Two petitions concerning the leadership at Bellevue are now online.
The first is the Postpone the Ordination of David Coombs petition which many of you have already signed. The ordination is scheduled for this Sunday, February 25th, so don't delay.
The second is entitled Should They Go?.
Please stop by and sign both petitions if you haven't already.
Carol Pemberton has written another fine letter regarding the situation at Bellevue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
658 comments:
1 – 200 of 658 Newer› Newest»Yet we now have another petition and this time from someone anonymous. Some will call this boldness to call out these men of our church. Quite the opposite should be said of this person, a coward throwing stones from afar would be a better description. It is one thing for people to have civil (I know that’s a reach) discussions on a message board in anonymity but certainly not fair where making a public petition for the removal of God’s appointed. And then for the consideration of what is the worth of this petition. This is just another way to cause disruption and disharmony, to fragment brothers and sisters rather than bring us together for God’s glory.
But the usual suspects will rally around this petition as they have others. Will this bring them joy to be able to place their names or marks on another distraction? But what will be accomplished with this new task? May I submit nothing, nothing, and nothing! Even if 1,000 persons witness and sign this petition it is a relatively small number in comparison to the membership of Bellevue. I have a large contingent of friends at Bellevue and in the past months have spoken with them about our issues. Yes, most agree we have some concerns that need addressing. But everyone I speak with believes that the approach taken by those who create the IDC, petitions, and continued negative misrepresentation of facts are 100% wrong. Yes, they believe that now with Dr. Gaines as our pastor that we cannot continue to do things the same as when Dr. Rogers was our pastor. It is agreed that more accountability and transparency is needed. But there is a right way and a wrong way. And petitions are not the way to resolve these concerns.
You guys don’t recognize positive changes when they are made. We now have an opportunity to have someone of strong integrity and character come on staff. But the dissenters fight his addition at every turn. Now we have a petition which states that we have other men with character and ability willing to accept these roles should we ‘petition out’ our current leadership. Anybody want to provide some names of these men who have distinguished themselves and desire these leadership positions? I mean they must be a slew of men just waiting to have their lives dissected by the small masses and any missteps in their lives announced to the world. Please oh great men in reserved announce yourselves to us all.
Just My Opinion,
You mentioned a positive change in adding DC to staff.
What other positive changes have you seen at Bellevue under this new adminstration?
Just a little day brightner..I mentioned this yesterday when I discovered but it's soooo worth mentioning again.
Savingbellevue.org..click on Keep our eyes on our Savior "Jesus"
(the message is in the horses)
There is hope for all of God's creatures.
Thank you Jim Haywood.
JMO,
While it is such a small number here, I will weigh in and answer your question from yesterday. I am not necessarily opposed to Coombs being ordained based on anything I have heard on this blog. In fact, because of the way about three of the shrillest here behave, I am moved to leaning toward going ahead and doing it since if this is the best reasons with such unkind attitudes included, then there is no reason not to.
But, I would like to see a holy assembly of prayer, repentance and confession as a church happen first. I mean, if we we are serious about the importance and gravitas of what we face in the chuch, then even if it is not called for by leaders, why would the folks here not walk down to the front after a service fall on their faces and beseech the Almighty God, whose heart is breaking over the division , the hurt, the sin (on both sides) and then when reconciliation and healing occurs, let the church move forward against the forces of darkness. This is getting nowhere fast as it is and all have dug in and have adopted the theme song, "I Will Not Be Moved"... and Jesus heart is breaking over the attitudes of many on both sides (not all).
Those who so quickly defend those who lash out with angry vitriol, hurt their integrity when they then ask others not to. This is wrong and hypocritical and for some reason they can't seem to see the double standard. And, of course, throw in some scripture and that is supposed to shield you from any disagreement with your prior assertions and attacks.
I think it is interesting that since ACE is gone, the attitude between the sides is dramatically marked in the difference in tone as a general rule (not all). And, the ones who dominate here onthe "anti" side are by far the harshest.
JMO, I am ducking back behind the hedge now.
JMO said...
"I mean they must be a slew of men just waiting to have their lives dissected by the small masses and any missteps in their lives announced to the world. Please oh great men in reserved announce yourselves to us all."
The Lord will reveal them in His time.
mexico, sometimes we don't recognize that somethings are more impactful than what we may perceive. The fact that DC was critical of how our pastor and staff handled the PW situation in front of the congregation. Be assured that a stronger rebuking took place outside public consumption.
I remember as a child hearing my family talk about public hangings. How the town would fill with people wanting to watch these public executions. Yes there are consequences for sin and disobedience but not everything has to be for public consumption. I don't need the details of the PW situation publicly stated for me to understand an evil was perpetrated on his son. I do believe that some on this board would like nothing more than to hear and see all. And they would say it was for the sake of transparency.
I apologize for the wrong link in the topic heading. That has been corrected. Thanks to those of you who brought that to my attention.
NBBCOF
aragorn wrote: "But, I would like to see a holy assembly of prayer, repentance and confession as a church happen first. I mean, if we we are serious about the importance and gravitas of what we face in the church, then even if it is not called for by leaders, why would the folks here not walk down to the front after a service fall on their faces and beseech the Almighty God, whose heart is breaking over the division , the hurt, the sin (on both sides) and then when reconciliation and healing occurs, let the church move forward against the forces of darkness. This is getting nowhere fast as it is and all have dug in and have adopted the theme song, "I Will Not Be Moved"... and Jesus heart is breaking over the attitudes of many on both sides (not all)."
I stand aside to the wisdom of your words. You are on target with those words of wisdom.
realitycheck says…back and forth…tit for tat and still no response to my request in the other thread. It appears that posters are jerking each other’s emotional chains…not dealing with facts.
I posted facts. JMO, I sincerely requested that you respond to the logic associated with my post. DC was the head of the Team and he was approached several times for the inclusion of pertinent information. By the way, I don’t know him well enough to make a judgment one way or the other but the facts don’t add up as I pointed out earlier.
I suspect he will be ordained…that is the plan isn’t it? I don’t expect another mammoth event to surface. However, there are many issues yet to surface that need addressing.
Deal with facts not emotion. Stop going back and forth with… “I want you to see my point of view…how dare you say this or that about so and so.” One great saint used to pray… “Lord free me from the lust of self-vindication.” As long as this emotional banter goes back and forth, the most emotional have little if any credibility and it keeps the focus off the facts.
This is my story and I’m sticking to it.
Faith,
I just wanted you to know I'm praying for you right now. I cannot imagine your pain and suffering brought to you at the hands of your ex-husband.
God, please put a hedge of protection around Faith today - let nothing said on this blog be of a selfish, bitter or self-serving nature. God, keep a bit in our mouths (or on our fingers) today as we try to speak to each other in love and truth only.
AMEN!
I want to publically apologize to anyone here that I've offended with my style of words. I am a pretty decent writer, but I admit to getting a little out of hand lately.
God bless us all as we face the upcoming ordination of David Coombs. I'm sure he's a perfectly good person, but I do not agree with the timing nor the way in which this prospective ordination is appartantly going to take place.
Stephen Coombs said yesterday that this should be a time of celebration for his family - this should be a joyous occasion, but if they choose to have David Coombs ordained now, it's not our fault. If you could wait and do it at a more appropriate, less turbulent time, you could enjoy the celebration now. I find it highly selfish to do it now.
karen
Just My Opinion...
I'll ask again...what other positive changes have you seen at Bellevue under this new administration?
mexico, please clarify what you determine is the "new administration". I am not avoiding your question, I am not sure exactly your reference. Is it Steve Gaines that you reference? Or others? David is the newest but hasn't had much time to do anything as of yet. He had to deal with the PW situation off the bat.
realitycheck, sorry but did not intend to ignore your question. I do have a business to run and tend to go back and forth trying to keep up with the blog. Please save me some search time and suscintly post your question. I will attempt to answer in a clear logical manner as you've requested.
I have a conference call with a client starting so it may be some time for my response.
Just My Opinion,
Use Dr. Gaines' arrival as a starting point. DC would be included in this time frame.
Just glancing over the petition, I think the petition has nailed the coffin for some of the peoples cause to removed SG and stop DC ordination.
I also think it has moved IDC into the radical extremist (religion with no grace) camp.
Holding one man out and blasting him in public and allowing anonymous people and silly user names to hurl stones at him.
As I glanced over it, I just get sick to my stomach. That just is not righteous, no matter what the man has/has not done.
Seminary is a requirement? Jack Graham (past president of SBC) has many ordained ministers on staff who came out of the business world. I already know exactly which people are going to write and blast Jack Graham so save your time and arguments that will change nothing.
I think everyone agrees the current church structure has been like this for many years and we wil see some changes going forward.
Seems like many on the petition sees a corporate leader coming on to a church staff is inherently evil. The corporate world does not treat people like that petition does.
Bad Call on the petition.
A friend asked that I post this for her:
Mexico asked: "what other positive changes have you seen at Bellevue under this new administration?"
Well, God makes ALL things work together for good for those who are called according to His purpose:
~ The sheep-shed called Bellevue Baptist Church is getting cleaned.
~ We sheep are learning to keep our eyes on the Good Shepherd.
~ Steve Gaines has certainly turned BBC into a Praying church ~ We've been driven to our knees! May God keep us there in the good times too!
~ Our corporate and individual pride has been exposed. What will I do about mine?
There are more benefits to being tried by fire, so this is just a start...
Dr. Rogers gave us a word-picture of a tea cup getting bumped, and said that what is inside comes out at times like this.
Question: What's inside of you?
At the end of the day, may we each find a puddle of Godliness in our saucer. Amen?
Also Tim,
Any fallout you are recieving from the petition, I think you deserve it.
It must be difficult for you. If you were persecuted because you were in the open sharing the Gospel and people started persecuting you, you would have a completely clear conscious before the Lord.
However, I know you are having your moments of wondering if you did the right thing. That is a terrible postion to be in because you cant stand clearly and boldly before the Lord with a clear conscious. Because you yourself are probably starting to doubt your actions.
You can say you are standing up for the truth. But do you honestly believe in your true heart, without a shadow of doubt you did the right thing? If I were in your shoes, I would have to say no.
Nass, the trash cans are gone on the last thread. I hate to increase your work load but would appreciate it if you would delete every single one of my posts.
Evidently, some here are allowing what they perceive as my sin to dictate their view of truth.
Thanks.
Just my opinion wrote
"I think that realitycheck has set a high standard for well versed opinion verses just old fashioned rhetoric. Hopefully you can respond in kind. I would sincerely appreciate hearing from someone who was critical of Bellevue's report on their opinion to the DCS report."
OK here goes,
The DCS report was to see if any law had been broken and to see if there were any more victims or children at risk.
Bellevue's report was a dog and pony show. "The term has come to mean any type of presentation or display that is somewhat pathetically contrived or overly intricate, or put on for purposes of gaining approval for a program, policy, etc." There was a forgone conclusion that PW should be fired. This was evident from June 2006 when the pastor found out the details of this crime and did nothing to protect the integrity and purity of the church. Yet we have this investigation that, ta-dah, came to the same conclusion.
That the DCS found no illegality in no way absolves the pastor for his failure to make the right moral choice.
You also wrote, "The fact that DC was critical of how our pastor and staff handled the PW situation in front of the congregation. Be assured that a stronger rebuking took place outside public consumption."
The Bellevue report could hardly be called critical of the pastor. It was a slap on the wrist that mainly pointed fingers at Webb and Jamie and said , "well the senior pastor knew but they did too."
Just My Opinion, what I'm so outraged at is why was there no explanation for why my pastor thinks its ok to have a minister on staff that raped his son? I hold him accountable for this and I want an explanation-from him. He is to lead this church, but I don't like where this is leading. I emailed him under my own name saying this but I have had no reply.
JMO I welcomed the pastor with open arms when he came. The other indiscretions troubled me, but I did not think they were somthing worth calling for his resignation. Allowing a minister to stay on staff who raped his son is in a WHOLE different category. I again ask, where is our outrage, where is our shame?
