Justin Peters & Joshua Chavez: A Word War

The War of Words Between Two Professing Christians

Recently, I viewed some YouTube videos involving Justin Peters and Joshua Chavez that brought back some old memories and some lessons from “on high.” These two men, both professing Christians, became involved in what’s perhaps best described as a small “war of words.” Their exchange occurred several years ago.
Joshua Chavez runs a Youtube channel named Servus Christi, which is primarily used to make serious charges against various ministries and individuals within the world of Christianity. In several videos, Joshua Chavez attacked Justin Peters, also a man with a Youtube channel who uses his channel for similar purposes, i.e., attacking various ministries and individuals within Christianity, typically, those ministries and individuals who are Charismatic. Chavez made several accusations against Peters, accompanied with proffered evidence validating Chavez’s accusations.

Joshua Chavez made a very believable case against Justin Peters, especially if you were not a “fan” of Justin Peters. It’s not likely that the case was very credible with those who know Peters personally, or who have followed him for some length. But, for those like myself who really don’t know Peters, I’d have to say it was a pretty credible presentation, made all the more credible since there is a presumption that one who calls himself a Christian is unlikely to be making things up out of whole cloth or deliberately lying.

Then, I watched as Peters defended himself. His defense was more credible than Chavez’s case. One thing that struck me immediately with Peters was the absence of passion, of anger, of rancor, and especially, the lack of the use of any typical “attack” words. If I were a secular judge and this was a civil case made before me, and after the parties rested their case (I watched all the videos), I’d have ruled for Peters, not because of the absence of those emotional aspects I mentioned, but solely on the defense made by Peters.

Looking at the case in pure legal terms, Chavez did not make his case. He did not meet his burden of proof. In any civil case, the burden of proof is on the Plaintiff (the one bringing the complaint). That is true in all jurisdictions. The Defendant need only give a credible answer to the Plaintiff’s complaint (allegations) and at that point, the burden of proof falls to the Plaintiff to move the case forward and prove that the defense offered by the Defendant is either false, or in some fashion not credible, or present evidence that rebuts the facts given by the Defendant.

Mr. Chavez did not meet his burden of proof, in my opinion. If I were the judge and Peters had made a Motion to Dismiss after Chavez had put on his case (Plaintiff always puts his/her case on first), I’d have denied Peters’ motion. If the matter had been a bench trial, I’d have ruled for Peters. And, if it had been a jury trial and somehow the attorney for Chavez had been especially persuasive (and there are some Gerry Spences out there who have some amazing powers of persuasion), I’d have granted Peters’ Motion to Dismiss Notwithstanding the Verdict.

For the record, I”m not a “friend” of Justin Peters. I don’t know the man and I’ve never spoken to him as of this writing. In fact, I know him to be a Calvinist. I am not a Calvinist. I think he’s wrong. Likely, if we talked, I’d learn there are other things he believes that differ from my own beliefs.

I also do not know Joshua Chavez. I don’t know what his doctrinal positions are, other than the position alleged by Peters, to wit, that he is on the Charismatic side of the fence. I don’t know if that is true or not and it is irrelevant to this article. I do know from the several videos I’ve watched that Chavez is a very persuasive individual and I believe he’d have made an excellent lawyer. I like the way he presents his cases. He’s methodical and he carefully lays out his evidence, piece by piece. I think he made very credible cases against some of those he’s spoken against, e.g., J.D. Hall, (though I’ve not listened to both sides of Chavez’s charges against anyone besides the Peters videos).

Whether Joshua Chavez’s work is validated by God, I cannot and will not judge, though my first impression of his video on “John MacArthur’s Millionaire Lifestyle Exposed” is that he is probably in error, if it is an attack piece based on an article that was, I believe, poorly researched. I did do a piece on that, defending MacArthur. (For the record, I’ve not watched Chavez’s video, and likely will not watch it.) So, I”m speculating somewhat there. Perhaps he has made a decent case (though I fail to see how someone having a lifestyle enabled by being a millionaire is inherently evil.) But, I digress.

The point of my piece here is not really to make a ruling on the merits of either man’s argument, though I did so because it is important to the essence of this piece. In order to make my real point, I need to give some background to the reader.

Jack Hyles: The Independent Fundamental Baptist

Thirty years ago, I was a member of a church pastored by Jack Hyles, a man with incredible charisma, a powerful speaking voice, and with a nationwide following. The man spoke regularly around the country and was considered by many to be the successor to John R. Rice for being at the top of the pecking order in the world of Independent Fundamental Baptists (IFB). I’d been a member of Jack’s church since 1969 and was pretty well established in the church.

