Nashville News Blog

Nice, Mark.... you withhold judgment on a man who nearly decapitated a sunday school teacher, who routinely lies about how he was arrested and the drugs he was really taking, who embellishes the whole story and people excuse it because of the 'good he has done" since he personally created a scene worthy of a slasher film.

Only this slasher film was real, not fiction. He lies now about his crime, avoids the name of his sunday school teaching victim, all to win converts to Christ. How ironic is this? If he were a child molester I'd surely not want him around children even if he was forgiven by Jesus and a shiny new minister. Yet, he's allowed to be a pastor overseeing sunday school teachers, the very person he brutally murdered and served a mere 8 years for, when he should have been in there for life, or received the death penalty.

How many sex offenders turned pastors are you willing to have lead your Church vs cold-blooded murderers who nearly removed them head of a sunday school teacher with a Buck knife? And you have the nerve to say the author of the story had an axe to grind with Christianity, when the details of this horrific crime you willingly withhold judgment on, sir?

Really? You need not attend his church, try reading the transcripts from the court case, or talking to the investigators, and put two and two together as this story did. Then tell me, why is it OK for the murdered of a sunday school teacher to now be working around sunday school teachers?

I withheld judgment for two reasons, one, I read the original story from the Texas paper where Maury is much more forthcoming about the crime. Secondly, there is plenty of judgment being thrown at this; I was making a different point. You draw the comparison between one act of horrific violence committed 34yrs ago that is, statistically, highly improbable in the repeating (no more than you and I killing someone) and sex offenders, who, statistically speaking, are much more prone to repeat offense. The nature of the crimes is so different, and their possibility of repeat offense so disparate they render your point moot. However, that there is not full disclosure in the material Davis distributes is disturbing (I have never heard the testimony.) The Texas paper's article does a good job explaining his mindset. I believe the biggest point to be recognized here is that his own congregation knows the nature of his past crime and they choose to follow his leadership. What would you propose as a solution to this issue? My own proposal would be that his testimony be given full force and honesty, as accurate as possible so as to match the police report. Perhaps they could set up a memorial to the woman who was killed? He is not a repeat offender. I hate that this crime was committed in the first place. But it was, and two men are trying to move on with their lives. That process now includes Davis having to deal with the fallout of, given the facts at hand, not being completely forthcoming about the crime. Put yourself in his shoes. What would you do, and how would you want to be dealt with?

Some readers, and perhaps the author of the Scene story himself, seem to equate what seems to be a lack of justice in the criminal court system (Davis only served 8 years for a heinous crime that would have put him on death row had he been black) with the appropriateness of Christian forgiveness in his case. These are two completely separate issues.

Christianity teaches that followers of Jesus must repent of their wrongdoings and must be willing to forgive wrongdoers even before repentance takes place. (The example is Jesus himself, who prayed that his executioners be forgiven and who refused to break communion with Judas even though he knew that Judas was about to betray him.) And for that matter, Christian forgiveness only builds on the teachings of Judaism, which called for a person to forgive his brother 7 times -- and which Jesus interpreted to mean not just 7 but 70x7, or in other words, there is no limit to forgiveness.

Forgiveness by God in a Christian sense is not dependent on forgiveness by the aggrieved party. Thus, it is perfectly within Christian tradition to say that Maury Davis has been forgiven by God even if the family of his victim have not forgiven. Of course, Christianity also teaches that we should seek reconciliation and forgiveness between the aggriever and the aggrieved, but that is a separate issue from divine forgiveness. From the Christian perspective, whether Maury Davis DESERVES forgiveness is also beside the point, because none of us deserve forgiveness, which is an unmerited gift from God.

So I don't have a problem with the fact that Maury Davis turned his life around and now is the pastor of a megachurch. In fact, Jesus' teaching is that I should be happy. (There is greater rejoicing in heaven over the return of someone who was lost than over the retention of those who never strayed.) I don't care for megachurches for the most part, and from what I know of Davis' preaching, I don't care for his take on socio-theological issues. But that, too, is separate from forgiveness and acceptance.

Nor would it be a big deal to me that he doesn't go into all the gory details of what he did every Sunday, as long as he doesn't try to lie about the fact that he is a murderer. By the number of times I've seen the phrase "nearly decapitated," I gather that the Scene writers think this makes him something more of a murderer than someone who used a gun, or than King David in the Bible story, who arranged for the murder of a loyal subject to cover up his affair with Bathsheba.

