of guidance or comfort.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: cosign Ms Blake....
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: With that said and done I can kinda understand some of the dissenters arguments, well just the one argument and that is Juanita may have told Jakes not to discuss the matter in public and out of respect he has kept quiet, but the folks saying she may have been abusing him (then why didn't he leave he's obviously not scared of her) or we don't know what really happened cos none of us were there, all i'll say to that is gimme a break!
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Recgnizelife, been reading your comments and you've been on point, if ever you decide to run for president I'll vote for u!
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Boo, U know i really appreciate that, all i try to do is be objective based on personal experience, what i have learned from others and what i have gleamed from the scriptures...i been down the road that leads to serious mistakes; I have tried to learn from it, but I am never, ever ashamed or afraid to admit when I am wrong. Men do that. I learned that the hard way!
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: On a serious note though theres no denying that domestic abuse is a problem and whether church leaders speak out or not, the public are talking about it and most importantly condemning it.
|
|
Name:
iknowtheplans
Comment: What on earth does Jakes have to do with this? Bynum and Weeks don't fall under his organization; he is not THEIR Bishop. Yes, he's a leading Christian authority and this is best left to those in authority to handle. Yes, this horrible event was done publicly so it is open to the public's scrutiny but how and by who it will be handled is none of your business. Jakes is a name that everyone knows while Jesus is the one everyone forgets. This will be handled by those who are a part of the body of Christ and the authorities to which the Bible calls us to be subject. Please do not invoke the name of Jakes everytime a Christian is in error. We already have opportunist (who are regularly lambasted on this site) like Jesse Jackson who speak out of turn on behalf of all Blacks. Jakes ooesn't have to publicly do/say anything just to appease the secular public.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: When will you people understand this is not just about Jakes.....its bigger than that, jsut because he used Jakes as a person that had the opportunity to speak up and didnt' and he called him on the carpet for that is not a personal attack on Jakes...U worshipers of men get over yourselves....the Bible clearly says, "Therefore if one know how to do wha tis right and yet does not do it, it is a sin for him"
He called him out on not doing what was right. Get over it! He could have, but he didn't and yet he claims to speak on womens issues...well, there are few bigger women's issues....
let Jakes take his counsel and learn from it, he is no better than anyone else.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Mo' Kelly didn't create an article about others. He created an article about what Jakes didn't do and didn't say. The title of the article is not about the silence of other ministers. It's about "Jakes' Seeming Indifference to Juanita Bynum." Recognizelife, you may have good points. I can agree with disagree with the things that we don't quite see eye to eye on in this article. My beef is the pretext of Mo's article that has the audacity to blast Jakes for --Not-- publicly saying anything... yet.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Yes, T.D. mentored and developed Bynum's career. Yes, Jakes has ALWAYS been at the forefront of women's spiritual issues.
Yes, T.D. HAS emailed SELECT member of the media to acknowledge (Bishop sends his prayers)
Bishop Jakes is CLEARLY aware of his role and proximity to those involved.
If he didn't mentor Bynum and also befriend Weeks, he's not mentioned. If he didn't also SPECIFICALLY champion women's issues, he's not mentioned.
This is not rocket science. And in the piece I indicated how Eddie Long has spoken about it, so there is already a point of reference in terms of the expectation for the conversation to go beyond just Jakes.
You're arguing points that have CLEARLY been rebutted guys.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Recognizelife, the same Bible that you're quoting from also says to "BE SWIFT TO HEAR, SLOW TO SPEAK, SLOW TO WRATH." It also says to "LET THY WORDS BE FEW" and talks of sparing your words. It also says that EVEN A FOOL, WHEN HE HOLDETH HIS PEACE, IS COUNTED WISE." So I guess it depends on which verse you read that leads you to the conclusion that the Bible requires Jakes to talk... or encourages him to be "slow to speak." Just saying... there's two sides to the story and the Bible has no mandate that Jakes come out and talk about this one... especially since the facts are well developed.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Did the Catholic church need to wait until all the facts were in on the child molestation cases involving priests to come out and say they were against the molestation of children by priests?
It's the EXACT same thing. And the Catholic church has paid dearly for waiting so long to do just that...and they eventually did.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: oh its about Jakes; but its about others too...so Jakes did have this opportunity to stand up and failed...for whatever reason, if he gets called out for it, it is as it should be because he allegdes to be a minister and to minister to women and their needs, he slept on this one and its not fair to the only person that we absolutely know as the victim, Juanita. if it comes out later that they both are victims then he shoudl take a stand to resolve their differences. as i understand it he has an intimate relationship with both of them, but the flock is also watching.