On a couple occasions (perhaps more), but two I recall, he mentioned me from the pulpit, once touting me as the “best lawyer in the county.” In a church of 5000+ those kinds of “mentions” from a pulpit translate into dollars. Within a year of leaving law school, I had a busy practice with many church members coming to me and many of the college students and staff coming to me for their legal needs.

Once, in an office visit with Jack while counseling with him about a matter I’ve since forgotten, he looked at me and said, “Voyle, I dunno I can make you rich, but I can make you a lot of money. I have a lot of people who ask me about a lawyer. So, leave some of your cards with Irma.” I thanked him and did that. The business did increase. No question about that.

Fast forward to 1990. I wrote a book entitled Fundamental Seduction: The Jack Hyles Case. I’ll not detail the events leading up to this as I’ve outlined those in the book. I made my case. Many believed the case had to do with the allegations of Hyles having an affair with a staff person by immorality of Jack Hyles but that was not the point of the book. That, for me, was just evidence of a much greater darkness hovering over that pulpit, over his ministry. The book was mostly about idolatry–about a church, about members, including myself, who’d committed the sin of idolatry. We’d put a man before God. We’d put the words of a man before the Words of God.  While the book addressed the allegations against Hyles (and those against his son), the real point had to do with the idolatry.

I really did not want to write it. But, I felt strongly that God wanted me to do it for several reasons I’ll not go into here. Perhaps I’ll revive some of the details of that time in another article one day, just for the record (I’m a believer of making a record for others here. After all, God is making a record and one day we’ll all give account for every idle word.)

About 6 months after the book came out, I received a phone call from a preacher down in Texas. As I recall, the conversation went something like this. First, he introduced himself by name, and that he was a pastor, then said, “Brother Glover, I read your book. I don’t doubt it’s true, since I knew some of it already. But, there was one thing you didn’t do.” He paused, then added, “You spoke the truth, but you didn’t speak the truth in love.”
It was a kind and gentle rebuke, unapologetic, not dramatic, not harsh, but matter-of-fact, and I did not take offense at all. I told him that I disagreed with him, thanked him, then hung up. But, his words did stay with me. The reason was that this was God’s first attempt to teach me the difference between speaking the truth and speaking the truth in love. I thought I knew.

I really didn’t know.

But, I would learn.

The Fighting Fundamentalist Forum or the FFF

My law practice nearly collapsed when the book came out. I knew it would be hard since the bulk of my practice came from the church, but I honestly didn’t think it would be as bad as it was. I came close to bankruptcy. But, in a year, things were improving. I’d begun a newsletter and had a couple hundred subscribers. At one point, I joined an online forum called the FFF (Fighting Fundamentalist Forum). The membership was the rowdiest bunch you could find. I once likened it to a bar occupied by marines and navy guys in which regular brawls would erupt. (I was in a few of those bars overseas during my stint in the US Navy.)

The vast majority of the members of the FFF were declared Christians, some IFB to the bone, some who’d come out hurt and wounded and feeling betrayed and nursing a grudge, and some who were lurkers, observers but never engaging, and seldom commenting. So, there were some very ugly times in there. Here’s a sample exchange to give you a feel for how things often went in this forum (I am “browsing”):

Subject: Re: venompreacher/Smellin’ Coffee
Name: venompreacher
Date: Jun-26-02 8:37am
puke, gag, heave.
good try,now use verses in context,dodo.You know Glover, when I used to go to H.A.C.,I would drive by your office and pray for you once a week,back in the early 90’s.And I did not evn know anything you did.I just heard you were involved, and felt bad for you,Iguess I need to start prayin again.

In loving memory of Jack Hyles
venom

————-

Subject: Hey fool… they were in context…
Name: Biblethumper1611
Date: Jun-26-02 11:50am
Why don’t you be a good fool and get wisdom…

Subject: Re: venompreacher/venom
Name: browsing
Date: Jun-26-02 12:12pm

“puke, gag, heave. good try, now use verses in context,dodo.You know Glover, when I used to go to H.A.C.,I would drive by your office and pray for you once a week,back in the early 90’s.And I did not evn know anything you did.I just heard you were involved, and felt bad for you,Iguess I need to start prayin again. ” venom

You say you didn’t know about “anything” I did.” Is that supposed to mean I “did” something bad? And you “heard” that I was “involved?” Involved in what? What did you “hear?” Did someone come up to you and say: “Hey! Glover is INVOLVED.” You imply that I was involved in doing something bad or wrong. You allude to being “involved” in something evil or sinister. Spell it out, man. Don’t be shy.

As for your prayers, shucks man, use the time on more productive things. I’m not trying to say I have no confidence in your prayers, you know. It’s just that if your prayers match the venomous letters I received from your kind of folks, well, I’ll pass on the prayers. Love wasn’t one of the stronger qualities I found in you all.