The real questions I would ask and on which I would judge him involve how Davis carries out a ministry of forgiveness and reconciliation in his church. Unfortunately, the Scene article left something of a hole there, in my opinion. I didn't get much of a flavor for what Cornerstone Church is like or how Davis conducts himself. Is he a ruthless and vindictive dictator, like that TV preacher who ran Two Rivers Baptist Church? Is he a model of the forgiveness he received? Give us a better picture.

Well, OK. I guess forgiveness is a Christian virtue. I can even go along with that. The guy is no longer in jail (even though he probably should be), so is what he is doing now so bad? Well, other than the usual schucksterism, hypocrisy and money grubbing of fundamentalist mega-churches, I guess not. just as good to have Davis there as anyone. Maybe it just helps expose what those megachurches are all about.

But I also know that Cornerstone is a politically active right-wing church. They really hate gays and liberals and the ACLU, etc.

Do you remember when Billy Graham was asked if he could forgive Bill Clinton? And Billy Graham replied -- GASP! -- that, yes, he certainly could forgive Bill Clinton. Which would seem to pretty much fit with the whole Jesus concept of things.

And do you remember the vicious, adamant, mean-spirited reaction to this pretty mild statement? The attacks on Billy Graham for daring to suppose that Bill Clinton could be forgiven? Because, after all, only Republican, right-wing thinking, anti-gay, misogynistic transgessors can actually be forgiven. Becaus they cray and tell us about Jesus. (Didn't Mark Sanford just do that?) Anyone who doesn't agree with the myopic fundamentalist political world view cannot.

My point ot all this is that these churches are simply personality cults, and the personality is not Jesus. The personality conducting the cult is the pastor. That's why Jerry Sutton can cook the books at his church and throw out anyone who questions him. That's why Davis' congregants will pat him on the back a while clutching their study Bible in the other, knowing full well that he is a murderer who found a way to get very rich from their contributions. And part of that personality cult is to forgive anyone with their world view and spew hate and judgment on anyone who doesn't.

What a disgrace to this city.

Excuse the "David" typos, I don't want ANY comparison of DAVIS and King David implied as a Freudian slip on my part, they were typos.

If someone is repentant and demonstrates that through their character, I cannot hold them accountable for their previous actions, in a personal sense, because it is done and over with. Restitution should be made if possible. I have known many people who tried to rebuild their lives after making the worst of choices. We do not know the whole story on Maury, believe me (I did some research), and the article in Texas and the Scene are incredibly biased and lacking in information. I think this speaks to another blog I wrote for the Scene when I got started here, and that concerned the echo chamber that we all choose to live in. We often only hear that which mirrors our own thoughts and desires, reinforcing what we already believe. It is evident in this thread that some people have some serious grist for the mill concerning Christians.

Mark, you've danced around it again. Its simple. If you've "researched it" then you know what the detectives said about the arrest, the lack of any car chases, the lies about the drugs found in his premises, and the over-the-top way Davis presents the story, embellishing and omitting. If you wish to judge their repentant character, you should start with examining their truthfulness when repenting. Either a high-speed car chase happened, or it did not. Again, who do you believe, the murdered, or the arresting officer who said it was a peaceful arrest without incident? On that one thing alone, how can Davis be truly repentant when he lies about this simple fact. He who is trusted with little will be trusted with much. Davis can't be trusted to tell the little details truthfully, and it taints the rest of his "message." Can you not see that his character is not demonstrating repentance through the way he lies and embellishes the story of his arrest? I'm done trying to talk some common sense into you here. If you can't see it, its because you simply are not willing to see it.

Maury Davis, I challenge you to come clean, to tell the truth with regard to the details of your arrest, and the truth about your actions, drug use, and the lot. Because as it stands, I don't believe you, and now millions of others don't either, because your embellished story doesn't match up with the criminal record, the police report and the detectives testimony. Until you decide to clear you heart and tell the truth, you will remain the charlatan that you are today, and that's the bottom line. You can't run around lying about these facts in the name of Jesus to help hype the story of your reformed life for the sake of winning souls. Jesus doesn't need your lies to win souls.

Bubbsdog, you chose to read all that into it. The story points out facts, you take them and do with them what you will.

Here's the bottom line:

Either Maury Davis is lying about the circumstances surrounding his arrest (ie high speed chase and his drug use) or he is not. The arresting officer's report says there was no high speed chase. Davis says there was. So who do you believe, the convicted murdered, or the arresting officer?

