Formerly called the "pulpit committee," is the body now called the "pastor search committee" always really qualified to search for a new pastor, and do they really do enough research before making a decision?
There were definitely some questions regarding conflicts of interest with Bellevue's last pastor search committee.
Related articles:
Pastor searches packed with perils
INTEGRITY IN MINISTRY: NO HIDDEN SKELETONS IN YOUR CLOSET
Pastoral Search Questions
The Pastor Search Process
This illustrates how monumental the task must seem!
Pastor Search Committee Workbook
Steve Gaines addresses the congregation of Gardendale's FBC July 10, 2005 regarding the call to Bellevue in his "Didn't I tick you guys off?" speech. Summary here.
There were definitely some questions regarding conflicts of interest with Bellevue's last pastor search committee.
Related articles:
Pastor searches packed with perils
INTEGRITY IN MINISTRY: NO HIDDEN SKELETONS IN YOUR CLOSET
Pastoral Search Questions
The Pastor Search Process
This illustrates how monumental the task must seem!
Pastor Search Committee Workbook
Steve Gaines addresses the congregation of Gardendale's FBC July 10, 2005 regarding the call to Bellevue in his "Didn't I tick you guys off?" speech. Summary here.
Thanks to "amazed" for this topic suggestion.
763 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 763 Newer› Newest»As far as not releasing the church membership list, has no one ever heard of "church directories"? In fact, BBC used to have them. Here's the evidence.
From the Administrative Pastor's page we have this gem:
August 22, 2007
Dear Fellow Church Family,
My office has received many calls today regarding an unsigned letter that has been mailed into many of your homes. The question being asked is, “Did the church furnish a mailing list?” The answer is that the church did not furnish anyone a list, and it is our policy when we have requests for mailing lists that we not provide this information to businesses or individuals for any purpose.
Bible Fellowship and choir rolls are used each Sunday as we have for years to register attendance, and if this is where the names for this mailing came from, they were taken for use without permission of the church leadership.
Receiving such a letter in your mailbox criticizing our Pastor is a frustrating and upsetting thing. Let me encourage you to keep your focus on the mission and ministry of Bellevue Baptist Church to win the lost and see our members grow in Christ, and I urge you to pray for those who are seeking to divide our church. God will honor us for doing this.
David Coombs
Administrative Pastor
I repeat that neither I nor anyone I know wrote that letter, and I have no idea where the person(s) got the names and addresses of the people it was sent to. I also think if you're going to mail someone a personal letter you should sign it. However, instead of blasting the person for sending the letter anonymously, how about reading the letter itself and considering the writer's words?
"I urge you to pray for those who are seeking to divide our church."
This is straight out of the playbook! Some women were heard praying out loud at the beginning of the so-called "business" meeting, and one of them prayed loudly, "Lord, please deal with those... who would divide... our... church!"
Please get this through your heads! There was no "division" until SG arrived on the scene and started "taking out the trash." There's one person (and his band of loyal sycophants) who is "seeking to divide our church." You are enabling this man to tear down this church. Deal with that, Mr. Coombs! You have spent your integrity for what again?
DC has been quoted as saying that it takes two years after the arrival of a new pastor for the "dissenters" to leave, for attendance to stop dropping, and for rebuilding to begin. I suppose, Mr. Coombs, that the fact Mrs. Rogers chose (unintentionally, no doubt) to move her membership from Bellevue on Steve and Donna's 2nd anniversary here means the rebuilding can begin now? You may not have noticed (though I'm pretty sure you have) that attendance is still falling. Guess you're a little behind schedule, huh?
The number of people in both services Sunday combined with the number in Sunday night's service would have ALL fit into the auditorium at once. Why not just go to one Sunday service? You could start at say, 1:00 p.m., thus allowing everyone to sleep in on Sunday mornings. Imagine the savings on utilities alone!
Nass said: "Why not just go to one Sunday service? You could start at say, 1:00 p.m., thus allowing everyone to sleep in on Sunday mornings. Imagine the savings on utilities alone!"
No way this is going to happen....you forget that pride issue that so prevalent.
I will say this for the 54 church members at Two Rivers, they are taking the only logical course of action to resolve the issues with the church administration. Lets see if the administration is willing to disobey a court order to open up. It would be nice to see some BBC members take the same approach. Can you imagine the shock of the deacons when they found out they were included in the lawsuit?
While some are singing the praises of Josh McDowell, please be aware that research needs to be done. He appears to be among those who have lost their way. He has endorsed the book, They Love Jesus but Not the Church: Insights from Emerging Generations. While I am not going to take the time to do a review of this book here, you can and should: suffice it to say it is bad news. It is by emergent pastor/author Dan Kimball, who is one of five of the emergent movement’s most prominent leaders. While this book is a theological disaster, readers will not know that. Josh McDowell, by adding his support to this book, will be responsible for people losing their chances for hearing true gospel and will, in fact, be falling prey to false gospel, another Jesus. He is helping pave the way to a mystical and apostate religion by one of the best false prophets, Dan Kimball. McDowell’s endorsement of this book is among those staunch emerging church/New Age promoters such as Leonard Sweet, Tony Jones, Mark Oestreicher and others. Josh McDowell tells readers that “it would be foolish” not to carefully study Kimball’s book. What is foolish is to promote such filth.
concernedsbcer
You have mail...again. :)
NBBCOF
It will be interesting to watch the outcome if this case at Two Rivers.
It is also interesting that the ACLJ has taken this case - a group of Christian lawyers who are protecting our religious freedoms. Religious freedom can be taken away by the state but also by the church itself when it's leaders place themselves above the laws of man and God for personal gain and power.
Why circumvent the law and withhold information to cover up your innocence? If these church leaders have nothing to hide, they should obey the law.
I am so thankful for the ACLJ. But it is a sad day in which we have to protect ourselves from our own church leaders.
Nass,
I like your idea but I say let Bellevue automatically debit your account for your tithe each week and pipe the service into your home. This way the money still flows in guaranteed. For those who must show up in person, just open the chapel. Think of the utility savings and you'll never have to worry about inclement weather again. The problem of filling Bible Fellowship teaching positions would go away as well.
You may laugh at paying the tithe online but it's happening all over the country.
Housewife,
You said. "I mean, it's one thing to twist Scripture before an already Scripture-ignorant audience but it's entirely another thing to show your true temper in front of a camera."
These are terrible words to use against so many who remain at BBC who sat under Dr. Rogers ministry for years. Just because these people have chosen to do church differently does not make them scripture-ignorant, does it? Also it comes across very arogant and I don't believe this is your intent.
Please reconsider how you state things, for your testimonies sake.
Hey NASS,
Did you know that if you go to the Administrative Pastor's page on bellevue.org that you can copy David Coombs signature to another document? Just thought I'd pass that tidbit along - just waiting to see how long it takes for BBC to put all documents to PDF (thereby taking away the oppotunity to cause havoc).
I wasn't doing anything, but goofing around this afternoon - but the opportunity for anyone to copy and paste his signature and add it to another document is there.
karen
NASS - I did watch the Johnny Hunt sermon archived on the BBC website from 8/29...I was amazed to see Johnny Hunt preaching the same exact sermon that he preached 2 weeks later at FBC Jax...I wrote about it on the Jax Watchdog blog. How gullible are the sheep that they allow their pastors to pay big $$ to their pastor friends to come to their church to recycle their sermons. This preaching circuit is quite a racket.
Cakes,
I remember studying Kathleen Kenyon’s excavations at Jericho in the mid-1950’s. I don’t recall it in detail but I did study it once upon a time.
Ya’ gotta’ love archaeologists! What other profession allows an adult to travel to exotic places and spend their entire career playing in the dirt? And all that playing produces a good living for them, usually on the backs of the work-a-day taxpayers via grant monies or other Federal subsidies -- not to mention digging up a notable discovery like Kenyon claimed that also netted her a nice book deal. Not bad. ;-)
Seriously, Kenyon’s conclusions caused quite a sir in both the Christian and scientific arenas -- and I’m not implying these two arenas are always in disagreement because that would be untrue. Archaeological evidence has validated the historical reliability of the Bible in many more instances than the few cases in which it has caused controversy. While I do not diminish those instances such as Kenyon’s, I would ask you to make a very close inspection of her data before attempting a conclusion. Kenyon did NOT prove the Biblical account to be wrong – she merely failed to prove it to be correct. That is a major difference and one that must not be overlooked in the final analysis.
Archeology has its limitations and the data is often ambiguous and limited in nature; thus, a variety of interpretations can be the end result. It is not an exact science.
Dear Cakes, for one who does not yet believe and hold to the infallibility of the Scriptures, I would suggest bringing a very large dose of cautious skepticism to any area of disagreement between any form of science and the truths of the Bible.
For more on this subject, a good site can be found HERE!
Mary
IMA,
You make a very good point about Josh McDowell. I've heard a few rumbling along those lines.
However, he wrote "Evidence That Demands A Verdict" many years ago -- somewhere in the late '70's or early '80's, I think. To my knowledge, his theology was spot on in those days. Please correct me if I'm wrong,
Mary
Really good, timely discussion at Teampyro today.
amazed said...
Larry--It sure is interesting that you and others think every move by a minister is because God is involved. That thinking leaves out the human factor and in this day and age, some ministers are becoming more human by the minute. JW just wasn't ready to hang it up just yet and a door opened and he stepped through.
9:05 PM, September 17, 2007
Amazed, I've found many of your posts interesting as well.
How are ministers becoming more human today? Did they used to be less so? If they somehow were, is that a good thing?
I was speaking of Jim Whitmire and only him. You must have inadvertantly run my post together with someone else's, because I made no comments about ministers in general. Since I know Jim personally and not just from seeing him from the congregation, I think I am able to confidently say that he put a lot of prayer and fasting into his decision to return to Florida.
Jim went through that door because God opened it for him, and for the life of me I don't understand why anyone would question his motives.
Are you willing to share your reasons for believing he had another reason for leaving Memphis?
Ezekiel,
I very much enjoyed your post of 8:34 this AM.
Mary
Mary,
You will have to be judge and jury on that one. I haven't read that book. However, I will say that so many of these guys have 'crossed over' in more recent times. A couple that come to mind are David Jeremiah and Charles Stanley. There are others. I am not going to listen to their sermons/talks, whatever...nor am I going to read their books. They just have nothing to say that I could possibly want to hear. I will spend my time in the Word...where I am certain I am doing the right thing.
Wouldn't it be nice if people would put the money into missions that they are wasting on these apostate books! My favorite mission is Heartcry...I love giving to that one.
Thanks...
Ima
Interesting that those who have chosen to divid the church accuse others of being the problem. Once again proving that each time you point one finger in accusation there are four more pointing back.
Rather than pray for God to "deal" with those who seek to "divid" why not pray for God to open us to wisdom, to follow the Holy Spirit and live in peace and obedience. The answer is they have chosen a path and are willing to stay on that path regardless of the leading of the Holy Spirit. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
I mourn everyday for what has been lost. I am shocked at how easily men I have regarded as Godly, men who prior to the arrival of Gaines, critized the very kinds of changes they now fully endorse. For years I have heard these men oppose that which they now embrace. I guess doubling and tripling salaries buys unquestioned loyalty.
Also interesting that in the first year Bellevue continued to grow. Remember the chart with the "growth in the all important 19 to 30 year old group." Wonder what that chart would look like now! Now numbers aren't important, guess they forget that the Bible has a book called Numbers.
As far as the Pastor Search Committee goes, I can only imagine how hard it would be to have prayed and sought God's will, been given the trust of the congregation and for months knowing this is the second most important decision of my life, to then have to be faced with the fact that a mistake was made. Who likes to say "I made a mistake." Once Gaines said take my name off the list, why wasn't his name taken off the list? Why pursue someone who doesn't want to come?
Worse,is that the same people are left in the position to police the choice.
By the way if Gaines' compensation package exceeds $150,000, he is overpaid. If Jamie's compensation exceeds $90,000 he is overpaid.