Bottom line is, you have bought into the lies and refused to hear truth. And that’s fine with me. You’re a big boy. But I don’t think God’s going to buy your defense in the end. We ALL have to stand and deliver an account of ourselves, our every word, our deeds and we will not be permitted to accuse someone else of leading us astray. You will not, for example, be permitted to say: “But I didn’t know, Lord! I was blinded. Jack led me to believe thus and so.” And God will probably ask you why you did not care to see for yourself, to look at the facts, to see if there was any merit in the allegations made by those “involved” individuals.

You guys are all alike. Not a single one of you has ever risen up and truly DEFENDED Jack, your alleged friend. Not a one. See, I don’t call a defense: “IT’S ALL A PACK OF DIRTY LIES!!” That’s a Clintonian smokescreen. It works good on people not used to thinking for themselves. For those who hold truth on a much higher plane, it is a worthless defense.

browsing… “I used to think that ignorance was bliss. Then I met someone on the FFF.”

Posted by browsing on Mar-26-02 2:08pm
(In reply to: The Life of Jack Hyles as a course posted by pmart2 on Mar-26-02 7:51am)
Dunno why there should be any surprise. Neal is just continuing the course taught at FBC and HAC during Jack’s ministry. It was a continuing education course where one was indoctrinated and then expected to take all the courses/lessons and pass all the tests. Back then, the lessons were titled as follows (wonder if Neal has them in this order?):

Loyalty to Jack
Fidelity to Jack
Faithfulness to Jack
Work for Jack
Play for Jack
Act like Jack
Think like Jack ‘n God
Do like Jack
Be like Jack
Don’t Quit on Jack

I loved the place. Why? Because I’m a wordsmith. And, I love word wars. I’m good at it. After all, it’s something I did for a living. And, I’m an expert at cutting a throat. I know where the dotted line is (because I usually drew that line, though from time to time, my opponent did it for me). However, I began to get convicted about my participation in there. But, I convinced myself that as long as I did not hurl insults or mock or be sarcastic, then I was within permitted boundaries and had God’s approval. So, I ignored God’s taps on my spiritual shoulder.

I learned long ago that the more you “talked” with someone, the more insight you had to them and their thinking, until at some point, you could lead them into a position where you could literally ambush them and make them look foolish. Depositions are great places for establishing facts and statements made in that setting to use later in ambushes at trial, because you learn so much from a witness after an hour or more of them speaking. You learn where they are vulnerable. You learn how to use their own words against them.
So, for me it was a kind of game. It was a game which I absolutely loved. And, I was convinced that I was showing errant idolators the error of their ways. But, to be honest, it was a “blood sport” and Voyle Glover absolutely loved it.

But, God didn’t love it.

One Christian Handing Another Christian His Head

Now and then, I’d hand a Hyles defender his head, doing it of course in a deft fashion, not crudely, and never with sarcasm. I enjoyed it, carrying the satisfaction that I’d taught the idolator a lesson, perhaps dissuaded him of his error, and had perhaps persuaded those who only watched but never posted. The lurkers who were too timid to venture into the bar, too fearful of someone picking a fight with them. So, they lurked. I was fighting on their behalf, I reasoned.

Then, a Hyles defender who I’d sparred with now and then, never with much vigor, made some argument (I don’t recall what it was about, probably defending Hyles or attacking me), and I made a deliberate decision to hand him his head. After several exchanges, I accomplished my purpose. I hurt him. Bad. I knew I had hurt him. That had been my purpose. It had been deft, like a murderer expertly slicing across the throat of his victim.

God really convicted me. I could not shake it. It bothered me so much that I private messaged him and apologized sincerely and profusely. Then, I repeated the apology publicly on the forum. I hung around a bit after that, but actually it was over for me. I seldom posted and when I did, the posts were innocuous. I knew I could not stay in the forum because it was akin to an alcoholic coming into a bar to sip at his soda while all around him, everyone is drinking his favorite beverage: alcohol. So, I left the Fighting Fundamentalist Forum, what we affectionately called the FFF.

The Control of a Holy God to Enable One to Do Right

Since then, I’ve avoided word wars. This is not to say that there is no place for Christians to raise the alarm against those who are doing harm to the body. There are some times when we really have to stand and declare to the world, “This is wrong and does not represent me, nor Christianity!” The Falwell story is an example where there had to be a judgment rendered and Christians needed to declare the actions there as not representing Christianity.  But, I needed to back away from the word wars. It was too easy for me to cross the line, too easy to begin to see the “dotted line.”

