Saturday, November 04, 2006

New Financial Thread

Since everyone used the "Announcements" thread for discussion anyway, and since that thread has now grown to over 200 comments, we need to tie a knot in that one and start anew.

So please continue the current discussion in here.

Thanks,

NBBCOF

42 comments:

New BBC Open Forum said...

Derrick,

It's apparent to me that you are indeed sincere in your beliefs and opinions, and I respect you for that. I also appreciate the civil attitude with which you express yourself. You have made a valuable contribution to these discussions and are welcome to comment as you see fit.

It's a shame that we've reached the point where we can't trust our church leaders. It's the way the information seems to always be always predigested and presented that I think people object to. It's my understanding as well that the information presented this week regarding the credit card receipts seemed to pass muster.

But after the 9/24 meeting and the tactics in evidence there, can you not see why people are naturally skeptical now? How did the people at that meeting know that they were examining all the credit card receipts for all the credit cards the church has? Does anyone even know how many of those cards are floating around? Did they see the actual credit card statements or just a stack of receipts?

It's not the people examining the evidence that people seem to be questioning. It's the way the evidence is controlled and presented. What is called for is an independent investigation where a disinterested third party (or parties) goes and obtains the evidence independently. At this point, I might even suggest a private investigator. What isn't going to ever satisfy people, especially after the 9/24 information meeting, is the leadership controlling what information is open to examination. There's a clear conflict of interest here.

NASS

New BBC Open Forum said...

Looks as if several people are getting fed up with the "Bellevue Boys Club" running the church. It's about time. It's funny, as someone who's relatively new to Bellevue, I don't know a lot of people, but when I saw the list of deacons I wondered why there seemed to be so many with the same last names (not the common names which may or may not be related to each other, but the not so common names which represent obvious family connections).

And now I see that most of the committees at Bellevue as well as the boards of directors for BBC, LWF, the BF, ECS, and even MABTS are comprised in great part of the same little group of men. Why is that? Where are all the unsung "common" men who warm the seats every Sunday but whose names we never hear? Where are the women? Working in the nursery? Cooking the Wednesday night suppers? Barefoot and pregnant at home? This is getting more like The Stepford Wives all the time!

While the PD stuff is part of the problem, this little core of rich men running things is what I've perceived to be a bigger problem all along. Steve Gaines' football background, his comparing himself to the head coach of the "team," the same exclusive group of men in all the leadership positions and on the boards of directors of all these related organizations -- it's a pattern. It's the good ol' boys network in action, and it ain't pretty. Bellevue has a big problem, and it's not all Rick Warren's fault. Sadly, it's ours for ever letting this happen.

NASS

New BBC Open Forum said...

Moved from the "Announcements" thread:

WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said...

MKW said...

God is in control and can handle those in leadership over us without us
_________________

Greetings to you in the precious, healing name of Jesus.

I know the LORD uses people, places, and things to bring his will to pass.

I personally love the story of David, as a shepherd boy.

David was called of the LORD and bold in his calling.

When he saw that no one else would step forth to face that taunting Giant Goliath, he stood forth, with but a simple sling in hand and flung the pebble that brought Victory that day!

If the LORD can use a little boy, If he can use a sling slot, If he can use a pebble, to bring HIS WILL to pass, then that`s enough evidence for me to know he will use whom he chooses, what he chooses to do as he chooses, just when he chooses.

It`s not that he needs help from anyone but more that he delights in using his creations to show himself strong through their weaknesses.

When I think on this, I just get so excited!!!!

GOD bless you!
Sister Pam

11:37 AM, November 04, 2006

SallySherlock said...

NASS,

Do you know what the little men you describe who aren't as gifted and talented are allowed to do?

Like Dr. Gaines daddy, they can't do much, but boy they sure can "ush." Bless their hearts.

If we listen closely to what is said by the in-crowd, the disdain for the regular Bellevue member is obvious.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps someone could present a "family tree" of sorts for the church, mabts, bf, lwf, ecs, and so on. It could clarify some things for many.

*

westtnbarrister said...

Josh,

You make good points and I largely agree. The tone of the discourse has definitely changed.

But don't you think that tells us something important? I hear that tone not just in this forum. I hear it at church and out in the community. I think we ignore the feelings expressed here at the peril of our church.

That people are openly and vigorously questioning the leaders should surprise no one. That questioning will only grow worse the longer the conflict drags on.

Someone said their faith in the leadership has been shattered. I think that is a more serious problem than misuse of credit cards.