'It sure is interesting that you and others think every move by a minister is because God is involved.'
Amen. Why do so many assume that?
The point I was making is not to take Kenyon's side over Albright's, only that the "evidence" is in dispute. Biblical archeologists are often swayed by a investment in proving the Biblical account, and in many cases sloppily.
Also, if Christians are so invested in proving the Bible and believe that they can or have, then faith would be superfluous, no? There is a danger always when science is used in a premeditated manner to support a particular philosophical construct--that was Albright's Achilles heel.
The scientific method is one which proposes a hypothesis, then gathers data, not to prove it, but rather to disprove it. This is the weakness of Biblical Archeology or any other "science" predicated on a particular end result.
fogmachine wrote:
"You may laugh at paying the tithe online but it's happening all over the country."
You're correct, fog. Even our friends at FBCJax can do that here. :-D
Mary's link. :-)
Larry--I don't know how to be any clearer. JW was not ready to hang it up and a door was opened and he stepped through. To allay your concern, yes God was not finished with JW and he provided a place for him to continue to serve. I still say people make decisions that are not always God driven.
"You may laugh at paying the tithe online but it's happening all over the country."
No kidding. My former church was implementing that process when I left.
I have learned so much about 'tithing' in the last few years. I have been stunned to learn from scripture that the entire concept changed in the NT. Jesus raised the standard of giving. And it has nothing to do with what we see taught in most churches today.
If you notice, most pastors who teach tithing use OT scripture and a few NT verses to fit the premise.
OT: 10% plus
NT: If your brother is in need, sell your stuff and help him
Most churches today: Give 10%, build lots of buildings, hire lots of staff to do what the Body should be doing and negotitate a large salary and golden parachurt for the hirling.
I started reading the Biblical Archeology apologia--but what the article says:
"The archaeologists who excavated Jericho published their theory. These findings were debated and ultimately accepted by most of the archaeological community."
I think the reason the publishing of the apologia is relevant by the webmasters is because of the widespread appeal of McDowell's book amongst evangelicals and it's claim to empirical evidence. Well, empirical evidence is not such a big deal to the acquisition of "truth," after all. I agree with that--not only is empirical evidence to support the c;aims of a particular faith not important, it is an uphill climb. If modern archeology dovetials its findings to that of the Koran or Heroditus, that doesn't mean I will accept them as Gospel.
Speaking of Heroditus, much of the history of long-deceased civilizations is found in his accounts. Do I believe that Sparta existed, despite few artifacts to prove it? Yes; however, his accounts flow from the mind of a Greek, reflecting his bias. We can cross polinate various disparate writers and artifacts to be convinced that Sparta existed, sans a complete picture of it.
I know that the history in the Bible is grounded in historical fact, yet might the Koran or the Upanishads accounts dovetail with archeological findings? Of course. But that wouldn't change your faith in Jesus Christ, and with good reason.
It really does have to do with the meaning of truth. Truth, in the spiritual sense, is not the textbook definition of truth--a kernal of information that leads to understanding, as in "a truth"--it is the very understanding itself; not bulwarked by the collection of empirical data nor diminished by the lack of it.
My dad, a Mormon, once said to me, "even if you can prove to me that Joseph Smith was not a prophet, I'll still believe he was."
Nass: I sure wouldn't give anything online to FBC Jax...just look at the URL at the link...it is run by the Agroup, Mac's church marketing firm. Any money donated through the website is handled by the AGroup, and I wouldn't feel comformtable about that.
Cakes,
Sort of like when scientists try to prove my ancestors were apes...right? Then everything they dig up just had to have been in my gene pool.......
Mary,
Very kind of you! Thanks for your encouraging words!
BBC 11yrs said...
Housewife,
You said. "I mean, it's one thing to twist Scripture before an already Scripture-ignorant audience but it's entirely another thing to show your true temper in front of a camera."
These are terrible words to use against so many who remain at BBC who sat under Dr. Rogers ministry for years. Just because these people have chosen to do church differently does not make them scripture-ignorant, does it? Also it comes across very arogant and I don't believe this is your intent.
Please reconsider how you state things, for your testimonies sake.
11:34 AM, September 18, 2007
I was sitting there under Dr. Rogers too. I said NOTHING about the time AR was the pastor. He never twisted Scripture to beat his sheep.
Why is it that people always have to bring AR into it when defending their support for SG?
The problem isn't that "these people have chosen to do church differently". (Are they still telling that lie?) The problem is with the lack of integrity from SG and his camp. And that includes his twisting of Scripture to beat his sheep. Worse still is that people don't seem to notice that he's twisting Scripture. How else to describe that other than "Scriptural ignorance"? ...unless you're saying that you did notice that he's twisting Scripture and you don't mind or don't think it's a problem.?.?.?
It's seems that you are more concerned about the terrible words than you are about the terrible epidemic in our church.
You're shooting the messenger while ignoring the true problem.
Have you found a Hitite yet? That was the phrase used in the 19th Century by science to criticize believers. The reason it is no longer used is because several different types of Hitites of since been found. Science does not have all knowledge but we have a God who is all knowledge and has given us a book, the Bible. Imagine on the day of judgement as all knowledge is revealed how many unbelievers will be saying "of course, how obvious, why didn't I see it." Sad to have never heard, Sadder is to have heard but rejected the truth.
wishihadknown said, in part:
Once Gaines said take my name off the list, why wasn't his name taken off the list? Why pursue someone who doesn't want to come?
Reply:
This is the same question Concernedsbcer asked a while back. And it is still an excellent question. And it still remains unanswered. Was it deception and manipulation? Was it a matter of "I'm not coming until the 'chaching' gets higher"?
Steve said he wouldn't come. But now he's there.....
Just sayin'.
oc.
No profile visible = no comment published. "Perhaps" all need to check their profiles to make sure they're visible!
FBCJax, Check out this article:
http://www.batteredsheep.com/index.html
amazed said...
Larry--I don't know how to be any clearer. JW was not ready to hang it up and a door was opened and he stepped through. To allay your concern, yes God was not finished with JW and he provided a place for him to continue to serve. I still say people make decisions that are not always God driven.
4:26 PM, September 18, 2007
Amazed, I agree with you. But I hope that you'll agree with me that some people do make decisions according to God's leading. We mustn't let our own bad experiences make us cynical.
If Jim had felt that God wanted him to 'hang it up' he would have done so. He could have easily retired but instead he felt led to move Linda and himself into an unpredictable situation.
No one has any reason to question his motives, and I'll continue to question those who do.
Cakes,
You wrote, ” It really does have to do with the meaning of truth. Truth, in the spiritual sense, is not the textbook definition of truth--a kernel of information that leads to understanding, as in "a truth"--it is the very understanding itself; not bulwarked by the collection of empirical data nor diminished by the lack of it.”
AMEN, dear friend! On this, we are solidly on the same page!
Blessings,
Mary
EZ,
maybe so; a lot of people are as invested in disproving the existence of God as are those invested in proving it.
I am just happy to accept some mysteries as unconclusive, based on any empirical data. I haven't, however, claimed that empirical data is the only vehicle to knowledge, so don't assume I'm an atheist or being contrary (just following up on the thread). Many Christian writers cover this ground--St. Augustine, Kierkigaard--where does it say in the Bible that faith is a matter hoped for but not seen?
How do you define truth?
Larry - I don't disagree with you.
One observation that I've made over the years that maybe you can explain:
Why is it that the mega church pastors are never "called" to pastor a smaller church? Its just amazing how God "calls" mega church pastors to larger and larger churches, and not to smaller churches. Isn't it something that God "called" Steve Gaines to BBC to earn $400k and not some rural church for 1/10th of that salary? Isn't it something that God "called" Mac Brunson to FBC Jax from Dallas and not to some smaller church?
Why does God call these mega church pastors to bigger and bigger churches and not to smaller churches? Hmmmm....
Cakes said"
where does it say in the Bible that faith is a matter hoped for but not seen?
oc says:
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
FBC: I have asked myself the same thing many times.
Career instead of calling.......
BBC worship attendance figures from 9/16/07:
9:30 a.m. - 3500
11:00 a.m. - 2400
6:00 p.m. - 1500
Attendance in the morning services is down about 25% from one year ago. Sunday evenings are down about 35% from the same time last year.
As I said earlier, they could have easily fit the attendees from all three services into a single service.
New BBC Open Forum said...
BBC worship attendance figures from 9/16/07:
9:30 a.m. - 3500
11:00 a.m. - 2400
6:00 p.m. - 1500
Attendance in the morning services is down about 25% from one year ago. Sunday evenings are down about 35% from the same time last year.
As I said earlier, they could have easily fit the attendees from all three services into a single service.
10:11 PM, September 18, 2007
If the rate of decline continues, before long the numbers will show that there were more Spartans at Thermopylae than people attending Bellevue. (Now I sound like Dennis Miller lol)
New BBC Open Forum said...
From the Administrative Pastor's page we have this gem:
August 22, 2007
Dear Fellow Church Family,
My office has received many calls today regarding an unsigned letter that has been mailed into many of your homes. The question being asked is, “Did the church furnish a mailing list?” The answer is that the church did not furnish anyone a list, and it is our policy when we have requests for mailing lists that we not provide this information to businesses or individuals for any purpose.
The law specifies that the mailing list must be to be provided to any member who requests it, provided that the request is made "in good faith and for a proper purpose".
DC and the BBC lawyers parsed the wording of the law so as to claim that they didn't have to provide the list to the individuals who were requesting it, because they assumed the intent of the requestors was to cause division in the church (which would not be a "proper purpose"). Of course, that argument was and is specious, because they had no direct evidence to support the claim that the requestors' purpose was anything other than to communicate information of interest to the general membership that the members had a right to know, but which was not forthcoming from the church administration.
But now DC is so bold as to state that the information is not provided "for any purpose". So although the law says they must provide it for a "proper purpose", DC says they won't provide it for any purpose, proper or otherwise. What arrogance! They no longer bother to hide behind a dubious interpretation of the law, they now blatantly admit that they aren't going to follow the law at all!
(Word verification: yyzen)
junk wrote:
"But now DC is so bold as to state that the information is not provided "for any purpose". So although the law says they must provide it for a "proper purpose", DC says they won't provide it for any purpose, proper or otherwise. What arrogance! They no longer bother to hide behind a dubious interpretation of the law, they now blatantly admit that they aren't going to follow the law at all!"
Good point.
Off Topic:
Today was our 25th wedding anniversary. My husband came home in the middle of the day and brought me roses and a love note that he had written to me. He thanked me for marrying him, for being faithful, devoted and dedicated to our family. He thanked me for our children.
Sigh.
Life is good.
Awww, congratulations, SOTL! Happy 25th! May you have many more happy years together.
Cakes,
I define truth as anything without error. On a personal level, if I tell you that I look 10 years older than I am, it is the truth. From my perspective. Others will tell you that I look closer to 20 years older than I am. ☹ So truth to me may not necessarily be truth to you. So in some respects, truth depends on the lens through which it is viewed. The whole BBC dispute to an extent can be looked at like this. People are judging the actions of the church and the people in it through their own lens. My truth vs. yours kind of thing.
Now, that brings us to what is actual truth. Not what I think it is, not how I view it through my lens. That is what is so important about the battle we fight over the WORD. If we judge the actions of people or the church by what we know to be absolute truth, things get a lot clearer and easy to deal with. Without a final judgment, final measure, referee, judge, supreme court so to speak, all we will ever do as men/women is argue and fight based on what truth looks like through our lens.
So what is the final judgment, final measure, referee, judge or supreme court to a believing Christian? It has to be the WORD. Ok, now I beg your patience…
1)WHAT/WHO IS THE WORD?
John 1: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend[a] it.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
So an eye witness to his death, and one of his disciples tells us that the WORD is God in the flesh.
2) TRUTH IS JESUS
John 1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
John 8:32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 14: 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
3)THE HOLY SPIRIT IS TRUTH
John 14: 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.
John 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.
John 16:13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.