I ask you JMO, do you think it is ok to have on staff a minister who raped his son? Our pastor does. If you do not agree then how can you support this man? When you go out for FAITH visits how will you respond if someone asks how can your church believe it is ok to have a minister on staff who raped his son?
I know I am being repetitive, but I think you are missing the point. The Bellevue investigation merely stated the obvious, and the DCS investigation concerned legality not morality.
Great knock,
That is a great point about the FAITH visitations. I think I would probably be speechless.
There really is no excuse, reason or explanation why a pastor would allow a staff member to remain on staff after discovering a horrible act, no matter if it was 1,17 or 30 years old.
How was church attendence Sunday during the first and second service?
Well said, the great knock.
Thank you,
socwork
I read this post from a previous thread:
And, by the way, telling the truth is always loving.
I believe this to be an unbiblical statement.
In speaking to Christ's church in Eph 4:15, Paul wrote "but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ" There is a distinction between truth and love.
In John 16, Jesus told his disciples "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come." In his wisdom, infused by the Spirit, Jesus withheld the 'truth' about his upcoming crucifixion because he knew it was not yet the right time for them to know. The Spirit knows all things, but even he doesn't speak it until the Father tells him the time is right.
In Ephesians 4, Paul wrote "Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear."
In the light of these passages, I believe that truth is much more than just facts. It's the facts that God wants known at the time God has ordained, revealed in the way God wants to accomplish the end God desires.
If any of us have knowledge, a word from God, knowledge of sin, or if we see spiritual blind spots in our friends, let's look for the appropriate time God wants us to speak, so that the purpose God wants is fulfilled, "that it will give grace to those who hear."
karen,
Bless you, sister. Faith and I have prayed for you regularly, especially during your exchanges with 'pastor'. God honored those prayers, and He will continue to hear us.
Hope
Maybe this would be an important time to review the purpose of BBC's Investigation.
As stated by the Investigative Team, the purposes of the investigation were:
1. Paul William's Employment Status.
2. Victim Support.
3. Church Policies and Procedures.
With me so far?
1. Did we really need an investigative team to come to a conclusion about Paul William's Employment status? He serially raped his son over a period of 12-18 months, and then decided it was ok to stay on church staff for 17 years following. It is possible that he still would be on staff today if not for the courage of his son. Paul Williams should have been fired immediately when he spoke to Steve Gaines about this in June.
2. Victim support. Now, it would seem only logical to me that if the investigative team was so very concerned about victim support, they would have actually included the victim in the process. They would have made some concessions to make the victim feel more comfortable in sharing information with the team. This did not happen.
3. Ok, church policies and procedures. Now, if I remember correctly, later in the report, it was mentioned that there was a seminar for staff to attend about child abuse. That's great, but these kinds of trainings/seminars occurred before the PW issue. Clearly, I can't speak to policies and procedure changes since, well, I can't see them.
Terry Smith,
If there were in any doubts in my mind concerning the petition I could pull the plug on it at any time. There are honest issues that need to be addressed by the church. The petition does not say that David Coombs should never be ordained just that it should be postponed until a more appropriate time.
Since the ordination was not an action that was brought before the membership, the petition's purpose is to determine whether we are "congregationally approved" or not.
I am well aware that one day we will all stand before the Lord and give account. At that time my defense will be limited to what was done according to the Word of God and the leading of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps I will be admonished for being too literal and dogmatic in my reading of Scripture. I will trust the judgment of God to pure and true.
The fact of the matter is that there are too many problems that exist to sit back and do nothing. Amazingly enough there are those that know much more than I do and choose to do nothing. Beyond belief are those that know the truth and actively seek to conceal it.
The better questions are not to ask why I am doing what I am, but rather to those that know the truth, why they are not doing anything or worse why they are doing what they are doing.
Faith Jackson,
I am so very sorry for the pain that you suffered at the hands of your former husband. My heart breaks for you, and your two children in heaven. And I totally understand your statement about being there to watch. I have had to deal with myself about that, too.
I finally realized that hating someone is like injesting poison into my own body and then waiting for the other person to die.
I do not even begin to give you advice on forgiveness or about hating someone who deserves it.
I listened to Dr. Rogers sermons on forgiveness and I cannot tell you how much they helped me.
I once read a sign on a church that said this:
Forgiveness is giving up your right to get even.
That one statement was the beginning of my long journey of forgiveness. I think that the Lord had me driving down that street, on that day, for that pupose.
Please know that I understand just how valid your feelings are, and that I love you in Jesus.
Hope,
Thanks for the prayers - that whole "pastor" thing really did freak me out. Just the price I paid for being "known", I guess.
Terry Smith,
Please don't think that Tim is totally responsible for the petition. We've had a deacon on a previous thread acknowledge that the petition was causing a stir with the leadership. I how it's more than just a stir now and that they are truly wishing to listen and minister to the sheep of their flock that are truly hurting. I don't blame anyone for signing the petition anonymously. After the things BBC leadership has put people through who have put their names out in public, do you blame them? Since David Coombs mentioned their names in his letter to all members of BBC, I have no problem mentioning them here: Riad Saba, David Green, Josh Manning, Tim Coggins. With the tremendous beatings (figuratively) that Mark Sharpe and Richard Emerson have had to endure, how in the world you blame members of BBC for wanting to remain anonymous? I have nothing to lose, so I have always had my name out there. It's still scary to sit home and night and wait for 4 men to get over my fence to "reconcile" with me. So don't blame Tim or anyone else for the way the petition is being addressed.
I really will feel sorry for you when something that BBC leadership does to harm you or your family - physically, mentally or spiritually. I hope it never happens to you, but if it does, I will be the first to comfort you because I know how it feels.
karen
Deuteronomy 32:4-5
4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
5 They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.
socwork said,
3. Ok, church policies and procedures. Now, if I remember correctly, later in the report, it was mentioned that there was a seminar for staff to attend about child abuse. That's great, but these kinds of trainings/seminars occurred before the PW issue. Clearly, I can't speak to policies and procedure changes since, well, I can't see them
FYI, there was a training seminar held at BBC last year, supposedly attended by all staff regarding reporting child abuse. So whatever this bunk is about having DCS come in to train the staff, it's been done long before PW confessed.
Bryan Miller is an educator - once he knew of the abuse he should have taken the wheel and reported it. I hold him accountable. Also, the SBC put our a mandate in 2002 about reporting child abuse (per reports on CNN.com and MSNBC.com), so any self respecting pastor in service in 2002 knew what to do about child abuse.
Common sense tells you what to do - if you suspect abuse, you report. You don't have to have a degree or pastorate to know that. Protect the children at all cost, period!
karen
Karen,
Brian Miller is not an educator. His job is to oversee the administration of ECS and raise funds for it's maintenence and operation. However, since the board of directors of the school are ultimately responsible to oversee the safety as well as the education of the students of ECS, then he should of necessity be very intimately familiar with how to formulate policy regarding abuse issues.
I am not calling you out, just correcting an assumption for the sake of our integrity.
aslansown said...
Karen,
Brian Miller is not an educator. His job is to oversee the administration of ECS and raise funds for it's maintenence and operation. However, since the board of directors of the school are ultimately responsible to oversee the safety as well as the education of the students of ECS, then he should of necessity be very intimately familiar with how to formulate policy regarding abuse issues.
I am not calling you out, just correcting an assumption for the sake of our integrity.
Are you saying he's never been a teacher? How do you get to be principal without first being a teacher? Or am I totally off base as to what his title is at ECS?
karen
Karen,
Brian is President of ECS.
karen,
Thanks for the clarification about the DCS trainings. That doesn't suprise me with as many children as come to BBC, it's only logical to address signs of child abuse and what one does when one encounters these signs.
I have little to say these days because it appears to me everything has been said that needs to be said...until something else breaks or tears, which probably will happen. I am in the WORD a lot these days, more so than usual, and on my knees praying that TRUTH will reign over the darkness that has crept ever so slowly into our churches. (You know...the frog in the pot thing.)
I am ever so moved by watching "Keep Our Eyes on Our Savior "JESUS"" which Jim Haywood put on savingbellevue.com. I pray every PD pastor/CGM pastor will watch this and then ask themselves why these eighteen beautiful horses had to be sacrificed? I hope they will ask themselves if the death of these beautiful horses created by our Holy Father were worth it? I hope they will be able to tell their Maker what 'the point' was? I would like to hear what their answer to 'What was the point?" might be. I would like them to tell me if their churches are better off for their efforts? I would like for them to tell me what jewels might be added to their crowns for having done this to their fellow brothers/sisters in Christ? For the damage to Body of Christ? I would like to hear a sermon from Steve Gaines from the pulpit this Sunday morning comparing his sheep to these horses...and give his analogy to the spiritual death of Bellevue Baptist Church. HIS children are drowing while the pastor of BBC stands by and continues to do nothing. He started this...he needs to stop it. And I say the same for his staff.
We need Jesus...plus nothing.
Ok, he's president of ECS - I guess it's being like any other business with kids being product. Thanks for the clarification.
karen
Piglet asked yesterday evening if anyone knew about the sermon notes for Feb 25.
I went to the sight yesterday and they were on the web site, but today it is showing the notes from Feb 18.
?? Sermon Notes ??
You can go here, however and see what I saw yesterday.
Ordination Sermon
Does Donna Gaines or her company "Hope for the future" have a budget or an expense account at Bellevue?
Who approved Donna's expenses for her speaking trip to Africa later this year? Didn't think we knew about that trip did you???
Are we also picking up the tab for others to go with Donna on her speaking tour to Africa?
Donna's trip alone will cost the Church Thousands!!!
How much is money will Donna or "Hope for the future" receive on the Afraic trip?
Will any of the answers to the questions above be given to the members.
Lasr question....Who can I give my application to at BBC to apply for a staff position....Kidding of course!!
Congregationally approved?
With modern technology, it really shouldn't be that hard for even a very large church to get a feel of the congregation's collective understanding of the direction God would have them go. A church with Bellevue's resources could set up a section on their website for collecting feedback, assign each member a username and password, and allow each member to vote once on any question.
In the meantime, NASS, what about setting up a quick poll or two of the blog readers on the questions raised by the two petitions? I know it would not be as secure and reliable as a system with usernames and passwords, but it would still be interesting to see if there is a significant number of people reading this blog who disagrees with the petitions.
Just a thought...
Iwant2know:
All this reminds me of Bill and Hillary Clinton's trip to Africa that time. Remember the HUGE group they took with them? They took everybody and their brother's cousin!!!
Since I AM Algore's 5th cousin ( according to the family historian) I was thinkin that maybe I was going to get to go with!!! hehe
And before I get jumped on for being the cousin to Algore, just remember, ' everybody's got SOME kinfolk that they don't claim!!!
At 12:13 PM, February 23, 2007
iwant2know said...
Who approved Donna's expenses for her speaking trip to Africa later this year? Didn't think we knew about that trip did you???
junk99mail says...
Are you saying that you know as a fact that the church is paying for this trip? Is Donna Gaines on the Bellevue staff?
Honest questions; I just want to know.
mom4, what if some don't agree or believe that it's the Lord's man? I believe without a doubt that the Lord has called David Coombs at this time. I know hundreds who believe as well. So what do you say to this?
Folks should really read this over.
I saw this yesterday but there is not a direct link on the Bellevue web-site any longer.
Read it Here
-----------
Karen @ 9:23 a.m.
let nothing said on this blog be of a selfish, bitter or self-serving nature. God, keep a bit in our mouths (or on our fingers) today as we try to speak to each other in love and truth only.
AMEN!
I want to publically apologize to anyone here that I've offended with my style of words. I am a pretty decent writer, but I admit to getting a little out of hand lately.
--------------------------------
Karen @ 11:58 a.m.
Ok, he's president of ECS - I guess it's being like any other business with kids being product.
-------------------------
Wow!
junk99mail says...
Are you saying that you know as a fact that the church is paying for this trip? Is Donna Gaines on the Bellevue staff?
junk99mail,
Yes, it is a fact and on the books that Donna Gaines speaking trip to africa will happen later on this year.