I'm with you, I hope we can raise the level of the discourse. I also hope our leaders are paying attention because the people are growing restless.

Anonymous said...

mkw said:

"...a home that is suitable for the entertaining and hospitality required of the Parkers' position at BBC..."

Hmm, now just where is that requirement in the Bible?

Just wondering.

New BBC Open Forum said...

praiseteam,

Press here.

New BBC Open Forum said...

choice_is_yours, mkw,

I agree we all need a break from time to time, and I would encourage everyone to do just that. However, because of work schedules or other obligations, some people only have a day or two each week during which they have the time to come here and participate. I would hate to arbitrarily turn off the ability to comment and lock someone out who may not have another opportunity to participate. Also, we have new people dropping in all the time, and if comments are turned off, some may think we're shut down permanently and not return. Not that some don't want the forum to be shut down permanently anyway, but I digress.

So everyone who desires to take a break, please just choose the day or amount of time you need to be away and by all means, take a needed rest. Then return refreshed and ready to contribute.

Everyone have a wonderful Lord's Day tomorrow!

NBBCOF

New BBC Open Forum said...

straining gnats wrote:

"Why did RE need to edit his letter?

"What happened to the part about "putting down his sword?"


You'd need to ask him. He didn't explain, and I didn't ask. I didn't think it was any of my business.

NBBCOF

SallySherlock said...

whynotask,

Do you really think he is a good preacher of the word?

I think his sermons are shallow. This series on the family any Christian parent married 5 years could have written. I believe he could do much better. For whatever reason he doesn't exegete the word. He takes a scattered verse or two, sprinkles in a few anecdotes and jokes, hits the hot buttons evangelicals agree with and then begs people to come to Jesus. These are not the deep biblical sermons we at Bellevue are accustomed to.

If he is going to preach someone else's sermons, I recommend he rip off Doctors Lee, Pollard and Rogers. Those were sermons.

I agree with you about love. You never see it or feel it. Have you been in a room when he enters? He has a rockstar air about him. He calls attention to himself. Dr. Rogers was so humble. The contrast between them as men is striking.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Report on Sunday evening (11/5) "Information Meeting"

Steve Gaines announced that Harry Smith and David Coombs were going to speak.

Harry Smith began by saying that he was going to report on the progress made by the Communications Committee in the three weeks since they'd been formed. He told about a meeting this past week where an undisclosed number of people met to go over the credit card receipts. Linda Somebody (Garce? Garth? something like that) was present to explain the process to them. They went over "all the receipts for every credit card." After going over the receipts, those present concluded everything was in order.

The pastor and his wife ran into "the former CFO" and his wife in a restaurant this week and "had a nice visit." The former CFO (never named, but he meant Craig Parker) met with Steve Gaines later in the week, and they had a really positive meeting, etc.

Then the deacons met at 3:00 today (11/5), and they rolled out the credit card receipts again. Steve Gaines was there and told them he wanted to "get this behind me." One of the deacons reportedly said, "We don't want to see them, Pastor!"

{Standing ovation}

One or two of them did ask to see them "so they could honestly say to people who asked that they'd seen them with their own eyes and could assure them that everything was okay." (Again, that's paraphrased but close.)

So the "one or two" deacons spent some time reviewing the receipts, and after that the deacons, "unanimously, 100%," voted that they were "completely satisfied" that the credit card records were in order.

{Applause}

There have been about 15 of the committee questionaires returned, and they've talked with or met with the people who submitted the questions. The committee members have compiled a list of FAQs along with a statement, and they're mailing a copy of that to every member of the church later this week.

Beginning next Sunday (11/12), the committee members are going to be in one of the rooms off the hallway next to the fellowship hall between the hours of 8:30 and 9:30 on Sunday mornings, and people can come in and meet them and ask questions or just talk with them.

The deacons were going to continue their meeting after this evening's service to further address some undisclosed issues.

Then we stood and were dismissed.

Nothing more was said about David Coombs speaking.

New BBC Open Forum said...

i love my church,

This morning Dr. Gaines commented that he had gotten some statistics about singles from Tim Shelton but that the words [of his sermon] were his own.

NASS

SallySherlock said...

NASS,

"This morning Dr. Gaines commented that he had gotten some statistics about singles from Tim Shelton but that the words [of his sermon] were his own."