There’s been some temptations. I recall one instance where a particular person took issue with me regarding a comment I’d made about Trump. He was devoted to his hatred of all things Trump, blind beyond reason, beyond common sense. He really would have been an instant “favorite” of mine in the FFF because there were so many areas of vulnerability. We were on Facebook. I knew exactly where and how to hurt him and make him look really bad and demonstrate the nonsense of his arguments. But, I ignored the urges. That was strictly God. Not me. I know me, too well. I”m a fighter. When someone hits me, I want to hit back harder. I want to win the argument. It’s my natural nature. The carnal me wanted to engage.

But, I remember the feeling of joy that came over me at one point when I realized God was leading me, was in control of my actions, that I was acting totally out of character, and it was not really difficult. I wasn’t struggling to not engage. I can’t really describe that feeling. Some of you, I’m sure, know what I’m talking about. You’ve experienced times when God was in control.

In a recent Bible study which I do with some men on Sundays, I said, “Here’s how you can tell if you’re walking in the Spirit as it says in the Bible “(Gal. 5:16. “…Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.” ). When you do something that is entirely inconsistent with the old man, something that you’d not ordinarily do, attribute that power to do good, to God, to the new you, the new creature in Christ. It’s not your will power or the virtue in you, but it is the control of the Holy Spirit of your life.”

That is what makes the impossible, possible. Far too many Christians, especially new ones, do not realize that it is impossible to live the Christian life as we’re supposed to live, simply by deciding to follow Christ. They do not realize that being obedient to Christ is not just an act of the will, nor just a determination of the mind, but is a complete surrender of the life to God; and a deliberate decision to trust God in you to do what is otherwise impossible to do. It is walking by faith. It is trusting God to do in you and through you, the things that are otherwise impossible.

Back to Joshua Chavez and Justin Peters

These men had a quarrel with one another. Paul had some rather tumultuous disagreements with other Christians over the years. I do not know the right or wrong of those disagreements Paul had, and it’s rather unimportant to me, frankly. I only know that having disagreements with one another is going to happen. We cannot avoid some of it. Sometimes, we are put in a position where we feel we must defend ourselves. Perhaps, we may believe we must address an issue within the Body. Disputes are going to continue within the Body until this life is done.

But, how we handle the dispute is the real issue. Do we respond with love. Do we speak the truth…with love? Sometimes, we can know the answer to that by the tenor of one’s voice, or by the words themselves. For example, Joshua Chavez spoke some very ugly words at Justin Peters that were devoid of love. Most mature Christians will agree with that. I cannot tell what was in Peters’ heart but can say that none of the words I heard from the man would suggest they were hateful or angry or were even devoid of love, but clearly displayed a lack of anger or rage or disdain. I cannot say the same of Joshua Chavez. His words were closer to the kind that I am probably more familiar with than Chavez.

The lesson? Speak the truth…in love. Keep in mind that if we are going to give an account for every “idle word,” how much more every word hurled on purpose? God’s made it abundantly clear to me that I am going to give account to Him one day for my words, not just my actions. Since that lesson, I’ve attempted (not always successfully) to be careful of what I say. I try and speak the truth, but if I cannot speak and do it with or in the spirit of love, I”ll keep my mouth shut.

Speaking the Truth in Love Not an Emotional Feeling

Realize that speaking the truth in love is not just a warm fuzzy feeling, but speaking with an awareness of the hurt I might bring, or the destruction I might bring to a life. We must consider that our words may turn a life just a fraction away from God’s purposes and in doing so, we will be instrumental in aiding Satan’s purposes for that man or woman’s life. We will see, in heaven, the ripple effects of our words (and actions or non-actions) to people. We will rejoice in heaven as we see the effects of our kind words, our wise counsel, or our tender words of comfort rendered to others while on earth. And, Jesus will no doubt have to wipe away our tears of anquish as we see the devastation we caused, the detours we caused in a life, or the turning away from God, all caused by our careless words delivered in anger, without love.

We must realize too, that our angry words are not just harmful to the one on which we hurl our invective. We may turn someone away from a person being used by God in that individual’s life, an individual who could have otherwise have gained valuable insight and wisdom and direction, perhaps even salvation.

Not for naught sayeth the Scriptures, “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom” (Pro 13:10). Pride will take us down. Any of us. Regardless of our length of day, regardless of our deep biblical knowledge, regardless of our love for truth, and regardless of who we are.

Be wise with your words.

Capish?

Copyright 2022 Voyle A. Glover

My Personal Testimony

I was a fun-loving 19 year old sailor who had no interest in God at all…until I had a face-to-face encounter with an angel,  an entity I did not believe existed any more than Martians, ghosts, or devils. It’s a bit difficult to not believe when one is standing in front of you.