1 John 5:6 This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.
4)THE WORD IS SCRIPTURE
JOHN 17: 17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.
1 Thes 2: 13 For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.
5)THE TRUTH IS THE GOSPEL
Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Colossians 1: 5 because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel
Cakes, short answer…I define truth as God, Jesus, Scripture and the Gospel. Our connection to the truth comes through the written word of God and through the working of the Holy Spirit.
Some folks today are content with the “truth” they get on Sunday morning from the preacher. To do that, they have to build all kinds of bridges of trust to the preacher and these bridges turn into devices of control in skilled hands……..
If you are like me, I don’t trust anyone to give me truth…so I go to the source. My cell phone won’t work there so I use the next best thing….the BIBLE.
SOTL,
Congratulations!
In this day, increasingly rare.
I must admit, I'm a bit jealous,
but I rejoice in your success.
True love.....nothing like it :)
I suspect I just ruined my image. Oh well......:)
oc.
SOTL: A rare and wonderful accomplishment. Congratulations!
:)
FBCJAX--You made my point about ministers being called better than I did. To say that God moved SG to BBC so he could do nothing but sow discord and division is hard to believe.
Ezekiel said: "If you are like me, I don’t trust anyone to give me truth…so I go to the source. My cell phone won’t work there so I use the next best thing….the BIBLE."
It's all we have that we can trust to give us the truth. God's Word. His Spirit.
God's Word is amazing. It is always relevant. There are no contradictions. It can be understood by all.
"To say that God moved SG to BBC so he could do nothing but sow discord and division is hard to believe."
Read the OT and see how God used the Syrians and Babylonians and many others to get the attention of His people to turn back to Him.
Read the Prophets in the OT to see how well the people listened to the warnings God sent.
New BBC Open Forum said...
BBC worship attendance figures from 9/16/07:
9:30 a.m. - 3500
11:00 a.m. - 2400
Actually, the attendance figures show a drop of 41% from one year ago.
We were averaging 10,000 plus on a typical Sunday morning when Steve took over and it continued up many Sunday's over 10,000 until the spring of last year when people started to trickle out.
The numbers that are being published by David Coombs are just not accurate. Too many people are counting the current numbers so they can't play with them. What they are playing with are the numbers from one year ago. They are lowering those numbers so the current numbers don't look so bad compared to them.
Everyone knows we were averaging over 10,000 on Sunday mornings with the 9:30 service completely packed out and the 11:00 at 85% capacity. Things sure have changed in the past year and a half.
As Steve went fence jumping, donating money to the abortion/homosexual church, hiding from the church a compromised staff member, and then the false business meeting, people started dropping like flies.
Most people who couldn't stomach what BBC has become have already left but there are still a lot of folks who are trickling out to other churches every Sunday. It will probably take another year or two before most unhappy members leave for good.
Hey, sheeps! Comments won't be moderated until this evening. Have a great day!
Lin...
What do you think about 1 Cor 11:19? Anyone else...
Why does God call these mega church pastors to bigger and bigger churches and not to smaller churches?
fbc & amazed,
Mega churches are what they are, and so are their pastors. Some are called by God, some are not. The same thing can be said of pastors of small churches and missionaries.
There are good pastors and bad pastors in churches of all sizes. It's not fair to say that just because a man is a pastor of a mega church that he is motivated by greed.
No one can really say what anyone else's true motivation is, anyway.
Yes, there are men who have abandoned their flocks for more prestigious churches. Likewise, there are men who have obediently stepped down as pastors of large churches to assume not only pastorships at smaller churches, but supporting roles as well.
For some reason, it seems like it's become more common to fixate on the bad examples than the good ones. Christians are to take note of those who cause problems and those who are exemplary, and learn from the good examples.
I'm afraid the good ones are getting lost in the shuffle, though.
It doesn't matter if you believe the Bible. It doesn't matter if I believe the Bible. God's Word isn't dependent on whether or not anyone believes it. It stands on it's own merit. The Bible is true in and of itself because it is God's Word. If every single person that ever lived (except Jesus, of course) never believed in the Bible, it would still be the Truth!!
Romans 3:4 "Let God be true, and every man a liar."
Further, God's Word isn't dependent on what anyone "thinks" it says in this or that particular passage. Many teachers often ask, "What do you think this verse means?"
The correct answer is, "It doesn't matter what I think it means. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks it means. The only thing that matters is what does it say in and of itself. What does GOD say it means??? What is God saying here?"
Lin--Sure God used other people to get the attention of the jews, but SG is not classified as "other people". He is one of us, born again, bible believing christians. How can an individual that fits that mold set out to destroy a group of believers?
Housewife,
My issue is not with Dr. Rogers preaching, I loved it. As I have stated before on this blog, I am also looking for a new place of worship and am not defending Steve Gaines. I am though defending all those you labeled as "Scripture-ignorant" (your term). There are many who have chose to stay with BBC, and although I think it is a bad choice, I support their choice to do so and I do not believe they are Scripturally-ignorant.
Your statement is painting with a very wide brush about some very godly people. This is wrong and very arrogant on the part of anyone who would say such.
As I stated previously, I don't think this is your intent but it is the way it comes off.
I would compare your words as beating your fellow sheep. If it is not good for Steve Gaines, it is not good for us.
FBCJX,
I know of ONE pastor who left his salary paying, mid-sized church (about the size of Gardendale FBC) to follow the Lord's calling to a NON-paying poor church in another state. This church was struggling spiritually and financially. HE took odd jobs, he and his family sold everything they had to make ends meet and now has the church in the black, growing by leaps and bounds. I PERSONALLY SUBMITTED HIS NAME TO THE BBC SEARCH COMMITTEE. THEY DID NOT REQUEST HIS RESUME OR EVEN CONTACT HIM!
Go figure THAT one...
Hey....you guys keeping up with Iran's antics today?
Between them and Russia's latest activities....getting interesting.......
Mom4 said:
FBCJX,
I know of ONE pastor who left his salary paying, mid-sized church (about the size of Gardendale FBC) to follow the Lord's calling to a NON-paying poor church in another state. This church was struggling spiritually and financially. HE took odd jobs, he and his family sold everything they had to make ends meet and now has the church in the black, growing by leaps and bounds. I PERSONALLY SUBMITTED HIS NAME TO THE BBC SEARCH COMMITTEE. THEY DID NOT REQUEST HIS RESUME OR EVEN CONTACT HIM!
Go figure THAT one...
Reply:
No figuring needed. Apparently being a servant-leader was not one of the requirements. That would require humility, wouldn't it?
Hey Sheeps,
We've been visiting Ellendale Baptist a lot recently and are very impressed with their new pastor, Dr. Jerry Harmon. He is an expositor of the word, preaching and teaching through the scriptures. All his messages have been, in a word, pastoral. He's very cordial and humble to chat with. We also spoke with Associate Pastor Danny Spurlock (likewise very personable) who told us Dr. Harmon's stated priorities are to 1) love the people and 2) preach the word.
This evening after the service they had their monthly business meeting, which we sat in on. Short, sweet and straightforward. While no one had any questions, the floor was certainly open. We asked the lady in front of us, who turned out to be the church secretary, if they had bylaws. She said yes and if we wanted to see them, all we had to do is call her at the church office and she'd be glad to mail a copy.
I tell ya, it's been a breath of fresh air for us bruised and jaded sheep.
Dr. Rogers said something interesting in today's message on LWF:
"And if there's a false Jesus, and if there's a false spirit, there are also false ministers. Second Corinithians eleven, verses thirteen through fifteen. Paul is describing these and... listen to him:
'For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.'
That is, they haven't been called, they have appointed themselves.
'And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.'
And when you look for the Devil, never fail to look in the pulpit."
The Counterfeit Christian
BBC 11yrs said...
Housewife,
My issue is not with Dr. Rogers preaching, I loved it. As I have stated before on this blog, I am also looking for a new place of worship and am not defending Steve Gaines. I am though defending all those you labeled as "Scripture-ignorant" (your term). There are many who have chose to stay with BBC, and although I think it is a bad choice, I support their choice to do so and I do not believe they are Scripturally-ignorant.
Your statement is painting with a very wide brush about some very godly people. This is wrong and very arrogant on the part of anyone who would say such.
As I stated previously, I don't think this is your intent but it is the way it comes off.
I would compare your words as beating your fellow sheep. If it is not good for Steve Gaines, it is not good for us.
12:51 PM, September 19, 2007
Yeah, you're not getting what I'm saying.
If you DON'T KNOW that SG is twisting Scripture, then you're Scripturally ignorant. He does it quite often and some of it should have been apparent by now.
If you DO KNOW that SG is twisting Scripture and you DON'T CARE or DON'T THINK IT'S THAT BAD OF A PROBLEM, then that's almost worse than being Scripturally ignorant. It's not something one should "overlook" because one thinks SG is a "good guy" or you like the music. (or for whatever the reason)
If you DO KNOW that SG is twisting Scripture and you DO CARE and are staying because you're willing to fight the fight or don't want to abandon ship before attempting to salvage BBC, then that's understandable.
I never said ALL at BBC are Scripturally ignorant. But there must be enough of them that allow SG to get away with this nonsense. Do they or do they not know he's twisting Scripture to beat his sheep? Why do they allow him to do it if they know what's going on?
BTW, I'm not beating the sheep. I'm stating the truth about a very serious problem. And part of the problem is that too many people are ignorant or pretend that SG isn't twisting Scripture.
When SG twists Scripture, it's because he wants to get away with something, he wants to bamboozle the sheep, or he wants to beat the sheep into submission so they won't hold him responsible/accountable for his actions.
That's NOT what I'm doing in any way. Last time I checked, we were still allowed to state the truth about very serious problems.
Another small note on the arguement about the dating of the conquering of Canaan.....
Acts 13:19 tells us that the conquest took about 450 years.
Acts 7:45 tells us the "disposession" lasted until the time of David.
Judges 11:26 tells us that Israel had posessed Heshbon for about 300 years...well before David's reign.
So when we dig up evidence dating the conquest from 1400BC to 1100BC all of it could be correct and all of it fits within the timeline of the conquest that the Bible gives us.
Let me say "AMEN"! to Ellendale's new pastor, Dr. Jerry Harmon. It is so wonderful to look into the eyes of this godly man and his wife and not see them looking over my head to see how they can get away. Every message so far has been right on target! I have found a home!
all2Jesus,
Thanks for the info on Ellendale. We have visited there twice, the first time when Jerry Tidwell was pastor and we liked it except for the music minister. He seemed to like to run thru the music like he was in a hurry to get out of town. We visited later when a visiting pastor from Kirby Woods spoke and loved it, but the music minister was still keeping us out of breath. Is it still the same?
Housewife,
Thanks for your exposition. Whether or not I believe the Bible is true (or truth) seems fundamental to following the path of Christ. You believe it to be the literal, inspired word of God and so, from beginning to end, it is truth. Or truth is truth, and that's all one needs to know, period.
My inquiry is about evangelism, what tropes of reason, logic and scientific fields--like archeology--can reliably be used to convey either the truth of the Bible, or of the Judeo-Christian God (or any spiritual truth, for that matter), to one who is not a Christian--and thus may not be compelled by the heartfelt belief of a preacher, soul-winner or fellow blogger. The powers of reason and scrutiny, after all, are inherent in human beings, and the benefits are all around us—those cannot
God wrote the Bible, thus those ancient hands that held the pens were reliable instruments of the divine; then God saw the compilation of its books, through various stages and translations, and weeded out books over the course of history--there's a lot of God's reliable humans that nurtured the document as it stands today. You may say that you do not trust the word of any human—yet that presumes the reliability of many as vessels of God’s absolute communication and facilitation throughout the ages.
That may be a perfectly satisfactory answer if you believe already that it is scripture, But for the unbeliever, it is not just a matter of generating faith in the one true God, but also belief in a caliber of human--so wedded the Divine that they can transcribe His very thoughts--that doesn't walk amongst us today.
