In Defense of the PRC: A Response to Daniel Hyde’s Blatant Lies and Slander
Rev. Daniel R. Hyde ("Pastor Danny") is certainly no stranger in moderate Calvinist circles. Hyde serves as pastor at Oceanside United Reformed Church, Adjunct Instructor of Systematic Theology and Missions at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, and Adjunct Instructor of Ministerial Studies at Mid-America Reformed Seminary.
But Pastor Danny (as he calls himself) has demonstrated in a recent social media post that he is not always pastoral or intellectually honest. On the contrary, he has proven that he will exaggerate or blatantly lie to discredit men who disagree with him.
It all started with this thread on Hyde’s personal Facebook (FB) page, which I assumed was satire and a response to something that was related to the Protestant Reformed Churches [PRC]:
In my opinion, Nathan Eshelman’s comments were facetious and appeared to be directly targeting the PRC denomination, which is why I felt compelled to provide a response:
As expected, critics of the PRC started to surface, with vitriolic comments by not only Steven Carr, but also by the so-called Pastor Danny.
Hyde’s melodramatic comments were so desperate that he felt the need to exaggerate by saying, “Talk to any former PRC member” (emphasis mine), which implies that anyone who has ever left the PRC will corroborate his allegations (“were the truth [sic] church on earth and if you leave us…), which the PRC has historically denied.
Even though Hyde provided no evidence to justify his allegations against the PRC, he still felt the need to rely on vituperation by implying that the PRC is a “cult” whose members are guilty of “spiritual abuse.” These are pretty serious charges that are levied by a so-called pastor who cited no articles or books by any pastor in the PRC to verify his rather outrageous claims.
I respectfully replied with this retort to Mr. Hyde:
It’s interesting that Hyde says, “I never said all,” when it is patently clear in the previous snapshot that he said, “Talk to any former PRC member.” This is what happens when men are melodramatic or desperate to denigrate others: they will contradict themselves and they do not want to be challenged to justify their calumny.
Nonetheless, Hyde clarified what he meant, but that does not dismiss the fact that he provided no evidence to justify his allegations, and he relied heavily on melodramatic comments to smear the PRC. This is why Hyde was quick to dismiss my respectful comments by saying, “Go your own way, unfriend me if you’d like…” In my opinion, Hyde appeared desperate to remove me from his friends list so I would not challenge the veracity of his outrageous allegations. This would prove to be a valid assumption in the end, which will be discussed in this article.
Hyde was not the only one on his social media thread who made slanderous comments towards the PRC. There were several more. As a result, I decided to reply to a few and explain what the PRC teaches and how they are not hyper-Calvinists, as a few were alleging. Interestingly enough, Hyde was not appreciative that I made an attempt to defend the PRC from a few allegations that were made on his thread. This is how Pastor Danny responded:
After I decided to respond to a few more replies that were directly addressed to me, Hyde banned me from his page.
So I decided to send Danny a private message to address his unbecoming and dishonest behavior:
Consequently, I was shocked to find out that Hyde had accused me of “threatening” him via instant messenger.
Now when someone hears the word “threat,” it has the power to incite or induce panic. For example, if my wife or son informed me that someone had threatened them, I would demand clarification, or I would be forced to call the police to determine if someone had actually threatened bodily harm or promised to impugn my wife or son’s reputation if they did not meet their demands. Even the dictionary recognizes the implication of the word threat, as it references: to "hang over dangerously,” or to “portend evil.” As shown above, I made no threats to Hyde. But Hyde never ceased from perpetuating the lie that I had threatened him:
For the record, this gentlemen (Adam) is an observer whom I do not know. Even though Adam said, “…it didn’t seem like Mr. Hernandez was being unreasonable,” Hyde continued to rely on exaggeration and melodramatic lies by saying, “…Oh, and receiving private threats is always fun.”
Hyde’s lie that I “threatened” him did not go unchallenged on his thread. Since Hyde appears to have no problem making serious allegations against professing believers without providing evidence, I took a snapshot of my private message to Hyde and I sent it to one of his Facebook friends, who posted the snapshot to Hyde’s personal FB page:
Accusing the PRC of being “hyper-Calvinists,” or implying that they are a “cult” who are guilty of “pastoral abuse,” is slanderous. I am close friends with Professor David Engelsma, who is one of the godliest men whom I have ever met in my life. Prof. Engelsma would vehemently deny and easily refute the slander that men like Hyde have made against the PRC. I would encourage those who would disagree, and have been led astray by Hyde’s lies, to read books that have been published by the PRC and by Prof. Engelsma to find out the truth for yourself.
Hyde’s comments were public; therefore, this article is public. Thus, let’s hope and pray that if someone in Hyde’s church disagrees with him, or challenges his outrageous allegations, they are well prepared to defend themselves, if he [Hyde] decides to rely on melodramatic lies or slander to discredit them.