I heard him say that. If I were him I wouldn't want anyone to know I wrote that sermon. I am suggesting HE SHOULD use other people's sermons because these are stinkers. They aren't wrong. He isn't preaching lies. He just isn't preaching at all. They are the expositional equivalent of a paint-by-number painting. I believe he has been trained to do much better. Some people are impressed by a slick delivery. I'm not. I'm impressed by content. His sermons are short on biblical content.

Anonymous said...

I was very disappointed that tonight's report was so empty.

Mark Sharpe,

I have some questions for you.

When Harry Smith said that they had been wanting to talk to Craig Parker for quite a while I almost came out of my skin. He made it sound like they just been missing each other and were finally able to visit. Is this a reasonable interpretation of what he said and how he stated it?

Also, I for one need to know for sure if what Harry said about Craig is comprehensively accurate. Harry said that Craig "had no concerns, everything was fine, there was no problem there." Harry did not specify what Craig had no concern about or what was fine but in the context of the overall, it seemed that Craig was ok with the financial side of things. Mark, you have said things that have led me to believe that Craig had legitimate concerns over something and the only way he would meet to discuss them was to have particular people in the room and have it recorded. Hearing it from you, "the deal", sounded bigger to me than what Harry said tonight.

Something is not right here. Did Craig just give up and make up? I believe Harry is telling the truth as he knows it. However, Mark you have said things that I've heard with my own ears that make me believe there is still more to the story. Perhaps I misunderstood.

Please set me straight on all this.

Is there more to Craig's list that he brought up this time?

Is there a problem that Craig still needs to resolve with the Pastor and or Mark D or the church? Or is it time to put Craig Parker's concerns on the resolved list?

Forgive me Craig, you may certainly answer for yourself here but again my understanding is that you are fairly tired of all this.

*

gopher said...

Perhaps he needs to "get this behind him" because Bellevue is hosting the Tennesse Baptist Convention in Memory of Adrian Rogers on Nov 13 :

http://www.tnbaptist.org/CalendarEvent.asp?eventid=902&cat=admin&subcat=events06and


That is why he wanted the deacons to "see" the credit card information and why the deacons are staying until all is resolved.
He doesn't want just "We don't want to see them, Pastor!" as he wants to be cleared by the deacons of all charges and not have to face his accusers.

Anonymous said...

Go ahead outsider. Don't hold back. Really, get it off your chest.

Who said...

Guys,

First let me say this. I love you all. If I have offended in some point I ask your forgiveness, and to the degree to which any of you have offended me, you are indeed forgiven.

My conviction has not changed that I do not need to participate in answering questions here anymore. For every question I can answer for a sincere truth seeker, my words may cause others to stumble.

But anyone with a sincere question, PLEASE e-mail me. I will do my very very best to get you a true and correct answer.

Or meet with the communications committee, or send them questions. Our Lord is using their ministry in a mighty way.

There are things being said here this very night that are simply not true, so please... before you sew discord among the brethren, if you have a question, try to get it answered the the legitimate channels that your church has provided for you.

I am here as your servant, as are the member of our communications committee.

In His service and yours,

Derrick Calcote
dcalcote@msn.com

SallySherlock said...

Outsider,

The church at large is suffering from a lack of expositional preaching. Our pulpits have been turned into places for nice conversations about problems and felt-needs. Today Dr. Gaines tiptoed all around the sin of living together before marriage. He didn't want to seem harsh or mean. The Bible says that is sin. Sin! It is crystal clear. Our church is accustomed to sound no-holds-barred preaching. We no longer get that. For me, this is a much bigger issue than credit cards and hopping fences. He is trying to appeal to the unsaved instead of equiping and edifying the saints. That is his big mistake.

Lwood said...

Gopher Said
In the tithing blog Gopher gave the compensations for several at lwf and bellevue foundation. I went to the site and downloded but did not find the amounts given. Can Gofer expand on this issue...It was verry interesting to see the amount that went to ECS.
Check it out!!!!!!!!

New BBC Open Forum said...

Okay, let me try that again!

The name I tripped over was Linda Glance, Dr. Gaines' Administrative Assistant. Am I correct now? My apologies to Ms. Glance for the error(s).

NASS

New BBC Open Forum said...

sw&w,

Thank you. E-mail me and I'll tell you how to do that.

NASS

New BBC Open Forum said...

Moved from "Prayer is the Key" thread...

junior 5432 said...