Now, saying it doesn't matter what you or I think "truth" means is fine for the believer. But for everyone else for whom you might lovingly seek to win to Christ, it sounds like the whole basis of the exchange is "I possess the truth and you can too, if you choose to believe me."
Housewife, I just met you. This conversation began as someone trying to compel me to read a text that implies empirical evidence for the truth of God’s word. Yet when the scholarship of McDowell’s text is shown to be less than conclusive (not just on the Canaan issue), then I am directed to another text basically implying that where the archeological record supports the Biblical account, it may bulwark the Christian’s argument; yet where it casts doubt on its authenticity, then that data may be discarded, as it is in conflict with a presumed truth. Again, the method is inconsistent and dare I say, conveniently selective in the eyes of an unbeliever—i.e. it may harm your witness.
Also, as I questioned before, if you believe there is empirical, objective and factual basis for the Biblical account, then what good is faith? I don’t believe that reason and the scientific method are the only paths to knowledge, and I am ok with that. Far be it from me to say that you are wrong regarding truth or God, yet I believe it specious to apply a method that selects its data, and ignores other, based on an already-accepted canon.
I believe the very meaning of faith is founded, not on objective analysis of factual data, but a subjective, personal and intuitive acquisition of knowledge beyond the tropes of reason or the scientific method. Saying that the truth of the Word is obvious, that it is not contradictory, plain to all who read it, may be scrutinized by the conflicting interpretations, the thousand of sects, sub-sects, the division within the Bellevue congregation, the very history of Christendom since the dark ages.
I thank you all for engaging me in such a kind and measured manner, on these points of inquiry.
David
PS--My Mom goes to Ellendale now, and she is very happy there.
mom4,
The music minister does tend to speed up the invitation songs - I was out of breath by the 4th stanza of "I have decided to follow Jesus", but that's the only "problem" I have.
The new preacher is spot on (I posted about his 1st sermon based on Psalm 23 - really good!) and I love the fact that the pastor and his wife go to the doors at the end of the service then greet everyone coming out.
searchingfortruth,
Email me please! :)
Housewife,
Thank you for letting me know what you believe concerning any people who remain at BBC.
Let me end my part of this discussion by saying, I totally disagree with you and now know what you said was intentional. I'm sorry.
I'll give you the last word.
Mom4,
Yes, the music minister does tend to lead a little fast for us (though not always), but I usually enjoy his selections. I'm sure there are other facets that won't quite be to our liking, but I praise God for the minor imperfections. I wouldn't want to ruin a perfect church by joining it. :-) I prefer to see areas of need as potential areas of ministry. If your particular gift is music, the choir could certainly use you.
Karen,
Thanks for the info. The music was the only drawback to Ellendale that we had, and we have not heard the pastor except online. We did enjoy him and felt they had made a very wise choice, but the music is so much an important part of the worship service that we had a tendency to cringe. The people were very nice and welcomed us when we were there, but it would be nice to sing out of a hymnal at a tempo appropriate for the song. It takes the reverence out of the music.
(John Phillip Sousa would have LOVED marching to the tempo there:))
all2jesus,
Thanks for your gracious input. I am not gifted in music, (and I always wanted to be), so I won't ruin a perfectly good choir by trying to join it:)
I feel very strong about the reverence of the music, not to be stoic or staunch in it's presentation, I just like it to bring me into worship, not rush me to lunch. It is not minor to me.
all2jesus said...
The Counterfeit Christian
11:00 PM, September 19, 2007
all2jesus,
Thanks for this reference. I just briefly checked in and bounced over to the the LWF message.
I'm saving it to listen to later, but just wanted you to know how much it lifted my spirit just to see Dr. Rogers face.
When we see his face and hear his voice, there is no doubt how much he loved Jesus and lived his life in a way that honored our Lord.
What a great legacy he has left and how very blessed we were to have him as our pastor for 32 years.
Just a reminder...
I cannot edit anyone's comments at any time -- either before or after they've been published, nor can I post a comment using anyone else's account (as I've apparently been accused of doing). If you want to edit something in a comment that you've already submitted, you must copy and paste the original comment into a new comment box, edit as desired, and repost it. Then you can delete the original, or ask me to delete it for you if you're one of the unfortunate few who doesn't have a trashcan.
Also, your profile must be visible to post comments.
Interesting article.
Ima...
Look at how the different translations communicate this verse…It tells us there are sects, factions, heresies, divisions in the Body so that the approved or genuine will be evident. Sounds judgmental, doesn’t it?
1Corinthians 11:
19for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. ESV
19for it behoveth sects also to be among you, that those approved may become manifest among you; YLT
19For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you. NASB
19For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you KJV
This verse always makes me think of Matthew 13 because it shows that God allows this for a reason:
Matthew 13
27And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?' 28He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' So the servants said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?' 29But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"
Lin--Sure God used other people to get the attention of the jews, but SG is not classified as "other people". He is one of us, born again, bible believing christians. How can an individual that fits that mold set out to destroy a group of believers?
12:43 PM, September 19, 2007
You could ask the same thing of the Pharisees. The Chosen people. The priests who knew the law.
One of the things that really surprised me studying the OT is to find out that several times God made it clear He would only save a small part of Israel. In Zecharia, I think, He said only 1/3. And these are His CHOSEN people.
Ez would probably know where the other OT references for this are.
I just posted Matthew 13 which speaks to this.
As we can see examples throughout scripture that God allows certain things that does not fit our paradigm. Anyone can call themselves Born Again. Most anyone can go to seminary. The question is: Am I a new creation? Am I broken over my sin? Any sin. Small sins? Am I growing in Holiness being sanctified. yes, I still sin but I hate it. Do I hate what God hates and love what God loves?
The book of 1st John is a good test for us all to take over and over.
"I know of ONE pastor who left his salary paying, mid-sized church (about the size of Gardendale FBC) to follow the Lord's calling to a NON-paying poor church in another state."
This is beautiful! My cousin traveled to hear Paul Washer preach last week and the church that brought him in rents meeting space. they are determined to keep expenses low so they can send 90% to missions and operate on 10%
She said they were so welcoming to her she did not want to leave!! She said she felt like she was with her 'family'. This is what the Body...anywhere should be like.
Cakes said...
My inquiry is about evangelism, what tropes of reason, logic and scientific fields--like archeology--can reliably be used to convey either the truth of the Bible, or of the Judeo-Christian God (or any spiritual truth, for that matter), to one who is not a Christian--and thus may not be compelled by the heartfelt belief of a preacher, soul-winner or fellow blogger.
Cakes would make an excellent Presuppositionalist!
all2jesus,
Thanks for posting the link to LWF. Wouldn't you just know, Dr. Rogers is still teaching and encouraging us, all the way from Glory. Isn't that just like him!
Cakes,
Frankly, I'm not trying to convince you of the veracity of the Bible. As I said before, it's true no matter who does or doesn't believe it. I'm simply telling you the truth. If I care about your soul, I will tell you the truth. If I don't care, I'll just stand by and watch you go down the path that leads straight to hell without at least trying to tell you the truth. Harsh? Yes, but true.
But what you do with it is up to you. Ultimately, you will have to answer for what you did with the truth about Jesus Christ. Period.
You can fill as many paragraphs as you want with your cliches that you like to attribute to me (as if I'm the one using them when in reality you're the one who won't let them go) and with your reasons why you don't want to rely on faith but ultimately, it's all waste since your doubt will never disprove the Bible. (And no, my faith will never prove It either. That's my point. ;})
Let me put it this way - chalking it all up to your own "I have the truth and you don't" cliche as a way out of making a decision is no excuse to God. You may keep us busy with semantics but it won't wash with God. Dismiss it if you want. I'm not the One you'll have to answer to.
Am I trying to scare you into it? Nope. It's just the truth. If fear comes from it, so be it. The Word never said the truth wasn't supposed to scare you. If you don't feel fear, so be it as well. Again, I'm just telling you the truth and you have no excuse.
Now, as to some of the issues you wrote directly to me about...
You talk about 'not trusting humans yet allowing for the presumption of the reliability of God's vessels.' (more or less the wording) Yup. Both are correct. It's not a contradiction, if that's what you meant. Humans, in ourselves, are not to be trusted since we are sinners. But when the labor is of God himself (whether via His own hands or one of His vessels) it is no longer in the same category as human labor. That's why we trust in His Word, even if human hands were used.
About "redirecting you" to different sources... It's not "redirecting you." Rather, it's a collection of sources. Some will be stronger than others. I don't expect all of the outside sources to be perfect because they are NOT the Bible.
As for the part about "casting doubt on the authenticity"... I thought you were already there so in your eyes, what's the difference? You're doubting no matter how much truth is said.
About the different sects and interpretations... It's what I said in my last posting. It doesn't matter what I think it says. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks it says. We as humans are bound to misinterpret and have our divisions. We are human and sinners. That's why I said that the Bible is true in and of itself. And it only matters what God says.
Now, we weed out the inaccurate interpretations made by humans by reading/learning the Bible constantly and keeping the text in it's true and original context. This is why the best scholars study the Bible in the original languages rather than in the interpreted ones. (John MacArthur comes to mind.)
Most of us don't do that because we don't posses such knowledge of the original languages. We rely on the Spirit to lead us as we read the Word and consider our learning sources. We do our best to keep away from translations that are "flimsy." That requires a bit of homework on our part. But it's our responsibility to find a reliable translation, pastor, church, etc.
So, you may want to dismiss the Bible because there are plenty of errors made in the name of Christianity. But it doesn't excuse you from your own responsibility to Jesus Christ in any way. You speak about your ability to use your God-given brains to draw conclusions. Your right. And it's your responsibility to use that knowledge/ability to learn to weed out the misinterpretations, bad translations, false teachers, etc.
If you chalk it up to it being just a matter of my already believing Scriture as truth, then I suppose you have nothing to lose by doing your own homework. It seems like that's what you really want. You want to make up your own mind. Go ahead. Test the Bible. But be honest about it. You can't fool yourself. And you certainly can't fool God. If you won't do your homework honestly or are not willing to accept what's at the end of your studies, then you're only wasting your own time.
If you're going to test the Bible and study it to find out IF it's true or not, do it honestly. Go ahead. What do you have to lose if we're all wrong anyway? If you're not interested, fine. All we can do is present you with the truth. The decision is yours and the responsibility is yours.
=) God bless you. Jesus Christ is Lord. Sola Fide.
Lindon, the Zech appears to be unfulfilled. However Ez 5:11-12 has happened.
This prophecy has been fulfilled. It happened when Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar.
Ez 5: 11 ‘Therefore, as I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘surely, because you have defiled My sanctuary with all your detestable things and with all your abominations, therefore I will also diminish you; My eye will not spare, nor will I have any pity. 12 One-third of you shall die of the pestilence, and be consumed with famine in your midst; and one-third shall fall by the sword all around you; and I will scatter another third to all the winds, and I will draw out a sword after them.
I am pretty sure this is unfulfilled prophecy.
Zech 13: Zechariah 13:7-9
The Shepherd Savior
7 “ Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
Against the Man who is My Companion,”
Says the LORD of hosts.
“ Strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep will be scattered;
Then I will turn My hand against the little ones.
8 And it shall come to pass in all the land,”
Says the LORD,
“ That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die,
But one-third shall be left in it:
9 I will bring the one-third through the fire,
Will refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested.
They will call on My name,
And I will answer them.
I will say, ‘This is My people’;
And each one will say, ‘The LORD is my God.’”
We see part of the fulfillment in Rev 8 and 9
Rev 9: 18 By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed—by the fire and the smoke and the brimstone which came out of their mouths. 19 For their power[a] is in their mouth and in their tails; for their tails are like serpents, having heads; and with them they do harm.
20 But the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and idols of gold, silver, brass, stone, and wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk. 21 And they did not repent of their murders or their sorceries[b] or their sexual immorality or their thefts.
It is important to see a couple of other instances that while they don't appear to be 1/3, there was certainly destruction of God's "chosen". And many of them.
