Monday, April 09, 2007

A Tale of Two Churches

This is a look at some of the things that happened at Germantown Baptist Church last year. Click on "The Book" to see all the links. Who would have thought that Bellevue would be facing a similar situation one year later?

Fortunately for GBC, they had a good set of bylaws, and BBC does not.


Obviously there are differences in the two churches, but there are many similarities as well. Compare and contrast those here.

Remember to sign the Petition to Call Bellevue Baptist Church into an Open Business Meeting and forward the link to your fellow Bellevue members.

568 comments:

1 – 200 of 568   Newer›   Newest»
Piglet said...

25+yrs@BBC said...

Here are a few important changes that would help during these days of crisis in leadership:

I. Pastoral Accountability to the Congregation:
1. A business meeting in accord with Matthew 18 to deal with the issues that remain related to Mark Sharpe and "the Dream"... and any other loose ends that should have been dealt with months ago!!
2. The giving records of the membership and the ministers on staff at Bellevue should never be for pastoral review in any shape, form, or fashion.
3. No church credit cards.
4. An admission Dr. Gaines should have never given $25k to FUMC and an explanation of policy changes to prevent a repeat.
5. A policy for open books on Holy land trips and no overcharging of members. Free tickets for the host and wife are fine but not for anybody else.
6. Full disclosure of ministerial compensation: salary + benefit breakdown, etc.
7. Timely removal from office of ministers guilty of sexual immorality with immediate and timely coordination with the appropriate authorities if any laws have been broken by a minister (no matter how long ago), including thorough investigation of the matter when the minister’s conduct may have affected other church members or their children.

II. Congregational Church governance:
Some of the congregation has awakened to the reality that our church has a set of "lay-elders," a close knit group of men who manage to be appointed to key positions year after year. The rest of the congregation needs to be awakened.

1. Those who are part of this lay-elder "power block" need to step down from positions of influence for a long time. Bellevue needs “new blood” in these key positions.
2. There needs to be the signing of a public conflict of interest form for any member that has any business contract to provide services for the church. These people should not be allowed to serve on committees that review bids for their services.
3. Congregational nomination of and election of all of the Board of Directors as called for in the 1929 bylaws.
4. A quarterly business meeting with open mike Q&A with each committee chairman. **The current bylaws mention "monthly" business meetings! When were they changed??
5. A good updated set of bylaws similar to GBC.
6. A transparent committee selection process.
7. Much greater congregational oversight of the current budget with a transparent policy for consideration of non-budgeted expenditures exceeding a reasonable amount.
8. Thorough communication with the Congregation for ANY capital project well in advance of any vote. Building prayer buildings or any other type of building should be brought through proper channels to the congregation for prayerful consideration--not coerced "rubber stamping." [By the way, Dr. Rogers taught us quite a bit about prayer. As a matter of fact, I believe all of the current buildings ARE prayer buildings already. He and Dr. Whitmire also taught us quite a bit about worship also... but that's another topic].
9. Bellevue needs to reject Warrenism fully and finally.
10. Higher standards should be put in place for the hiring of "ministers." Seminary training should be considered a normal prerequisite.

III. Treatment of ministers on staff at BBC and members:
1. A whistle blower policy for ministers, staff, and members.
2. The end of heavy handed dealing with ministers, staff, and members; and the end of signing non-disclosure statements. All ministers who have been pressured or asked to sign such non-disclosure statements should be released from them in writing by BBC! Former staff should be allowed to address the congregation and/or the deacon body either in writing or in person without any fear of reprisal regarding their exit from BBC. Gaines has confessed to mishandling Dr. Whimire's exit... The congregation now needs to hear from Dr. Whimire--and several others--by letter or in person IN THEIR OWN WORDS. The congregation needs to know how their leadership has treated and is treating ministers who leave the service of our Lord through BBC.
3. Forgiveness for those in leadership who have allowed this to deteriorate to this point--AND consequences for their actions.

All in my opinion as usual.

We are to be “providing things honestly in the sight of all men” (Rom. 12:17). Revival, reform, congregational oversight... for there is level ground at Calvary and "he who would be great among you shall be the servant of all."

***********************************

How many people believe this is EVER going to happen at BBC?

You know, as outdated as they are, we DO have bylaws and if we followed them we would be having a meeting in a few weeks.

Problem is, unlike GBC, we here at BBC think we are above bylaws and make the rules up as we go.

How ARROGANT is that?

And what's more, most people know that is the case and DON'T CARE.

(Piglet: Skipping off to GBC where people CARE.)

socwork said...

piglet,

Can piglets skip? I would guess the hooves don't have a lot of spring in them, but then again, I wouldn't know.

On a completely unrelated note, thanks for posting 25+yrs list again.

oc said...

Socwork and Piglet,
What's wrong with you two that nobody wants to be here with you?:)

socwork said...

Well, I know piglet's smell... I guess socwork's smell too.

Now you smell too, oc.

Sorry.

oc said...

Socwork,
Guess what, smarty pants? I smelled before I got here. So there!

concernedSBCer said...

Hey, I'm here! I don't think anyone smells. I'm just resting from today's activity!

oc said...

Concerned,
You must have a cold.

socwork said...

Whew... what a relief, I mean, I did take a shower today, but one can never be too sure.

concernedSBCer said...

socwork: You've got mail.
:)

Piglet said...

This piggy is squeaky clean. :0)

gmommylv

I saw your earlier post about leaving because it is easy. We have stood up, informed everyone we know. We are not being fed at BBC or edified and built up by the fellowship.

It is important that we nurture our spiritual health. We'll maintain our vote for a while but we have to remove ourselves from those who have truly caused division - as Dr. Rogers stated in his sermon on apostacy - those who have departed from the faith.

I read through the GBC BOOK and it just made me sad that my friends at BBC care so little. I admire the folks who stood firm at GBC and have enjoyed worshipping with them on occasion.

People in the Gaines fan club are just downright creepy. I'm sick of their shallow logic in the hateful emails I've been getting.

One guy suggested we should not even expect to have any say - that BBC is too big to have meetings. And of course, each person excuses sin after sin after sin of our leaders. Shocking and tragic.

Instead WE are the enemy. We who want to obey bylaws, follow scripture, obey the law, have a meeting to allow congregational approval - we have the problem.

I can not associate with these people any longer.

Amy said...

nathanb said
The Manning/Angel video clip just got an award from YouTube for being in the top 75 most watched News/Politics Videos for today.
Not long after that, someone from Bellevue called and had them pull the plug.


Well I am mad for BBC!!
The powers that be pulled the plug after it was on tape the parliamentarian verified there is no motion after an adjournment motion! That's not right! They at least could of "fix the time to adjourn" because there was not a regular business meeting on the schedule where Josh's motion would have been first as un-finished business.

I did a search on the Parliamentarian. Not only has he been involved in a PDC church split, he has been the parliamentarian for the Southern Baptist Convention for 20yrs and has written a few books on Parliamentary Procedure. He was a hired gun- you guys never had a chance.

Amy said...

Piglet,

What's the GBC BOOK?

Piglet said...

amy

Let me take this opportunity to thank you for encouraging us here, and for rolling out the welcome mat at GBC. I was so blessed there Sunday, that I nearly cried.

Piglet said...

The GBC BOOK is in the link posted on this thread. I had never seen it before today - but it gives a lot of details of the events of last year.

Amy said...

Well, BBC members are always welcome to worship with us. We would even understand if you made GBC a temporary home until things got better at BBC. We certianly know how it feels to be in a church divided, and I know it makes a lot of us just sick to see BBC fall.

Lin said...

I went and read through the site of "The Book' about the GBC takeover.

Let me just say, I am totally confused. Mr. Russell keeps mentioning Calvinism and Purpose Driven in the same sentence! I am not sure if he understands that they are polar opposites in terms of doctrine. Perhaps he is using Calvinism in terms of the 'structure' which would include elders or something. But most PDL or seeker churches are elder rule. As are many Reformed churches. (For different reasons, I might add)

He mentions that Hell, repentence, etc., are never mentioned by the pastor... that in and of itself sure does not sound like a Calvinistic pastor! But it does sound like a PDL pastor.

Those of you who have read my blog know that I am not a proponet of referring to the Doctrine of Grace as Calvinism. I abhor anything named after a mere man that does not give God the Glory.

I would like to hear why Mr. Russell believes the pastor was a Calvinist and a proponet of PDL. That part really confuses me.

Amy said...

Thanks Piglet!

I had seen this web site awhile ago and had forgotten about it.

It really was such a hard time and God was in control afterall! I hope you can say this about BBC soon.

New BBC Open Forum said...

lin wrote:

"I would like to hear why Mr. Russell believes the pastor was a Calvinist and a proponet of PDL. That part really confuses me."

That confused me, too.

Piglet said...

As I read THE BOOK, I was assuming he must be referring to church government but using that term "Calvinist" is misleading...

charlie fox said...

Lin said...
I would like to hear why Mr. Russell believes the pastor was a Calvinist and a proponet of PDL. That part really confuses me.

REPLY:

He said it because it is the TRUTH.

Bepatient said...

"People in the Gaines fan club are just downright creepy."

wow.

Amy said...

I really don't know what exactly Frank Russell is alluding to about the Calvinist comment whether it was in regards to elder led churches or Sam's theology. He never expressed Calvanist views from the pulpit that I remember. I am guilty of being asleep at the wheel before our crisis, so maybe I missed something. I'll ask around to those more aware than I was.

Amy said...

Charlie Fox said...

He said it because it is the TRUTH.

I do remember a friend told me once Sam Shaw said he was a "three point Calvinist" but I don't really know what that means? Can you pick and choose among the five?
I didn't want to say anything not knowing what that meant, but since Charlie seems sure-maybe he knows.

Lin said...

"He said it because it is the TRUTH. "

Charlie, PDL and Calvinism are polar opposites in doctrine. It makes no sense. A Calvinist would never apply seeker methods.

What are some of the things the pastor taught that are Calvinistic? I am just curious because lumping these together makes no sense at all.

charlie fox said...

Sam Shaw is a solid Calvinist and big buddies with Rick Warren. He sent all of the GBC staff out to SBU ( Saddle Back U.) for some learning. He was following the "Church Transition" script to the letter.

charlie fox said...

Lin,

You are just going to have to trust me on this. You might say that he is a "closet Calvinist"

Lin said...

Sam Shaw is a solid Calvinist and big buddies with Rick Warren. He sent all of the GBC staff out to SBU ( Saddle Back U.) for some learning. He was following the "Church Transition" script to the letter. "

Charlie, Rick Warren is as far away from being a Calvinist as Mr. Ed the talking horse.

Lin said...

If he were a closet Calvinist, the LAST person he would be learning from is Rick Warren. Maybe John Piper, John McArthur or EVEN Mark Driscoll...but NEVER Rick Warren.

Amy said...

Charlie,
Do you know what a "three point" ( the points always reminds me of antlers) is?

Proverbs 12:22 said...

