Part one was yesterday's post. My musings are bolded.
After carefully reading your entire paper, spending considerable time in prayer about it, and discussing my preaching with our Elders and other ministers, I feel comfortable standing behind my comments as I intended them and as the vast majority of listeners apparently heard them. (So does Joel Osteen) I appreciate the time and thought that went into the responses in your paper; however, I do not intend to give rebuttal to them because I do not believe it would be a helpful process. (Since when is considering another point of view healthy anyway. Now what was that comment that Elder T made at our meeting, that the minister had responded to every point in my letter? But I don't really think it was the truth they were after anyway. I think it was more about being right in and charge.) As 2 Timothy 2:14 says, "...Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins the hearers." (It is quarreling because I have a different opinion and I don't agree with you? What about classroom discussion? Are you saying I should be warned? Why have you only picked out half a verse here? Isn't the real meaning of this passage about Paul reminding Timothy to focus on the gospel, and not on trivial words? And that is the very reason we came to talk to you!)
Frustrating! I do see a real comparison here to Joel Osteen and other prosperity gospel preachers. The whole idea that they are above reproach, and if they are confronted they just gather around them the very people who give him his power to form a hedge of protection. What about always being ready to give an answer for the hope that you have? There are other Scriptures that come to mind, but you don't really want to hear them now, do you?