Just as when Satan sinned, God could have destroyed him right then, but he didn't becasue there was a issue that Satan put before all creation, a matter of who has the right to rule, had God just gotten rid of Satan then, nothing would have been proven, he had to give man a chance to see if they could rule themeselves, he is doing so now, (we are failing misererably as HE said we would) but the point is he allowed this to continue so that for once in for all that all creation could see including the billions or how ever many angels there are could know the truth. Is the Bishop any more than God himself. I shudder to think. Why not follow God's example.
He will correct things in his time. And so it could be for them to but do you think God did nothing, he spoke up quick and then he sent his son to redeem us.
Sometimes action is necessary, it doesn't have to be all at once conclusive but when error is evident you can't whitwash it or ignore it; especially when it is a central and fundemental issue facing women in this case.
Exxun...I don't have any beef with you or anyone else, but the man just failed to act. He could have and should have done, said, signed, written, babbled something, anything. Take a stand.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Being slow to speak, does not mean saying nothing at all...there is a huge difference and he has an intimate relationship with these people, pick up the phone get the facts and take a stand...be a Man!
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Mo' I can't fault you for defending your position. But this is not the same thing... at least we can't say so yet. Until Juanita Bynum in whatever form that she chooses explains what (in her view) occurred then the story is not well developed. It would also be helpful to hear what Thomas Weeks says what in his view happened. And personally, I'd like to learn exactly what the Bellman saw or didn't see. But to create an article attacking someone's integrity about a story that you don't yet know much about is not right. In the issues involving the Catholic church, at least the victims spoke up. And in many cases the Priests admitted to it (or were found guilty). This is not that. Bynum is silent. Hasn't said much of a word. It is appears that she may or may not have told Jakes and others to respect her privacy about the situation. The Catholic Bishopric was in a position of legal, moral, and financial authority over the offending priests and they did nothing. Here your article is not about Juanita Bynum's authority, but another third party who is not her authority and has no basis for "authority" over her (encouragement perhaps but not authority). So this is different from the Catholic church issue and you shouldn't be making simplistic conclusions and analogies.
|
|
Name:
arenaissancemind
Comment: Kool off Recognize...what hood you from. I need you on my team. roflmbao
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: You know what...Recognize is simply BLOWING ME AWAY...and I mean that truthfully and humbly.
In this spiritual discussion, I'll just let my spiritual lawyer Recognizelife speak on my behalf.
WOW.
Finally, we're on the same TEAM!
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Furthermore, the scripture that you quoted about speaking is referring to situations that invlove a heated argument. The Bishop is not in a heated argument, he has had time to acess the situation. So check this out, the Bible clearly says and which applies to all instances, @Matt. 5:23-25, be quick about settling matters". "If fact it says, fi then you are bring your gift to the altar and you rther remmeber that yoru brother has something against you, leave your gift therein front of the altar and go away; first make your peace with your brother and then when you have, come back offer up your gift"
A word spoken a the right time can help us pursue peace"...Prov. 25:11
The harmony in the Bible prevails and it supports handling matter quickly as the Ephesians 4:26 says Be wrathful and yet do not sin, let the sun not setwith you in a provoked state, neither allow ta place for the Devil.
Comprende!
|
|
Name:
forthebruthaman
Comment: Recognizelife you off the hook today yo! You sick wit it...Kat you on your game.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Recognizelife, the scripture that you're quoting from Matthew deals with two people who are in conflict with EACH OTHER. Jakes is a third party to what happened to Bynum. Are you suggesting that Jakes "sinned" (re: your Ephesians reference) by not saying anything publicly. You're twisting up the scripture to say what you want it to say. I will repeat one of my earlier posts... there is no scriptural "requirement" that Jakes make a statement publicly about a situation that does not involve him directly. Your scripture doesn't speak to that point. And Mo's off the wall attack on Jakes ain't scriptural no matter how many versus you throw at it. If Mo' or you were talking to Weeks or Bynum to not "let the sun set" with them in a provoked state you'd be saying something. But we're talking about a THIRD PARTY. And though it may make you feel better about Jakes if he's say something publicly... he's not required to do so... and I don't think he's any less of a man because he doesn't hold a press conference about a developing story. All I'm saying. Comprende?