Just ask someone on the mission's committee.
Just don't ask them how much the trip will cost BBC or how much money Donna Gaines or her company "Hope for the future" will receive!!!
JMO said
It is agreed that more accountability and transparency is needed. But there is a right way and a wrong way. And petitions are not the way to resolve these concerns.
Piglet says:
This is a desperate attempt by the masses to be heard. Their voices have been crying out for a year now. They have been told to leave. They have been ignored. They have been demonized. They have been denied a hearing over, and over, and over again.
Their pastor is proud that he does not allow them to speak in an open business meeting and only has informational meetings where ONE sideis allowed to speak.
HOW DARE YOU CRTICIZE THEIR EFFORTS. THESE LEADERS HAVE BROUGHT THIS UPON THEMSELVES.
THE TRUTH WILL NOT BE SILENCED.
forreal,
I don't understand your "wow" to my email. Was that ugly of me to say? Seriously, please let me know. I don't want to make it sound like I was being harsh.
I find it surprising that a man can be a president of a school and not be an educator. I don't have kids and never went to private school, so I really didn't know this was possible.
karen
Memo to the great knock...
I don't support the decision made by Bro. Steve in relationship to the PW situation. I've not wavered from that position from day one. No minister should be or remain on staff that did what PW admitted.
It was obvious by everyone except Steve Gaines. I certainly understand the difference in God's laws and man's laws. The point on the DCS is that they didn't find any children at risk from PW. You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board. And that was shown not to be the situation. While I understand that it is difficult to cure a pedophile I know that my Lord can cure one. So before I get the ifs and possibles from you folks, keep in mind that I serve a God that can cure pedophilia. And I believe that PW was cured since his son was the one and only that has been known.
Tim is right, read the link. That sermon smacks of agenda, in my opinion.
jmo says:
And I believe that PW was cured since his son was the one and only that has been known.
SOTL says:
I suppose that the best way for you to back that up is to volunteer to leave your kids/grandkids with him for a weekend visit.
A major concern at BBC now is about there being discussion on the budget which is upon us.
I understand the leadership is very concerned about this. Sooooo get your questions together and get organized.
mexico, I can't honestly say that I see much positive impact since Bro. Steve's arrival. While I support my pastor and his position, I am not a Steve Gaines fan. But I wasn't before when he preached to us in Dr. Rogers absence. I recall one particular sermon in which he challenged Bellevue to be more evangelical in Memphis and America. I remember thinking to myself..'the nerve of someone coming to Dr. Rogers sheep and admonishing them in their walk'. But I am more concerned about Bellevue than I am Bro. Steve. But again he is my pastor and I support that position of authority.
JMO,
If it was obvious to everyone, but Steve Gaines, can't you conclude that Steve Gaines is inept to lead others? It's like the Emperor's New Clothes? If no one says anything to the guy, he's still naked. Dooesn't change the fact the fact that he's naked even when his "flunkies" (if you will) say it's okay that he's naked, does it?
If Steve Gaines really didn't know that Paul Williams should be fired for admitting to molestation, how can we be sure that he totally fit to lead the church? If something so fundemental to common sense didn't cause him to immeadiately act, what else is festering in the background now? Why should we as a congregation be subjected to such risk? I'm just not comfortable with Steve Gaines leading anymore. He may be a man of God and a great speaker, but does he have what it takes to lead us? I personally don't think so.
karen
aragorn said
Those who so quickly defend those who lash out with angry vitriol, hurt their integrity when they then ask others not to. This is wrong and hypocritical and for some reason they can't seem to see the double standard. And, of course, throw in some scripture and that is supposed to shield you from any disagreement with your prior assertions and attacks.
I think it is interesting that since ACE is gone, the attitude between the sides is dramatically marked in the difference in tone as a general rule (not all). And, the ones who dominate here onthe "anti" side are by far the harshest.
Piglet says:
The cases you refer to are the victims of past abuse who lash out in anger because they have suffered so much and now are being victimized by their own church.
In other cases,I believe many are
at the end of their patience. I know I am one, as you can see from my post above.
There is obvious documented ONGOING and UNREPENTED sin in our leaders. Yet, the sermons and BFC lessons teach on the evil satanic influence over those speaking out. How ironic.
What are our crimes?
A website, because we were denied meetings and could not secure a list or meeting place to inform our own members.
Petitions, because the members who are informed want a VOICE.
How evil we are.
Our crime is speaking out? Maybe too harshly?
And where are all the "hearsay, rumors,gossip, and half-truths"?
Righteous anger is certainly in order here.I refuse to be shamed by a pastor and leadership who have broken the law FOUR times in the past eighteen months.
IF JESUS WERE HERE HE WOULD BE TURNING OVER TABLES, AND CALLING THEM A GENERATION OF VIPERS AND WHITED SEPULCHRES.
Save your scolding.
Terry smith said...
How was church attendence Sunday during the first and second service?
11:00 AM, February 23, 2007
The total current average attendance for the two AM services is around 7,000. This is down from our prior average of 10,000.
Karen, Brian Miller was the president of a bank prior to ECS. He felt lead to leave that field to devote his energy to Christian education. Some might say he stepped down in his career path but he followed the Lord's lead.
Just for the record, Brian is a tremendous man of integrity and I've known him to be one of the kindest, tender hearted persons at Bellevue. He loves Jesus more than he loved money.
jmo says:
You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board.
SOTL says:
Jmo, seriously,...SG had no way of knowing whether or not he was an " active' pedophile. The point is that he was willing to take that risk with our children. I do not think that SG has enough training ( according to SG himself) to properly evaulate whether or not PW was active at the time. Sg just dismissed it as " under the blood" without considering the risk that he put BBC children in. And THAT is the outrage.
Tell me, JMO, seriously, and I"m not trying to be unkind or controversial...but who's child would you be willing to have taken that chance on?
How could you live with yourself?
How could SG have known if he was dangerous or not? Because he took the word of a man that raped his own son, who told him that he was cured?
At 12:35 PM, February 23, 2007
iwant2know said...
Just don't ask them how much the trip will cost BBC or how much money Donna Gaines or her company "Hope for the future" will receive!!!
junk99mail says...
I understand what you mean by "just don't ask" ... that an answer might not be forthcoming ... but that is the main question to know. If BBC isn't paying for it, or contributing to it, then there is no issue. But if they are, and she is not on staff, that could be a cause for concern. I'm not interested in the facts so as to avoid speculation.
Anyone know? Any way to find out?
JMO,
No offense on the Bryan Miller thing - I honestly thought that you had to be a teacher/educator to be involved at a school. I'm sure he is a Godly man. I never said he wasn't.
So you're saying by him being a President of a school, he's not responsible for the kids themselves? He doens't have to attend the in-service type seminars that teachers have to? He's not been trained in how to report abuse? I'll understand if you don't personally of Bryan Miller's experience in this area, but it would seem to me that anyone involved with children in any capacity would have to undergo the same type of training. I could be wrong - so please let me know.
Don't think I don't hold Webb Williams and Jaime Fish responsible as well. They've been ministers for a long time and I know they've had training in the areas of reporting abuse. BBC held one last year and the SBC said they had a mandate or standard in place for reporting abuse since 2002, per CNN.com.
There are a lot of people responsible - please don't think I'm heaping this all on Bryan Miller's plate. I've never said he was unGodly. He's human and we all make mistakes, but shouldn't we hold the ones that are in leadership "more responsible" than say me, who's just a plain ole member with no agenda, nothing to lose or gain in this situation. I just want to know that the people who lead the church I attend can be trusted in the small things and the big things. Looks to me that there have been many mistakes made - you yourself have acknowledged that on the other thread. How many mistakes should be allow before the church's very foundation is to weak to sustain it?
Karen
junk99mail,
Again, everything I wrote is a fact!!
Karen,
Tell me something I don't know! Yes, read humor into that.
One of the reasons I am glad that David Coombs is going on staff is that I know that he is a no nonsense guy. The PW incident would have ended the moment that David would have been made aware. He came in after the fact but I can assure you that David will hold people on staff accountable. And yes that will include our pastor. While other staff members may fear for their jobs/careers David only fears God. He doesn't need the job or the money. He will do God's will, no ifs ands or buts.
JMO said...
Just for the record, Brian is a tremendous man of integrity and I've known him to be one of the kindest, tender hearted persons at Bellevue. He loves Jesus more than he loved money.
12:51 PM, February 23, 2007
JMO,
For the record, I understand the President of ECS has a package that well exceeds $200,00 + and rising...
BBC has a policy that one must retire at age 65, except for the pastor.
Why would BBC hire someone and spend years training him, when he must tetire in a couple of years.
This is a no.. no... for anyone in Human Resources to hire someone this close to retirement.
JMO,
Ok, you made me laugh!
I just don't see how David Coombs is going to keep things under control. I hope you're right; I pray you're right, but from what I've seen for the past months, I just don't believe it.
There have been others who have disagreed with the pastor and they are gone, regardless of where they resigned or forced to retire or quit. I admire your gumption for the voracity of David Coombs, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Even though David may keep things under control in the future, what do we about the things that have happened in the past? How do we resolve the issues that have talked about here for all these months?
karen
Everyone should take a break and get outside and enjoy this beautiful day.
JMO,
You don't have all your facts about PW. There were many women like myself that PW revictimized by asking diviant sexual questions to..in my case,I asked about a scripture. Others were in front of him because they had to be screened by this predator before they could teach SS. ..Pay Attention Please.....after he brought me to a place emotionally that I won't explain on this blog.....he said he wanted to help me with my son.....I snapped out of the dark place his perversion had brought me because I choose what men I allow around my son.WhenI said no,I don't want your help....he smiled for the 1st time...he was cold as ice with no facial expressions while he was getting his jollies by violating me emotionally....he smiled and said...no,you are a single mom...you need help with your son. That was what I needed to snap and get out of there. He thought I would be easy.....injured AND a single mom.You cannot know if he was able to accomplish his goal with another vulnerable mom. He certainly had the setting to take advantage of many. IF degrading women like myself DID satisfy his perversion enough to prevent him from stealing the innocense and dignity....and so much more that you don't understand....of another child we would all go suffer willing at his hands again....to protect children. But you are sadly mistaken if you thing sexual perversion is fixable. You need to do some research before you stick your neck out for PW. From this line of thinking,I am thinking you may be a part of the lies that were fed to the deacon officers. I would like to say more but I can't right now. I will end with this. His son does not believe he is cured or he would allow his children to be alone with their grand dad. It is so sad how blind you and many others are choosing to be about this. I wish I could live in the bubble you live in and I pray you never have to understand and deal with this in the lives of the people you love
Karen,
I don't know the particulars of Brian's experience in the situations you've asked about. Call him and he will let you know. He can be reached at ECS and if it's that important to you then follow-up. If you're just casting stones at people it does no good in bringing us together in unity for God. If he doesn't answer you questions then I will personally approach him for you.
Guys, we have got to stop posting these questions that just are posted to raise doubts about people. Now I see people asking about the Donna Gaines Africa trip. If you honestly want to know call someone at the church and ask. If they tell you it's non of your business then post the question with the name of the person who responded. But if you don't make the attempt to be honest about your quest for an answer then don't just toss it our on this board as fodder to fight over. If you keep getting stonewalled then I will seek an answer for you.
I just heard that Steve Gaines has recently purchaed property off HWY 196 in Fayette County. I believe this has been in the "works" for quite some time and finally closed.
"I just heard that Steve Gaines has recently purchaed property off HWY 196 in Fayette County. I believe this has been in the "works" for quite some time and finally closed"
and????
gmommlv wrote: "But you are sadly mistaken if you thing sexual perversion is fixable."
Jesus said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God."
Either you accept this or you don't. I accept God's Word.
I just purchased lunch for my associates in Shelby county.
