I want to share with you something very observant my husband Jason just posted in regard to that answer I had heard was given to Brannon Howse regarding his objections to a pro family group participating with and promoting the Response, with heretics from the NAR and IHOP among others.
[This pro family group, I have been told, is the AFA. Buster Wilson's silly post seems to support the AFA as the identity of the 'pro family group' which Brannon seems unwilling to name as yet.]
"It seems to me that a group that responds to a critique by admitting ignorance or dismissal of doctrine has forfeited the standing to say anything at all regarding anything."
"One's doctrine is revealed by action or inaction; claiming otherwise is naïve at best, and still undermines any teaching authority."
"I can respect a group which says "This issue is most specific to a secondary doctrine that isn't tied to the function of this organization, so we don't promote a specific position on it." I may not agree with their position, but if they work within that constraint, that's fine. I would say that position wouldn't support a group telling anyone else what their priorities in preaching, etc. should be, though."