Lin,

I agree Calvinism and the church growth movement are incompatible, but that does not stop some pastors from trying to weld the two. One of the large local Presbyterian Churches, Hope Presbyterian, is as seeker-friendly as it gets.

As crazy as it sounds, Shaw claims to be a Calvinist.

Amy said...

I remember he had John Piper ministries linked on his first blog.

One thing I do remember about Sam, he had a habit of promising two different things to two different groups- couldn't really say no. Maybe that's how he got involved with two different movements. Wouldn't surprise me.

Lin said...

Where is aog when you need him?

Amy said...

I just looked on Sam's new blog( after I promised I would never look again- he made another swipe at GBC a couple of weeks ago and I had had it) and he has a link to Desiring God which is John piper's site. So, I guess Charlie and Frank Russell are correct

charlie fox said...

Amy said...
Charlie,
Do you know what a "three point" ( the points always reminds me of antlers) is?

Reply:
There are 5 major points of Calvinism. These 5 points are known by the acronym: T.U.L.I.P.
Pick 3 of the 5 and you are a 3 point.

Lin said...

Just for reference...the 5 Points:

T -- total depravity. This doesn't mean people are as bad as they can be. It means that sin is in every part of one's being, including the mind and will, so that a man cannot save himself.

U -- unconditional election. God chooses to save people unconditionally; that is, they are not chosen on the basis of their own merit.

L -- limited atonement. The sacrifice of Christ on the cross was for the purpose of saving the elect.

I -- irresistible grace. When God has chosen to save someone, He will.

P -- perseverence of the saints. Those people God chooses cannot lose their salvation; they will continue to believe. If they fall away, it will be only for a time.

charlie fox said...

lin said....
If he were a closet Calvinist, the LAST person he would be learning from is Rick Warren. Maybe John Piper, John McArthur or EVEN Mark Driscoll...but NEVER Rick Warren.

REPLY:
I say again, ya gotta trust me on this one!!!!!!!

charlie fox said...

A variation of Lin's T.U.L.I.P


T
Total hereditary depravity
Babies inherit the sin of Adam and are totally depraved and therefore unable to respond to the gospel message of Christ.

U
Unconditional election
(or predestination) God had a master list of those who will be saved and those who will go to hell before creation in Gen 1:1. The list is unchangeable.

L
Limited atonement
Christ did not die for all men but only those on the "saved list"

I
Irresistible grace
God sends the Holy Spirit only those on the saved list which removes their depraved nature inherited from Adam and creates within them a saving faith in Christ. The Holy Spirit thereafter guides them directly to understand and correctly interpret the Bible.

P
Perseverance of the saints
A child of God once saved, cannot be lost.

junk99mail said...

At 9:56 AM, April 09, 2007
Lin said...
There has been some very serious false teaching on this blog coming from 'seminary' trained posters.

junk99mail says ...
Lin, just curious ... wondering how you came by that info ... I don't recall anyomn on this blog specifically mentioning being seminary trained, but maybe I missed it. I've wondered (and asked in a previous post) if students or faculty from MABTS participated or lurked here, but if so, no one admittted it. I saw the posts recently about the class from SWBTS studying this blog, but no mention of if the students participated. (SWBTS is Steve Gaines alma mater, by the way...wonder if the professor previously mentioned knows him?) Anyway, just wondering if any posters had mentioned being seminary trained.

Lin said...

Charlie, this is freaking me out. The man must be very conflicted. He cannot go to learn seeker methods from Warren and then believe in any 3 of the 5 points of Calvinism. IT makes no sense. They are diametrically opposed.

I need a drink. Oh wait...I am a Baptist. Shoot!

Lin said...

Junk, e-mail me.

Lin said...

Charlie, Just one question: Do you believe that God knows right now exactly who will be saved in the end?

charlie fox said...

Lin said...
Charlie, this is freaking me out. The man must be very conflicted. He cannot go to learn seeker methods from Warren and then believe in any 3 of the 5 points of Calvinism. IT makes no sense. They are diametrically opposed.

REPLY:
Try to imagine how "freaked out" the GBC congregation was.

charlie fox said...

Lin said...
Charlie, Just one question: Do you believe that God knows right now exactly who will be saved in the end?

REPLY: YES!!!!!!!

junk99mail said...

Charlie,
Lin's descriptions of the 5 points are more in keeping with the way a "Calvinist" would present their own views. Yours sounds more like an Arminian's characterization of those views.

charlie fox said...

junk99mail said...
Charlie,
Lin's descriptions of the 5 points are more in keeping with the way a "Calvinist" would present their own views. Yours sounds more like an Arminian's characterization of those views.

Reply: I don't disagree. As I said, my description was a variation. So, which is right? It is an age old question and will only be answered when we go HOME.

Lin said...

Charlie, So what is your problem with predesination? You are agreeing that He already knows who will be saved. It is not like someone is going to surprise Him. Right?

So, How are we saved? Does the Holy Spirit have anything to do with it at all?

Btw: For disclosure: I am NOT a calvinist but I do believe election.

Lin said...

T
Total hereditary depravity
Babies inherit the sin of Adam and are totally depraved and therefore unable to respond to the gospel message of Christ. "

I do not understand this one at all. We are convicted of our sin and saved by the hearing of the Word through the work of the Holy Spirit.

What you wrote here makes it sound like no one can be saved at all even after hearing the Gospel.

Amy said...

I volunteered when GBC was a Red Cross shelter for Katrina. Rick Warren sent a team from Saddleback to help for a week (another red flag I missed). One very sweet lady I was working with said Rick Warren was so missions minded because when all the elect were saved Jesus would return, so by reaching more people we were speeding up the second coming. I said, very nicely, I didn't believe we could change God's timing, and should just focus on spreading the gospel. I thought she was just a little mixed up. Would this line of reasoning fit in somewhere with Calvinism? Or is it a PDC freedom of belief kind of thing?

charlie fox said...

Lin said...
Charlie, So what is your problem with predesination? You are agreeing that He already knows who will be saved. It is not like someone is going to surprise Him. Right?

Reply:
I said I know GOD KNOWS who will be saved. GOD knows everything. That is NOT the same as saying GOD ELECTS who will be saved and who won't be.

Proverbs 12:22 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Amy said...

I believe God in His infinite wisdom has always known who, of their own free will, would accept Him.

Piglet said...

amy

I agree. :)

G'night all.

Lin said...

Would this line of reasoning fit in somewhere with Calvinism? Or is it a PDC freedom of belief kind of thing?"

More like Kingdom on Earth teaching. Which is exactly what Warren teaches and is part of his PEACE plan. This is the opposite of the belief of total depravity.

Tim said...

I have been amazed at the number of people that have the idiotic idea that requesting an open legitamate church business meeting is devisive.

Perhaps these folks need to go into work tomorrow and tell the boss that business meetings are devisive. Or maybe they should contact Congress or the Senate and let them know that meetings are devisive. Of course everyone knows that meetings of the armed forces are devisive. The President of the United State should cease all staff meetings because they are devisive.

This is probably the least believable and most inexcusable argument that I have ever heard in my life. I can not believe for a single solitary moment that any of the folks that are spinning this yarn accept it as the truth.

The more probable argument would be, "We don't know what all is going on at this church and we don't want to know. We have kept our heads in the sand, heard and believed a lie and we like it that way. As a matter of fact, we love it. We don't know and we don't care".

One thing that I do know is that Bellevue has proved beyond any doubt that the old adage, "Ignorance is bliss", to be completely erroneous, otherwise Bellevue would be the most blissful place on earth.

Proverbs 12:22 said...

Total Depravity...We sin because we are sinners. That is who we are from the moment of conception. (Psalm 51:5)

junk99mail said...

Charlie,
I wasn't meaning to comment on the rightness or wrongness of the different views, just commenting on the phrasing of the descriptions. I believe that in His presence we will "know as we are known"--but even then, we will still be finite, and by nature unable to fully grasp the infinite. But if we get off into too much on this topic, NASS will prolly banish us to another thread. :)

gmommylv said...

Hey Piglet,
Please forgive me if anything in my earlier post was hurtful to you. I am to the over flowing frustration point.
I know you have been in there standing,praying and shouting.....

there have been too many sitting on their hands and I believe had they not been afraid to join with others and not waited for their particular group of friends to stand 1st....MAYBE we would be somewhere today.
Maybe not.
I do agree with you about the spiritural health.
A sweet friend pointed out to me today that for those of us who have suffered loss in our lives, this is yet another loss to endure...
I was powerless before to fight the thief whose intent was to steal and destroy.
I see this one clearly and I have a voice now so I believe I should do all I know to do.....
it seems I am powerless against this thief as well.
Then I think I am being sinful and prideful to think about MY FEELINGS...I KNOW how this whole thing ends and who the real enemy is.
it is a constant struggle and like many,I am weary.
I truely am concerned for the lost and wounded and weak that sit under SG. The pastor and leadership are not concerned for their souls.
BBC is a very spiriturally unhealthy church.

charlie fox said...

Looks like amy, piglet and Charlie are on the same page.

Tim said...

I just did a word search.

Calvin is in the Bible - zero times.
Same goes for tulip.

How 'bout we just chunk Calvin and Tulip and go to the Word. It seems to me that what God made quite simple, men try to complicate.

Where oh where is Uncle Bill Looney?

Lin said...

Ok, Charlie. You're still my brother even if you do think we can choose Christ when we were born hating God without help from the Holy Spirit.

I Praise Him that you are one of the elect. :0)

Lin said...

No Tim, you are right! Which is why I am NOT a Calvinist. But 'elect' or 'election' is in there...

Proverbs 12:22 said...

Is Unconditional Election biblical?

Let us turn to Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. There we read: “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before Him in love; having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,” 1:4, 5. In Romans 8:29, 30 we read of that golden chain of redemption which stretches from the eternity that is past to the eternity that is to come, — For whom He foreknew, He also foreordained to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He foreordained, them He also called: and whom He called, them He also justified: and whom He justified, them He also glorified.” Foreknown, foreordained, called, justified, glorified, with always the same people included in each group; and where one of these factors is present, all the others are in principle present with it. Paul has cast the verse in the past tense because with God the purpose is in principle executed when formed, so certain is it of fulfillment. “These five golden links,” says Dr. Warfield, “are welded together in one unbreakable chain, so that all who are set upon in God’s gracious distinguishing view are carried on by His grace, step by step, up to the great consummation of that glorification which realizes the promised conformity to the image of God’s own Son. It is ‘election,’ you see, that does all this; for ‘whom He foreknew, them He also glorified’.5

The Scriptures represent election as occurring in past time, irrespective of personal merit, and altogether sovereign, — “The children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth, it was said to her, The elder shall serve the younger. Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated,” Rom. 9:11, 12. Now if the doctrine of election is not true, we may safely challenge any man to tell us what the apostle means by such language. “We are pointed illustratively to the sovereign acceptance of Isaac and rejection of Ishmael, and to the choice of Jacob and not of Esau before their birth and therefore before either had done good or bad; we are explicitly told that in the matter of salvation it is not of him that wills, or of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy, and that He has mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardens; we are pointedly directed to behold in God the potter who makes the vessels which proceed from His hand each for an end of His appointment, that He may work out His will upon them. It is safe to say that language cannot be chosen better adapted to teach Predestination at its height.”6

Even if we were without any other inspired utterances than those quoted from Paul, so clear and unambiguous are those that we should be constrained to admit that the doctrine of Election finds a place in Scripture. By looking at the Scripture references in the Confession of Faith, we find that it is abundantly sustained in the Bible. If we admit the inspiration of the Bible; if we admit that the writings of the prophets and apostles were breathed by the Spirit of God, and are thus infallible, then what we find there will be sufficient; and thus on the irrefutable testimony of the Scriptures we must acknowledge Election, or Predestination, to be an established truth, and one which we must receive if we are to possess the whole counsel of God. Every Christian must believe in some kind of election; for while the Scriptures leave unexplained many things about the doctrine of Election, they make very plain the FACT that there has been an election.