1 Kings 19:14-18 and Ez 9:4-11
Cakes,
I don't think anyone can convince another person to follow Christ.
I also think you know the answers to the questions you posed:)
Only God knows your heart.
I don't even think it's about you deciding anything about Christ. (no eggs, please!)
I'm sorry that people and evil and pride cloud the path to the love of Christ. (speaking in general here)
I'm sorry the hypocrits are more easy to spot than the ones becoming more Christ like.
I am no one. But my heart identifies with your heart...I think God isn't finished with you yet.(or me!)
I don't think you have to pray the EE prayer. I don't think the Christ that tugs at you is the one our parents taught us.
I think you can be an intellectual AND be a follower/believer.
God is super natural....he's bigger than our reason and understanding.
There was no reason that a wounded and frightened kid would hear or feel the voice of God ...especially in the evil place I was when I knew He had plans for me that didn't include the hell I was living in at the time.
I love you and I am praying that He will be real to you.....that you will feel his touch,(or hear his voice, or presence) and know that you are His child.
In today's (Thursday) message on LWF.
Dr. Rogers was teaching from Matthew 13 on the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares.
I. Sowing of the Tares, v.39
who- satan is the sower of bad seeds
why- satan wants to be worshipped
when- while men slept, and didn't sound the alarm
II. Growing of the Tares, v. 28-30
The tares have been allowed by God to grow up with the wheat.
Our job is NOT killing weeds. We should warn and preach the Truth, but let everyone grow until God's harvest time.
III. Knowing of the Tares, v.40-43
*see Rev. 14:14-15
The harvest time is not come yet, because neither the wheat nor the tares is ripe yet.
Even though Dr. Rogers is dead, his influence continues to win souls for our Lord, Jesus Christ. The time is not yet come for a final counting of his impact for Jesus.
Likewise, the false jesus/false spirit/false ministers/false brothers/false gospel/false christians are not finished yet. The time is not ripe for all of their influence for evil to be counted against them.
Dr. Rogers' final points today:
1) Make sure of your own salvation (2 Cor. 13:5) Examine yourself whether you are in the faith. Prove yourself.
2) If you've never given your heart to Jesus, don't hide behind some hypocrite.
3) If you are a hypocrite christian, get RIGHT with God NOW, before it's too late!
God did not come to condemn the world, but to save.
Today's tape "Counterfeit Christian" is available through lwf.org or 1-877-LOVE-GOD
His words penetrated my heart this morning: I shouldn't dare to condemn those who Christ does not condemn yet. I should pray for their salvation, while there is time.
Whew! God's gonna have to help me with this one!
Housewife,
I'm sorry you were insulted. But please reread what I wrote and percieve what I have intended--that I have lovingly and carefully engaged an issue that was, in fact, directed to me; with the purpose to say what I think, honestly, while never being so presumptuous as to even imply that you are wrong or the Bible isn't scripture.
I'm just ok with being honest, with myself and you all too. I feel like I don't have to prove I am a friend, that I have nothing but the best of intentions with the truthseekers here, that I care about your happiness and peace; ievitably with many a soul-winner, if I, an unapologetic and articulate Buddhist, actually engage them compassionately while voicing my views openly and honestly, instead of running them off hatefully or timidly act as though I am ashamed of not being a christian, then it is colluded that I have an agenda. Such cannot be inferred in any measure from my comments.
Let me make this perfectly clear: everyone that is not a christian is anti-christian. On the contrary, I have encouraged on this blog many times that my friends here should deepen and rely on their faith, support one another; I have stood with the truthseekers going on 9 months now, in the sanctuarary, met with them for conversation and solidarity, faced your detractors in person and defended them over at Bratton's hole.
Please don't presume me antagonistic or attribute to me intentions that I don't have. I have never foisted my beliefs here and won't. Yet if a matter of inquiry is presented to me directly, like some "evidence to demand a verdict," I feel the sense of freedom and equal-footing with everyone to speak openly and honestly.
I am a writer going on a decade, and it shows in my vocabulary and locution, so I'm sorry the number of paragraphs was an issue. I was just trying to be clear and concise in my communication.
Like I said before, I am a person who places a premium on compassion over being correct about who God is, and it is a blessing to my way of life. I never meant to insult you--I tried so hard to not do so.
Cakes,
No, I wasn't insulted. I also was more interested in being honest. As a matter of fact, I just wanted to get to the point. And if a comment is directed at me, I will likewise address it accordingly if I can.
It doesn't matter if you're pro or anti-Christian. It's not that your friendship isn't appreciated regardless of religious differences. But your friendship with another Christian (or 100 of them) won't get you into heaven. You either choose Christ or you don't.
The number of paragraphs wasn't an issue. I usually end up posting long answers myself. I was acknowledging your oft-repeated points and I addressed them. Content vs quantity.
I am a person who places a premium on compassion over being correct about who God is...
Yeah, I picked up on that. That's all good and well but because one can't earn their salvation, all of the compassion in the world won't save you. You still have to make a decision about Christ.
Borrowed from Faith's mens breakfast this morning.
3 ways we have access to God.
1)Revelation. God's WORD. (Psalm 19)
2)Inspiration. The Spirit of God
3)Illumination. The Light of God
1 Cor 2:5That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
6Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
7But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
GMommy said: "I'm sorry the hypocrits are more easy to spot than the ones becoming more Christ like."
This is so true, isn't it? If only we could measure those striving to become more Christ-like every day against the hypocrites; we would know what kind of shape the church is really in.
It's so easy to talk success or failure based on numbers instead of fruits.
Off subject......but is anyone here a CSI fan? If so, please email me....adress is in my profile.
:)
Also off topic - Have you been reading the Poppy Joy blog? If not, you'll want to read it. It's so inspiring. FYI, the Luce's friends in Nashville have had their baby and she's hanging on so far (56 hours I think). Be encouraged by this couple's stregth. Go to poppyjoy.blogspot.com and look for Copeland's blog.
kren
sweet cakes,
I love ya man.
:)
SOTL,
What, no caveat--no brow-beating, no telling me I'm going to hell, ad infinitum, no self-righteousness, no attitude of contempt towards a fellow-truthseeker, no ascribing to me the motive to "disprove" the Bible, no intimation that I wish to "earn" some eternal reward?
I love you too, dear SOTL; and the fact that many Christians still understand the importance of compassion over posturing.
No, cakes. Not from this sheep either. You've heard it all. No need to browbeat you with it. In the end everyone has to make his own decisions and choose his own path in life.
We love and appreciate you, my friend.
Cakes: As I can recall, we've never told you any of that. We love you. We love you enough to pray for you EVERY day. We love you enough to let you see our hearts. We love you enough to be concerned for you. And we love you enough to love you unconditionally.
Cakes,
YOU KNOW I LOVE YOU.
Email me buddy.
I know all y'all love me (like, what's not to love?--hehe); that was just a not-so-subtle attempt to get a certain someone to ratchet it down a little, lest I start thinking I've died and went to Bratton's hole or Billie's Sunday school class.
You are all awesome.
Cakes,
Remember. I'm the lion. :)
Our sweet cakes said:
SOTL,
What, no caveat--no brow-beating, no telling me I'm going to hell, ad infinitum, no self-righteousness, no attitude of contempt towards a fellow-truthseeker, no ascribing to me the motive to "disprove" the Bible, no intimation that I wish to "earn" some eternal reward?
and SOTL Replies:
Nope, sweetie pie...just unconditional love. You've been to seminary. What else could I offer you intellectually that you don't already know? Jesus commands us to love one another. And that's what I intend to do..Actions speak louder than words!!!
oc said...
Remember. I'm the lion. :)
And I am the walrus! goo goo g'joob!
Alright Cakes. If you need a disclaimer, here it is.
In responding to your posts, I tried to keep things in general terms. But, as most conversations eventually progress, our posts became less generalized. In other words, I would have rather kept things generalized but you posted a few things which I felt the need to respond to directly, hence the personalizing of responses.
When talking about salvation, eventually, the issue of heaven and hell come up. I don't think it's out of line to be straight with you about what the Bible says. Yes, that includes the issue of hell.
That said, I have NOT been brow-beating you about hell. I mentioned it what? Once? Even it was twice it still doesn't constitute brow-beating.
As to the issues of disproving the Bible and earning your salvation, I think that was a fair assessment. Perhaps you didn't mean to come across as having these views. It happens.
Toning it down... Your posts have been pretty heavy themselves from before we started to exchange posts so I don't understand why that's an issue now.
Compassion... I never discounted compassion. Where did you get that? I guess I could baby you with the facts of the Bible but for someone who prides themselves as being very articulate (which I'm not disputing, btw), I would think that it would almost offend you to be babied. I could be wrong. That's why I was dealing with facts with you.
Again, I never discounted compassion. The point I made about compassion is that you can't earn salvation by your show of compassion no matter how wonderfully you display it. Of course compassion is essential!! All I was saying is that you can't earn salvation with it. That's all.
It is my sincerest prayer that you will allow your wall to crumble before the Lord Jesus Christ and that you would give your life to Him.
As for our conversations, I will tone it down if you'd prefer. And I apologize if I offended you. Well, I'm sure I offended you, so I apologize without the "if."
Truce? LOL. =)
And to be perfectly fair, I haven't seen Housewife
'brow beat', or be without compassion, nor be without sincerity. I believe she has comported herself in a civil and dignified manner.
So I say Peace. Ya'll agree to disagree for now. :)
Just my observation and suggestion.
oc.
oc said...
So I say Peace. Ya'll agree to disagree for now. :)
OC, peacemaker extraordinaire! According to someone I know, that means you are blessed!
I agree...what's not to love about Sweet Cakes????
I think Cakes knows HW's heart is pure.
...different subject....
One of our other loved ones needs our prayers right now....hope everyone received the recent email.
Junk, my brother,
We both are there, at Matthew 5:9.
You rock, my brother in Christ!!!!
Thanks oc. =)
Concerned...you don't know how I hate to bring this up. CSI?
Housewife,
I don't doubt your heart, and I was out of line on that last comment. It is just that I don't believe that spiritual truth is so obvious, otherwise, there would be no need in having faith. I also think it is unfair to people who choose other paths or who are still weighing the matter.
You know, Buddhism is not so devoted to discovering truth about God (nor miligning those folks who are) than it is concerned with living a meaningful life on this side of the veil.
Ima: You've got mail.
:)
Cakes,
Spiritual truth is as obvious as the lines in the palm of your hand. IF the Holy spirit is giving it to you. Faith also is not something that you have to produce. It is something that He gives you. I implore you to seek it, ask Him for it.
What is really unfair is to see another person on the wrong path and turn away from him, ignore him in his error, forever condemning him to an eternity seperated from God.
As far as buddhism and its focus on a "meaningful life" on this side of the veil...There are two glaring problems with that. One, there is no more veil. It was torn in two, ripped apart when Jesus died, thereby giving believers direct access to God. No more priests, no more nothing, just direct access. That is what is so blessed immense about what Jesus did on the cross. He died, shed his blood, so that our sin is washed away and we can once again walk with God just as Adam and Eve did in the garden BEFORE they decided they needed a more meaningful life.
Micah 6:8 He has shown you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justly, To love mercy, And to walk humbly with your God?
Two, the focus of meaningful life is where we, man, always want to put it rather than where it should be. On man, meaningful to man.... Sometimes we forget that our lives need to be first and foremost meaningful to God. That is the whole point behind "crucified with Christ", "dead to self". "In Christ and Him in us." There is no more me, but all Him....
Deuteronomy 10:12-13 (King James Version)
12And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,
13To keep the commandments of the LORD, and his statutes, which I command thee this day for thy good?
Love, EZ
This article ends with what has to be the quote of the year.
"Roger Oldham, vice president of [SB] convention relations, told a Nashville TV station the convention is looking for a broad approach to 'first of all, protect autonomy of the local church, and second, protect the children, too.'"
Glad to know the SBC still has their priorities straight. {Beating head against wall!}
NASS,
GRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!