JMO says:
One of the reasons I am glad that David Coombs is going on staff is that I know that he is a no nonsense guy. The PW incident would have ended the moment that David would have been made aware. He came in after the fact but I can assure you that David will hold people on staff accountable. And yes that will include our pastor. While other staff members may fear for their jobs/careers David only fears God. He doesn't need the job or the money. He will do God's will, no ifs ands or buts.
SOTL says;
Jmo, i have to say that i am encouraged by this post of yours..the very fact that you see the need to hold Sg accountable is encouraging. However, don't you think that if that were to be the case, that SG would have never hired him? Sg doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that wants to be held accountable by anyone. Are you saying that behind the scenes, DC is going to say to SG,...knockitoff?
JMO,
I don't think calling ECS and asking to speak with Brian Miller is that easy. As a matter of fact, I DID call and ask to speak with him and my call was returned by someone else wanting to take care of matters for him. I politely told this person I'd rather speak to Mr. Miller personally. I was yelled at and called names on the phone and told that Mr. Miller didn't have time to talk to people. So I sent an email and the response I got was far from "tenderhearted". I was actually shocked at knowing that he couldn't care less about what I had to say.
I apologize for the misspellings and sentence problems in my previous post. I still can't address this w/out shaking and my heart jumping out of my chest. I can't stand by and let people say either ignorant or manipulative things ...I have no idea which....about a sexual deviant.There are no degress required in todays world to understand this sin.No excuse to stay ignorant. Save your attack....you cannot influence me at all in this area. Just discussing it is all the pain I can deal with.
jmo wrote:
Jesus said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God."
Either you accept this or you don't. I accept God's Word.
SOTL says;
ok, brother, leave your kids/grandkids with him for a weekend and how us how this works.
You know, it really shouldn't matter what position in a school one holds... a school janitor should know that child abuse should be reported if it's even suspected (how much more if it's been confessed!).
karen said...
"If Steve Gaines really didn't know that Paul Williams should be fired for admitting to molestation, how can we be sure that he totally fit to lead the church?"
Something that has continued to give me a check in my spirit is the fact that Steve Gaines considered Paul Williams sin "under the blood" which would have made it OK as far as Steve Gaines is concerned. While I am glad that all our sins are "under the blood" if we are saved, I still cannot understand why he felt that it was within reason for Paul to continue in his job, even though the son repeatedly objected to his worthiness as a minister. If the son continued to object, and the son has removed himself and his children from the company of Paul, there must be ample reasons for these actions. I may be speculating here (and I know there will be those that attack me for it) but I need to know what Steve Gaines was thinking when he allowed Paul to stay in his position and why Steve Gaines refused to act in any other way to protect the victims that would be under Paul's counsel during the 6 months or so that this knowledge was concealed. I cannot help but think that there is something in Steve Gaines' life that he is concealing as well that would be devastating to him and his ministry if the truth were known, therefore he is unable (or unwilling) to judge the qualifications of another when his own life cannot bear witness to the same accountability and requirements. Since the Pastor Search Committee did no background check or search, I would like some legitimate thoughts on this (not attacks please) I am very sincere and I feel very strongly about this.
Jmo,
Would you like to publicly admonish others who, after being abused, refuse to leave their own children alone with their abuser?
Would you like to accuse us of not believing in God's word? Here is your chance to do it. So go for it, RIGHT NOW.
iwant2know,
He purchased 4 acres @ $50,000 per acre off Harrell Drive in the Hickory Wythe area. There is only 1 home in this area because the cost is so high - million dollar homes.
gmommylv: I am praying for you.
and guess what ___ it's gated!!!
notonaside, please provide me names and post a copy of the email and I will address with Brian. Otherwise I give no creditability to your claim.
JMO...last time I will ever respond to you. You completely ignored the point of my post that should have stood out for you. You chose to play God and judge me rather than listen or even try to open your mind and deal with this. You are posting with a clear agenda that is not sensitive to reality. I was shamed by many "mature Christians" at BBC when I tried to tell about PW. You are no different ...even now that the facts are public. You have no position in my life to advise or judge me spiritually.
dot said:
and guess what ___ it's gated!!!
SOTL says;
BUT, is it an iddy biddy fence?
dot,
How high is the gate? Just for future reference, of course.
karen
sotl,
You beat me to it! :(
karen :)
SOTL, stick to the facts. I don't have a clue as to your latest ramblings. I would never advocate leaving a child with a molester. Shame on you for suggesting. If you are concerned with the verse I posted:
Jesus said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God." .
Then take it up with God
offline, but
Gmommy
I am praying for you. I believe every word you have posted, and your feelings are MORE than valid.
JMO,
Got any pull to get this email answered? I've been waiting for an answer. By the way, this particular email was bounced back to me saying that email address was not valid (same day I emailed it) so I had to send it to Linda Glance, so should I blame her for the non-answer?
Karen Marshall (karebear11068@hotmail.com)
To: sgaines@bellevue.org
Subject: I love you Dr. Gaines
Dear Dr. Gaines,
I have been a member of Bellevue since 1978 - having grown up in the Children's Department, nurtured in the Youth Department by Phil Newberry and having enjoyed being an adult member as well. I left Memphis to live in California for the better part of 12 years, then I returned to Memphis in 2001. My life has involved a struggle with drugs and alcohol which kept me apart from God for many years - I believe I was saved at age 12 and have resolved my issues with addictions and with God over the past 3 years. All that to say this - I am not an "Adrianite" (I wasn't here for over 12 years and just came back to Bellevue full time in 2003) and I do enjoy you as our pastor.
Dr. Gaines, I know you have misspoken from the pulpit in the regards to the apology to Dr. Whitmire. I am personal friends with them and I have heard their account of the events that transpired the day of Dr. Rogers funeral. Your outburst of an angry "I'm sorry" does not make an apology. You may think it does, but think about it this way - I know you speak of your mother often and I feel that if you banged your fists on a desk while trying to apologize to her, do you think she would accept it and all would be well? I think if you truly search yourself, I would like to think you'll see my point.
You are a very intelligent and charismatic man. But, frankly, sir, I find you arrogant and stubborn as well. There are unresolved issues involving Mark Sharpe, Dr. Whitmire, the fence issue (your apology for that was lacking - do you realize you broke the law?), the Holy Land trips for which you are pocketing money, your acceptance of airline tickets as a "moving expense" for your daughter to attend a cheerleading event, your allowing use of Bellevue money, facilities and resources to produce your wife's video series (the proceeds of which will go to your corporation, "Hope for your Future") and probably, the most heinous, you have a senior pastor still on staff who you know has been accused of a sexual sin against his own child. Dr. Gaines, please help me to understand how in God's holy name can you justify these issues?
Please don't tell me "if I don't like it, I can leave", which I understand has been your mode of operation in responding to your critics. I say back to you if that's your response, "You leave; I was here first".
You are a man of God with an opportunity to turn all this junk around and get this church back on track. You must come clean and face whatever consequences you have brought upon yourself. Please do not hide behind your "firewall" of men - Harry Smith, Chuck Taylor, Mark Daugherty, Steve Tucker and others. Be a man of God, a man of integrity and come clean with your church, sir. I beg you in the holy name of Jesus.
I await your reply.
Respectfully and with much prayer for you and your family,
Karen Marshall
JMO said
I don't need the details of the PW situation publicly stated for me to understand an evil was perpetrated on his son. I do believe that some on this board would like nothing more than to hear and see all. And they would say it was for the sake of transparency.
Piglet says:
How awful! We are not voyeurs!
We want the kind of transparency that keeps people accountable.
You know, like keeping the door open when a man at the church speaks with a woman in his office.
Transparency keeps things on the up and up.
I don't think you really believe we want gory details. If the door is left shut and something
happens,I don't want a video,I just want the guy fired.
Gee. :/
gmommylv, I apologize to you if my answer seemed to be the wrong response but I do not accept the limitations of God.
With regards to you situation with PW, I am sure that it was an awful experience and I am sorry that you had to endure that hardship. I have never once supported PW remaining on staff. If you've read my post I said he should have immediately been escorted off the property. But I can't undo what I had no hand in doing. Don't assume anything about me or my family. I know that sexual abuse issues can split a family apart from living it. But I know that God can mend what is broken.
Karen,
I will be glad to print your email and deliver it to either David Coombs or Linda Glance. I cannot control or guarantee that you will receive a response but I will commit to doing what you would like of me. Personally I doubt that Bro. Steve will answer. I believe that Dr. Rogers had a policy on answering of letters but can't recall his policy at the moment. I think that if someone provided their name he would respond. Let me know what you want.
"mom4, what if some don't agree or believe that it's the Lord's man? I believe without a doubt that the Lord has called David Coombs at this time. I know hundreds who believe as well. So what do you say to this?"
Well, who here may argue with God's will, when it comes out of your mouth?
How about the PCIR that Coombs administered--God's own as well?
terry smith said
Just glancing over the petition, I think the petition has nailed the coffin for some of the peoples cause to removed SG and stop DC ordination.
I also think it has moved IDC into the radical extremist (religion with no grace) camp.
Holding one man out and blasting him in public and allowing anonymous people and silly user names to hurl stones at him.
As I glanced over it, I just get sick to my stomach. That just is not righteous, no matter what the man has/has not done.
Piglet says:
Iwould not expect you to support the petition. However, some ofyour points need to be addressed.
1)The petition was started by Tim Coggins and not by a vote of the membersof IDC.
2)This is merely an avenue for the members to make their voices heard.
3)This petition does not hold ONE man accountable for all. It DOES make the point that he played a large part in some issues of concern and these should be settled before the members can support the ordination.
4)The silly comments by fictitious names are being deleted as they appear and are not IDC. These are unsupervised children or Gaines supporters, and YES it is "not righteous" that they do it.
Terry also said:
Seminary is a requirement? Jack Graham (past president of SBC) has many ordained ministers on staff who came out of the business world. I already know exactly which people are going to write and blast Jack Graham so save your time and arguments that will change nothing.
Piglet says:
This is not the opinion of all. Some may believe this but the petition is a reflection of the unrest in our church caused by decisions made from a CEO point of view rather than a "pastor's heart".
Terry goes on to say:
I think everyone agrees the current church structure has been like this for many years and we wil see some changes going forward.
Seems like many on the petition sees a corporate leader coming on to a church staff is inherently evil. The corporate world does not treat people like that petition does.
Bad Call on the petition.
Piglet says:
The petition is merely the voice of the members who want to be heard. It is not a baseball bat used to beat anyone over the head.
The question is, do our leaders CARE about what the members are saying or will they continue on the current path?
Sometimes a glimpse into the future is not that difficult.
This is the sermon that is planned for the ordination service on Feb 25.
The Ordination Sermon
I would encourage folks to read thru the notes.
Just My Opinion Wrote,
"I don't support the decision made by Bro. Steve in relationship to the PW situation. I've not wavered from that position from day one. No minister should be or remain on staff that did what PW admitted.
It was obvious by everyone except Steve Gaines. I certainly understand the difference in God's laws and man's laws. The point on the DCS is that they didn't find any children at risk from PW. You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board. And that was shown not to be the situation. While I understand that it is difficult to cure a pedophile I know that my Lord can cure one. So before I get the ifs and possibles from you folks, keep in mind that I serve a God that can cure pedophilia. And I believe that PW was cured since his son was the one and only that has been known."
While I am relieved you don't approve of a minister being on staff who raped his son, I am confused as to how you can continue to support the pastor and yet not support a bad decision that was "obvious to everyone except Steve Gaines."
I understand what you mean. It isn't necessary to agree with everything a person does in order to continue to be loyal to that person. However, my question to you is how egregious must the offense be before you withdraw your support from this man? If keeping a minister on staff with no questions asked who raped his son won't give you pause to rethink your loyalty to this man what will?
Yes the DCS found no children were at risk but that is only because the crime came to light after PW's son went to the pastor resulting in this being made public.
You said,"You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board. And that was shown not to be the situation."
Actually that was exactly what did happen for six months because of the pastor's silence. PW actively raped his son for a period of twelve to sixteen months. Again, just because this happened 17 years ago did not mean it could not have happened again. One thing is for sure: There was a much greater chance for it happening again as long as PW remained on staff with no one keep him under observation. The pastor didn't even bother to check into his duties for crying out loud; he just let him go with no accountability whatsoever.