Christ explicitly declared to His disciples, “Ye did not choose me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that ye should go and bear fruit,” John 15:16, by which He made God’s choice primary and man’s choice only secondary and a result of the former. The Arminian, however, in making salvation depend upon man’s choice to use or abuse proffered grace reverses this order and makes man’s choice the primary and decisive one. There is no place in the Scriptures for an election which is carefully adjusted to the foreseen actions of the creature. The divine will is never made dependent on the creaturely will for its determinations.

Again the sovereignty of this choice is clearly taught when Paul declares that God commended His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us (Rom. 5:8), and that Christ died for the ungodly (Rom. 5:6). Here we see that His love was not extended toward us because we were good, but in spite of the fact that we were bad. It is God who chooses the person and causes him to approach unto Him (Ps. 65:4). Arminianism takes this choice out of the hands of God and places it in the hands of man. Any system which substitutes a man-made election falls below the Scripture teaching on this subject.

In the darkest days of Israel’s apostasy, as in every other age, it was this principle of election which made a difference between mankind and kept a remnant secure. “Yet will I leave me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him,” I Kings 19:18. These seven thousand did not stand by their own strength; it is expressly said that God reserved them to Himself, that they might be a remnant.

It is for the sake of the elect that God governs the course of all history (Mark 13:20). They are “the salt of the earth,” and “the light of the world;” and so far at least in the world’s history they are the few through whom the many are blessed, — God blessed the household of Potiphar for Joseph’s sake; and ten righteous people would have saved the city of Sodom. Their election, of course, includes the opportunity of hearing the gospel and receiving the gifts of grace, for without these means the great end of election would not be attained. They are, in fact, elected to all that is included in the idea of eternal life.

Apart from this election of individuals to life, there has been what we may call a national election, or a divine predestination of nations and communities to a knowledge of true religion and to the external privileges of the Gospel. God undoubtedly does choose some nations to receive much greater spiritual and temporal blessings than others. This form of election has been well illustrated in the Jewish nation, in certain European nations and communities, and in America. The contrast is very striking when we compare these with other nations such as China, Japan, India, etc.

Throughout the Old Testament it is repeatedly stated that the Jews were a chosen people. “You only have I known of all the families of the earth,” Amos 3:2. “He hath not dealt so with any (other) nation; And as for His ordinances, they have not known them,” Ps. 147:20. “For thou art a holy people unto Jehovah thy God: Jehovah thy God hath chosen thee to be a people for His own possession, above all the peoples that are upon the face of the earth,” Deut. 7:6. It is made equally plain that God found no merit or dignity in the Jews themselves which moved Him to choose them above others. “Jehovah did not set His love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any other people; for ye were the fewest of all peoples: but because Jehovah loveth you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore unto your fathers, hath Jehovah brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.” Deut. 7:7, 8. And again, “Only Jehovah had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and He chose their seed after them, even above all peoples,” Deut. 10:15. Here it is carefully explained that Israel was honored with the divine choice in contrast with the treatment accorded all the other peoples of the earth, that the choice rested solely on the unmerited love of God, and that it had no foundation in Israel itself.

When Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the Gospel in the province of Asia, and was given the vision of a man in Europe calling across the waters, “Come over into Macedonia, and help us,” one section of the world was sovereignly excluded from, and another section was sovereignly given, the privileges of the Gospel. Had the divinely directed call been rather from the shores of India, Europe and America might today have been less civilized than the natives of Tibet. It was the sovereign choice of God which brought the Gospel to the people of Europe and later to America, while the people of the east, and north, and south were left in darkness. We can assign no reason, for instance, why it should have been Abraham’s seed, and not the Egyptians or the Assyrians, who were chosen; or why Great Britain and America, which at the time of Christ’s appearance on earth were in a state of such complete ignorance, should today possess so largely for themselves, and be disseminating so widely to others, these most important spiritual privileges. The diversities in regard to religious privileges in the different nations is to be ascribed to nothing else than the good pleasure of God.

A third form of election taught in Scripture is that of individuals to the external means of grace, such as hearing and reading the Gospel, association with the people of God, and sharing the benefits of the civilization which has arisen where the Gospel has gone. No one ever had the chance to say at what particular time in the world’s history, or in what country, he would be born, whether or not he would be a member of the white race, or of some other. One child is born with health, wealth, and honor, in a favored land, in a Christian home, and grows up with all the blessings which attend the full light of the Gospel. Another is born in poverty and dishonor, of sinful and dissipated parents, and destitute of Christian influences. All of these things are sovereignly decided for them. Surely no one would insist that the favored child has any personal merit which could be the ground for this difference. Furthermore, was it not of God’s own choosing that He created us human beings, in His own image, when He might have created us cattle or horses or dogs? Or who would allow the dumb brutes to revile God for their condition in life as though the distinction was unjust? All of these things are due to God’s over-ruling providence, and not to human choice. “Arminians have labored to reconcile all this, as a matter of fact, with their defective and erroneous views of the Divine sovereignty, and with their unscriptural doctrines of universal grace and universal redemption; but they have not usually been satisfied themselves with their own attempts at explanation, and have commonly at last admitted, that there were mysteries in this matter which could not be explained, and which must just be resolved into the sovereignty of God and the unsearchableness of His counsels.”7

We may perhaps mention a fourth kind of election, that of individuals to certain vocations, — the gifts of special talents which fit one to be a statesman, another to be a doctor, or lawyer, or farmer, or musician, or artisan, gifts of personal beauty, intelligence, disposition, etc. These four kinds of election are in principle the same. Arminians escape no real difficulty in admitting the second, third, and fourth, while denying the first. In each instance God gives to some what He withholds from others. Conditions in the world at large and our own experiences in every day life show us that the blessings bestowed are sovereign and unconditional, irrespective of any previous merit or action on the part of those so chosen. If we are highly favored, we can only be thankful for His blessings; if not highly favored, we have no grounds for complaint. Why precisely this or that one is placed in circumstances which lead to saving faith, while others are not so placed, is indeed, a mystery. We cannot explain the workings of Providence; but we do know that the Judge of all the earth shall do right, and that when we attain to perfect knowledge we shall see that He has sufficient reasons for all His acts.

Furthermore, it may be said that in general the outward conditions with which the individual is surrounded do determine his destiny, — at least to this extent, that those from whom the Gospel is withheld have no chance for salvation. Cunningham has stated this very well in the following paragraph: —

There is an invariable connection established in God’s government of the world, between the enjoyment of outward privileges, or the means of grace, on the one hand, and faith and salvation on the other; in this sense, and to this extent, that the negation of the first implies the negation of the second. We are warranted by the whole tenor of Scripture, in maintaining that where God, in His sovereignty, withholds from men the enjoyment of the means of grace, — an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the only way of salvation, — He at the same time, and by the same means, or ordination, withholds from them the opportunity and power of believing and being saved.8

Calvinists maintain that God deals not only with mankind in the mass but with the individuals who are actually saved, that He has elected particular persons to eternal life and to all the means necessary for attaining that life. They admit that some of the passages in which election is mentioned teach only an election of nations, or an election to outward privileges; but they maintain that many other passages teach exclusively and only an election of individuals to eternal life.

There are some, of course, who deny that there has been any such thing as an election at all. They start at the very word as though it were a spectre just come from the shades and never seen before. And yet, in the New Testament alone, the words eklektos, ekioga, and ekiego, elect, election, choose, are found some forty-seven or forty-eight times (see Young’s Analytical Concordance for complete lists). Others accept the word but attempt to explain away the thing. They profess to believe in a “conditional election,” based, as they suppose, upon foreseen faith and evangelical obedience in its objects. This, of course, destroys election in any intelligible sense of the term, and reduces it to a mere recognition or prophecy that at some future time certain persons will be possessed of those qualities. If based on faith and evangelical obedience, then, as it has been cynically phrased, God is careful to elect only those whom He foresees will elect themselves. In the Arminian system election is reduced to a mere word or name, the use of which only tends to involve the subject in greater obscurity and confusion. A mere recognition that those qualities will be present at some future time is, of course, an election falsely so-called, or simply no election at all. And some Arminians, consistently carrying out their own doctrine that the person may or may not accept, and that if he does accept he may fall away again, identify the time of this decree of election with the death of the believer, as if only then his salvation became certain.

Election extends not only to men but also and equally to the angels since they also are a part of God’s creation and are under His government. Some of these are holy and happy, others are sinful and miserable. The same reasons which lead us to believe in a predestination of men also lead us to believe in a predestination of angels. The Scriptures confirm this view by references to “elect angels,” I Tim. 5:21, and “holy angels,” Mark 8:38, which are contrasted with wicked angels or demons. We read that God “spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness to be reserved unto judgment,” II Peter 2:4; of the “eternal fire which is prepared for the Devil and his angels,” Matt. 25:41; of “angels that kept not their own principality, but left their former habitation, He hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto the Judgment of the great day,” Jude 6; and of “Michael and his angels going forth to war with the dragon; and the dragon warred and his angels,” Rev. 12:7. A study of these passages shows us that, as Dabney says,

there are two kinds of spirits of that order; holy and sinful angels, servants of Christ and servants of Satan; that they were created in an estate of holiness and happiness, and abode in the region called Heaven (God’s holiness and goodness are sufficient proof that He would never have created them otherwise); that the evil angels voluntarily forfeited their estate by sinning, and were excluded forever from heaven and holiness; that those who maintained their estate were elected thereto by God, and that their estate of holiness and blessedness is now forever assured.9

Paul makes no attempt to explain how God can be just in showing mercy to whom He will and in passing by whom He will. In answer to the objector’s question, “Why doth He still find fault?” (with those to whom He has not extended saving mercy), he (Paul) simply resolves the whole thing into the sovereignty of God, by replying, “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?” Rom. 9:19-21. (And let it be noticed here that Paul says that it is not from different kinds of clay, but “from the same lump,” that God, as the potter, makes one vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor.) Paul does not drag God from His throne and set Him before our human reason to be questioned and examined. These secret counsels of His, which even the angels adore with trembling and desire to look into, are left unexplained, except that they are said to be according to His own good pleasure. And after Paul has stated this, he puts forth his hand, as it were, to forbid us from going any further. Had the Arminian assumption been true, namely, that all men are given sufficient grace and that each one is rewarded or punished according to his own use or abuse of this grace, there would have been no difficulty for which to account.