I have surmised, and rightly so, based solely on these facts that you are other apologists for Davis avoid, that Davis's repentance is not sincere if he feels the need to aggrandize the story, to lie about the circumstances.

What does he need to embellish or lie about a high speed car chase that never happened? Nobody wants to answer this or face the truth that a man who feels the need to lie about his sins in the process of repentance is not repentant at all.

Peter, all I can say to your reply is "Amen!"

Simple, you're exactly right.

Pete, I re-read your story just to make sure of this. The story never mentioned that Davis or his church members refused to talk to you. (The closest you came, and it's not very close, is a sentence to the effect that Davis doesn't talk these days about the details of his crime.) At the very least, you owe it to your readers to explain that you tried to talk to Davis and some of his parishioners, but they refused. (And how many parishioners did your writer try to reach, by the way?) Mentioning that they refused to talk to you is basic to the reporting of this story, and it's almost unpardonable that you left it out.

And, as Simple points out, you always could have recycled some of the quotes from the DMN with attribution to their story. Doing so would at least have allowed Davis to be heard in his own words, which is one reason why the DMN piece comes off as much more professional than the Scene's. The two main voices in your story are Mrs. Liles' son, whose point of view is understandable, and that of the original investigating officer, whose motivations are less clear. In any event, by skewing the story so heavily toward their voices and by failing to include any voices from Davis or his flock, your story comes across as one-sided.

Or was the Scene reticent to recycle Davis' quote because it would have made it even more apparent that your own story was so thoroughly recycled. (Really, Pete, it wasn't that far from the kind of job the Tennessean does when some national media outlet beats them on a local story, and then they hastily try to put something together.)

Your story leaves readers with the impression (intentionally, I believe) that Davis is the same unrepentant scumbag he was on the day of his arrest, and has used "finding Jesus" as his ticket to a life of respectability and ease. And maybe that's just what he is. Then again, maybe he's someone like Gary Hart and Garrison Keillor, who changed their names inexplicably and fudged some details about their lives in the stories they tell. Maybe Davis today doesn't mention all the gory details of the murder because, as he told the DMN, he fears they would be too disturbing to some of the people he's trying to reach. Maybe he is fabricating the story about heavy drug use because, as your story implies, because he wants his listeners to believe his outburst of violence was caused by something people could at least understand, if not endorse (and, by the way, neither you nor the DMN actually establishes that he did, merely that the investigating officer, relying on his own experience, strongly BELIEVES that he did -- a distinction you don't quite get around to making in your story). Or maybe he publicly gives drugs a greater role in his crime because it is scary to confront the idea that some inexplicably evil something within him led him to commit this murder, and he's not sure that it couldn't happen again. Mrs. Liles' son claims to be able to see this homicidal rage inside Davis, and one of the most intriguing anecdotes from the DMN story came from the man who was nervous about sharing a room with Davis on a church mission trip not long after Davis got out of prison.

The point is that I come away from your story without anything close to a picture of Maury Davis -- except for the picture you try to paint. There's nothing in his own words, not even a quote from his life-story CD that you frequently referenced. There's nothing from his congregation, not even from his former fellows in Dallas. All I knew about him before reading your story is that he's a very public megachurch preacher who's highly vocal on a lot of social and political issues (which doesn't distinguish him from most of your other megachurch preachers). Your story presented an opportunity to provide a nuanced, thought-provoking piece that invites readers to think about the issues of repentance, forgiveness and accountability, rehabilitation, grace, truth and self-delusion. Instead, you published a poorly recycled piece that (partly because it omitted some of the shades of gray from the DMN piece it copied) appeared to be driven by an agenda. As a liberal evangelical who probably wouldn't be very comfortable in a church like Davis, I nonetheless couldn't help but wonder whether the agenda in your story was driven by some animus against evangelical Christians in general, against conservative evangelicals in particular, against megachurch TV preachers like Davis or Joel Osteen, and whether your writer may lack familiarity with the Protestant Christian understanding of divine forgiveness and acceptance (which is more than what you described in your post as "Cornerstone's brand of forgiveness"). I'm most disappointed that what could have been a truly powerful piece came off as more of a down-and-dirty hatchet job.

We'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one, Bubba.