NASS said:
Glad to know the SBC still has their priorities straight. {Beating head against wall!}
oc says:
As long as you are 'autonomous', I guess it doesn't really matter whose head you beat against the wall.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Nass,
The red flag for me on that article is that their goal is
2nd...to protect the children
NOT first to protect the children.
Protect the precious autonomy of the Baptist church....
just WHERE can that be found in the Bible????
Why would this man made rule be more important than the scriptures that very clearly tell us our highest concern is to protect the innocent, protect those that can't protect themselves????
Why would protecting the ability of the Baptist churches to pass around sexual predator ministers be 1st over protecting the weak, the innocent and the wounded???
Cakes,
I humbly apologize to you if I offended you by suggesting the McDowell book or the AnswersInGenesis website. If you will kindly refer to my post, I did not “compel” (your word) you to accept either as presenting empirical evidence and I never said I believe they contain any such thing. I offered them merely as good sources for further reading on a subject that you initiated. I’m truly sorry if I gave you the wrong impression -- that was not my intention.
I consider you a dear friend because you have added your voice in support of the truth seekers and I am grateful to you for taking that stand. You have done what so very many of the ‘fine Christian men’ at BBC have failed to do. And you have done so with honesty, kindness and compassion – you’ve displayed more compassion than I have read from many who post here – myself included, I’m sorry to say.
I am at a disadvantage because I do not know you and I have no knowledge of where you are coming from on the issue in question other than your own claim to be a Buddhist; a religion to which I readily admit total ignorance.
With that understood, in my post of 4:50 PM, September 17th, I gave you a ‘round-about answer to your recent question, but I don’t believe anyone has answered it directly, so I will here, even though I feel that you already know the answer.
Your question:
”My inquiry is about evangelism, what tropes of reason, logic and scientific fields--like archeology--can reliably be used to convey either the truth of the Bible, or of the Judeo-Christian God (or any spiritual truth, for that matter), to one who is not a Christian--and thus may not be compelled by the heartfelt belief of a preacher, soul-winner or fellow blogger.”
Simply stated, the answer is, none.
There is no logic or any field of science or any form of reason, statistical or rhetorical, or any other device of mankind which can be used to prove the existence of the One True and Holy, Living God or the truth of His Word. And if there were such tangible proof, then I would not be a believer since any god that can be proven by man is far too small to cleanse me from my sins and secure the destiny of my eternal soul.
It’s not the preacher or the soul winner whose heartfelt belief causes an unregenerate soul to turn to Jesus. It is the Holy Spirit working in the person, convicting them of their sin and of their need for the Savior. And this can be accomplished in only one way – by faith. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,” Hebrews 11:1 (KJV) and ”But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.” Hebrews 11:6 (KJV). There is no other way, my friend.
I do not believe there is full and complete truth apart from the Bible, which I know in my own heart to be the Divinely inspired Word of God; penned by men as God gave them utterance, verbally inspired, God-breathed and God-protected in every jot and tittle down through the ages. I am referring to the original text; not the many watered down versions and paraphrases that have become so popular in recent years.
Housewife told you correctly, and though you may have found her words harsh, it does not diminish the truth she stated. You would do well to give strong weight to her post.
Cakes, I love you! I love you not because I perceive you to be a kind and sensitive person, which I do; but I can freely say I love you because my precious Lord loves you and He gave His life for you just as much as He did for me or for anyone else. Can I prove it? Oh no, He is far too big!
Mary
Biblically speaking, the church has never been autonomous. God ultimately runs His Church. Men just hijack God's church for their own purposes.
Cool Mary, Housewife,
I love y'all; the Josh M. thing doesn't offend me--I only takr issue with some of its theses. I just don't ever wish you'all to think that a criticism of an argument is some latent antagonism of the Bible.
I think the questions I ask are not to cause doubt in you, but legitimate counters the the points made, and knowing the unbeliever's reception to them may help refine your own thoughts.
No harm intended.
Something comes to mind that I heard a long time ago when talking with a counselor about how to keep my children from bearing the scars from a terrible experience they had. He said to me that there was no way to keep what happened from effecting them. We are all products of our past. That past makes the "filters" that we make everyday judgments and choices by. Our actions (and reactions) effect other's perceptions. When those we trust the most betray us, the effects are forever.
This blog has been ridiculed because of our stand against PW and the fact that SG gave him the opportunity to do more damage. Whether anything else was done, we have no way of knowing and cannot even guess. But the OPPORTUNITY was there. As a minister, PW had respect and authority and misuse of that could have damaged someone forever (and did.)
Something I think we need to understand is our role as Christian believers is serious business. When we walk contrary to God's Word, the effects on others can be devastating and life-long. It can cause someone to turn away from God. What a heavy responsibility that will be when those responsible reach Heaven and the Judgment Seat of Christ.
How many children have been turned away from a relationship with Jesus because their role model, or parent, betrayed them? The loss of trust is unfathomable. And it effects the rest of their life. Let us not forget to pray that through the scars and filters they bear, God will continue to work on their hearts so they can feel and know His true consuming, unconditional, and faithful love.
Lynn: Good point. I'm beginning to get more disenchanted with the "autonomous" idea the further we go.
Comment about the infamous unsigned "letter" and DC's web letter in response to it:
It has been surmized that the mail list source was possibly a deacon's address list. I think it more likely the source was the choir roll. If you were to draw a contingency diagram of the membership I think you'd find the "circle" representing choir members would be overlapped by all the other circles of member populations (deacons, members of Bro.J's class, etc). From what I have observed of the choir, the choir (if each member represents a family) is a microcosm of the church's membership.
More specifically I believe the address source is the choir roll. I state this not with any official knowledge of the author or anyone in the administration but from a 15 year observation of the choir roll and what I have seen recently with my own eyes. When I first heard of the letter on this forum I couldn't help but recall that I hadn't seen the rolls out for a short period of time (it's used as an attendance collection tool). So I made a point to look at them a few weeks ago and noticed that they now no longer contain addresses. I can at least applaud the administration for changing this. I have never liked my address lying around for just anyone to see (I was once a member). While it has been the source of good for other members to use to send get well wishes and encouragement, I can recall at least once (albeit arguably for a special occasion) where it was used in a manner that would net the sender potential income. That I did not like.
Just sayin'.
Lynn,
The whole idea of being 'autonomous' is that the individual church is not 'hijacked' by the denomination. It instead looks like it's become a reason not to be responsible. That's what is sad...
Concernedsbcer.
Good 12:19 post.
Just an addition:
But as a survivor of child abuse, I would add that we don't have to stay there. Our lives do not have to be colored by the sickness of what's been done to us. We can learn to live and love beyond our bad experiences and the soul damage done. We can choose to help others through it or we can wallow in it. I choose the former.
Just sayin'.
oc.
We received the "unsigned letter" and we are not or ever have been involved with the choir - go figure!
searching,
I heard some members of Joe Jernigan's class as well as some of the deacons also received it.
"Roger Oldham, vice president of [SB] convention relations, told a Nashville TV station the convention is looking for a broad approach to 'first of all, protect autonomy of the local church, and second, protect the children, too.'"
This is an example of placing right doctrine before right living. As important as right doctrine is, Jesus taught us that right living arises from having a right heart, not from having the right theological views.
"first of all, protect autonomy of the local church, and second, protect the children, too." How very Baptist. How very Phasisee.
Junkster: And how very Wrong.
Hi Cakes. There were a couple of thoughts that came to mind while I was reading your post at:
6:00 AM, September 22, 2007
...but Ezekiel and Mary covered them. And they did it far better than I would have.
But I do have one more comment. Faith and proof don't have to be exclusive of each other in our relationship with Christ.
There are some things that will be proven to us now, as we live here on Earth which show us Who God is and how much He loves us, among other things. At the same time, there will be other things that we will have to be patient about. Some things will be revealed to us but not necessarily "proven" to us until we get to heaven. Other things will not even be revealed to us at all until we get to heaven.
Anyone know who REALLY killed JFK? OK, I'm just being silly; but you get the picture.
Again, faith and proof don't have to be exclusive of each other.
=)
"Men just hijack God's church for their own purposes." Great one sentence description of what I see happening.
I'm glad you all saw the SBC's "first autonomy/second children" statement of priorities.
You might also like to look at this article for more info on how the SBC in Nashville is handling the clergy sex abuse issue. For an organization that keeps insisting it's "bottom-up" and not "top-down," their approach seems pretty disdainful of the 8600 Southern Baptist messengers who, by their vote, directed them to study the feasibility of a database.
I do not understand the SBC "leadership" at all. They are coming close to not representing me at all.
Their literature is awful; their failure to stand on Godly principles....it's just not good.
From the Ethics Daily article that Christa Brown referenced:
Vasquez says her abuser is still a pastor in a Southern Baptist church. Her lawsuit identifies him as Dickie Amyx, pastor of Bolivar Baptist Church in Sanger, Texas, and news reports quoted depositions admitting he had sex with the girl while he was an associate pastor in Lewisville, Texas, but claiming it didn't begin until she reached the age of consent.
Whatever happened to scriptural qualifications for ministry?
Assume for a moment that this pastor's church believes that his admitted sex with a young female in his former church was consentual and legal (a belief that would mean they were either grossly ignorant of the dymamics of abuse by an authority figure or in denial or both). Even if one is gullible enough to buy the "consent" argument, why wouldn't his current church demand his resignation purely on the basis of his admission of prior sexually immoral activity?
Does the scriptural requirement that a pastor/edlder/overseer be "above reproach" have no meaning at all?
Those who would claim that prior sexual conduct of a minister toward a congregant would not permanantly disqualify the man from ministry if the activity was believed to be "consentual" need to carefully consider Proverbs 6:32-33 -- "The one who commits adultery with a woman is lacking sense; He who would destroy himself does it. Wounds and disgrace he will find, And his reproach will not be blotted out."
How could a man be "above reproach" if he has done something the Scripture says carries with it permanent reproach?
Bravo, Junk. EXACTLY.
Wrong is wrong and sexual promiscuity is wrong, no matter the age.
Warning: On the Endangered List:
The ability to think logically.
From the article Christa linked to:
"Having an investigatory body would not be a bad idea in any denomination that recognizes ecclesiastical authorities outside the local church," Boto said, "but Baptists are among those faiths that do not."
This is 'begging the question' and a strawman. The "Body" of Christ is to call out sin from its elders, pastors, teachers, etc. The 'Body' is not autonomous. If I know of a sexual predator pastor in Canada or Cairo who is in the Church of Christ, my job, as a Christian is to warn the "Body" and publicly rebuke this person.
If the congregation chooses to keep the predator as BBC did, then there is nothing I can do about it except make it public and warn as many as possible to try and protect as many as I can.
If that congregation wants to continue in sin and ignore scripture, we can do little about that.
However, what SBC is REALLY saying is that they do not want to even warn churches. They would rather they find out the hard way after some kid has been sexually molested. How shameful.
Here is a thought: If these sexual predators KNEW that this would not be tolerated and that there are plenty out there in leadership who would call them into account and if it happened, their history would be sent to any church they go to...they may think twice before committing this vile sin.
Folks, we are talking about PASTORS and MINISTERS here.
Frank Page has been a HUGE disappointment. All he does is go around and talk about civility and how bad bloggers are but he gives only lip service to this SERIOUS issue. Even after it happened in one of the SBC Flagship churches.
Bottom line? They do not want any more publcity..I mean they are trying to increase the numbers!!
And they fear lawsuits. This is not a legal problem. This is a Biblical problem. If the so called 'leaders' are not willing to hold their pastor peers accountable, what does that say about them?
It says: They are not YOUR leaders.
Lin: Exactly.
And they are not HIS leaders, seeems to me.
:(
"This is not a legal problem. This is a Biblical problem."
I do not mean to imply this is not a legal problem at all. What I mean to communicate that...as in the Body of Christ, it is a spiritual and Biblical issue. Not only must we deal with it Biblically, but we must also turn them into the authorities for civil law.