Just a thought but why are credit card charges so sensitive. I have heard many here say that they are private and sensitive. I just do not understand that statement.If there had been no impropriety what difference would it make? Are we worried about the IRS or the congregation. Those who have said things are OK are the same ones who are on every committee and board. What they may think is usual and customary may be acceptable to those in power but would they be OK's by the vast majority of the church? For example many businesses allow entertainment of customers and potential employees. Many also allow somethings to be charged to their cards thqat would not be appropriate for a SBC Church to allow. Some also allow the employee to charge personal things on credit cards but must reimburse the company. Also tonight Harry Smith said that
David Coombs was in aggreement with him and that he would say so. It was quite apparant to me that he did not go to the platform to speak nor did he even stand up. With all the "Info" they were given why was he not there to speak? Granted, most of us do not know him from Adam, it would have been intersting to hear what he had to say.

11:28 PM, November 05, 2006

Tim said...

In another string I made mention of the credit card issue. This one always seemed to me to be of minor importance. Not because financial infidelity would have been ok, but because it is an issue that quite frankly would be difficult if not impossible to bring into the light with out an informant on the inside. Whether, there is any thing there or not, we are faced with either believing what we are told or not believing it. It is that simple.

I do believe that the credit card issue has been used as a "smoke and mirror" tactic to redirect attention away from the things that are known.

For example:

We know that we were directly and intentionally misled by our pastor concerning the Wednesday night services.

We know that there are deacons within our church that have offered the door to those that had questions.

We know that there are staff members in positions of authority that have exhibited childish and ungodly behavior.

We know that some of our most trusted and dedicated leaders are no longer on staff.

We know that there is a need for reconciliation, restoration, and healing.

Tim said...

David,

I am in agreement with you in the credit card issue has become a dead issue.

It appears to me that it is being used as diversion from other serious issues.

I personally would like to see it dropped altogether unless there is someone with rock solid proof.

There are issues that are indisputable that need to be addressed and we would be far better served to concentrate on them.

Tim said...

stillwaitingandwatching,

thank you for the support.

I hope that you and others are familar with the "Home Improvement" tv show, because otherwise there might be a Tim "Taylor" at Bellevue that is going to be in serious trouble.

And also, "Beulah Land", that is, like a pseudo name ...right...

Tim said...

CONCERNING THE PLEDGE OF ALLIEGIENCE TO THE PASTOR

I know that there a few deacons who read these post daily, perhaps more than I am aware of.

Your alliegience belongs to no man. Your alliegience belongs to Christ and his church. There is absolutely no Biblical mandate that require or supports such a pledge.

The apostle Paul when faced with those that wanted pledge as his followers told them directly that Apollos planted and Paul watered but God provided the increase. It was also Paul that told the church follow me as I follow Christ. If Paul would not accept the alliegience of followers then by what right does Dr. Gaines have to do so.

I WILL PERSONALLY CONSIDER THIS AS HIGH TREASON AGAINST THE THRONE OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH.

I ALSO WILL CONSIDER THAT OUR CONGREGATION NEEDS TO BE IMMEDIATELY CALLED INTO A BUSINESS MEETING, DISMISS ANY DEACONS WHO SWEAR THERE ALLIEGIENCE TO ANYONE OTHER THAN CHRIST JESUS AND BEGIN REPLACING THEM WITH GODLY, GOD FEARING MEN.

THIS IS WRONG. FLAT WRONG. BLATANTLY WRONG. AND ABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE THAT IT WAS APPROVED BY OUR DEACON BODY.

WHEN THE CHURCH IS NO LONGER STRIVES TO BE A REFLECTION OF CHRIST, THEN THE CHURCH NO LONGER HAS A PURPOSE FOR EXSISTENCE.

THESE ARE DESPERATE TIMES.

Anonymous said...

Tim said...
CONCERNING THE PLEDGE OF ALLIEGIENCE TO THE PASTOR


No such thing exists, as has been noted in the applicable thread.

I WILL PERSONALLY CONSIDER THIS AS HIGH TREASON AGAINST THE THRONE OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH.

Treason, Tim, is a capital offense. What does your "personal consideration" entail, exactly? Do you plan some sort of punishment or condemnation of those you find guilty?

I ALSO WILL CONSIDER THAT OUR CONGREGATION NEEDS TO BE IMMEDIATELY CALLED INTO A BUSINESS MEETING, DISMISS ANY DEACONS WHO SWEAR THERE ALLIEGIENCE TO ANYONE OTHER THAN CHRIST JESUS AND BEGIN REPLACING THEM WITH GODLY, GOD FEARING MEN.

Are you questioning the salvation of those who disagree with your viewpoint?