You do not know if PW is cured of pedophilia; your believing that he is cured and that God is able to cure him does not make him cured. Only God knows that. Our responsibility is to watch and make sure his crime would not be repeated on another in our church, but by keeping it secret the pastor did not even give us the knowledge we needed to protect our children.
Surely you understand why I believe this is an offense worth calling for the pastor's resignation. I do not say this lightly, and I really do like Steve Gaines. I just believe his willingness to allow a minister who raped his son to stay crosses the line from a being a poor decision to one requiring him to resign.
Just My Opinion said...
Karen,
I will be glad to print your email and deliver it to either David Coombs or Linda Glance. I cannot control or guarantee that you will receive a response but I will commit to doing what you would like of me. Personally I doubt that Bro. Steve will answer. I believe that Dr. Rogers had a policy on answering of letters but can't recall his policy at the moment. I think that if someone provided their name he would respond. Let me know what you want.
JMO,
I don't want an response from David Coombs. This email is between me and my pastor. I sent this LONG before David came on the scene. December 13th to be exact. I don't know the specific policy of Dr. Rogers, but I do have friends in Michigan who had received personal correspondence from him. The only thing I do know for sure was that Dr. Rogers didn't eat any cookies or food that was brought to him - 1) he would weigh 900 lbs. if he did and 2) too many kooks out there (can you imagine? Exlax laced cookies or worse!
No, David Coombs doesn't need to lay eyes on my email - it's not addressed to him. Steve Gaines should be the one to reply - or Linda Glance since I had to send a 2nd one to her attention. I didn't even get a computer generated "hey, we got your email". Why would you think I would want someone else to answer this email? If I wanted that, I would have cc: it around the church.
The firewall between Steve Gaines and the people he says he loves still stands. Not your fault, jmo.
karen
trollcakes, let's just agree to disagree about the report. I believe that it accomplished it's purpose but didn't solve the problems. But the problem was created by one man, PW and added to by silence of the staff. But the situation with PW and his son are not going to be resolved by Bellevue church.
I've tried to keep civil and limit my personal remarks about others. I've made no claims on knowing God's will but I said that I believed that God has called David to Bellevue at this time for a reason. But I do appreciate you comments snide remark excluded.
the great knock...please don't look for me to be signing any loyalty pledges for Bro. Steve anytime soon. You will not find a post whereby I supported his actions. But I say again I am lead by my beliefs to support the pastor of my church until his removal or else I will leave the church on my own accord and worship elsewhere. I currently have friends and members that I enjoy my fellowship with. But if i get at that point I can no longer support my pastor then I will broken heartily leave. And that may be God's will for me and others.
But for now I am praying and hoping that David Coombs brings integrity and honor back to the staff of Bellevue, God willing. I truly believe that he has no other goals or plans but to do just that.
JMO said:
The point on the DCS is that they didn't find any children at risk from PW.
Piglet says:
The report said there were no other known VICTIMS. Nobody can say there were no other children at risk unless they followed PW 24/7 and even accompanied him to the men's restroom every time.
JMO also said:
You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board. And that was shown not to be the situation. While I understand that it is difficult to cure a pedophile I know that my Lord can cure one. So before I get the ifs and possibles from you folks, keep in mind that I serve a God that can cure pedophilia. And I believe that PW was cured since his son was the one and only that has been known.
Piglet says:
God can raise the dead. I've no doubt that He can heal a pedophile.
But no one person can know PW's heart and make the determination that he has been "cured". Our children should be protected from him. It is very arrogant for anyone to make this evaluation of a pedophile and permit him to be around MY children.
"But the problem was created by one man, PW and added to by..."
Well, you cannot villify this blog, because one person started it, and then added to by...
Sorry, but when logic stinks, it stinks; and it stinks fairly often from your side of the (short) fence.
Curb your dogma.
Since everyone has been discussing the PW matter once again, I decided to weigh-in on the aspect I am most troubled by.
My issue with the handling of PW by the pastor is not his failure to report him to the authorities. Any criminal culpability stemming from his failure to report is a matter for the authorities to sort out. For the record I hope Brother Steve is never charged over the failure to report.
My problem with the handling of the PW saga is that Brother Steve believed a man who admittedly molested his son was still qualified for ministry at Bellevue. I appreciate David Coombs and his investigative team for taking the position that PW was in fact not qualified for ministry. Why didn't our pastor take that position last summer or on December 7th?
At Bellevue a man's divorce is never sufficiently "under the blood" to qualify him for deacon service. No matter how long ago a divorce happened and regardless of the circumstances of that divorce, a divorced man is forever barred from serving as a deacon. Even if a man has never divorced himself, but his wife has been divorced, he is forever barred from serving as a deacon. In light of our rigid standard (a standard I believe to be scriptural) for lay service, how can we allow a child molester, however repentant and reformed, to serve as a minister? Does anyone honestly believe we should have lower standards for full-time ministers than we do for our lay leaders?
It is my understanding Gardendale has the same high standard as Bellevue for deacon service. Despite that high standard, Brother Steve hired a friend for a ministerial position who had been removed as pastor of another Southern Baptist Church when caught having an extra-marital affair. So again, their deacons were held to a higher standard than the staff ministers. (This information was sent to me directly by a Gardendale member last fall)
At the close of the last Communications Committee meeting on December 3rd, I gave Brother Harry Smith a written question dealing with this exact issue. In my question I mentioned that at West Jackson more than one staff member was fired by Brother Steve for divorces. One of those staff members was fired even though he met the requirements for a biblical divorce (his wife had an affair with another man and refused to reconcile). My question was then, and still is today, in light of Brother Steve’s rigid adherence to the biblical requirements for ministry at West Jackson, what has changed in his thinking.
I do not understand Brother Steve's theology in this area. I am willing to listen to his rationale, but I’ve not heard anyone in leadership address this point and I never received a response to my question from the Communications Committee.
JMO said
"But I say again I am lead by my beliefs to support the pastor of my church until his removal or else I will leave the church on my own accord and worship elsewhere."
Respectfully my question to you is how is he to be removed? At what point do YOU believe a pastor should be asked to resign by the church body? Are you suggesting he is to leave only by an act of God (i.e. death or illness), or are there circumstances where christians in a local body should ask a pastor to leave the church?
You said, "But for now I am praying and hoping that David Coombs brings integrity and honor back to the staff of Bellevue, God willing. I truly believe that he has no other goals or plans but to do just that."
Don't you see that David Coombs cannot get Steve Gaines integrity or any other staff member's integrity back for them. That integrity is proven by their actions, attitudes, and the decisions they make. That's why I believe the pastor should resign: his actions, attitudes, and the decisions he has made.
Again I ask why has the pastor not explained why he believes it is ok for a church to have on staff a minister who has raped his son.
By not calling him to account for this wrong decision what does the world believe about our integrity as a church. Please answer my question as to how you would answer a non-members question as to how a church and a church's pastor can allow a minster to stay on staff who raped his own son? I have answered by saying that the pastor is wrong and should resign because of his cover up of this man's crime.
WTN,
Your post is very related to mine (1:29 pm today). There is a reason for the way this situation was manipulated and no one is willing to respond to legitimate questions or provide scriptural answers. I do not believe there will be peace at Bellevue until this is all aired in the open.
(Not one person responded to my post - Go figure??)
At 1:02 PM, February 23, 2007
iwant2know said...
Again, everything I wrote is a fact!!
junk99mail replies...
Ok ... I thought you were stating you new for sure that she was taking the trip but you didn't know for sure if BBC was paying for it. Thanks for the clarification.
At 1:16 PM, February 23, 2007
Just My Opinion said...
Guys, we have got to stop posting these questions that just are posted to raise doubts about people. Now I see people asking about the Donna Gaines Africa trip.
junk99mail replies...
Hi, JMO,
Concerning the questions on this topic … the original question asked by 1want2know was "Who approved Donna's expenses for her speaking trip to Africa later this year?" That seemed to me to be a rhetorical question—that is, I thought it was used to point to concerns about the lack of congregational involvement in church financial decisions—but iwant2know can correct me if I am wrong about that. But if it was a rhetorical question, I don't think there would be a point to calling the church offices to ask about that.
I responded with the question "Are you saying that you know as a fact that the church is paying for this trip?” That was specifically about what 1want2know knew. The church offices might know if it was a fact, I was asking if iwant2know knew it to be true, or if it was a speculation.
But my next question, is Donna Gaines on staff at Bellevue, does indeed fall into the category of something appropriate to ask the church offices – I just thought someone here might know. So I just called the office and asked if she is on staff. The answer I got was “No.”
Which brings us to the whole point of this ... if iwant2know is correct, and BBC is paying for Donna's trip, but she is not on staff ... that is information I think folks would be interested to know.
There may be good and appropriate reasons why the church would fund a ministry trip of a non-staff member. But when that member also happens to be the pastor's wife, and when the administration has shown less than full openness in financial matters, such questions, and the concerns that give rise to the questions, are reasonable. And I see no reason not to ask them in a public forum, if there is nothing to hide. Just because someone asks questions publicly does not necessarily mean that the person is trying to "toss it our on this board as fodder to fight over."
Or am I not being as reasonable as I think I am? I'm open to having my thinking corrected.
the great knock said...
"Respectfully my question to you is how is he to be removed? At what point do YOU believe a pastor should be asked to resign by the church body? Are you suggesting he is to leave only by an act of God (i.e. death or illness), or are there circumstances where christians in a local body should ask a pastor to leave the church?"
Great post! It seems that some people want "somebody" to do "something", but when IDC was formed, we get called a "bunch of rag tag dissenters". Ok, we're trying to do something. Why can't IDC be the "act of God" people seem to be waiting for?
God can "take someone out" via illness or death if He wants to, but I don't wish that on anyone. God could strike Steve with lightning if He wanted to. Heck, he could make Steve disappear - remember Enoch? Do we want Steve to be "not", like Enoch all of a sudden "was not".
Genesis 5:24 Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.
It's like when I was out of work - I knew God had the right job out there for me, but I didn't sit on my behind and wait for a Human Resources Director to be dropped on my doorstep. I went out and did something about it and now I work full time.
karen
mom4,
I am so totally with you on your post and I thought some of the same things too.
Sorry for not responding sooner! :)
Karen
Karen,
Thank you! I am very sincere in this matter. There IS a reason that Steve Gaines is concealing the PW information from the congregation and there IS a reason that he was so liberal in his decisions.
Like WTN said, he fired a man because his wife had an affair - but he leaves a confessed homosexual child abuser on staff??? What is scriptural about that? He knows something else is out there and is concealing it - has to be...
JMO,
I will be happy to discuss the before mentioned matter with you further if you would be so kind as to email me. I would have emailed you instead of posting what I did, but I did not see an email address on your profile. My address is on my profile if you'd like to contact me. Thank you.
the great knock, I am sorry but I can't give you an answer which will suffice without creating more questions. I don't have the answers. I think that until the majority membership wants Steve Gaines gone he will remain our pastor. I do not disagree with your position but you know the rest...he is my pastor and I support my pastor.
As far as the integrity question and my very general response. Integrity is not like virginity in that once given away it cannot be regained. A man can lose his integrity and regain that which was lost. But you gain integrity the old fashioned way...by proving your steadfast and consistent behavior in all matters upholding the higher of man's and God's standards.
Mom4,
I missed your post. I started writing my post earlier today and just got around to finishing it a few minutes ago.
I hate to speculate on the reasoning for his decision to allow PW to remain on staff, which is why I asked my question privately. Since I never received a response I decided I would pose it here.
I pray your hunch about the pastor is wrong. That would be horrible for Bellevue and for his family. If by chance you happen to be correct, I cannot imagine his daily anguish. Let's all remember to pray for him.
And JMO,
You most certainly make it personal when your sole qualifier is some assumption of special annointing of God--it's tantamount to exclaining in frustration, "are you going to believe me (and God) or your lying eyes?"