The SBC becoming some kind of ecclesiastical ruling body would not solve any problems at the local church level, or any other level for that matter. It's true that collectively, the body of Christ is not autonomous in the sense that Christ is Lord over all. But that body is expressed in local congregations. That is decidedly Biblical. The NT record will bear that out. The Pauline letters were addressed to specific local churches as are the letters to the seven churches in Revelation. In those letters specific sins of those individual churches were pointed out, and it is plain the responsibility for dealing with it belonged to each church. The same is true of Paul's instructions/rebukes to the Corinthian church, Collosae, etc. If the SBC were to become a ruling body, they would be telling the local churches what to do, believe, etc. Is that what anyone really wants? Think about it.
aog wrote:
"In those letters specific sins of those individual churches were pointed out, and it is plain the responsibility for dealing with it belonged to each church."
Nice ideal, but the cold, hard truth is that today the individual churches are NOT "dealing with it."
"If the SBC were to become a ruling body, they would be telling the local churches what to do, believe, etc."
It seems to be a big leap from asking that there be a central database of convicted, confessed, or "credibly accused" sexual predators to making the SBC a "ruling body."
I agree Nass. I get the feeling that some think if you do not meet in that local body you have no cause to even warn that the minister is a predator?
Having that database of information is not 'ruling' on anything. (I am not convinced the database would do much good unless people were willing to report it in the first place)
One of my dearest friends lives far away and is part of the Body as I am. Does that mean she cannot rebuke me for sin that she is aware of in my life because I am not in her local Body?
By the way, there is evidence that the SBC IS becoming a ruling Body on several secondary doctrinal issues.
aog wrote:
If the SBC were to become a ruling body, they would be telling the local churches what to do, believe, etc. Is that what anyone really wants? Think about it.
8:33 AM, September 23, 2007
SOTL replies:
Personally, I don't care one way or the other about " ruling body" stuff. ALL I know is that predators in the SBC need to be stopped. Nothing else really matters when you have the choice of stopping a child from being sexually molested or being a ' ruling body'..
WHO CARES????
The safety of a child should be first and foremost..if they need to dissolve the entire SBC, so be it. All that other stuff is just paperwork.
Nobody's saying children shouldn't be protected. But it still comes down to the local level. Whoever is responsible for hiring staff in a local church has to be diligent in checking out potential employees/staff. It's sad that it has to be that way, but that's the world we live in. You can't assume anything. The fact that churches aren't disciplining their own isn't a result of a faulty "ideal"...a term I hesitate to use to describe the Biblical record..the fault lies in the church itself. The SBC could create the database you describe, but it won't create a hermetic seal against the possibility. Even the strongest safeguards have holes. I think what most are really wanting is justice..rightly so, but look around you...how much real justice do you see in this life? Rest assured justice will be exacted. It bothers me that a woman can fire a shotgun blast into her husband while he sleeps, and not only get away with it, but regain visitation with the children. He may have been the biggest jerk on earth as far as I know, but she could have left with the children that night while he slept, as easily as she killed him. I don't see much justice there either, or in a lot of other places. I would agree, that if the SBC dissolved tomorrow it wouldn't break my heart one iota...the church has never depended on the SBC for it's existence. But I know the SBC is not the answer to local church problems...it never has been. A database won't prevent those who are still flying under the radar undetected from ending up in someone's church, or those who are yet to even be in the pool of potential pastors/staff who are capable of such things...only those who have been caught. Part of the problem is the legal system itself..there just aren't any teeth to the law anymore...sad, but true.
aog wrote:
"He may have been the biggest jerk on earth as far as I know, but she could have left with the children that night while he slept, as easily as she killed him."
I cannot say I condone what Mary Winkler did, but do you believe for one second that Matthew Winkler wouldn't have hunted her down like a dog if she'd taken the children and left? Of course he would have. No way his ego would have allowed his wife to leave, and he certainly wouldn't have let her take the children. What, exactly, could she have done?
Since I never heard Matthew Winkler's side of things I can't say what he would or wouldn't have done...what I do know is that when she killed him, he was asleep...he wasn't beating her or threatening her life. If that were the case, in my view, she would have had every right to defend herself. I think most of those who didn't defend her actions outright, certainly gave tacit approval. But back on point...we'll never have 100% certainty of anything in this life. All we can do is be vigilant and take responsibility for protecting ourselves and our families. If a church won't discipline, then it's time to find one that does. If the law won't protect us, then we have to lobby the legislature. It matters little what type of denominational structure or local church government you have..it still boils down to the willingness of the governor and the governed to honor it's precepts.
Okay, so the answer, if I understand correctly, is that she should have waited until the next time he beat the stuffin's out of her, then shot him? Of course that might have made it "premeditated," but it would have truly been self-defense.
What I'd like to know is why, when her friends and members of their church saw her with make-up covering the bruises on her face, they didn't put two and two together and try to help her. People had to know what was going on. They either chose not to believe what they were seeing and/or didn't want to get involved.
"He may have been the biggest jerk on earth as far as I know, but she could have left with the children that night while he slept, as easily as she killed him. "
As just an aside to this some would be stunned to hear what some well known SBC leaders have counseled as to spousal abuse. Some have told them to go home, submit and pray. They have put the blame and the solution to this problem squarely on the woman's shoulders.
People had to know what was going on. They either chose not to believe what they were seeing and/or didn't want to get involved.
7:10 PM, September 23, 2007
I volunteered in a womens shelter years ago and thought I had seen it all until one night the police chief's wife came in at 1 am in nightgown and robe in a taxi with a swollen face. She couldn't call the police, now could she?
Guess what? The Mayor was called by the director. But the police chief was not fired or disciplined. She never went home. Someone was sent for her clothes. That was it. She moved far away.
Aog, I agree about the database but it would send a message that they are more serious than before.
So far, their public statements have been appalling. Not even basic PR 101. It is like they have given a green light to predators.
No, the answer as I see it, is after the first time he abused her she should have left. But it's really neither here nor there now is it?..he's dead, she's free, and the children have to live with it. If you don't condone what she did, what is your answer?
Well, one thing about a database, if churches would use it, a certain former Minster of Prayer would never be hired by another church. Nor would Tommy Gilmore and a whole raft of others.
I'm still not sure how this would violate the "autonomy" of individual churches. I suppose they could still choose to hire a confessed sexual pervert, but at least it would be an informed choice.
aog,
I agree she should have tried to leave -- preferably before bringing three children into the world. I also still think he would have hunted her down and that he would never have let her take the children. (According to trial testimony, he'd already abused the baby by holding his hand over her mouth and nose in an attempt to stop her from crying.) I think she should have tried though. And I think she should have defended herself and her children when he came after her -- which I've no doubt he would have done. That was one of those marriages where the only way it ever ends is by someone dying. That's sad to think and it may sound shocking, but unfortunately that's reality.
And since you asked my opinion, I hope she gets her children back.
Lin wrote: "If the congregation chooses to keep the predator as BBC did, then there is nothing I can do about it except make it public and warn as many as possible to try and protect as many as I can."
Lin: Your 9/22 10:16 pm comment hits the nail on the head. This is exactly what SBC leadership has the power and ability to do. It can warn and inform.
allofgrace wrote: "A database won't prevent those who are still flying under the radar undetected from ending up in someone's church..."
allofgrace: Yes, a database would help to prevent clergy sex abusers from flying under the radar and moving from church to church. Too often, when they finally are caught, we see that they had been detected at a prior church, but it was kept secret (in much the way that it was kept secret at Bellevue ... except for a whole lot longer ... or except they allowed him to resign and move on to another church in another state instead of keeping him). I have talked with literally scores of Baptist clergy abuse survivors who desperately want someplace within the denomination to which they can report their perptrators (many of whom are still in their pulpits), but when they try to report to the local church, they are scorned. The pattern is pervasive. If clergy abuse reports could be made to a denominational office that would professionally and objectively review them to determine "credible accusations" (which is part of what Rev. Wade Burleson's motion suggested), then when such a determination was made, the information could at least be made known. I suspect that, if the SBC made a determination that a minister had a "credible accusation" of clergy sex abuse against him, and if the congregation chose to retain the minister anyway, the church's insurer might likely put pressure on the church at that point (by raising their insurance rates sky-high, etc.) The SBC does not need to become "a ruling body" in order to address this problem a whole lot more effectively. It does not need to become "a ruling body" in order to warn and inform. But it does need to have leaders that actually act like leaders and that provide genuine leadership on this very critical issue.
Lin wrote:
"As just an aside to this some would be stunned to hear what some well known SBC leaders have counseled as to spousal abuse. Some have told them to go home, submit and pray. They have put the blame and the solution to this problem squarely on the woman's shoulders."
Specifically, that would be Paige Patterson. In 2000 he and his wife participated in a panel discussion called "How Submission Works in Practice: A Panel Discussion." I can't find the audio now (thankfully, since that would obligate me to listen to it), but this was the account of someone who did listen to it:
"At about fifty-five minutes into the message he is asked about how he handles wife abuse. He explained that he never recommends divorce, and only in the most serious of cases does he recommend a separation. He said he advises women who are being abused less seriously to do three things: pray, submit, and elevate their husbands. As an example of why he is right in counseling in this way, he gave an example of one of his counseling situations. A woman came to him and said she was being abused by her husband. He advised her that every night she should kneel down by the side of the bed and pray for her husband even if it made him mad and may cause him to beat her again. She did that, and she did get beaten. When she came back to church, she approached Mr. Patterson with her bruises and angrily told him, 'I hope you’re happy,' to which Mr. Patterson replied, 'Yes, ma'am, I am.' He went on to explain that he was happy because what the wife didn't know at that point was that the husband felt so bad about beating his wife again that he had come in earlier and repented and became a Christian and from that time on was a man of God. The moral of the story was that if a Godly woman stays in the situation and takes his advice (pray, submit, elevate), then she can trust God to move in the situation."
She'd better keep one eye open while she kneels and prays. And of course, she might be dead by the time "God moves," but hey, if Paige Patterson's happy, then all is right with the world!
Is it any wonder the SBC is in trouble?
It kind of fits the profile of Patterson and his view of women. Look what he did to Dr. Klouda. And she has a very sick husband and has to be the main breadwinner with health insurance. He lied to her then he just ruined their lives.
Loving Christians? I beg to differ.
"The moral of the story was that if a Godly woman stays in the situation and takes his advice (pray, submit, elevate), then she can trust God to move in the situation."
This is nuts. There is no reason what so ever that I can see that someone should remain in an abusive relationship. In a situation like this, personal safety has to be considered as well.
Paige Patterson is an imbecile.
aog,
Knowing what we have shared about our childhoods and that you are a male....
I guess I understand why you would make that statement about the wife leaving after she was abused the first time.
We all WISH that is the way things would work.
BUT I would have expected more understanding/compassion about this subject from you....I know you are well read and there is alot of info on domestic violence.
Just as a child is "groomed" before they are actually sexually abused by a predator,
there is a lot of mental and emotional manipulation and degradation that happens in this situation before the first beating and afterwards.
Violent predators "smell and pick" their prey .
I am a passionate mother as you know. But there was a moment when even I allowed myself to be so beaten down that I actually thought my daughter MIGHT be better off with out me. I thought I was so stupid and incompetent.
Later when I knew I had to get out...I had no idea where to go and how to make it. I was even told that "the judge" would never give my child to me because I was too stupid to earn a living.
When you are beaten down AND wanting desperately to be a Godly woman and willing to bear the full responsibility for all the things that are wrong.....you can get very hopeless.
BUT as a mother she probably couldn't bear to kill herself because she couldn't fathom leaving her children.
She broke. She did the only thing that seemed to make sense at the time.
It was wrong. But I have compassion for her and for the women like her.
I DO understand how you feel the way you do since you have been the responsible caring parent. I just don't agree with you.
No ugliness intended to you...JMO.
SOTL,
Can you elaborate, darlin'?