THIS IS WRONG. FLAT WRONG. BLATANTLY WRONG. AND ABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE THAT IT WAS APPROVED BY OUR DEACON BODY.

Were it as some anti-Bellevue types have portrayed it, yes, it would be wrong.

It isn't.

WHEN THE CHURCH IS NO LONGER STRIVES TO BE A REFLECTION OF CHRIST, THEN THE CHURCH NO LONGER HAS A PURPOSE FOR EXSISTENCE.

So you, personally, judge a church where the deacons commit to being servants of God and to freeing the pastor to attend to other duties no longer fit to exist? Do I understand you correctly?

THESE ARE DESPERATE TIMES.

It's been said that desperate times call for desperate measures, Tim. Is that what you're attempting to communicate? And if so, what sort of desperate measures do you propose?

--Mike

Tim said...

Mike,

Before I begin answering your questions, there a just a couple of things that I would like to point out.

The first being that you and I are not nearly so different as some would think. I believe that in some regards we are very similar.

The second is that I have tried and I emphasize tried because I can not claim that I have always been 100% sucessful, to remain civil with all who have directed toward me.

Thirdly and finally, I have not participated in dragging all the names of deacons that I both know and have spoke with around and personally attacked them. I have poked a jab your direction on occassion and I apologize for that, most of the time it has been meaningless fun, not all the time however and I recognize and apologize for the times when it was not.

Now on to the matters at hand.
Treason would certainly disqualify one from service, so the punishment would be removal from office.

In regards to questioning anyones salvation, I confess that it is not my responsiblity to do so. I would challenge anyone who pledges alliegence to any man to question their own. We are commanded to be subjects of Christ and Christ alone.

Regarding the way in which this is viewed. I have looked at this and tried to understand, how it is possible that several, perhaps more of the deacon body came up with this idea and thought that it was a good one. I believe that they are sincere in that, however, to say that those in attendance unanimously decided that all are unaniamous is absurd. Does this mean they are unanimous or else they are dismissed?

I personally judge a church that has no reflection of Christ and no desire to be a reflection of Christ to have no reason for exsistence.

Yes, these are desperate times. Our Church is being destroyed from within, not because you and I disagree or even because Mark Sharpe and Dr. Gaines disagree. Rather it is our inability to disagree in a manner that is Christ like (You, I, Mark Shapre and yes, even Dr. Gaines) and when confronted with our short comings or failure or sin (to use the Biblical term) confess it to one another and ask for forgiveness from one another. For some it has become more about winning and losing and that is wrong.
However, with that being said, it should be known that there are matters of doctrine in which there is no room for compromise and to those that have been around Bellevue for a period of time those should be self evident.

Anonymous said...

Tim said... Treason would certainly disqualify one from service, so the punishment would be removal from office.

As I mentioned previously, Tim, treason is a capital crime. Capital crimes are crimes punishable by death, not by removal from office. No doubt you didn't intend to make that inference, but it is there nonetheless.

In regards to questioning anyones salvation, I confess that it is not my responsiblity to do so. I would challenge anyone who pledges alliegence to any man to question their own. We are commanded to be subjects of Christ and Christ alone.

When insisting that certain people be replaced with "GODLY, GOD FEARING MEN," the implication is that the certain people to whom you refer are un-Godly men who do not fear God.

And I completely agree that we, as Christians, are "subjects of Christ and Christ alone." The deacon affirmation does absolutely nothing which disagrees with that.

Regarding the way in which this is viewed. I have looked at this and tried to understand, how it is possible that several, perhaps more of the deacon body came up with this idea and thought that it was a good one. I believe that they are sincere in that, however, to say that those in attendance unanimously decided that all are unaniamous is absurd. Does this mean they are unanimous or else they are dismissed?

Good question. Let me ask you one in return, if I might. Have you ever heard of a "dissident deacon"?

I personally judge a church that has no reflection of Christ and no desire to be a reflection of Christ to have no reason for exsistence.

Bellevue Baptist Church is not such a church.

However, with that being said, it should be known that there are matters of doctrine in which there is no room for compromise and to those that have been around Bellevue for a period of time those should be self evident.

That pretty much didn't answer my question, Tim. Again, what sort of desperate measures are you and yours proposing?

--Mike

Tim said...

Mike,

The questions that you asked were indeed answered. It might be that you are seeking clarification, but I believe that I was fairly direct. Perhaps you might clarify what it is that you are asking. Again, I am a simple man and you must forgive my lack of understanding your inquiries.