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Let's advance the discussion. Can ALL of us agree on the following:
Domestic violence in any of its forms is wrong and unacceptable, regardless of circumstances?
Can we agree that millions are/have been watching T.D. Jakes in regards to this issue because he has long championed women's issues?
Can we agree that whatever tone Jakes sets (through action or inaction) has a ripple effect in the Christian community and directly speaks to all those who look to him for guidance?
If we can agree on the above...and I believe we should be able to...
As a man of God with incredible influence, his leadership on this issue is not an arbitrary matter.
Circumstances compel him to lead the way on this issue. He must.
That's not a "presumption" on my part it's at the very core of Christian leadership.
|
|
Name:
shayshay14
Comment: Mo Kelly T.D. doesn't need to make a comment. Cowardice? What exactly should he be fearing? If Jakes & Bynum are friends, spiritual buddies, or if he is her spiritual father which i think i may have heard before, then she knows he supports her in this tough time. He doesn't need to tell the public that. What do you want T.D. to say or think he should say to the public? Even Stevie Wonder can see that what Weeks did is wrong. If Jakes were to make a public statement you'd have some BS to say about that, so maybe SILENCE IS GOLDEN for a man in his position. If anyone makes this a subject in the pulpit, it is just plane old gab. Everyone by now knows someone who has been abused or in a fight with their husband/wife, so it is a lesson already learned for the majority of us adults. Another thing is, what goes on in a marriage is personal. Sure we are free to make opinions and comments. Sure they are televangelists in the spotlight and this mess happened publicly, but their marriage (or failed marriage) is none of anybody's business.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: If silence is golden, then never more should T.D. Jakes have ANYTHING to say about Don Imus-type issues or American foreign policy.
Consistency is relevant too. You can't pick and choose when you want to champion women's issues in the future then.
Be a leader or don't be a leader. Just pick one.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: shay shay...sorry to say this...but you've missed the point.
This is not about "their marriage" this is about the Christian issue of domestic violence and the incident happens to be the catalyst.
Nobody asked Jakes to comment on their marriage or the future of it.
But going forward domestic violence is an issue that the church needs to deal with and this PUBLIC double-felony case is more than an appropriate entry point in which to address it.
If not now...never. It doesn't get any easier or "better" than this...except for the murder of a spouse.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Mo', You asked: "Can ALL of us agree [that] Domestic violence in any of its forms is wrong and unacceptable, regardless of circumstances?" >>>> YES. You asked: "Can we agree that millions are/have been watching T.D. Jakes in regards to this issue because he has long championed women's issues?" >>>>> That question is where you threw me and many others. THIS is the exact tone of your article... that Domestic violence is bad. That Jakes is a popular preacher among women... and that Jakes is not a bad person/preach because he hasn't said anything publicly about domestic violence allegedly committed on Juanita Bynum. You made a huge leap from your main discussion. If you want to talk about domestic violence... what does Jakes have to do with it? And why is he the 'bad guy' poster child for domestic violence issues when he didn't have anything to do with it? Your second question begins the enormous leap of logic that many of us just don't get. Why Jakes and why are you implying by your sensationalized title that he's the bad guy when Tommy Weeks allegedly beat his wife Juanita Bynum?
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Correction that should have read "that Jakes is a bad person/preacher because he hasn't said anything publicly about domestic violence"
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: no it is u who are twisting the scripture, because in this case if he has a congregation before God and the world and he claims to have women's issues on his platform, then he needs to speak about it, especially since this is a paramount issue within the church as we all know it is.
So, thereby him failing to act he is not doing what is right and therefore sinning. The Bible requires men of God to speak out against wrong doing! Especially among the Christian congreation, especially between other ministers. Galatians 6:1.
Yes, that scripture does apply to two people that have a conflict, and i was using that to show u the expediency to which matters should be handled, don't twist it to say the i was using it for the Good Right Bishop himself.
This is not my first time at the rodeo!
The scripture concerning the sun setting is also to prove the same point as was the other...the point of the matter is, he as a minister should have said something. He is required to encourage peace. that is all the scripture you need.