FURTHER SCRIPTURE PROOF

II Thess. 2:13: God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.
Matt. 24:24: There shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.
Matt. 24:31: And they (the angels) shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Mark 13:20: For the elect’s sake, whom He chose, He shortened those days (at the destruction of Jerusalem).
I Thess. 1:4: Knowing, brethren, beloved of God, your election.
Rom. 11:7: The election obtained it, and the rest were hardened.
I Tim. 5:21: I charge thee in the sight of God, and Jesus Christ, and the elect angels.
Rom. 8:33: Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect?
Rom. 11:5: (In comparison with Elijah’s time) Even so at the present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
II Tim. 2:10: I endure all things for the elect’s sake.
Titus 1:1: Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect.
I Peter 1:1: Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect.
I Peter 5:13: She that is in Babylon, elect together with you.
I Peter 2:9: But ye are an elect race.
I Thess. 5:9: For God appointed us not unto wrath, but unto the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 13:48: And as the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of God; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
John 17:9: I (Jesus) pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me; for they are thine.
John 6:37: All that the Father giveth me shall come unto me.
John 6:65: No man can come unto me except it be given unto him of the Father.
John 13:18: I speak not of you all; I know whom I have chosen.
John 15:16: Ye did not choose me, but I chose you.
Ps 105:6: Ye children of Jacob, His chosen ones.
Rom. 9:23: Vessels of mercy, which He afore prepared unto glory.


by Loraine Boettner

Lin said...

"I truely am concerned for the lost and wounded and weak that sit under SG. The pastor and leadership are not concerned for their souls. "

You are right. And Tim is right...Get into the Word. Just read it. Pray for understanding.

Grace and peace. G'nite.

charlie fox said...

junk99mail said...
Charlie,
I wasn't meaning to comment on the rightness or wrongness of the different views, just commenting on the phrasing of the descriptions.

REPLY:
All is well. I knew what you meant. I just put that in as food for thought. I don't know the answer. I just know where I stand.

junk99mail said...

BY THE WAY, on what basis could the "powers that be" at BBC (or anyone, other than those who made the recordings) determine what can and can't be posted to You Tube? Based on the quality, the videos I saw looked like they were done by individuals (with cell phones maybe?), not anything that would belong to the church as a corporation. Or are the "powers that be" still asserting that non-existent "copyright" nonsense?

charlie fox said...

Lin said...
Ok, Charlie. You're still my brother even if you do think we can choose Christ when we were born hating God without help from the Holy Spirit.

REPLY:
WHOA!!!! TIME OUT!!!!! Where did that come from???? I merely posted a variation of the T.U.L.I.P.

Tim said...

lin,

I completely agree, election is in there. However, I don't think that in our finite minds we have any chance at all of completely understanding an infinite God.

I posted much more and back spaced through all of it. This issue will not get us any closer to resolving the issues at Bellevue.

Proverbs 12:22 said...

"This issue will not get us any closer to resolving the issues at Bellevue."


A misunderstanding of Scripture, including the gospel, has us where we are today. I don't think we can resolve much of anything until we return to doctrinal purity.

Piglet said...

gmommylv

Nothing you said was hurtful. I agree with many of your points. :)

But I AM hurting. Any association with BBC has become unbearably painful and I am becoming cynical. I'm afraid I might not recover if I don't get out now.

I don't judge those who left before us or those who are staying right now. God has an assignment for each one and we have completed ours.

Every member will give an account for their part in this and whether they were obedient or too afraid to stand up. We have done what we could.

Piglet said...

(offline)

charlie fox said...

I see NO LOVE in Steve Gaines, just as the members of GBC saw NO LOVE in Sam Shaw. It appears that both of these men have COLD, COLD HEARTS.

Tim said...

Folks,

Does the Bible contradict itself? Heavens No!!!

Why not admit that you do not have it all figured out?

God is God and you and I are not!

Calvin was not either!


Matthew 18:14
Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

John 3:15-17
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.


II Thessalonians 2:10-12
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.


II Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Dr. Bill Loney said...

Sorry to interrupt a theological discussion, but I have a question.

I have decided that I might file my taxes this year. So, can you claim depreciation on a vehicle, say maybe an '88 Ford Country Squire Station Wagon, even though the Kelly Blue Book value is listed as 'you gotta be kidding'?

And also, do transients who occasionally bed down in the garage below my apartment qualify as dependants, especially if they have helped themselves to my potted meat stash? And I think one took my autographed 'Aunt Esther' "Watch it Sucka!" coffee mug...(possibly a business loss? cause the Grady "Good Goobity Goo" and the Fred "You Big Dummy!" mugs are worthless if the set is not complete)

As my esteemed mentor, Dr. Nachos Grande, told me on the day I graduated from Mexico City Community College Medical School: "Senor Loney, what you lack in medical knowledge and basic human hygiene, is far outweighed by your ability to cause chaos and human suffering, ineptly ignoring obvious common sense and universal decency, but your check cleared, so congratulations." Like soothing rain Senor Grande, soothing rain.

William T. Loney, M.D.

Advice from Lucy! said...

Would the last one out please turn off the lights? The revolving door is spinning.

Lucy already realizes that she needs a healthy atmosphere to worship in, so won't be back UNLESS the false messenger leaves.

Piglet,
Thanks for your hard work. May God bless you and your family.

Lucy
All accounts are declared paid in full. My counseling office is now closed permanently.

New BBC Open Forum said...

I'm afraid some of you are missing the point of this thread. It's not about the doctrine of Calvinism. There was a thread for that topic a few weeks ago (just scroll down the front page), and anyone who's interested is welcome to go there and continue the discussion.

The point of this thread was to compare and contrast the issues that affected GBC with those affecting BBC now.

Thanks for your cooperation!

NBBCOF

Proverbs 12:22 said...

Brother Tim,

Those verses are not incompatible with the Doctrines of Grace.

Keep studying them and you will understand how that can be. I resisted them for a long time myself.

Lin said...

Tim, Ok, I am not gone yet...had some other things to do...but do a Greek word study on the word "World" and 'all' in some of those passages. it is an eye opener.

As the the children passage, He is referring to His followers using a child as an example. We are to be child like in faith.

In the 2 Peter passage, go up a few verses and see who he is writing to...

Then check this out:

http://coffeetradernews.blogspot.com/2006/11/calvinism-and-2-peter-39-this-video.html

Sorry my links are not working.

Tim said...

Lucy,

You will be missed. Please update us in your search for a church family as many of us will be doing the same.

Proverbs 12:22 said...

NASS,

I respectfully suggest that this discussion is the most germane discussion the blog has seen in days. This IS at the heart of our struggles. If we believe man can achieve salvation through faith, then we convince ourselves that we must invent new and improved methods to reach the lost.

But the Bible says faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word. The only method we need was written and modeled nearly 2000 years ago. If we faithfully preach and proclaim the Word, the Lord does the work of salvation.

THIS IS THE HUB OF THE BBC PROBLEM.

Lin said...

Sorry Nass. I am the guilty party. Mr. Russell had me very confused and I started all of this. They don't call me trouble for nutin.

(To the woodshed)

gmommylv said...

Just read thru all the GTBC info.
I am so proud that they stuck together and won.
SO GLAD that a 75 year old man got in there and showed the young men what a real man looks like!!!!

Where is our older man ?
and our help from the seminary??????
GTB even had their previous pastor's support....
Bro. R is in heaven...where is the minister courageous enough to stand for truth at BBC!!!
Why didn't we ask that 75 year old man to teach us earlier.

I had my head in the sand during the GTBC fight.Missed it all. Guess most at BBC did.

BBC is and was larger and we allowed a false teacher and the power brokers to hijack our church.

Lindon said...

Speaking of problems at BBC. Here is some excellent teaching on the Holy Spirit and seeker methods

teaching

the url..

http://mikeratliff.wordpress.com/2007/04/09/the-promise-of-the-holy-spirit/#comment-10674

This guy was a deacon in a church that transitioned...

Because the 'link' may not work. Very frustrating

New BBC Open Forum said...

I'd just like to remind everyone that instead of posting very long comments of another author's work or long passages of Scripture, that you just post a link to the text of interest. These comment pages tend to get very long, and for those with slower internet connections one long comment can bog down the whole page for them.

For example, you can read Loraine Boettner's whole book or just the chapter referenced by "proverbs" earlier.

Again, your cooperation is appreciated.

New BBC Open Forum said...

lindon,

Here.

Tim said...

So what does all mean in this verse?

John 10:29
My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Dr. Bill Loney said...

Nass,

Because of your tireless efforts as blogistrator, and also for the kindness you have shown to this highly trained medical expert, you have earned one of the following, courtesy of The Loney Clinic:

1. Botox therapy. (I grew it myself!)

2. Fluid removal, from the joint of your choice.

3. A cholesterol reducing smoothee (pickled gamefish of your choice)

William T. Loney, M.D.

disclaimer: Botox may cause abnormal swelling of the tissue surrounding the brow/eyes/cheeks/lips/jaws, especially if physician grew said botox in his mini-fridge. Fluid removal dependant upon availability of sterile needles and/or patient's pain tolerance. Cholesterol reducing smoothies may be hazardous because frappe button on blender sometimes doesn't work, thereby leaving gamefish bones large enough to present choking hazards. Always consult a your personal doctor before undergoing questionable procedures by physicians who obtained their degree @ unaccredited med schools in foreign countries, and obtained their license from a guy named Lou for 40 bucks behind The Waffle House in Bartlett.

Lindon said...

John 10

22At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon. 24So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." 25Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, 26but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. 27My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me,[a] is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. 30I and the Father are one."

Tim, I am not sure what 'all' means here. It would be a good thing to study.

It would also be interesting to study the word, 'them'.

I love this passage: My sheep hear My voice.

New BBC Open Forum said...

proverbs wrote:

"I respectfully suggest that this discussion is the most germane discussion the blog has seen in days. This IS at the heart of our struggles."

It seems to me the PD stuff is more at the heart of our problems than Calvinism. I did notice Mr. Russell's references to it, but that was not meant to be the focus of this thread.

However, if y'all want to continue this discussion, go right ahead. I'm going to bed.

Good night, all!

New BBC Open Forum said...

Hey, welcome back, Dr. Loney! You must have misunderstood me the other day. As far as I know, we had no "agreement" about how often you post. You're always welcome. You can even wax serious if you'd like.

As for your generous offer, I've narrowed it down to #1 or #2, but I'd like to sleep on it before making my final choice. Is that okay?

As for those "cholesterol-reducing smoothies with gamefish bones large enough to present choking hazards," we have a restaurant chain here called the Bonefish Grill. For some reason I always think of things like that when I see one of those restaurants. It's just not the most {aack!} appetizing name for a restaurant, you know?

Now, good night!

Proverbs 12:22 said...

NASS,

The PD stuff is an outgrowth of a misunderstanding of the gospel. PD is a symptom, not the real problem.