I think you're right about more clearly pointing out that he and his parishioners wouldn't speak. It must have mistakenly chopped somewhere in the editing. That's on me. But we did make multiple calls for interviews to his church. Brantley also went to his church for services. He didn't want to talk to us, nor did he have someone else talk in his place. He's a grown man. If we're going to include him in the story, he's gotta speak for himself or have someone else do it for him. The only people who talked on his side were his attorney and the retired cop who sat on the jury. Both of those people were quoted at length. After the Dallas story, Davis clearly didn't want to submit himself to a new round of questions, especially when they'd be read on his home turf. That's his choice.

Brantley was raised Southern Baptist, so I think he has a fairly good read on this kind of Christianity. You may not like his read, but I think it's an honest one.

You're right about putting a heavy weight on what the cop said. As general rule, we're going to put a lot more weight on what a cop says than we would a convicted murderer. I think you'll find this at most papers. The cop has no motive to lie. Davis has every motive in the world to lie.

As far as him fictionalizing his story, I guess that's a matter of viewpoint. You'll see it as a sermonizing technique. Others see it as a sign of a man running a racket. Everyone comes to a story with their own bias based on how they view the world.

As for whether the story worked as a thought-provoker, I think that speaks for itself. There's nearly 100 comments on the story itself, and me and you are still debating it two weeks later. The comments are pretty much split, some thinking the story was great, some saying we're huge assholes. There's no way to please everyone on what to include in a story, but I think this one very much works in terms of stimulating thought and debate.

Either way, I really appreciate your response and insight. It's always nice when obviously smart readers take the tiem to dissect your stuff, even when they don't like it. We are fortunate to have readers like you, Bubba.

Bubbadog and the other apologists for Davis still dance around the facts that LYING about the circumstances of a horrible sin you are supposedly repenting for does not repentance make. Jesus doesn't need a liar hiding facts or embellishing the truth, to try to protect people this Davis person wants to convert. The truth will set you free, Maury Davis. Come out and tell the truth about your drug use, tell the truth about the circumstances of the arrest, because until you do, this will haunt you in Google and you'll be called to account for it not only in the real world, but on that final day of judgment. Jesus doesn't need people to lie about their past to help get the sinner to convert. Stop lying, Maury Davis. Come clean. And shame on the apologists who won't deal head on with the facts and the situation Davis places himself and the rest of us in when his lies are exposed, and he chooses to say nothing.

I've not lied. If you don't like my characterization of your whining over the Scene's story, then piss off and please kiss my happy, hairy arse, you ignorant oafish grunt. I must have hit a nerve. You obviously have some reason to come defend his honor against the Scene's so-called on-sided attack. Well I read both stories, and they are consistent, so go to the Dallas paper and whine to them, you tool.

You're just a distraction here and if you're not an apologist, you're their best friend in this comments section by creating a nice diversion from the real issues at hand and the point of this article. That point is that Davis glorifies the circumstances around his arrest, blames the drugs for nearly beheading a defenseless sunday school teacher, lies about the car chase and his arrest, and then uses it all to get rich in the name of Jesus. So shove the so-called journalism-integrity check up your bum, the points made deserve to be addressed without the distraction of your whiny, pitiful crybaby crap about their writing ability.

Unless you have some facts to back up your whining about their writing, shut the heck up. You've nothing to say but accuse them of the same thing you're doing. At least they have police reports to quote. You have speculation and pants-wetting.

Don't dance around the facts here because you're unhappy with the rag that is the Scene. Yeah, they ain't Pulitzer material, but they did the right thing running this story, and you've nitpicked the details to death, all the while ignoring the biggest issue at hand. You complaining about the quality of the writing in the Scene is like going to a Green Day show and complaining that they didn't play Mozart's Marriage of Figero.

Give us a break. Why won't somebody address the real issue here...... anyone. Somebody? Preferably Maury Davis himself.

Either Davis is lying about the arrest of he is not. There is nothing skewed about that, but you'd rather dance on the "head of a pen" than let discussion flow about the real issue at hand, which is Davis, not your whiny opinion of this article.

So, Davis, step up to the plate and address these issues. I know you're reading these comments in the dark of night when nobody is around but you and God, so come forward and tell the truth. Until you do, you're just the lying scum-bag that Bubbadog thinks you to be for all he knows. There Bubba, did I quote you right? Crybaby.

Davis, you're a lying sack of crap who uses your heinous sinful murder for personal gain and somehow you think you need to lie and embellish your story in order to better lead people to Christ. You deserved to die in the death chamber in Texas. That's what should have happened at the worst and at best you should have done life. How can you look a family of another murderer who got the death penalty for a crime identical to your own? How dare you.