The principles are exactly what they are.
|
|
Name:
Exmun
Comment: Recognizelife, I'm glad that you've been "at the rodeo" before. We'll agree to disagree. Arguing over what the Bible MEANS is like arguing about the color green. You're talking about a meaning that you've extrapolated from the Bible as if it's a direct statement and law... and I'm saying it doesn't say that directly. We're both right. I'll leave it at that.
|
|
Name:
recognizelife
Comment: Good people, and bad people sleep, he slept on this issue and he shouldn't have given his position and the following he subscribes to. This is not a personal attack on him, how many times do we have to say that...he slept; get him an alarm clock , tell him not to do it again, or he or any other minister that has this kind of platform to reach millions and fails need to turn in his badge if even now he doe not see his mistake.
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Here's an open-ended question.
If there is another high-profile spousal abuse "incident" in the church and Jakes (and others) still have nothing to say...
What does that say about their credibility on ANY women's issue in the future?
If you won't speak out against domestic violence, it doesn't really matter to me what you have to say about "Woman Though Art Loosed."
You are in direct contradiction with yourself.
The question is...when is the "right" time to address it...when it happens again? Not at all? Just when it doesn't involve the clergy?
When?
|
|
Name:
Closet_Nerd_Girl
Comment: I'm jumping in late, but I have to co-sign Mo's article. As a very public leader with a very large following, I believe that it's Jakes' responsibility to speak on an issue that affects one of his own and members of the church in general. A simple statement like the one Mo offered is fine. As for the speculation that he's already spoken to Bynum and she requested he be silent, all he has to say is something like, "I have spoken to Minister Bynam and she is resting well. Please join me in prayers for her continued healing." and leave it at that. This "private" matter is already public, and him issuing a simple statement like that will not make it any more public or less private than it already is. But it WILL let people know that he at least gives a damn about her. Imean, he is her mentor for Pete's sake. I wonder if he has said anything in support of her to his own congregation. I would at least expect that from him. Personally, I think Jakes is somewhat of a sheister and he's probably weighing what to do or say based on how he thinks it will affect his bottom line. But I digress...
|
|
Name:
Closet_Nerd_Girl
Comment: Mo, in response to your open-ended question, it says that Jakes really doesn't give a damn about women or women's issues, but will continue to pander women as long as we keep opening up or purses and wallets in support of his women's ministries. It could also mean, as one asute poster pointed out earlier, that he doesn't want to draw too much attention to HIMSELF on this matter, because he might have something to hide. What's so ironic about this whole debacle is that on the ATl local news when they were covering this story, they showed clips of Bishop Weeks' sermons, and they showed one where he said "husbands, do not beat your wives." My husband and I CRACKED UP laughing at that. *smh*
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Closet...I've GOT to find that clip! If you can point me, direct me!
|
|
Name:
ITSMYOPINION
Comment: Just because Jakes hasn't made a public statement, there's no reason to assume he hasn't reached out to Bynum privately. Damn! Some people will use any excuse to bash Jakes. Let's not forgt her husband beat her up. HE is the villain here, not Jakes or anyone else.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: I am not trying to attack TD Jakes credibility (actually I got mad love for him) but the reason why 85% of the comments support Mokelly is because Jakes is known for championing womens issues especially sexual abuse and domestic abuse, and its true he is under no obligation to comment but people expect him to. Below Jake discusses his stance on sexual abuse which may be the same way he feels about domestic abuse. (maybe I said so don’t cyberjump me!!!)
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Interviewer: Why don't African Americans want to talk about sexual abuse?
Jakes response: Well we were raised culturally to believe that what goes on in this house stays in this house. But there are some things can't stay in this house. We have had to deal with secrets all of our lives. Whether the master was coming over to the slave cabin at night or whatever it is. We've had to deal with secrets. That Black people are secret keepers. We keep secrets like nobody else in the world. But this is a secret that we can't afford to keep. Because it stinks in our house. Because the smoke has filled our nostrils and we've got to break the silence and talk about it. We feel like if we tell, we betray the family and we betray the community.
Source blackfilm.com
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Below are excerpts from a PBS TD Jakes Interview
(Portland Christian named severson comments – on Jakes influence & position on abused women.