I believe most here who argue against "Calvinism" (I prefer "Doctrines of Grace") have never studied them sufficiently to truly understand them. Most here and elsewhere argue against their perceptions of the Doctrines of Grace instead of the reality of the doctrines. They just know they don't like the sound of them, so they automatically dismiss them.

I will leave you with a simple verse:

As many as were appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48)

Dr. Bill Loney said...

pas(greek) All

1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types

ow-tos’(greek) Them

the reflexive pronoun self, used of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of that, their(-s), them([-selves]), there[-at, -by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with], they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which

Man! Where did that come from?

This blogging is starting to make me talk crazy!

William T. Loney

Proverbs 12:22 said...

The word, world, in the gospel of John does not mean 'all men without exception.' Proof:
John 1:29: 'Beho1d the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.' Did Christ by His death take away the sin of all men without exception? If He did, all men without exception shall be saved.


John 6:33. 'For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.' Does Jesus give life (not, ineffectually offer life, but, efficaciously give life) to all men without exception? If He does, all men without exception have eternal life.


John 17:9: 'I (Jesus) pray not for the world.' Does Jesus refuse to pray for all men without exception?
This last text points out that the word, world, in the gospel of John does not always have the same meaning. In John 3:16, the world is loved by God, with a love that gives the Son of God for its sake; in John 17:9, the Son of God refuses to pray for the world. The saints must not come to an understanding of the world of John 3:16 by a quick assumption, but by careful interpretation of the passage in the light of the rest of Scripture.

allofgrace said...

Blaming the church growth movement on Calvinism is a stretch at best. Calvinist doctrine...or the Doctrines of Grace has been around since the Apostle Paul..even Christ himself. The PD movement has only been around the last 15-20 yrs. I'm a "Calvinist" for lack of a better term, and know many others who are...and I can tell you that all the ones I know despise the PD movement...and that would include me. To automatically make that connection is due to either a lack of understanding of the Doctrines of Grace and their implications, or just simply jumping on the current anti-Calvinist bandwagon in the SBC...which is pretty silly considering the theological bent of the founders of this denomination. Read some Baptist history....the Doctrines of Grace have a history here...PD does not.

Dr. Bill Loney said...

Attn:

Special for all DOG'ers:

Have one procedure, get the next for free. Which ones? Providence will tell.

Anyone bringing Pink or Gill literature will also qualify for a free third procedure.

William T. Loney, M.D.

allofgrace said...

Pink I have..Gill is a little more rare except online.

watchman said...

The Purpose Driven counterfeiting and ultimate desecration of a Holy and Seperated once reverential Church continues, as the Pied Piper of Purpose bellows yet another inane and ultimately revealing connard to his staff:

In a recent edition of Saddleback Sayings, Rick Warren had this to say: "I want my staff members taking risks and making mistakes. That means they're being innovative and it means they're not afraid to try. Now, I don't want them making the same mistake every week - that means they're not learning, and that is bad. But I tell them, 'Make a new mistake every week'. I tell them, 'Show the innovation and creativity to do something really stupid that you've never done before'". UNQUOTE

Ah yes... Isnt Rick just the coolest dude on earth man ?

Cant you smell the sulphur ?

Offering current staff leadership an alleged freedom and license to be as stupid as you need to be in order to build the Purpose Driven Church.

Indeed. Mr. Warren. Indeed.

Stupid ?

No.. Evil

The FEAR of THE LORD is the beginning of Wisdom.

concernedSBCer said...

Going along with some of our discussions yesterday, I thought the daily devotion from LWF today was appropriate:

I wonder what would happen if scientists began making a human being from the cell of another human being. We are living in strange days, are we not? But I want to tell you, our hope is not to be found in science. There’s no blessing in the book of science. Friend, the blessing is in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. When I see things like cloning come to pass they do not shake me. Sometimes they grieve me or sadden me, but they do not shake me because I know God’s Word. I know it is the fulfillment of prophecy, and I can say with all of the saints, “Praise God! It’s getting gloriously dark.”

It does seem to be growing gloriously dark, doesn't it?

concernedSBCer said...

Junk: I agree with you. I don't understand how a video can be pulled from Tube......

Get Real said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
SpringerSpaniel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
New BBC Open Forum said...

Profiles... must... be... visible.

Amy said...

Get Real said....


If you are going to reference or especially if you plan to join GBC then you might want to check out what really went down and just who that person is "worshiping" next to you.

http://www.thetruthatgbc.com/



I can't believe that site is still up. That sight came up after the vote. It has always been anonymous- can't even email anyone. It was set up by a company called Domains By Proxy- so you can't trace who started the account. It should be noted, Sam S haw started a blog twenty minutes later with the same provider.

The only proof, they had was an email sent by the board of directors after Sam, and other leaders, had resigned to create some stability.

None of the statements came to pass.

We didn't shut down the contemporary service.

The ROC is still open to the community.

We still have people that have tattoos and wear jeans.

No staff member was let go. The ones that left quit.

During this time last year, a member who didn't support the bylaws, had scheduled a trip to the Dominican Republic. It had been approved by the finance committee and the mission’s board. GBC was going to loan him the money to secure a plane. GBC has done this in the past, and these trips have always been financed by the people who go. GBC has always been repaid. When he went to get the check for the plane, one of the Pastors for missions refused to give him the money( this pastor is now on staff at Saddleback I might add). Because we have our business meetings, and bylaws, this gentleman was able to make a motion to release the funds that had been approved.


The proposed bylaws were about power and control. One of the first statements says GBC is a SBC, but could affiliate with other
groups going forward.


Get Real- I can back up everyone of my statements. The minutes from the business meetings are on the GBC website. I have a copy of the proposed bylaws, as well as our current bylaws in a pdf file if anyone is interested.
What proof can you show us?

GBC_Member said...

Get Real said...
If you are going to reference or especially if you plan to join GBC then you might want to check out what really went down and just who that person is "worshiping" next to you.

http://www.thetruthatgbc.com/

You don't have to agree or even like what is said there but it might prompt you to ask a few more questions before you rush the isle to change your membership.

8:08 AM, April 10, 2007


The difference between "thetruthatGBC.com" and "SaveGBC.com" is as follows:

1. “SaveGBC.com” focused on the bylaw document - providing side by side comparison, the other site is rumor and sour grapes. Any opinions posted at “saveGBC” by individuals regarding the bylaw document or the situation in general were signed by people with their real names. All information at “thetruth” is anonymous.

2. savegbc listed the real names and contact information of the people that created the website, the "thetuth" is totally anonymous.

3. Savegbc was removed after the vote was over so folks could move on. The other site remains as a monument to what? Bitterness?

And as an FYI – the Recreation Outreach Center is still open, the contemporary service is still on going, they don’t kick me or say anything to me when I wear denim on Sunday morning, and people are allowed to raise their hands in worship when they sing. Basically none of the things people said would happen have happened. Some things are new - we now have a service each Sunday night and Wednesday night which we didn’t before. So if three worship services a week with singing and preaching are a bad thing then we are guilty. Bob Sorrell, Jim Whitmire and Mike Spradlin have all smiled at me, shook my hand and said they were glad to see me despite my blue jeans. They sure seem glad I am there. If they start caring more about how I dress than what is in my heart I’ll move on. Could happen, but I doubt it will ever will.

Find a church you like and move past your GBC bitterness. Be warned though, you will never find a church that doesn’t have some folks that maybe rub you the wrong way a bit. You may even disagree with them on church polity. Yeah, we are all fallen and thus tend to make each other mad from time to time. But resentment and bitterness are bad things to hold onto, let it go dude. Move on. Try to find some peace about it.

If people don't like GBC and it's "style" that's fine. But it is a Baptist church. It is what it is. If that does not suit you that's fine, move on. Peace out.

John 16:33

Dr. Bill Loney said...

Good morning Nass.

When I referenced that we had an 'agreement', I was simply meaning that Dr. Bill would post at times(not necessarily according to the clock) that were more appropriate, so as to keep from interupting the flow of comments of a more serious nature, not that I had been censured or banned. Apologies if the implication conveyed anything other than what we discussed.

With that said, maybe you can answer a question for me. When a business establishment posts the sign "NO SHOES, NO SHIRT, NO SERVICE", if the patron is only in violation of one of the aforementioned deficiencies, can service be expected to be rendered? And if said patron is in violation of both and does not prefer to be served, can he/she just hang around the lobby of said establishment without fear of reprisal? Just hypothetical questions of interest, while my leisure suits are being laundered.

As my oriental barber/back hair trimmer, Fu Mann Chu, once told me: "Give a man a fish, he eat for a day; teach a man to fish, and he able to make gamefish smoothies and eventually establish cholesterol reducing drink to be sold in unsanitary medical clinic at healthy profit, until Tennessee FDA shut down, citing widespread salmonella outbreak in southern part of Bartlett, as well as numerous emergent bone stuck in throat cases at local hosptial emergency rooms." Dobo Ali Gotto hairmaster Chu, Dobo Ali Gotto.

William T. Loney, M.D.

PS...Nass, I mistook the botox for butter and depleted my stock on my toast this morning. Sorry, but on the bright side, my tongue and uvula have never looked younger (or larger.)

SpringerSpaniel said...

HaHa!!

Thanks for the laugh, Doc Loney.

Amy said...

Get Real,
If you are still lurking I would really like to hear your response. You can make your profile visible and not display any personal or contact info. Look at my profile.

Tim said...

Concerning Germantown Baptist Church

The one thing that I have to respect and admire about this church is that it was not overcome by apathy. The congregation of this great church investigated the isssues, studied the issues and voted according to their convictions.

The majority of folks at Germantown Baptist Church had the spiritual insight to realize that they were on a slippery slope and in danger of slidding away from the Gospel of Jesus Christ and into a one world religion.

God Bless the wonderful people of Germantown Baptist Church. They have held true to the Scripture.

Bellevue Baptist Church has fallen into such pathetic apathy and weak Christianity that the majority will not take a stand for anything.

Case in point. The "support Steve petition" only gained about 400 signatures. Staff, deacons and other leadership names were obviously missing from this petition. The "open business meeting petition" has gained about 350 signatures in the same time period.

So there you have it a church that boast a membership of 30,000 only generates 750 people that care one way or another. That is less than 3% of the membership.

The governmental elections for dog-catcher generate a higher turn out than this.

Revelation 3:15-19
15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

If your religion hasn't changed you, you need to change your religion. If your convictions don't motivate you to act, you need to question your convictions.

gmommylv said...

Amy,
I didn't see an email or profile on you....is there more to do than to click on your name????
Just curious....and thanks for all your helpful and insightful posts!

watchman said...

I still am trying to get used to coming to the blog and parsing between Rick Warren updates and mental images of Dr. Loney's "UVULA ".

Please be patient, as I try to dismiss the notion that the WORLD Ahs not gone totally mad, ..rather, it just be be "non-plussed", as my dear nutty and sweet aunt, Carmella Sunday used to say...."top that ". Keep spoonin it Carmella, Keep spoonin.