(And before anymore of you accuse me of blasphemy, may I ask, what's your excuse?
The biggest problem with the truthseekers is that they spend any time at all trying to convince you of legitimate beefs. And then you get all whiny that something is personal--open contempt for good people, pushed out of open dialogue within their church, is snide, sir--whatever particular words you wrap around your intent.
It seems a certain ilk does nothing more than throw the intellectual equivalent of rotten friut at people then whip out the judgement when they in return show their teeth. The outrage is funny actually, given to what it is misdirected.
Anyway, aren't these blogging folks "under the blood" too? And gee, sorry it gets out of control sometimes, for most of us these are "uncharted waters." Where's your forgiveness?
Has it ever crossed your mind that your beloved leadership helped create this blog and Saving Bellevue, not to mention all the stories in the local and national media, because they made no acknowledgement of accountability, trust and ethical matters within the membership--you know, real people, sir--that would natural arise of this trauma.
Then, when it left the church, it is condemned.
This report has more holes than swiss cheese, a craven and self-serving document; the man behind the report is being scurried to ordination and with this shadow over him, if this man is a minister, then I'm the King of Denmark.
This smells of some kind of strickly-business shuffle, so that in case Padre doesn't survive, the corporate guys are intact.
jmo said...
"I think that until the majority membership wants Steve Gaines gone he will remain our pastor."
Sir, if the majority of the congregation were aware of ALL of the lies and deceptions, they WOULD want him gone. Until we have an open, honest business meeting where all can speak, with the proper protections in place for those with legal implications, and witnesses who NEED to come forth and tell what they know - this will remain in the dark - which is where Steve Gaines and his leadership want it to remain - why else would they shut down the Communictions Committee without answering questions - why else would they attempt to conceal financial and meeting records. There is NO reason to hide from the truth unless there is something to hide..so why are they? If you have so much pull in the "David Coombs" circle, ask him to let you see the financials and see what happens.
Karen,
I think that until the majority of people at Bellevue are concerned about who is the pastor then nothing will happen. But you gotta admit that the tactics many have taken to date doesn't give a lot o credibility to the attempt to remove the pastor. If there is say 500 people that really want to impact Bellevue it would be simple. Come to a Wednesday night service. Have someone stand and make a motion from the floor. If it is seconded then a vote may be made to take the church into a business meeting. If enough people vote to authorize a meeting then you have a meeting to vote on removing a pastor. You do not have to advertise the meeting but you will have to be recognized to make the motion. That is called democracy and is workable according to our past ways of calling business meetings. And that is much more productive than some ill conceived petitions.
JMO,
I agree that integrity can be regained, but in regards to the PW matter that will not happen until the pastor comes forward with an explanation for his decision, admission of wrongdoing, and asking for forgiveness. I do not say this with malice, but I think this means somthing more than saying you take responsibility for it and asking to remain the pastor.
Taking full responsibility means you are willing to take the consequences as well.
What do you think the consequences should be? Formal reprimand by the church body, resignation?
How can we ever know what the majority thinks or what the consequences should be without a formal open business meeting.
I've said before I know I'm in the minority, but that doesn't mean we go along like everthing is fine and like everything is resolved on this issue because it is not.
WTN,
mom4,
You have expressed my opinion succinctly. (1:29PM and 2:48PM posts)
What has caused Steve Gaines' change in interpreting scripture?
Why has he allowed staff members with immoral behavior to remain on staff at Bellevue and Gardendale when he fired staff members with immoral behavior at West Jackson???
JMO said...
"You do not have to advertise the meeting but you will have to be recognized to make the motion."
And who would "recognize" us?
This has already been suggested and was shot down because the leadership who is in control will not recognize a member from the floor - therefore - no meeting.
mom4, I am not an ignorant person nor are most of the people at Bellevue. We just see many of the situations differently. It doesn't mean we are right and you are wrong. I know many who support our leadership and non of them are foolish nor being mislead. I spoke with a former member of our church who now lives 300 miles away. She knew what was going on as well as I. Don't believe for a minute that the majority are in the dark. I don't know one person (and I know plenty at Bellevue)that I spoken with in the last few months that wasn't pretty well informed.
mom4, then you have 500 people that stand and all ask to be recognized. They cannot reject a majority of people.
My experience and heart told me that ignorance could not be the reason SG allowed PW to remain on staff and ignore the requests of the victim. I have thought he must have secret sin in his life for him to feel more compassion for the child molestor than protection for his flock. My other thought..(but basically the same.)was that he was desensitized to sin and consequences....but even for non Christians this issue is a no brainer. Today an out of town friend called because she had heard the story playing out here....her question was....What did PW have on SG for SG not to remove him from the staff immediately??? There are reasons why an experienced minister would not be shocked and disgusted by what was revealed to him....OR that the Holy Spirit would not convict and lead him.I hope the reasons being discussed today are not correct.
JMO,
If you would send me an email I would appreciate it. I have a question related to one of your earlier comments. It is nothing major, but I prefer to keep it off the blog.
Thank you!
WTB
Whether or not the error was intentional, let me correct this misquote, revisited thusly and like so:
esther's response:
Hope, tell your pro Gaines friends to lay off the victims here like sotl. I am sick of people bashing her and other victims here and thought I would pull a 'Bratton' style goose and gander. Not nice, is it?
Do you realize how many times the victims have had to hear: You are bitter, unforgiving, etc? And what Faith wrote was 1000x worse. She actually said she wanted to see him avenged!
Of course, this was the actual statement, regarding the questionable behavior of some contrarians: "Then let me boil it down: What's good for the goose is good for the gander. When a group condemns the actions of others, yet that group's own actions are not above-board, the condemnation rings hollow."
Being quoted is always flattering, but context is key. Being disingenously used as an excuse to verbally assault someone else, on the other hand, doesn't flatter in the slightest. Please don't do it again.
--Mike
Mike,
Welcome back! How's stuff?
"gmommlv wrote: "But you are sadly mistaken if you thing sexual perversion is fixable."
Jesus said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God."
Either you accept this or you don't. I accept God's Word. "
gmommylv, I think I know exactly where you are coming from on this. We all know that with God all things are possible. In this situation, PW, who is a minister and we assume knows some scripture, did not step down his ministry position 17 years ago. He was not qualified to be a minister according to the Word, and he covered up his sin with the help of some others. He did not confess to the Body as a member of the Body for accountability and becasue he was in a position of authority...either 17 years ago or even recently. This says quite a bit.
Let us assume he is completely regenerate and Born Again even though he did not publicly confess and God has given him a new heart of flesh where this past sin has left him broken and repentent.
Still, would it be wise to be in a position of authority over women and children? That would be very unwise. Just like putting an regenerated embezzler in charge of the money.
He is totally forgiven by God if repentent yet, must pay the consequences for the rest of his life by being limited to his contact with children. Even though forgiven by his family and friends, that would not mean blanket trust.
I believe your thoughts about PW not being regenerate are probably on track due to his lack of confession and stepping down from his ministry position. To this day, the congregation, and people like you who were 'interviewed' have not heard from him a confession and desire to repent. This is quite disconcerting for a former minister of prayer. And I certainly understand where you are coming from on this.
Just My Opinion said...
mom4, then you have 500 people that stand and all ask to be recognized. They cannot reject a majority of people.
3:57 PM, February 23, 2007
If we did that, it would look like a standing ovation for Dr. Gaines. :) JMO, you used humor earlier today - grant me one funny today, ok?
Seriously, don't you think we'd be looked at like a bunch of kooks - how can we just start a business meeting by standing up? We've talked about going to the altar en masse to pray, but that was shot down because we don't want to be a distraction to others worshipping. I just want to get a business meeting on the schedule - maybe hold a service that is just a business meeting. But being a distraction to those worshipping is totally disrespectful and I wouldn't want to do that.
Per my earlier post, God can take anyone out at any time He chooses and I don't really feel like being the lightning rod flunkie! :) Ok, that's 2 funnies, but indulge me, it's Friday!
karen
WTB, I could open an email account for you to email me but my preference is for you to just ask out loud. I won't be offended in the least and if I've offended then I will either stand or apologize if I've erred. My email is associated with my business and I don't want to create problems for my business interest. I am sure you can understand.
Mom4 wrote: "Sir, if the majority of the congregation were aware of ALL of the lies and deceptions, they WOULD want him gone".
Mom4, I think you just hit the nail on the reason you all will never see an open meeting or get the mailing list. The situation has to be 'contained' and as JMO said earlier, DC is there to get things under 'control'.
Mike,
Isn't it better to be quoted out of context than not be quoted at all? I'm just joshing ya! Like I said earlier, I have spring fever.
Karen :)
karen,
I love humor and you do it well. Trust me when I say that the assembly of 500 people in a Wednesday service will cause the leadership to grant a business meeting. The key is to try and do so under the normal procedure of our church. If in fact you believe that the majority want to make a change then you will find others supporting. If you are in the minority then even hanging chads won't help you cause.
Finally my best advise is to seek out our lay leadership in a more personal manner. SOTL approach was completely wrong, Josh's approach was dishonest in that knowing that he was recording he was able to ask baited questions. I have spent time in this arena and it is not hard to make someone look bad if that is you purpose.
Why is it that I as a member of 18 years know of the people in leadership but many on this board don't seem to have a clue as to these men's personality and work within our church. BTW I ain't no millionaire, nor do I socialize privately with these men. But my involvement in areas of our church have brought them into situations which have afforded me the pleasure of getting to know them. Which makes me wonder how actively involved have been some of the posters on this board. This is not a criticism but it's easy to be more critical of those you don't know than those you've worked along side in church.
JMO,
I am not an ignorant person nor are most of the people at Bellevue. We just see many of the situations differently. It doesn't mean we are right and you are wrong.
I'm glad to hear this tone from you, but yesterday you said of those who disagree with you on this blog: "It's not that they can't handle the truth, they just can't recognize the truth."
Have you changed your mind?
socwork, well let us take my comments out of their context and parse the words for hidden meanings. The reference you post was in regards to David Coombs and his particular situation. His son had referenced the movie "A Few Good Men" and the Jack Nicholas famous line of "...you can't handle the truth". And yes in light of that situation some of the posters were not able to recognize the truth.
And herein lies much of our problems..taking bits here and there and forming conclusions. Like the way they attempt to make David Coombs sound like he doesn't care about the laws of Tennessee. What he didn't care for was Josh's opinion of the laws. But it pleases the dissenters to try and put the worst spin on men who are honorable to advance their cause.
Trollcakes said...
Mike,
Welcome back! How's stuff?
Marvelous. I hear you enjoy Earl Grey tea?
--Mike
Mike,
Cowbell? You're not a MS State fan, are you?
socwork,
I agree with you on JMO. He's been very pleasant today - one of the best exchanges with one of differing opinions that I've had in a long time.
See, it can be done! :) JMO, email me if you will. Thanks!
karen
socwork, well let us take my comments out of their context and parse the words for hidden meanings.
Like I said yesterday, you have got to be kidding me. What hidden meaning did I parse from your words? In what context would that statement have been a statement of humility and open dialogue?
The reference you post was in regards to David Coombs and his particular situation. His son had referenced the movie "A Few Good Men" and the Jack Nicholas famous line of "...you can't handle the truth". And yes in light of that situation some of the posters were not able to recognize the truth.
The context was you telling SC not to post here... go read it. I would like to ask that when you make broadbrush statements like that, no matter what the context, that you name names... just like you have asked others to do on this blog.
And herein lies much of our problems..taking bits here and there and forming conclusions.
What possible conclusion could I form from your statement other than "they can't recognize the truth?"
Like the way they attempt to make David Coombs sound like he doesn't care about the laws of Tennessee. What he didn't care for was Josh's opinion of the laws.
Then why didn't he say "I don't care what you think the Tennessee Code says," instead of what he did say?
But it pleases the dissenters to try and put the worst spin on men who are honorable to advance their cause.