SEVERSON: ‘He's been called a spiritual physician, a shepherd to the shattered’.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Re: Jakes position on abused women
SEVERSON: ‘But what sets the bishop apart from most ministers, more than anything else, is his crusade to help abused women. It is his mission, and he takes it not just to women but to fellow ministers, who he believes have ignored domestic violence inside their churches’.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Bishop JAKES response: ‘One of the things that I'm probably adamant about is that the church historically has been silent about the real issues of the pews’.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: SEVERSON: ‘Eighty-four thousand turned out for a women's conference Jakes sponsored in Atlanta. His best-selling book, WOMAN, THOU ART LOOSED! is now a stage play touring the country’.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Bishop JAKES response: ‘The play gives an opportunity to give voice to the silent screams of people who live within the walls of domestic violence or child abuse’.
Source: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week320/cove r.html
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: What cracks me up is how some of the dissenters are up in here hollering at Mokelly but were the same folks cussing Oprah about not speaking out on certain black issues affecting our community *rolling my eyes * Ah huh I remember you, yeah u know who u are, don’t be looking left and right, u know how u are. lol Anyway as I said yesterday, there is a possibility Jakes is keeping quiet on a matter he is obviously very passionate about (as seen above) out of respect for Bynum, i.e. Bynum’s instructions, but we’ll have to agree to disagree.
|
|
Name:
MsBlake
Comment: Back to the matter at hand, new information is out regarding Weeks, turns out Bynum is not the only woman he has put his hands on.
FOX 5 News Tuesday August 28, 2007?
Former employees and members went public testifying the Bishop Weeks beat and slammed to the ground his Chief financial officer Lorain Robinson at Global Destiny. They alleged it happened 8 months ago and they all encouraged her to not go into the emergency room at the hospital.
You can see it on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grB5Aa0BE4U
|
|
Name:
MorrisOKelly
Comment: Ms. Blake...it's not often that we can actually come to an "end" of these discussions...we can usually only argue our points.
But with Recognizelife's thorough biblical analysis as support and your information which CLEARLY convicts Bishop Jakes in this matter...
Ain't much else to say.
Thank you both.
|
|
Name:
Closet_Nerd_Girl
Comment: >Morris, the local ATL news stations are as follows:
WSB_TV (website: wsbtv.com)
WXIA (website: 11Alive.com)
WAGA (website: myfoxatlanta.com)
There are more, but those are the ones I watch most often. I'm pretty sure I saw the story one of those channels. You are welcome to search their sites/archives for the clip. It was on either last week or earlier this week. Good luck!
|
|
Name:
PHScott
Comment: To end all of this mess about who is right, who is wrong, who should speak out, etc., I say this: Believe in GOD, not religion. Religion is a bunch of man-made bullsh*t set up to control you, which is why so many posters here have been brainwashed by TD Jakes. I am sure he's a good man, but he is no deity, and neither are Weeks and Bynum. They are people who have supposedly studied the Bible. Still, they are no better than any of us, and God guides us all. So, fcuk religion...
|
|
Name:
poetgcw
Comment: TD JAKES is not God. Truely he bares the gift of speech but, he does not ultimately determine judgement on anyone. The problem with the world is instead of learning understanding for themselves is that they "the world" always want to lean on other people who are "spiritual" or who have developed a relationship with the Almighty for answers. The answers are readily available in the bible. One needs only to pick it up and begin to develop the relationship for themselves that "rightly divides the word of truth."
In my own interpretation of this matter which can be said to be none of my business but, marriages are complicated enough. The enemy despises marriages. He despises the union granted by God. He believes in divide and conquer. Couples must be united at all times and on all fronts. Clearly the enemy found a portal into this marriage through some failure on the part of Bishop Weeks to surrender himself completely to Christ. Usually vanity is the spirit that prevails. Vanity can take on many forms. We as public must not be so quick to criticize and instead those of us who are spiritual should be ready to help Bishop Weeks with his correction and bring him back into the love of Christ. We have all fallen short of the glory of God and to say otherwise would be hipocracy. The amazing part would come on the point of Juanita Bynum Weeks if she can find it within herself to all God to make a correction in her husband because she is still his wife. I am speaking from the standpoint of a battered wife myself. But, the love of Christ has not left me ignorant of His abilities to bring glory to the Father in Jesus' name. He tells me that all things are possible through Christ Jesus. If I say I believe one thing in His word and not the other who would I then believe? Myself?
Look for the glory of God the Father in this matter through the love of Jesus Christ the son and let's not be so quick to judge. Maybe it is not too late for Bishop Weeks to surrender himself to the power of the Holy Spirit. AMEN.
|
| Back to Top |
| Click here to post your comments. |
| Back to the Article » Click Here |
|---|
...