Sorry..

Dr. Bill is gettin to me..

watchman said...

typo correction
..rather, it must just be be "non-plussed",

watchman said...

typo correction #2
minus one " be "

Tim said...

Concerning the off topic discussion of last night.

We are comparing oranges and orangutans.

Our finite minds cannot comprehend an infinite God. Period.

SpringerSpaniel said...

Anyone catch Rick Warren on CNN Easter Sunday night?

Sorry, Watchman... had to do it!!!

:D :D

SpringerSpaniel said...

Eh.. they need emoticon thingies here...

or the ability to edit your posts...

Translate the :D :D

Into :) :) or smiles or whatever

Amy said...

gmommylv,

I don't think there is more than clicking on your name.

Nass do you know?

Amy said...

Tim said...
Our finite minds cannot comprehend an infinite God. Period.

Amen brother Tim!

New BBC Open Forum said...

watchman wrote:

In a recent edition of Saddleback Sayings, Rick Warren had this to say: "I want my staff members taking risks and making mistakes. That means they're being innovative and it means they're not afraid to try. Now, I don't want them making the same mistake every week - that means they're not learning, and that is bad. But I tell them, 'Make a new mistake every week'. I tell them, 'Show the innovation and creativity to do something really stupid that you've never done before'".

So does that mean Steve Gaines is leading by example?

New BBC Open Forum said...

amy,

Your profile is fine. It's visible, and nothing more is necessary.

Tim said...

amy,

I see your profile fine. E-mail me sometime. There are a few people at Germantown that I would like to know if you are familar with, but don't want to throw names out on the blog.

Dr. Bill Loney said...

WARNING!

The man that was standing at the bottom of the Sycamore Drive offramp this morning holding a sign that said: "Will Work For Food", is advertising falsely.

Since he has been at my upstairs garage apartment, he has been laying on my futon(with his combat boots still on, I might add) watching 'The Travel Channel' and eating my last can of JalapeƱo Pringles(well actually we have been sharing). But all this TV watching and seasoned potatoe crisp consumption is not at all getting my vast collection of Pleather loafers shined, nor is it helping to get my mustard yellow extra long shag carpet shampooed. Crikey!!

As my (Native American/Polish) Motivational Coach/Financial Advisor, Tonto Wisnoski, always says:"Discretion is the better part of valor, that is unless, if by discretion, you mean asking the rotund woman in the elevator at the Baptist Hospital 'when her baby was due', only to find out that she was neither expecting nor was 'she' a she, and then have said person drag you into the 3rd floor stairwell and pummel you about the face and upper torso area until you begged that either he tire or sweet death come quickly". Dittos Kimosabe, Dittos.

William T. Loney, M.D.

gmommylv said...

How do you read what the pastors are saying on pastors.com????
All I can see is the books offered.

Amy said...

Tim,
You have mail!

Amy said...

gmommylv,

You can do a search and get to some of the articles.

Search Germantown Baptist and tell me what you find!

SpringerSpaniel said...

gmommylv said...

How do you read what the pastors are saying on pastors.com????
All I can see is the books offered.


You mean the pastor's forum?

You have to register first, I think.

As for anything else, you pay money first. Near as I can tell, anyways.

forreal said...

Worthy of being repeated:

allofgrace said:
Blaming the church growth movement on Calvinism is a stretch at best. Calvinist doctrine...or the Doctrines of Grace has been around since the Apostle Paul..even Christ himself. The PD movement has only been around the last 15-20 yrs. I'm a "Calvinist" for lack of a better term, and know many others who are...and I can tell you that all the ones I know despise the PD movement...and that would include me. To automatically make that connection is due to either a lack of understanding of the Doctrines of Grace and their implications, or just simply jumping on the current anti-Calvinist bandwagon in the SBC...which is pretty silly considering the theological bent of the founders of this denomination. Read some Baptist history....the Doctrines of Grace have a history here...PD does not.

New BBC Open Forum said...

gmommylv,

Click on "Pastor's Forum" under "Community Connection." You have to register.

New BBC Open Forum said...

You don't have to pay.

SpringerSpaniel said...

Eh... quite correct... I had clicked on pastors sermons instead of forum...

Sorry for the wrong info!!!

Tim said...

I truly wish that the people of Bellevue had the same zeal for their convictions as the people of Germantown.

It is not quite clear if it is a lack of zeal that is the problem or a lack of convictions. The latter of the two seems more likely.

Dr. Bill Loney said...

Sorry for getting to you, Watchman, and for causing you to wonder about general sanity of humanity(say, you're not the guy that repairs timepieces at Crazy Ed's pawnshop in south Memphis? If so, I'll be by later this week to get PawPaw Loney's pockethanger out of hock; if not, then I probably wont be coming in).

And Tim, so true about the inability to comprehend the infinite God...I find that equally true with the 'morning jumbles'. With that said, I see that the discussion is going beyond the scope of my cerebral capacity(and attention span), so I bid you all good day!

As my(German) court-appointed laison, Handel Kahns, advised me this weekend after I was 'given a vacation' for unpaid traffic tickets/failure to provide proof of insurance/no license plate/no exhaust control device/malfunctioned signal devices: "Always leave them wanting more...but in your case, I'd just leave". A rare jewel, court-appointed laison Kahns, a rare jewel.

William T. Loney, M.D.
PS...medical inquiries may be made via email, or once Burt, the "WILL (NOT) WORK FOR FOOD(but WILL eat all your pringles while watching the Travel Channel and getting heaven only knows what type of black substance on your Battlestar Galactica bedclothes)" vegabond finishes his futon slumber, you may come by the upstairs garage apartment 'wellness center'/landlady's lawnmower storage shed.

Tim said...

Another difference between the two churches.

Germantown has some real men. Men that are not afraid to stand up and speak out. They put their names on the line to protect the church and preserve the truth.

Where are the men of Bellevue? It appears that for the most part they are waiting to see if enough women mobilize into something that they can join with.

If I had daughters, I would definetly not recommend that they try to find a good husband at Bellevue. These men have confused meekness with weakness and substitued power for strength.

Tim said...

Similarties between the two churchs.

They were both blessed by long term God fearing Pastors in their past. Apparently, the folks at Germantown listened, believed and learned from theirs.

imaresistor said...

Piglet said, "It is important that we nurture our spiritual health. We'll maintain our vote for a while but we have to remove ourselves from those who have truly caused division - as Dr. Rogers stated in his sermon on apostacy - those who have departed from the faith."

Piglet...would you be kind enough to point me in the direction of that sermon? I would dearly love to hear it. Thanks...Ima

Amy said...

Tim said,
Germantown has some real men. Men that are not afraid to stand up and speak out. They put their names on the line to protect the church and preserve the truth.


So does BBC- it's called Integrety Does Count, Inc.

We just had bylaws that protected us. Also, when GBC powers were shown the laws re: membership lists and non-profits, they complied.

I didn't go to any saveGBC meetings, however I read what they sent, and it just confirmed the validity of my concerns regarding the proposed bylaws. It was just the facts information and was probably helpful to many.

Although I have a friend, who said, they didn't need to read the proposed CBL they trusted Sam and that was enough for them!

I operate under Ronald Reagan’s stance with the Russians in the 80’s- Trust, but verify. ( FYI - this motto also comes in handy with when raising teenagers!).

imaresistor said...

Watchman said: "Offering current staff leadership an alleged freedom and license to be as STUPID as you need to be in order to build the Purpose Driven Church."

Hey Watchman...I'd say this would have to be a prerequisite, wouldn't you say?

watchman said...

NBBCOF

I figured I would let all of you Bellevue resister people make your own
"connections" there.

They just " jump out " at ya sometimes...

Too easy

watchman said...

Ima...

Im simply the messenger.. : )))

imaresistor said...

Tim,

You fellows have stood strong. You have stood for Jesus...that is very clear. Don't ever forget that.

It is like I said on the blog yesterday...in all my research on this subject, GBC is the only church I know of that did not fall. And let's face it, GBC did stumble. But the bottom line is she came through like a giant. I praise God for it everyday. I really do.

God has a plan for the Body of Christ and we are all in it. And...there will be life after BBC. I learned that about my former church of forty-four years and fifty-nine for my husband.

I don't think I ever realized just how horrible a situation we had been in until we came out of it. I look back now with great clarity and wouldn't change a thing. It is like the 'Footsteps of Jesus' print you see hanging everywhere in a way...but, I see two sets of footprints instead of one but know he carried me.

Ima

youthmomma said...

I am very frustrated with the names I'm NOT seeing on the petition! There are many people that I know personally that should be signing it and they just aren't. I have sent them the link and a personal note from me and well...nothing. I know that they agree with it, they just won't sign it. I'm guessing they are still fearful of man. It's a sad day when the people of Bellevue won't stand up and ask for a REAL business meeting. That's all it is. It's not saying you like or dislike the Pastor. It's just asking for a REAL business meeting. I just don't get it. If you have left Bellevue or are going to leave Bellevue, you should still sign the petition for the people who are willing to stay and be heard! It's just a sad, sad day in the life of Bellevue...or should I say death of Bellevue.

SpringerSpaniel said...

Actually, if you have left Bellevue, you have no business signing the petition. Because it no longer is your business. Your business is your new church home.

Tim said...

youthmomma,

I sent out over 300 e-mails myself to those that I know would support this petition. I know because I have had contact with them in the past and am very aware of where they stand on these issues.

The problem with many of them is either their name is too well known to put it on the petition or they don't want their name to be known for putting it there.

I'll be extremely direct in what I am about to say about this. If your name, position, status is more important than the church that Jesus Christ gave himself for then you have officially made a god of yourself.

If you aren't signing because you don't support it, then that is fine. You are acting on your convictions by not signing.

However, if you are in agreement on the importance and necessity of this to the church, any reason that you have for not doing so has become your god. If you are denying the convictions that God has given you, then the Bible calls it a sin.

Karen said...

I went cross eyed reading about Calvinism and TULIP and all the rest. Hope y'all had a good time last night. :)

The one post that really stuck with me so far was this:

Proverbs 12:22 said...
The word, world, in the gospel of John does not mean 'all men without exception.' Proof:
John 1:29: 'Beho1d the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.' Did Christ by His death take away the sin of all men without exception? If He did, all men without exception shall be saved.

Jesus died for all sins. Whether or not you accept his gift of salvation is your choice. But he died for your sins regardless. I think Dr. Rogers phrased it sort of like this "God gives you a gift (Jesus died for your sins); You need to accept the gift being offered (It doesn't do you any good to know that Jesus died for the sins of everyone if you yourself don't accept the salvation that's offered). People that Jesus died for will die in their sin (not accept the salvation as offered) and go to Hell.

karen

Tim said...

karen,

Amen!

Proverbs 12:22 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Karen said...

tim,

Thanks - I'm just glad it made sense to someone other than me!