The final question that you had, I unintentionally omitted, but do you not believe that removing a portion of deacons and appointing others into these positions of authority would not be desperate.

Anonymous said...

Tim said...
Mike,

The questions that you asked were indeed answered. It might be that you are seeking clarification, but I believe that I was fairly direct. Perhaps you might clarify what it is that you are asking. Again, I am a simple man and you must forgive my lack of understanding your inquiries.

The final question that you had, I unintentionally omitted, but do you not believe that removing a portion of deacons and appointing others into these positions of authority would not be desperate.


Tim, you labeled these "desperate times." If you label these as desperate times, then you must advocate desperate measures.

What are they, if you don't mind my asking again?

--Mike

Anonymous said...

"Any foolishness packaged in pleasantry is still a waist of time."

Tim said...

Mike,
Replace .... deacons .... that
... will .... not .... fulfill
.... their .... responsibilities
.... to .... the .... church
.... with .... those .... that .... will.

I .... thought .... perhaps
.... if .... I .... wrote .... it .... a.... bit .... slower .... that .... you .... might .... get .... it.

Anonymous said...

Tim said...
Mike,
Replace .... deacons .... that
... will .... not .... fulfill
.... their .... responsibilities
.... to .... the .... church
.... with .... those .... that .... will.

I .... thought .... perhaps
.... if .... I .... wrote .... it .... a.... bit .... slower .... that .... you .... might .... get .... it.


Evidently, there's a contest to see which anti-Bellevue backer can be the most provocative; perhaps the winner receives a pair of front-row seats to the "Showdown" next Sunday morning, hmm?

Removing oxymoronic "dissident deacons" isn't anything out of the ordinary, and it isn't something that would be conducted by anti-Bellevue individuals. Deacons, by definition, support the pastor of a church; if a deacon is unwilling to do so, the deacon should voluntarily separate himself from active service until he can comfortably support his pastor, rather than wait to be removed from active status.

As someone affiliated with the "SB" group, Tim, you have defined these as desperate times. Since the "SB" group would be the last to want to see so-called "dissident deacons" removed from their position--and are not even in a position to remove anyone from anything--you had to have been referring to something else.

If you don't wish to share, I understand completely.

--Mike

Anonymous said...

I'm bringing this over to the appropriate thread.

Are there any more thoughts or solid information on this?

deceivedagain said...

It is now confirmed that Steve Gaines did use the Bellevue credit card to pay for his daughter's birthday party at Colonial Country Club.

The men who reviewed the American Express bill confirmed that it did happen. The church said Steve Gaines paid it back. I'd like to see when the charge was made and when the pastor's reimbursement was made.

More developing on other charges.....

8:04 AM, November 12, 2006


Andrew said...

deceivedagain,

The communications committee told me that...

...Steve tried to pay for the bill himself and was not allowed to by the Club, just like he had done previously.

...the Club didn't take his personal credit card.

...it was direct billed to the church.

... Steve reimbursed the church for his daughter's party.


I understood that a credit card was not involved, but rather an invoice type of billing was used. If you find out differently, please let me know and I will return to the committee in order to clear up and revisit our prior conversation. There is no room for misunderstanding in my conversation with them.

*

9:05 AM, November 12, 2006

Anonymous said...

Every question about the credit card issues has been answered and more than once. there are many that will NEVER be satisfied no matter what and that is trully sad. Not only are there no questionable charges, but Brother Steve has gone above and beyond from day one to make sure of that. There are some that have even talked to the Commucations Committee and have been given detailed answers and they are still not satisfied it is the "truth".

I find it sad that some would rather put their faith in rumors, gossip, slander and out right un-truths.

Yes, there are some hurting and they need to be comforted. There are also those that seem to be enjoying this. Actions speak volumes.

Tim said...

HisServant,

So are you saying the things that are stated here are not true or do you know?

Anonymous said...

most of the things on this entire site are not true and yes I know. there is a VERY simple explanation to 99% of the things on tghis site. like I have said, those that have true concerns can get answers to those concerns. i am not talking about music style and all the other many personal preference issues. I am taking about true concerns. go get the answers.

Tim said...

HisServant,

If you have them, why not give them. You are here and I am here.

Tim said...

HisServant,

Your reference to personal preference issues leads me to believe that you are unaware of what issues have been raised. I have heard this canned remark from more than one of our deacons.

Anonymous said...

I know every issue that has been raised. I never said all of them were personal preferences, but some are.