Can you accept past (seemingly good) advice from someone who later turned out to be a total hypocrite?

[Anonymous]

My former church pastor used to give excellent sermons. He was very good at staying on top of current cultural changes and provided excellent advice on how to best combat those challenges.

However about a year ago it was discovered he was improperly handling church funds for personal expenses. When confronted he completely denied it when he was confronted by it from the senior pastors. He was let go.

Yet I wonder if I should take some of his past advice or not. I even have a book that he wrote about social media and it’s negative influences on society that I never read sitting on my dresser. Should I throw it away?

I guess if this guy owned up to his sin and wrongdoing that’s one thing. But he didn’t. He insisted he did nothing wrong despite the cold hard facts proving otherwise. That is what bothers me the most.

Now I know some of you modern atheists on here will get all giddy, happy and rejoiceful to hear that. I know it thrills you whenever a religious leader is caught in scandal. Truth is the vast majority of Christian leaders are not like that. Even in the Catholic Church which is often your favorite target to disparage it isn’t like that. However there are unfortunately always has been and will be false prophets.

So if you are one of those kind people please take your feedback elsewhere (you will immediately blocked and removed if you don’t). Thank you.

[BCRanger10]

Personally? Yes.

For one thing, it's understandable to wonder whether their judgment was clouded by their personal scandals. But ultimately, you can't dismiss an idea solely because of whom it came from. If what they told you applies in significant ways to your life and it was beneficial to you, then you'd be foolish to cast it off.

And while misuse of church funds is a bad thing, it's objectively a lesser crime and sin than, say, sexual abuse or cheating on one's wife. "Personal expenses" is also vague. It could mean buying expensive suits or cars or paying for luxury cruises and vacations. It can also mean catching up on bills. It's wrong regardless, but motive and intent is still important.

[Asker]

He was using the money to fly his dogs out with him on vacations and other luxuries. Also our church was struggling when this happened. He also was reviewing how much each person was titheing which is a big no no.

Again if he would of owned up to wrongdoing and admitted his sin that’s one thing. The senior leadership was absolutely hoping this was NOT true. He was a very good pastor. But they ran a background check him and apparently this is the second time he has misused funds.

Anyway there’s a book he’s wrote sitting on my dresser. I was cleaning my room and I looked at wondering if I should finally read it or throw it away. It might have very good insights. But now knowing what the author is right it makes it hard to view his advice objectively.

[Asker]

*knowing what the author is like

[jshm2]

You're not very well informed. I've known professionals who don't take their own advice, and known high ranking people who engage in behaviour that would make you puke or shit your pants.

Advice is advice when it does good as intended. People are people and will always be flawed. Only some naïve dimwit is going to try and be a purist in whose advice he takes.

[Asker]

I don’t just swallow any and all advice someone gives from the pulpit. I take what works for me. And this advice was very good at the time. His advice also wasn’t related to the same issue he is guilty of.

But after I found out about his major (unrepentant) character flaw then do I just trash all of what he said?

[jshm2]

No. Pulpit advice aside, if he's giving advice that's working for you then you heed the advice, ignore the man.

A lot of medical advancements you enjoy are the result of experiments and torturing of people and animals. These same people are then giving you medical advice. Do you take their advice despite what they've done? Yes, you do, but you don't engage in what they do.

[Asker]

^^^ Alright that was the answer I was looking for above. Glad I stayed calm with you after your initial response came off as antagonistic.

[Asker]

Very good insight with that last response. However I am considering reading his book but considering I know now what the source is like it is impacting my judgement about the advice he gives.