Again, if you're going to make a statement like this, let me encourage you to name names. I did not "spin" your quote - I quoted you. If you don't like that you said it, say so. I was complimenting you on your tone, and you accuse me of "spinning" and taking your words out of "context."
JMO said
Karen,
I think that until the majority of people at Bellevue are concerned about who is the pastor then nothing will happen. But you gotta admit that the tactics many have taken to date doesn't give a lot o credibility to the attempt to remove the pastor. If there is say 500 people that really want to impact Bellevue it would be simple. Come to a Wednesday night service. Have someone stand and make a motion from the floor. If it is seconded then a vote may be made to take the church into a business meeting. If enough people vote to authorize a meeting then you have a meeting to vote on removing a pastor. You do not have to advertise the meeting but you will have to be recognized to make the motion. That is called democracy and is workable according to our past ways of calling business meetings. And that is much more productive than some ill conceived petitions.
Piglet says:
When you say that "you have to be recognized", it reminds me of the vote that was taken to have Gaines as pastor.
Dougherty (I think) said:
"Are there any opposed?" and I saw atleast two people stand.
He says "And there are none."
I don't think they were recognized.What does it take to get recognized?
Ok, for all that have asked for my email. I have now established one outside of my business so you guys can contact me directly. Just be kind...I am very soft hearted. Really.
JMO,
I understand. I will compose my question later and post it on the blog later tonight.
Thank you!
WTB
Piglet, a person had to address the speaker at the podium and basically draw everyone's attention to himself. Once he makes the motion then others need to immediately second the motion. The motion needs to be stated as such...I make a motion to call Bellevue into a business meeting at this time.
Karen said...
Mike,
Cowbell? You're not a MS State fan, are you?
No, that was a punch line from one of my favorite comedy sketches.
--Mike
socwork, I have a life and an active business so I am limited in my explanations at times.
You wrote: "and you accuse me of "spinning" and taking your words out of "context."
I was accusing other people of spinning David's words. I was not referencing you at all. I did charge you with taking my words out of context...that is a fact, just as I've taken your words above out of the original context. You would need to read all the blogs back and forth with S. Coombs as he was defending his dad and the way they were not wanting to hear the truth. I mean this is one proud son who was standing for his dad's honor and got blasted. I think that a son would know his father better than a blogger who before David's face was on TV probably couldn't pick him from a crowd of 5. And that was my point of reference to "they wouldn't recognize the truth". Hope this clarifies it somewhat.
socwork, would you please e-mail me? Your e-mail is not visible on the profile. Thanks
JMO,
Is it truthful to represent BBC as having 30,000 members?
It is a lie, lie, lie.
It only looks good when making an arguement of "how many "ficticious" people are on my side...
Why would BBC continue to throw out these numbers.
When was the last time a membership report was given in Deacons Meeting?
When was the last time a financial report was given in a Deacons meeting?
These two reports have always been given as long as I can remember. In fact, right after SG came to BBC, these reports were constantly verbalized to the congregation as somehow "God's approval".
I remember Chuck Taylor stating:
"Look at all the people, can God be displeased?
Look at our tithes, Can God be displeased?"
Somehow these people gauge God's blessings based on how THEY have grown God's church and brought in the money.
This is not of God. (another Chuck Taylor Quote)
Well, based on their own gauge of God's good pleasure...
Could God be displeased?
"I hear you enjoy Earl Grey tea?"
No, I just make people splash it on their keyboard.
Why, I never, ever...EVER!
JMO said:
You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board. And that was shown not to be the situation. While I understand that it is difficult to cure a pedophile I know that my Lord can cure one. So before I get the ifs and possibles from you folks, keep in mind that I serve a God that can cure pedophilia. And I believe that PW was cured since his son was the one and only that has been known.
I cannot believe you, sir. How did anyone know he wasn't "active"? Are you justifying what Steve Gaines did in allowing a known pedophile to remain on staff for over six months by saying that since nothing is known to have happened, he must be cured and everything was alright after all? How about we ask him to come back then?
Steve Gaines did not know and did not bother to find out whether Williams was an "active" pedophile. He simply took his word that it was in the past. Nevermind that Williams was admitting as little as possible in order to keep his job. The report, as anemic as it was, does at least point that out. Why, if things were clearly not right as far as the son was concerned, did Gaines accept at face value that they were from Williams, who had obviously hidden the sin for 17 years? If Gaines was that clueless after his years in the ministry, he should not be a pastor. He has NO discernment. If he was willfully ignorant -- or complicit -- the implications are far worse. So how can anyone say there was no risk of Williams being "active"?
Try this on for size. Say a principal catches a kid bringing a sawed-off shotgun to school. The kid tells him it's not loaded and the principal says, "Well, good. I'm glad we settled that!" The kid continues to bring it for months and is finally caught with it by teacher, who is properly scared out of her wits. The gun is examined and, sure enough, it's not loaded. Would it do for the principal to say, "Hey, it's not like I let a kid wander the school with a loaded weapon all year! You people need to get a life."
Steve Gaines was just about as negligent in this matter as a pastor could be. I can't imagine a worse example. Not only has he has not demonstrated one whit of care or concern for the sheep of his flock, but knowing that a wolf in sheep's clothing was in their midst, he did nothing to protect them.
Don't come here and pretend to tell us it was no big deal.
JMO,
I know you have a life, we all do, believe it or not.
Here's the thing: Words mean things. Tone is difficult to communicate on a blog, because no one can see your body language or hear your voice. So we need to be that much more careful about what we say.
I have read all the blogs back and forth when SC posted.
As far as a son knowing his father better, that may be. But is it within the realm of possibility that when someone says something about your mom or dad, you as their son might be a little too close to have an objective perspective on the matter? In other words, how many little kids get in fights on the playground because someone "said something about my momma." I don't blame him for defending his dad... I would be really angry if people were talking about my dad too.
And when you say the word "truth," I think you mean "accurate perception of reality." So to say that they "wouldn't" recognize truth infers that the people on this blog are too stupid to recognize truth when they see it. It's insulting.
I hope that helps clear up my own perspective.
bbc refugee, how we report the membership numbers are the least of our concerns. I am not discounting what you are saying but we have bigger fish to fry at this moment. Anybody know where I can get some good catfish? That reference just made me hungry.
ezekiel, where were you when Dr. Rogers were adding men to the ministry from business. Who is to say that David will not be preaching at some point. He certainly has done some in the past and has the understanding of God's Word to teach us.
all2Jesus, my message has been clear today on my feelings for PW and Steve Gaines. My point was that people were overreacting after the fact. PW was on staff for 17 years unchecked. You point is well made but the tone and anger isn't necessary.
all2Jesus,
Well said; everyone should just quit trying to justify your concerns to people that are not here to listen to any of them, but rather to cast doubt on even the most obvious of failings by their beloved leadership.
That "all's well that ends well" defense is below par. Gee, I thought situational ethics was frowned upon by evangelicals as skirting "personal responsibility."
Oh yeah, I forgot--that only applies to the poor and minorities, not ministers.
JMO said
Piglet, a person had to address the speaker at the podium and basically draw everyone's attention to himself. Once he makes the motion then others need to immediately second the motion. The motion needs to be stated as such...I make a motion to call Bellevue into a business meeting at this time.
Piglet says:
Thank you. That is helpful
Can piggies get recognized? :0)
Just kidding.
Just My Opinion said...
"Anybody know where I can get some good catfish? That reference just made me hungry."
Couple of good places to get catfish that I know of. It is my favorite thing to eat. The hushpuppies have to be as good as the fish too you know. Pickwick has some good places...the Pickwick Inn is one. Ed Shaw's place is another. There is another place everybody calls 'Sissy's' that is great. There is another place south of there over in Iuka, not far from Pickwick, called the Country Squire that has great fish. So...there you go.
Are you David Coombs or the wife? Or perhaps just a very good friend? You are doing a great job on this blog with the resistors. You are very smoothe. However, I think this group of people, the resistors, are too smart for you. They are the best of the discerners.
I am so pleased that IDC has been formed. I'm not sure that these resistors need a business meeting just yet. We all need to pray very hard about that. Timing...it is all in good timing, don't you think?
socwork wrote: "And when you say the word "truth," I think you mean "accurate perception of reality." So to say that they "wouldn't" recognize truth infers that the people on this blog are too stupid to recognize truth when they see it. It's insulting."
Well substitute ignorant for stupid and some are near that point in this chase for the truth. I certainly have been label by many on this board as ignorant because I didn't accept their point of view. But isn't that the case in most instances whereby one side believe that they so clearly see the truth and cannot believe that other side can't see it as well? For example my screen at the top is grey in color. But from your perspective you can not see what I see but you do see your own screen and it could be green. I argue that the top of the screen is grey and your argue green. The truth is that we are both right but both ignorant at the same time. Right about our position from where we sit and what we have viewed but ignorant as to the other persons perceptions. The point being is I know David and his son obviously knows David. But we are debating with people who only have a snippet of knowledge. But the difference is that I have the same knowledge as they but my additional knowledge as well. It places me in a better position to make an assessment of the situation. If your life depending on making the correct decision, on whose opinion would you make your final decision? The person that had access to looking at both screens or one who only had his screen to view?
You'll have to rub shoulders with all the gay and lesbian people, but Soulfish in Midtown is excellent for catfish (and cucumber salad--yum).
iamaresitor, you are probably right in that they are all smarter than me. But don't you think that my good looks make up for the lack of smarts?
JMO,
Sorry to carry forth your analogy, but is the sky blue? We can debate whether it is azure, lapis, royal, International Klein, etc., but if you say the sky is brown (barring the apocalypse), then our conversation has no currency.
You can decide that, whatever failures by the leadership in the sex scandal, your going to privilige loyalty over accountability, but that doesn't make your position credible.
Loyalty is not a perspective, it's a pretext.
But we are debating with people who only have a snippet of knowledge.
You are right - no one knows all or sees all here. We can only deal with what we DO see and know, correct?
But the difference is that I have the same knowledge as they but my additional knowledge as well.
Additional knowledge? Do you mean since you know DC personally, you have additional knowledge?
It places me in a better position to make an assessment of the situation.
Really? I'm not so sure about that. Is that a fact or your opinion?
You are so quick to defend DC (in this instance) that you appear to have just as much bias as someone who is questioning his decisions. That does not put you in a "better" position - it puts you in a "different" one.
If your life depending on making the correct decision, on whose opinion would you make your final decision? The person that had access to looking at both screens or one who only had his screen to view?
Not yours. I don't know you. Why should I trust someone I don't know? The answer: I shouldn't. All I can do is take what I see, hear, know to be true and make assessments based on that information. I have learned the hard way that trusting in people I thought to be men of God because of their position is wrong and only sets us up for disappointment and disillusionment.
Uh, I'm better looking too.
Which is why I'm sitting at home on Friday night talking to people I barely know.
Which is why I'm sitting at home on Friday night talking to people I barely know.
LOL!
Um... me too.
What's sad is I'm not even talking...I'm just "listening!" (Of course, I am working and toggling back and forth...sigh. I need a life!!! *No comments from the peanut gallery please!!!)
Chatterbox in Red Banks MS has great catfish too....go down Hacks Cross til you hit the interstate (the one that Lamar becomes) and take the Red Banks exit. They are well known for their homemade desserts too!
Reflecting on the banter back and forth about sons and their fathers (JDW and JW, SC and DC) ...
Wonder why no one took CW seriously when he started talking about his dad?
JMO said...
all2Jesus, my message has been clear today on my feelings for PW and Steve Gaines.
You are correct that I haven't read all your posts. I will go back & read them to get a better picture.
My point was that people were overreacting after the fact. PW was on staff for 17 years unchecked.
People's anger after the fact is due to the reality being worse than we imagined. The "incident" 17 years ago was, in fact a period of repeated abuse over 12-18 months. The perversity and sickness of that cannot be overstated. Why Dr. Gaines did not find that deeply troubling (by which I mean enough to remove Williams) I cannot fathom. That is not a sickness one is easily cured of.
You point is well made but the tone and anger isn't necessary.