In my youth, I did plenty more drugs than Davis ever did at 18, and it never crossed my mind to do anything so murderous and evil. Never. Not even once. Not on mushrooms, not on LSD, not on pot, not on booze, not on speed, not on ludes, not on coke, no nothing I ever did. At the same age as Davis, doing well more than him, I'm sure, it never made me do anything I didn't want to do. Blaming drugs is a cop out. Its dishonest, its a lie and its not taking responsibility for the crime. Its not repenting. Its shifting blame. Its "the devil made me do it so it wasn't really my fault" bull-crap.

On top of that, claiming there was a car chase when the police report states for the official record there there was a peaceable arrest is something ol' Maury never thought would see the light of day. He thought he could make good theater, tell a great story of his wrong ways turned right, and show what a great witness its made him. Instead, he's he's walking perjury in his witness.

So Bubbdadog, we've heard you, you don't like the Scene, they're "one-sided" even though Davis refused several request to do the story, blah blah blah. I'm glad they exposed in Davis's own home town the evil he committed, and lies he's told about what he did, the way he flaunts his sinful, murderous past to win people to Jesus and does so painting a picture of his crime that is light on facts, and heavy on lies.

Bubbadog: "The story never mentioned that Davis or his church members refused to talk to you. (The closest you came, and it's not very close, is a sentence to the effect that Davis doesn't talk these days about the details of his crime.)"

Hargrove, in the story: "But whatever the story he tells now—he declined interview requests from the Scene—it's certainly captivated Middle Tennessee's evangelicals."

My feeling is that Maury Davis would probably get a lot more forgiveness from both Christians and non-Christians if his focus was on bringing people to his church and not brazenly injecting himself into political debates in Tennessee.

This is a guy who has been openly critical of political figures, publicly supported presidential candidates, called out fellow pastors for refusing to endorse political candidates from the pulpit, touted two members of his congregation running for office from the pulpit and is a regular stop for every right wing politician running for national office and whose name has appeared in daily newspapers in Tennessee more than 50 times in the last five years. Yet, his church remains tax exempt.

If Pastor Davis is going to inject himself into the public political discourse, he has every right to do so, but he and his followers can't then whine about reporters digging into his past. Maury Davis is a politician and that's what happens to politicians.

He can't argue that gays are condemned to the fiery pit of hell, but then claim God doesn't mind if you cut off somebody's head.

To claim that journalists can't cover issues related to Christianity because they probably aren't Christians shows a distinct lack of understanding of what journalism is all about. Christianity may be 2,000 years old, but during that time, Christ's teachings of peace and acceptance have been used to justify wars, murders, hangings, executions and just about every form of barbarity known to man. Christianity has also fractured into thousands of denominations most of whom claim to be the "one true faith."

The problem is not that people don't understand Christianity. Its that they understand it all too well.

Wow! You guys are the best, that last blog from Just Me! I was really entertained by that! Most of the blogs on here are from people who do not go to Cornerstone, how they got so educated on how the Pastor preaches I am not sure, they probably watch him on TV and love him!! I go there and no he doesn't get rich on telling the story of his crime, and he only does it twice a year, and that is by demand. I am sure if he could that is one chapter in his life he would close the door on and never look back! You people just cannot stand it because someone is able to accept Gods grace , mercy and forgivness and move on!! So according to you guys all he needs to do is pay some fines then his preaching would be OK!! Get a life! Find someone new to follow around! For people who cannot stand him you sure do keep up with him!

Matthew 5:7 - Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy

What's up all, I'm chic to the forum and just wanted to approximately hey. hi leaning manipulate to grasp fresh pepole and allowance stuff with them

suffer with a contented year

I knew Maury very well. I played with him in the park across the street from his house. I 'partied' with him during high school, often at his parents' home on weekends while his family enjoyed their lakehouse on Possum Kingdom lake. He was a gentle person then, even in times alcohol and 'recreational' drug use. I was as shocked as most who knew him when he murdered the woman in our hometown. I can speak with certainty that Maury was not drugged out during the days preceding the murder. His behavior was not that of a crazed drug addict. I spent time with him just days before. Blaming the murder on drugs is a cop out. He murdered a defenseless woman and has spent the ensuing years profiting from that heinous act. Forgiveness? Be honest Maury. Only then will you be remotely worthy of forgiveness.