And I agree with you about why some who know things are rotten at Bellevue aren't signing the petition - fear of retribution, too comfy at their current position at the church, whatever. If you want to keep attending a church where the Administrative Pastor keeps a VERY SHORT LEASH on the Senior Pastor so the Senior Pastor doesn't do anything else monumentally stupid, by all means, continue attending Bellevue. If You enjoy attending a church where the Administrative Pastor needs to run around Memphis "making nice" with MABTS, LifeChoices and whoever else the Senior Pastor has snubbed, miffed or truly ticked off, then enjoy. If that's the kind of leadership you wnat, you got it. Enjoy!

Piglet, since you shared your "Da Doo Ron Ron" dream, I have to share mine. I was on a couch sitting next to John Caldwell. I turned and asked him "what the heck are you doing scaling a fence at your age?" Woke up sweating!

karen

Proverbs 12:22 said...

Karen,

Your last post indicates you do not believe in particular redemption (or limited atonement..the L is TULIP). It is certainly the most controversial point of Calvinism. Many Baptists are four-point Calvinists, disbelieving particular redemption.


This doctrine simply means Christ’s atoning work on the cross was not to redeem the whole world but to redeem only those given to the Son before the foundation of the world.

If God punished the sins of men who went to hell on Christ, and then again punished men in hell for the same sins which Christ died, this would illogical, and would be an instance of "double-punishment" or "double-jeopardy," and God would be guilty of injustice to sinners and to Christ. If Christ suffered for the sins of men who are in hell, then whose sin are the men in hell suffering for? For Christ to die for men who will never believe would render a portion of His sufferings as vain. Not one drop of Christ’s shed blood was in vain.

Also remember Christ's death is substitutionary!! Please take note of this. For Christ to die for sins means that He was the actual substitute for men. Substitution means that someone actually fills the place of another. If I had a substitute teacher who didn't show up for my class, did I have a substitute teacher? If Christ indeed suffered a substitutionary death for every single individual person in the world, then He indeed showed up and was punished for them. Which means what? It means that the sins of all are paid for. Again, whose sins are the people in hell suffering for? They are suffering for their own because Christ did not substitute for them.

It is vital for someone to understand that, unless you are a universalist, or if you believe that a man doesn’t go to heaven unless he is cleansed by the blood of Christ, then you believe in a limited atonement because you don’t believe everyone goes to heaven. The question then becomes not “Is the atonement limited?” but “How is the atonement limited?” Is the atonement limited by the free will of man or the free will of God? The answer is found in the definition of “atonement.” If Christ atoned for the sins of everyone, then everyone goes to heaven. For that is the meaning of “atonement.”

To atone for sin is to clear sin from a person. "Atone" or "Atonement" in the Bible is primarily the Hebrew word "kaphar." "Kaphar" means "to cover over," "to pacify," or "to make propitiation for." "Propitiation" ("hilasmos") in the New Testament means "to appease." In 1 John 2:2, if by, "He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world," the Apostle John means that Jesus propitiated (appeased the wrath of God) then why would any one go to hell? Then you might say, "Well, the sins of all men are propitiated for, but that propitiation can only be applied by personal belief." My reply to that is twofold. First, who determines who will believe? Is it man or God? It is God (review "Total Depravity" and "Irresistible Grace"), and God causes men to believe on the basis of election. So, to believe that the propitiation is "waiting" for the faith of men is to believe falsehood. Second, if one believes that belief or unbelief in Christ is the sin that condemns, then it must follow that those who do not get a chance to believe or disbelieve go to heaven. Sharing the Gospel would then become counter-productive, and there is an element to Christ's suffering that is rendered vain. The idea that people who do not hear the Gospel go to heaven is clearly rejected by Romans 1:20 and 2:15.


It is important to remember that Christ did not come to die just to make salvation possible, but Christ came to save. He came to die for the sins of His people whom He foreknew. There was no uncertainty about Christ’s work on the cross. Christ Himself knew that He was dying for those whom the Father had given Him before the foundation of the world and that He would lose none of them (John 6:37-39).
Someone once wrote:

The Arminian limits the atonement as certainly as does the Calvinist. The Calvinist limits the extent of it in that he says it does not apply to all persons (although as has already been shown, he believes that it is efficacious for the salvation of the large proportion of the human race); while the Arminian limits the power of it, for he says that in itself it does not actually save anybody. The Calvinist limits it quantitatively, but not qualitatively; the Arminian limits it qualitatively, but not quantitatively. For the Calvinist it is like a narrow bridge which goes all the way across the stream; for the Arminian it is like a great wide bridge which goes only half-way across. As a matter of fact, the Arminian places more severe limitations on the work of Christ than does the Calvinist.

imaresistor said...

"I'll be extremely direct in what I am about to say about this. If your name, position, status is more important than the church that Jesus Christ gave himself for then you have officially made a god of yourself."

Tim: I am trying to think of the right words to respond to your statement. Your boldness edifies the cause of Christ!!! Beautiful!

Did you folks hear what Tim said? If you haven't signed this petition, give yourselves to his statement.

Ima

Proverbs 12:22 said...

John Owen wrote, "[If Jesus died for all men]...why then, are not all freed from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, "Because of their unbelief; they will not believe." But his unbelief, is it sin, or not? If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be sin, then Christ underwent the punishment due to it; If this is so, then why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died from partaking of the fruit of his death? If he did not, then he did not die for all their sins."

Spurgeon wrote, "We are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ, because we say that Christ has not made satisfaction for all men, or all men would be saved. Now, our reply to this is, that, on the other hand, our opponents limit it: we do not. The Arminians say, Christ died for all men. Ask them what they mean by it. Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of all men. They say, "No, certainly not." We ask them the next question--Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of any man in particular? They answer, "No." They are obliged to admit this, if they are consistent. They say, "No, Christ has died that any man may be saved if..." --and then follow certain conditions of salvation. Now, who is it that limits the death of Christ? Why, you. You say that Christ did not die so as to secure the salvation of anybody. We beg your pardon, when you say that we limits Christ's death; we say, "no my dear sir, it is you that do it." We say Christ so died that he infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ's death not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved. You are welcome to your atonement; you may keep it. We will never renounce ours for the sake of it."


John 6:37-40, "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."

Matthew 1:21, "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins."

John 10:15, "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep."

John 15:13, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

Acts 20:28, "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."

Ephesians 5:25, "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;"

imaresistor said...

You know Tim, I thought of something else.

We should stand ready to give our lives for Jesus Christ, just as He did for us. Signing a petition is insignificant by comparison. People should not even hesitate to put their names on this petition and should feel humbled to do so.

I only wish I could sign mine, but we know I can't because I am not a member.

Ima

imaresistor said...

Good try Spaniel, but as long as a member is a member they have the right to sign a petition...OR VOTE! These people have left as injured sheep.

preacherdude777 said...

It is beyond me why some people are too afraid to have their names on the petition. I bet if it were a petition to bring football games on the big screens then they would sign. Sort of breaks your heart that they are willing to give over the church to the wolves in sheeps clothing. Sad.

SpringerSpaniel said...

Well yeah.. if they are a member... but if they've joined another church, then they don't. Kind of like if you move from Memphis to Germantown, you can't still vote against Mayor Herenton. But if you are still a member, then yup, you have every right to sign the petition. Believe it or not, even I signed the thing. Because no matter what "side" you are on, until there is a legitimate business meeting and ALL issues are brought forth and discussed, then no one will be happy.

charlie fox said...

karen,

If tim will allow me, I second his AMEN!!!!!!!!

Proverbs 12:22 said...

"People that Jesus died for will die in their sin (not accept the salvation as offered) and go to Hell."


Can I get some Scripture to back up that claim?

Amy said...

Charlie Fox,

Where were you this am around 8:40??

Did you not here me yelling for you?

SpringerSpaniel said...

imaresistor said...

... I only wish I could sign mine, but we know I can't because I am not a member.

Ima
.

Heck.... Donna Gaines' sister voted at the business meeting....

I'm just sayin'....

Amy said...

Springer said,
Heck.... Donna Gaines' sister voted at the business meeting....

I'm just sayin'....


Ima- maybe BBC definition of a member includes us too! I have sat in the sanctuary at BBC several times- how 'bout you?

SpringerSpaniel said...

Amy said...

Springer said,
Heck.... Donna Gaines' sister voted at the business meeting....

I'm just sayin'....

Ima- maybe BBC definition of a member includes us too! I have sat in the sanctuary at BBC several times- how 'bout you?


There ya go!!!

On a different note... if memory serves me correctly, you are a member of GBC.

What, if anything, are they going to do with the old white church that Methodist now owns??? Leave it or move it, or does anyone have any idea? Just curious.

Oh yeah.. go sign the stinkin' petition, folks... Tim's right... if your name means more than your convictions, then, well, your name's not really worth alot, is it?? And it CERTAINLY isn't worth as much as Jesus' life is worth...

upside down said...

youthmomma blogged in part "they just won't sign it. I'm guessing they are still fearful of man."

May I present a reason some of us don't sign the petition. First of all I am for having another business meeting. I voted to continue the one just past. I did notice the voting on youtube and it did appear from that camera's angle that the majority voted to end the meeting. That is disappointing that the majority didn't want to hear from everyone who wanted to make a motion.

As to the reason I will not sign the petition. First I am not sure that anything will come from this petition drive. Second and most important to me these issues are very violate. I now have one neighbor who looks the other way when I go by because of our 'discussions' over the issues. I have another neighbor who is a deacon and he and I agree on some things and disagree on others but do so respectfully. For me personally I am kind of like an independent around election time. There are certainly issues that I can agree on, specifically some of the wrong actions by our pastor. But with the seeker friendly issues I just don't see the alarm. Unfortunately lines are being drawn in a for/against positions. I think that there are many like me that see right/wrong on both sides. To place my name on the petition would be like identifying myself with one side. And like many I've talked with we don't want to be labeled as one that is against our church. I know that is not exactly what signing the petition would say but you know the old saying....perception is reality to many. I love my BBF and friends at church. I don't want my name on a petition on a web to interfere with those friendships. And please don't call me out for not standing up for my Lord and Savior....this just isn't a defining moment where one needs to take a stand. People on both sides of these issues love the Lord and those who speak differently are doing so dishonestly.

I personally think a better approach would be to work through the deacon body. I understand that Ted M. as well as others would be the ones who would support a business meeting. Why not work behind the scenes to have those men work in an organized drive to get another business meeting? Unless a petition has 3,000 names it will not mean very much. And at the rate it is going there isn't much of a chance of that.

charlie fox said...

Amy said...
Charlie Fox,

Where were you this am around 8:40??

Did you not here me yelling for you?

REPLY:
You did a GREAT job and didn't need MY help. ATTA GIRL!!!!

Proverbs 12:22 said...

I have not signed the petition because we don't need business meetings. Our problem is SIN, not business. We cannot address the sins of the past in a business meeting.

How does anyone plan to force the leadership to deal with the sins of our pastor and other leaders in a business meeting? Until those sins are dealt with BBC will be unable to recover.

Belleve leadership, it is on you to start the healing the process by creating a forum for dealing with SIN in the pulpit, staff ministers, and lay leadership.

youthmomma said...

