PSA: We Have Archived Every Sermon by Jim Berg and Bob Jones III

 

Some commenters here felt it was unethical to save these sermons when GRACE has recommended their deletion. In our opinion, it’s worth having the real, “uncensored” words of these men saved for several reasons:

1. BJU might go beyond the GRACE recommendation and delete ALL sermons by these speakers, thus removing any permanent record of important public statements made therein (including ones related and unrelated to abuse).

2. Even in the event that only “offending” sermons are removed, GRACE left the definition of what constitutes “offensive” to BJU itself (“any sermons it determines to be offensive…”). Also, there’s the possibility that BJU might ask SermonAudio to edit and re-upload certain sermons minus offensive content, thus saving face.

Even if no one ever contacts us for a copy of these sermons, or even if BJU never deletes them, we felt it important that BJU be notified that its publicly-spoken words can’t be permanently erased.

One of the recommendations in the GRACE report was for BJU to remove from its archives any sermons “insensitive or hurtful to sexual abuse victims” (pg. 230). This directive, combined with BJU’s habit for disappearing any information detrimental to its image, makes it important that sermons from Jim Berg and Bob Jones III, in particular, are preserved in some way. We took it upon ourselves to download each of Berg’s sermons (about 150) and each of Bob Jones III’s sermons (over 500) from SermonAudio while they still exist there. This vital audio record could prove essential for further investigation.

Although we unfortunately don’t have the resources to upload all of these sermons here for easy downloading, we have compiled a sermon guide for both speakers listing all of the sermon titles along with date, location and other information. Simply drop us an email if you’d like to listen to any of them.

Click here to download the Jim Berg sermon guide.

Click here to download the Bob Jones III sermon guide.

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “PSA: We Have Archived Every Sermon by Jim Berg and Bob Jones III

  1. Peter

    So you’re effectively taking steps to hinder BJU from implementing recommendations in the report. Outstanding.

  2. A. James

    One of the recommendations in the GRACE report was for BJU to remove from its archives any sermons “insensitive or hurtful to sexual abuse victims” (pg. 230).
    —-
    So, GRACE, made up of experts, made a foolish request? So, BJU should obey GRACE while others go and do the archiving and sharing of “insensitive or hurtful to sexual abuse victims” sermons? Perhaps, we should simply e-mail GRACE to undo that recommendation so those sermons will stay available. So no one will forget from whence BJU came, and be warned. Which way do you want it? Let’s not rewrite history so to speak. Keep them accountable for what they’ve said in the past. So then, the sermons ought to stay available and the resources in the bookstore and at the press…for us to never forget. We are basically null and voiding GRACE’s recommendation, making them look foolish indeed for this advice for BJU to distance themselves from a wrongful past, since we keep these sermons readily available.

    That was the whole point…for BJU to come clean in this area with the help of a neutral party. To move forward. But GRACE still wasn’t good enough. Just as many suspected it wouldn’t be.

    And the team of legal experts? They should not have recommended that BJU remove these? So we are coming in behind GRACE to correct their mistakes?

    “Bob Jones III’s sermons (over 500) from SermonAudio while they still exist there.”
    They might as well leave them there, if they are available here. What the hell is the difference?

    “This vital audio record could prove essential for further investigation.” Damn. Thanks for catching that! GRACE, the revered team of experts, should have thought of that after two years of legal work and making the final recommendation.

    “Simply drop us an email if you’d like to listen to any of them.” But make sure you have a listening buddy as you relive all of the bad counseling, insensitive, hurtful, trigger comments. You could get raw from listening to it.

    Let me reread this from the report:
    “Remove certain sermons
    During the investigation GRACE identified BJU sermons that included statements that are insensitive or hurtful to sexual abuse victims. It is recommended that BJU remove these sermons from public access. Furthermore, BJU should remove any other sermon it determines to be sensitive or hurtful to sexual abuse victims.”

    So GRACE has already identified enough sermons for their legal purposes. They have also requested the sermons be removed from public access. So, perhaps BJU could contact a lawyer to request we indeed remove their sermons from public access? I’ll check into that curiosity. Maybe e-mail GRACE. And so then, should we not also remove sermons that we determine to be sensitive or hurtful to sexual abuse victims?

    I ditto Peter. “Outstanding.”

  3. Camille K. Lewis

    Perhaps A. James and Peter have forgotten that BJU News is not Bob Jones University. BJU News was not investigated by G.R.A.C.E., and G.R.A.C.E. had no recommendations for BJU News.

  4. The Author

    An abuser who maintains a diary of his abuses is far different from a victims advocate who keeps a record of those same abuses.

  5. bjunews Post author

    We’re keeping an archive in case one of these sermons is needed in the future for any reason. Whether BJU does or doesn’t listen to GRACE’s recommendation on the matter is none of our concern.

  6. Bill

    “An abuser who maintains a diary of his abuses is far different from a victims advocate who keeps a record of those same abuses.”

    If the abuser (the Bob) were to admit he was an abuser then I see no need to keep the diaries. Since he hasn’t and probably never will I applaud BJU news…we’ll done.

  7. Peter

    The original post said the messages are now freely available to anyone who wants them (“drop us an email”). That would put BJUNews into a position of DISTRIBUTING this material and helping disseminate it. Outstanding.

  8. Bill

    Where is john Matzko? He was always here to defend Jonestown and now he is silent? John, please give us your take on the report.

  9. A. James

    Outstanding. BJU News and BJU aren’t the same! Wow. What a revelation. Entertaining and entirely ridiculous, yes.

    “An abuser who maintains a diary of his abuses is far different from a victims advocate who keeps a record of those same abuses.”

    It is one thing for someone to have downloaded the sermons to keep a personal record. It’s quite another to advertise and unnecessarily distribute material that has been deemed hurtful and insensitive. Victims’ advocate indeed.

    I am also curious as to the legality on a couple of levels.

    “We’re keeping an archive in case one of these sermons is needed in the future for any reason. Whether BJU does or doesn’t listen to GRACE’s recommendation on the matter is none of our concern.”

    The original reasons that seemed to be stated was so BJU couldn’t hide things detrimental to their image (which GRACE recommends they DO) and for legal reasons (which GRACE already has a record of the specific sermons as/if needed). And again, to have them on personal file is one thing, to advertise and disseminate for no other good reason either…I’m questioning basic respect for what the victims/interviewees have actually accomplished. This unnecessary advertising and sharing of sermons that were to be removed defies that effort.

    Whether BJU does or doesn’t listen on the matter is none of your concern?
    Joke much? Actually that saddens me. EVERYTHING BJU does or doesn’t do has been the concern on this site (which has been quite useful these years). If GRACE links that aren’t visible or specific enough for one’s taste, to spreading about 650 potentially hurtful sermons “just in case” BJU removes them, to disallowing links that cast matters of BJU in a different light than BJU News are important enough for our concern, then surely BJU not meeting a GRACE recommendation in making things right towards victims is MUCH more of a concern.

    Okay then, I shall quote this should BJU News ever bring up BJU’s disregard of GRACE’s recommendation on this. Yes, when BJU leaves the sermons up,..”none of our concern” “none of our concern” It should be MORE of our concern than spreading the junk that GRACE has called them out on already.

  10. bjunews Post author

    Thanks for in the input, everyone. We’ve added a note to this post clarifying our decision to archive the sermons.

    Comments are now closed.

Comments are closed.