I do admit that got my ire up. I apologize for the tone. I just can't see minimizing the PW affair in any way simply because there appears to have been no recent actual molestation. I think the fact that several have testified to being oddly creeped out at the details he sought when interviewing them about their own abuse is enough to indicate he was far from cured. Those people do feel violated, albeit after the fact.
Ok, I'm home and i'm back online and I have a question for JMO.
You say that from the way some posters are acting, that SG allowed an active pedophile to roam the halls of BBC.
So...how was SG to know that he was not active?
ANSWER: Because PW told him he was not active.
So...we are to believe that a rapist is not necessarily a liar?
Hope,
Just my two cents...
If I were in your place, I would probably have tried to have this conversation in e-mail with esther rather than the blog... that's just me.
Also, I have kept up the posts you are referring to, and unless there is something I'm not thinking of at the moment, it seems you maybe have misunderstood some of what esther has been posting. Again, that is just the opinion of someone who has been watching the dialogue and not participating in it.
I think that it was very gracious of esther to remove the posts that you found so offensive. She did not have to do that.
As I mentioned to jmo earlier, tone is very difficult to communicate on the Internet, since you can't see each other's body language or hear each other's voices. So sometimes, our own "stuff" gets in our way of hearing what someone else is trying to say. Does that make sense?
From what I have read on this blog, esther seems to have a lot of wisdom and a good grasp on what the Bible says. No one is perfect and we can not speak the truth and avoid offending someone at the same time.
I know that you don't know me, and I don't know you, but at least maybe my post can be representative of someone else's opinion.
My last thought (for at least this post) is that it sounds like your sister Faith is still in danger. That said, the last thing you want to do is draw anymore attention to her on this blog, right?
Hope: If you could, please email me; my address is in my profile.
socwork,
Thank you. I know you now better than you think.
Hope: It's nothing major...I used to babysit sisters named Hope and Faith and I was hoping you were them!!!
SOTL, please don't misstate what I said. I've copied the post in it's entirety for your edification.
JMO wrote: "I don't support the decision made by Bro. Steve in relationship to the PW situation. I've not wavered from that position from day one. No minister should be or remain on staff that did what PW admitted.
It was obvious by everyone except Steve Gaines. I certainly understand the difference in God's laws and man's laws. The point on the DCS is that they didn't find any children at risk from PW. You'd thought that we had allowed an active pedophile to roam our hallways unchecked based on some of the posters on this board. And that was shown not to be the situation. While I understand that it is difficult to cure a pedophile I know that my Lord can cure one. So before I get the ifs and possibles from you folks, keep in mind that I serve a God that can cure pedophilia. And I believe that PW was cured since his son was the one and only that has been known.
SOTL, you seemingly draw the conclusion that a rapist is a liar. First, PW came to tell SG by his own admission. If he was still an active pedophile wouldn't it have been best for him to remain silent? I as an individual do not have trust issues so I generally take someone at their word unless proven differently. I am cynical by nature so I filter most things pretty thoroughly. I also have a forgiving spirit because I've been forgiven for much sin in my life. I would hope that in the future you read all my post before dissecting each sentence.
Geez, socwork, you never come to my defense like you have esther's. Maybe you just don't care to defend those of which you disagree.
JMO
PW did not come to SG by his own admission. His son forced him into it.
And I DID read your entire post and that is why i wrote what I did.
Steve gaines had NO way of knowing whether or not PW was an ' active' pedophile or not. And whose child were you willing to risk to find out if he was or not? Isn't it enough to know that his own grandchildren were not allowed alone with him,yet SG had no problem allowing him to roam the halls of BBC?
Again, the only way that SG could think that he was not ' active' was because PW told him so.
HIs son tried to contact SG over and over for a meeting, and Sg refused to meet with him. Does that sound like all issues were resolved?
In order to believe that SG was convinced that PW was not active, we would have to believe that rapists are not necessarily liars.
II Chronicles 3:8-9
8 Now be ye not stiffnecked, as your fathers were, but yield yourselves unto the LORD, and enter into his sanctuary, which he hath sanctified for ever: and serve the LORD your God, that the fierceness of his wrath may turn away from you.
9 For if ye turn again unto the LORD, your brethren and your children shall find compassion before them that lead them captive, so that they shall come again into this land: for the LORD your God is gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you, if ye return unto him.
Geez, socwork, you never come to my defense like you have esther's.
Good observation.
Maybe you just don't care to defend those of which you disagree.
If said person who disagrees with me is respectful to others, I would be among the first to defend them when challenged.
jmo says:
SOTL, you seemingly draw the conclusion that a rapist is a liar.
SOTL says:
HUH??????
Yes, I admit that if someone admits to being a rapist, it's not a long stretch to assume that they could also tell a ( gasp) LIE!
jmo,
socwork wasn't defending esther, she was speaking from her heart.
concerned,
Faith and I are sisters in the faith brought together through trials, not from the same mother. I'd be honored to have been one of the sisters you sat for, but it wasn't us.
God bless,
Hope
Thanks Hope :)
Oh Pooh...I've been searching for them for years! God Bless You both. :)
hope,
Could you ask Faith to email me? The blog adm. has my email addy.
Thanks.
First, PW came to tell SG by his own admission. If he was still an active pedophile wouldn't it have been best for him to remain silent?
I think that is an essentially true statement, but it lacks sufficient backstory. Without the backstory it would be easy to draw incorrect conclusions.
PW only went forward because he was being held accountable by his victim. The victim threatened to break off all contact with both PW and PW's wife. PW came forward because he did not want to lose all fellowship with his victim and the victim's family. If the victim had not forced the issue, undoubtedly he would have remained silent and would still be ministering and counseling at Bellevue to this day.
I've talked to half a dozen women who were counseled by PW. Their stories are eerily similar. He asked each one inappropriate sexual questions. Some of those women he knew were molestation victims. He asked them probing sexual questions in an attempt to learn all the base details of their abuse. One dear lady went to talk with him about a discipline issue concerning her teenager and he found a way to ask questions about her sex life with her husband.
I have no evidence that PW molested anyone other than his son. However, I believe there is ample evidence of an ongoing sex-related problem that continued to manifest itself in very recent months.
"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight!"
Isaiah 5:20-21
I see a problem in that JMO is creating confusion among those of t his blog...much like another did only much more tastefully. You cannot keep her/him from stirring the kool-aide; just be careful not to take a sip.
imaresistor,
No problem here.
The only person I see as confused is JMO himself.
Ima, Great minds think alike:o). I also think JMO is either David Coombs, his wife or a close friend.
I think JMO, if not Coombs, at the very least was dispatched here with talking points and is doing an excellent job of setting the agenda. So far, he has admitted that he 'advised' Steven Coombs not to post here. He has tried to set himself up as the 'go to' guy if bloggers have questions for the leaders. Even asking them to post their questions here.
And JMO admitted on the last thread that Coombs has been brought in to get control of things. (I would think you needs less control at the top these days!)
And my favorite is his response to your post where you make the same suggestion as to his identity:
Just My Opinion said...
iamaresitor, you are probably right in that they are all smarter than me. But don't you think that my good looks make up for the lack of smarts?
6:46 PM, February 23, 2007
But the one thing JMO cannot explain away (Because there is NO good reason) is why at the critical moment SG ignored very clear scriptural commands. PW was disqualified as a minister at that moment whether he was repentent or not. It does not matter. Scripture is very clear on that.
Catfish..hmmm...well, depends on how you like it...the Dixie Cafe has some pretty kickin' cajun grilled catfish. Add some red beans and rice...mmmm.
The corporate/CEO structure works well in the corporate environment...a church is not a fortune 500 company however, so ordaining another VP in charge of____(whatever), won't help get this church back on track. BBC needs an under-shepherd...one who loves God's sheep...one who remembers that they're GOD'S sheep, and that the call to care for those sheep is a privilege and a serious stewardship, not a "right", nor something that's earned. It's not a position of power to lord over others, but a position of servitude and humility. One of service to Christ by caring for His sheep..."Do you love me more than these? Then feed my sheep."
"Which is why I'm sitting at home on Friday night talking to people I barely know."
Cakes, If it makes you feel any better know this: Your comments are eloquent, funny and on target in common sense.
Now, would you get that at the pool hall?
WTB,
Did you get my email?
AOG,
I just hit send on my response.
WTB
SOTL, I am rarely confused and this is certainly not one of those times. But thanks for always taking the opportunity to throw a little insult my way. I generally have refrained from doing likewise.
Lindon says:
But the one thing JMO cannot explain away (Because there is NO good reason) is why at the critical moment SG ignored very clear scriptural commands. PW was disqualified as a minister at that moment whether he was repentent or not. It does not matter. Scripture is very clear on that.
SOTL says:
What is unbelievable to me is that a person with SG's education would BELIEVE a rapist when he says that he is not presently raping anyone at this time.
Just becuase you rape, doesn't mean you lie?
Let alone that PW had PLENTY of reason and motivation to lie.
Again, the bottom line is this:
WHICH CHILD WERE YOU WILLING TO TAKE THAT CHANCE ON? Which child do you choose to lose their innocense to find out if PW was really " cured"?
Instead of protecting the children at bbc FROM a rapist, SG was more intent on protecting the rapist himself.
ezekiel, obviously you don't know David Coombs at all. He has been ministering for a number of years. Just hasn't been ordained by a church. But he was ordained by God to ministry but I am sure a Bible scholar as yourself knew that.
PW to SG: I'm not actively raping any chldren now.
This reminds me of this statement:
" I used to beat my wife but I don"t anymore"
lindon, I sent you an e-mail earlier. (I think)
Well, what just tears me up is that here you have a CEO being ordained in a mega church who has not been called to preach by our Almight God and who has not been voted in by the church members. Who appointed this fellow and who voted him in? Please somebody tell me this. None of this is biblical. Where are the bylaws, the constitution, the common sense, the people? I certainly have nothing against this man personally, but I am against PD/CGM and this is clearly what this is. This is what is called 'being who-doed'. I have heard that phrase all my life and I have never known of it to be more 'fitten'.
These people coming on here trying to create confusion are clearly part of the agenda. They are trying to 'who-do' you.
sotl,
Faith is spending some time alone with God, but I'll pass on your message when I hear from her.
HP
Hope,
Thank you, and please tell her that I have prayed for her all afternoon.
aog wrote: "BBC needs an under-shepherd...one who loves God's sheep...one who remembers that they're GOD'S sheep, and that the call to care for those sheep is a privilege and a serious stewardship, not a "right", nor something that's earned. It's not a position of power to lord over others, but a position of servitude and humility. One of service to Christ by caring for His sheep..."Do you love me more than these? Then feed my sheep."
aog, Thanks for these words.
The modern church has completely gotten away from what the NT teaches is an elder/minister/pastor. I am doing a 4 part series on elders and the subsequent scriptures on my blog which includes the authority scriptures, etc. It is based on some teaching I ran across 2 years and goes indepth on the Greek translation of certain words that some may find interesting.
My guess is if the real role were laid out...many of the elders we have now in churches would run for the hills! Not quite so glamourous and powerful.
JMO said, "He has been ministering for a number of years. Just hasn't been ordained by a church. But he was ordained by God to ministry but I am sure a Bible scholar as yourself knew that."
Tell us about this. Where did he preach?
lindon, I have never attempted to explain away SG actions. You attempt to paint me in that corner is disingenuous at the least and a blatant untruth at most.
I have not offered to carrier pigeon all messages to the leadership but have made a couple of offers to individuals. Again you are misrepresenting truth.
You post is full of suppositions and misstatements of what I said. I never said that David was brought in for any reasons. I said that it was my hope that David would bring some sense of integrity and honesty to the situation.
It angers me when someone speaks for me without providing the true sense of my statements. Please do not post about me in the future. I do not respect someone who cannot maintain fair play in their responses.
I know this parts from my usual lovable self (LOL) but I try not to misrepresent another's opinion by paraphrases. I generally quote their own statements in my blog.
I am sure that socwork will come to my aid in the sense of fairness.
Post a Comment