Springerspaniel..apparently I need to clarify what I meant. If you have left Bellevue (but are STILL a member) or are going to leave Bellevue (and are STILL a member), you should still sign the petition for the people who are willing to stay and be heard!

Again, it's a sad sad day when people won't make a stand. I signed it and so did my family.

socwork said...

I'm with upside down on this one.

Surely we're not equating singing a petition about a business meeting with standing up for the Son of God, are we???

I respect that some people place a higher priority on protecting their families from potential harm (and yes, I mean harm) than putting their name on a petition on the Internet. Nothing wrong with signing it, but nothing wrong with not signing it either. It's a petition.

jmo

Amy said...

Springer said,

What, if anything, are they going to do with the old white church that Methodist now owns???

Unless we can get the City of Germantown to let us move it to our location, it stays where it is. Since it's on the historical register, it can't be destroyed. It seems like this issue came up not to long ago- I'll ask around. Wn't be a Purpose Driven Church I can promise you that!

Charlie,
Thanks for you encouragement! GBC Member jumped in. Everytime I ask for proof- folks like Get Real go away! Bring it on...I'm right here!
It never occured to me that site was still up- and I got mad all over again!

SpringerSpaniel said...

Eh... my ONLY point was that there are some that won't sign simply because they don't want their name on the petition. To me, that shows a lack of conviction. For other reasons, such as the ones given by upside down, Proverbs and SOC, I applaud them...

Just the ones that won't sign because they don't want their names showing up, yet they will come here and post until the cows come home but won't sign a stinkin' petition that, in all honesty, won't do a lick of good anyways. It is, as Proverbs correctly pointed out, a sin problem. I signed it because I guess that my hope is that if they have a REAL business meeting, then some sort of resolution can be reached between all parties. Although, I highly doubt it.

socwork said...

Thanks for clarifying springer :)

My concern is that we just keep things in perspective, and recognize there are legitimate reasons for not signing the petition, just as there are legitimate reasons for signing it. Sounds like you agree :)

Piglet said...

ima

I sent you mail.

Lin said...

"People on both sides of these issues love the Lord and those who speak differently are doing so dishonestly. "

Well, I guess that makes me dishonest in your eyes. But pastors, deacons, leaders and sheep who think ignoring scripture is loving the Lord are beyond me. How else do we love the Lord but by abiding in His Word? What is the Word for?

YOu cannot Love the Lord and excuse continual ignoring of scripture. It just does not work.

Please read and pray over Matthew 10:28

youthmomma said...

I agree Springerspaniel. There just has to be a starting place and a REAL business meeting would be something, although, like you, I highly doubt anything will happen. I just know that when we leave Bellevue permanently, we will know that we at least TRIED something.

Karen said...

As long as leadership can keep up snipping at each other about signing a petition, then they WIN!! As long as they had this "dog and pony show" business meeting, then they done with congregationally approved business until April 2008. As long as we keep chasing the "sign/don't sign the petition" and don't truly get the heart of the matter - SIN IN THE PULPIT - then they really don't have to deal with us on a serious level. The more we debate each other on 3, 5, 12 point Calvinism and business meetings that probably won't happen - the more bogged down with stuff that just ain't the point of what IDC and other are trying to accomplish.

As Dr. Rogers said, let's keep the main thing, the main thing.

karen

Karen said...

FYI,

If you want to see the "dog and pony show", it's still up at savingbellevue.com.


karen

Karen said...

karen said...

As long as leadership can keep up snipping at each other about signing a petition, then they WIN!!


typo correction: As long as leadership can keep US snipping at each other....

Lin said...

Special for all DOG'ers:

Have one procedure, get the next for free. Which ones? Providence will tell."

Dr. Bill, I am predestined for Botox. :o(

New BBC Open Forum said...

Karen wrote:

"If you want to see the "dog and pony show", it's still up at savingbellevue.com."

Unless I'm missing something, it's not.

Lin said...

"God gives you a gift (Jesus died for your sins); You need to accept the gift being offered (It doesn't do you any good to know that Jesus died for the sins of everyone if you yourself don't accept the salvation that's offered)."

Karen, How can we decide to 'accept' that gift in light of Romans 3? How can we can decide to accept Christ in light of Romans 8 and 9?

Did Esau have a choice? Did Pharoah?

Why the Jews? Why not the Hittites? Or the Babylonians?

nathanb said...

Amy,
I am sorry to hear Barry McCarty has been used by the Southern Baptist Convention.
As a Southern Baptist, I am going to send a letter of protest against our Southern Baptist Convention ever using Barry McCarty again.
If his relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention is not ended after this "misuse of power", perhaps everyone needs to let their voice be heard.
It's not like he's the only one the SBC can contract with.
It would be interesting to know how much $$ Bellevue and the SBC has paid him two weeks ago and over the years.

preacherdude777 said...

Methodist will use the little white church as the hospital chapel.

SpringerSpaniel said...

preacherdude777 said...

Methodist will use the little white church as the hospital chapel.


I probably shouldn't and all that... but I find that to be both highly ironic and a hoot!!!

preacherdude777 said...

Well Springerspaniel, I guess your right but I don't make the news, I just report it. : )

SpringerSpaniel said...

Well, were I to get sick, I'd MUCH rather be at a Methodist facility than a Baptist one... quite frankly, they are better run hospitals at this point in time...

Memphis said...

I will not sign the petition because I do not believe that Internet petitions are valid petitions. There is no way to verify signatures. So I do not think it would be respected by BBC anyways.

And so you know, I did vote to continue the business meeting. If you want a real petition, have someone stand at the doors or something, get real petition signatures.

JMHO
Memphis

SpringerSpaniel said...

Memphis said...

I will not sign the petition because I do not believe that Internet petitions are valid petitions. There is no way to verify signatures. So I do not think it would be respected by BBC anyways.

And so you know, I did vote to continue the business meeting. If you want a real petition, have someone stand at the doors or something, get real petition signatures.

JMHO
Memphis


Try to do that... there are men with suits... that have little white curly wires going from behind their ears into their coat collars... they'll come take you away!!!!

sheeplessatbbc said...

Memphis,

We can't even get a membership list, AS REQUIRED BY TENNESSEE STATE LAW!!

Just how long do you think we could stand at the door and hand out petition signature requests before being HANDCUFFED, CURSED AT AND HAULED OFF!!??

If the powers that be at Bellevue would handcuff a 15 yr old girl, what do you think they would do to a big, bad sheep?

P.S. If you don't think petition signatures are accurate, wonder how many were inaccurate for support Bro Steve?

sheeplessatbbc said...

NASS,

You are right our annual business meeting video has gone bye-bye at savingbellevue.com

Memphis said...

Sheepless, that is why I have not signed either petition on the net.


And no need to go all capital letters on me! :)

Karen said...

NASS,

My bad! - I saw the links were still there and didn't click on them to see they had been removed. SORRY!

karen

Karen said...

lin,

To be honest, I don't know. But I'm willing to learn.

I remember going to summer camp with BBC when I was in about 8th grade and I wondered out loud to a counselor "Why are we all sinners -it's Adam and Eve's fault. I wasn't ever there!" Never got a great answer for that one, but I still wonder about it from time to time. Just glad I'm saved! :)

karen

New BBC Open Forum said...

At least they're not allowing anonymous signatures on this petition. I'm sure most could be verified by the powers that be -- if they wanted to. In fact, they're probably compiling a "black list" from it now.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Karen,

No problem. I bet someone captured copies of them though! Hint hint.

sheeplessatbbc said...

Memphis,

Sorry caps not directed at you, but for emphasis as to the deeds going on at Bellevue by leadership.

imaresistor said...

"So I do not think it would be respected by BBC anyways."

When I read this, two words jumped out at me. They were 'respected' and 'BBC'. Somehow I don't see the two belonging together. Respect is 'not running people off from your church'. Respect is 'revering Truth' and being Christ like, even in the church.

Now...had it read, "So I do not think it would be ACCEPTED by BBC anyways", I would have just scrolled on by.

Ima

upside down said...

lin responded with "YOu cannot Love the Lord and excuse continual ignoring of scripture. It just does not work."

Lin are you referencing me as a non-believer? Otherwise why the Scripture reference?

You are making some assumptions about me which are incorrect. The problem with legalism versus grace is that those entrenched in the first see themselves as the standard for where the line is to be drawn. The misuse of Scriptures the most prevailing course of choice. I stand by my convictions to not sign the petition. As my daddy once told me 'only the wise search for truth, the ignorant believes he knows it'. It took me many years to really understand that little simple thought.

Karen said...

NASS,

you have email!

karen :)

sheeplessatbbc said...

New BBC Open Forum said...

In fact, they're probably compiling a "black list" from it now.


Sheepless says,

Maybe they should rename that list
"backbone of BBC"

I carry a saying in my wallet,

"What has been done to me today, that was not done to JESUS."

Amy said...

Does anyone know if what was on You Tube was BBC's video or an individual. No offense to who ever took it, but it didn't seem professional. I would think if it's an individual's private film, BBC wouldn't own the copyright. Maybe they could take anything that has "Bellevue" on it out and re load it.
Does anyone know how it was obtained- and if it ws from an individual who owns copyrights?

imaresistor said...

What this petition represents to me is this: those names you see are those who will take a stand for Jesus Christ at all costs.

They are merely asking for an uninterrupted business meeting...one without a purpose driven moderator and purpose driven parlimentarian. Since Steve Gaines' arrival, nothing has gone per the by-laws. In reality, how many business meetings have been skipped?

How many people are left at Bellevue who has a conscious?

GBC_Member said...

Does anyone else find it ironic that:

YouTube – a pagan enterprise that hosts pornographic videos – when requested will quickly comply with a request by BBC leadership to remove a video BBC claims it owns the copyright to.

BBC – a purportedly Christian organization – will not comply with it’s own bylaws and hold monthly meetings, nor will BBC comply with state law requiring them to furnish a membership list.

imaresistor said...

"I will not sign the petition because I do not believe that Internet petitions are valid petitions"

Any questions? Ask the person whose name on here you might doubt?

I just wonder how many of you people who are lurking and are still stradling the fence are in favor of a purpose driven church? The church as you have never known it before...totally PD, totally liberal. Is this really what you want? Look down the road a year from now and realize that you will not recognize this place ever again. It will be more like a mall with live music...LOUD live music. Hard rock. Is that really what you want? Sign the petition.

Lin said...

." As my daddy once told me 'only the wise search for truth, the ignorant believes he knows it'."

You don't have to search, it is in scripture. Your pastor ignored scripture. And continues to do so. That is a fact.

I was not referring to signing the petition. I was referring to this:

"And please don't call me out for not standing up for my Lord and Savior....this just isn't a defining moment where one needs to take a stand. "

A defining moment is when you know for a fact your pastor ignored scripture. How others treat you or how divisive this is--is moot. You either take a stand for scripture or you don't. It is that simple. And it IS a big deal.

imaresistor said...

GBC_Member said...
"Does anyone else find it ironic that:"

Reply: I certain do! Makes you wonder which one is the more worldly wouldn't you say?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 568   Newer› Newest»