This isn't a matter of compassion to me gmommy...it's a matter of precedent. The question that must be asked is at what point now, in light of this case, will it be justifiable to kill someone. Everyone seems very quick to rationalize or justify this killing....and that's what it is...not self defense. You have to look past the current verdict to what it will mean in future cases. I'm no lawyer, but I've watched the court system become so perverted over the last several years. Remember OJ? Many believe he did it and yet rationalize and justify what he did. All I know is...every time we make it ok to take a life, except in self defense, it degrades the value of it that much more. If that makes me without compassion, then so be it.
SOTL,
Can you elaborate, darlin'?
****
Nope, none necessary.
AOG,
I respect your opinion.
I don't think a comparison with OJ is a good one unless OJ's wife was abusing him but no debating needed.
I don't believe mary was right to kill and I respect the value you place on life.
I didn't think your statement that she should have left after the fist time was informed or wise.... that is what I didn't agree with.
gmommy,
I'm more informed than you may think, but at the same time, in matters of law and legal precedent setting, I have to divorce any emotional aspect involved in order to think clearly as to where these types of legal decisions will lead. Many laws on the books, and those that are being lobbied for may have good intents behind them, but are vague enough to be seriously perverted and abused. Legal precedent never remains in a vacuum, confined to one case. Consider euthenasia. Those lobbying for this "right" to self-determination give their reasons as the alleviation of suffering and the right of the individual to determine quality of life. All sounds good in theory, but one must consider when does the "right" to die become the "duty" to die? Another example: sexual harrassment...a good law..no one should have to endure sexual harrassment in the workplace or anywhere else. But then the question arises, what constitutes sexual harassment? Case in point (true story): A man arrives at the office where he works..a female co-worker arrives and he compliments her on her dress. The dress is not revealing in any way...a simple compliment. The next day he's called on the carpet for sexual harassment. Same for threats...the presence of a threat is determined entirely by the perception of the one who feels threatened: I could pass you on the street and as I passed you, make eye contact...you percieve my eye contact as threatening. You could stop the first police officer you see and tell them you felt threatened, and I could be arrested based on your perception, regardless of whether there were any real threat present. See where I'm going with this? I neither confirm nor deny Mary Winkler's account of her husband's actions. But the fact is, when she fired that shotgun blast into him, her life was not in eminent danger. She's already made "Oprah", and will probably make the talk show circuit at some point, book deal, etc. etc. and could well make a lot of money from what she did. I don't sympathize with her husband's behavior, but neither will I rationalize her own action. She set herself up as God, judge and jury, and carried out sentence. I don't buy that she didn't know or was unconscious of her actions. I believe what she did was calculated and premeditated. I know that angers some, but so be it.
AOG, NASS, SOTL, I love you guys, but unless you've been beaten by a man who says he loves you, you have no idea what you would do in the situation. During my 1st marriage, I was physically, emotionally and sexually abused by my husband. Sometimes I fought back and then I really got beat. It's during those times that I wished for a gun - just to make the hitting stop. Not to make him listen to me; just to make him stop and hurt like I hurt.
Mary Winkler had options, but I understand the one she chose. I don't condone it, but I understand it. I'm sorry that she was abused, but from what I heard, her abuse was very embarrasing (being forced to wear mini skirts, wigs and stripper heels) for her and I'm sure there was shame there. I didn't hear anything that was cause to shoot Matthew, but then again, I wasn't in her shoes at that moment. I agree with AOG, if he was asleep, how could she be in danger at that moment?
I feel like she needed more jail time and she does not deserve to have her kids back - when one of them angers her to the point of no return, what will she do to them? I'm not one to run that risk with kid's lives.
Anyway, off the soapbox! Love ya!
It doesn't really matter if Mary Winkler was right or wrong in killing her husband. The jury and the judge have spoken, she has served her time and it is now time to accept her back into society.
It is now pathetic that another judge has control over when she can have her children back.
What ever you do in life, please steer clear of the judicial system. It will control your life and mess things up for a long long time.
Amazed: You speak the truth. I learned real quick, while going through divorce and custody proceedings, that our court system retained no sense of the scriptural, moral principles our founding fathers intended. I was appalled at the lack of logic applied to decisions handed down that impacted my children. It was never about what was truly BEST for them; it was about some nutty PC "feel good" opinion.
Karen
You must have me confused with someone else.
My " Paige Patterson is an embicile" post was in protest to his advice to women to submit and elevate the man who is beating her.
I am the LAST person to EVER condemn women who are getting beat.
I fully understand the dynamics of leaving vs. staying..
Although I have never suffered abuse at the hands of my husband, I watched my mother get beat a time or two, and when I was 3, I was lined up against the wall with my siblings and my mother by my father, who had a shotgun. He was threatening to kill us all.
I'm not sure what I said to make you think that I would not be supportive of a woman in that situation.
32+ said: "Worship music is to prepare our hearts for corporate worship of our HOLY God - not to motivate us "jump, shout and dance about."
AMEN! I believe the 7-11 songs and "dumbing down" of even our music is a trend that tends to desensitize us to God's Holiness and Righteousness.
The final straw before I left my previous (going seeker, contemporary) church was when a very intelligent high school senior (called into the ministry) told me that when he got to Heaven he was going to give God a "high five."
My response was, "Oh no, dear, when you get to Heaven you will be on your face before a Holy God."
I couldn't take it that our youth were being taught that and that the casual mindset had permeated our entire church.
It started with the music.
"The final straw before I left my previous (going seeker, contemporary) church was when a very intelligent high school senior (called into the ministry) told me that when he got to Heaven he was going to give God a "high five."
Oh yes. I saw this exact same attitude at my seeker by the ADULTS.
It only tells you one very important thing: They do not know God or they would never say that. That is what is so scary.
One question I ask teens now to see what they understand about God is: Why did God create us?
I have been stunned at some of the answers. Because He was lonely was the most frequent. (Sigh)
"My response was, "Oh no, dear, when you get to Heaven you will be on your face before a Holy God."
Boy oh Boy, you can say that again. As one teacher put it: We will melt like wax figurines.
Lin,
I disagree with you. I think God is a very personal God who will not be legalistic towards us and if a teenager and God gives each other a high five, it is possible it could be done with total respect.
Heaven is not a place where we all are bowed down at all times, it is a place where real life is come upon us and we will enjoy God's presence and like the children in scripture many of us who desire will sit in His lap and be loved by Him.
Jesus was God, completely and He did not demand we all live in an external bowed down state to be around Him.
My God is not that stuffy.
As my wife says, when she gets to heaven, she and God will walk hand in hand through a never ending field of flowers.
11: I plan on walking with my Savior but I believe I will be worshipping our God. However, we will be there and see what it is like then!
I do think we have to be very careful with the casualness with which we approach God. Jesus even talked to him with respect and awe.
11+,
YOu can get a glimpse of the kind of worship that is going on in heaven now in Revelation 4. It is thought that the 24 elders mentioned worshipping God signify the TRUE ministers of the gospel.
You may also want to check out Rev 22. It says that in the new Heaven we will be worshipping God and the Slain Lamb. We have examples of the kind of worship in heaven all through Rev and it does not sound like a high 5. Not even close. More like on your face in Holy Reverence.
You can 'believe' anything you want. My hope is that you will search scriptures for what is actually said on the subject of heaven.
Most people want to go to heaven. They just do not want the God that is described all through scripture to be there.
bbc 11 yrs said:
"Lin,
I disagree with you. I think God is a very personal God who will not be legalistic towards us and if a teenager and God gives each other a high five, it is possible it could be done with total respect."
Reply:
No. That doesn't work. Unless you can show me in Scripture where God is just my Super Buddy. Reverence and awe is the appropriate response to the Almighty God. And where did reverence ever become legalism? Where did you learn that idea? Book, chapter and verse please.
bbc 11 yrs also said:
"Heaven is not a place where we all are bowed down at all times, it is a place where real life is come upon us and we will enjoy God's presence and like the children in scripture many of us who desire will sit in His lap and be loved by Him."
Reply:
I am very much hoping that Heaven is not a glorified 'real life' as you put it. This real life here is too often full of pain. If Heaven is like 'real life',(that which we experience here) then a lot of us don't want to go there. (Some would call it glorified Hell.)But I think you are mistaken here also. I believe that your experience, being so long in this alien land, has colored and greatly distorted your vision of Heaven. If Heaven is a glorified 'Now', well,... it's not where I want to spend eternity.
Do we have any takers?
And furthermore, I'm not convinced that you acknowlege God as more than just Cosmic Grand Daddy. I want Him to 'love on me' for sure. But He is more than that. If that is all He is for you, then you have 'down graded' the Heavenly Father, Almighty God. And I would ask again, give me book, chapter and verse to show me that the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe is just Super Grand Daddy, living for the day when I jump in His lap. Show me book,chapter, and verse where He states that a day will come when I no longer bow down to Him, which in essence would make me equal to the Almighty. I believe that's not a new, nor good idea. Again, show me book, chapter, and verse.
I am a gentleman, and will not discuss your wife's version of Heaven.
So, in conclusion I will just say this. You, nor anyone else, will be 'high fivin' God. You will not be towel snappin' God. You will not be pattin' Him on the butt and calling Him 'buddy' or telling Him that He made a good play. I would suggest you get a grip on Who He is.
He is the Almighty, The Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace, the Almighty God.
You will fall down on your face in awe. You will tremble in His awesome presence. You will acknowlege Who He is.
Not your big cosmic buddy.
Just sayin'.
oc.
I see where FBC Jax has signed up Donna Gaines to be a speaker at the women's conference at the 2008 FBC Jax Pastor's Conference.
Here is the bio from the FBC Jax website:
Donna Gaines is a sought after speaker and a published author. She has written several original Bible study books and has a new book coming out this fall entitled There's Gotta Be More. She also serves as a Bible Study Teacher and runs a ministry for the staff wives at Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, Tennessee.
Very interesting, no mention that her husband is the pastor of BBC! Steve Gaines looks like he will not be on the speaking agenda, but its still early and I think he will be on the agenda (these mega pastors have to stick together!)
Is Donna really a "sought after speaker and published author"? Is she a paid staff member at BBC?
If only this book were useful... but with the "God's man" comment, I personally doubt it.
Can someone please explain to me why a Godly man of any office - president or janitor - is referred to as "God's man"? It seems to drip with 'He's the Chosen one'. Is the janitor not "God's man" for his job too if he's following God vocationally? Why are we so stupid and foolish to elevate the pulpit over the plunger. Can not both be wielded by a man who loves God and His followers. Honestly, in God's eyes, is the Godly janitor less-than just because he's a janitor. NO!
I truly wonder if David or John the B, or a host of other lowly nobodies would stand a chance with our - "Oh come on everybody, let's find us a big handsome, strong, manly, experienced, lettered, diplomaed, charming gentleman who tells us how good he is and how we need him to speak so we can hear from God."
The whole concept of the congregation finding their own leader, hiring him and then saying, "Ok we've checked you out, you meet God's and our standards, welcome to the office of the pastor where you are now untouchable, no longer accountable to anyone but God - most certainly not the congregation that HIRED you and PAYS your salary. Congrats on being beyond losing your job for any future 'mistake' that, if you had committed before we hired you we would not have hired you in the first place - but hey aren't you lottery winner?...is just plain stupid.
I'm sure the writer meant well and I'm all for practical help but I sure hope no one mistakes this book to be the final word from the Holy Spirit on how to find God's will - that's a very different Book.
Come on Lifeway, how about a book dedicated to finding God's Man in the bathroom.
Okay maybe not.
- - -
Pastor Search Committee Handbook, Revised
There is always a church that needs help finding God’s man to lead them. Practical and resourceful, the Handbook will help your pastor search committee select committee officers and develop guidelines.
It will also help identify biblical qualifications for a pastor; develop, evaluate, and rank profiles of applicants; conduct interviews; present the prospective pastor to the church; and finally, orient him when he arrives.
Features a new CD containing reproducible forms that can be customized and used for gathering information and comparing candidates. Standardized versions of these forms are also included in the Handbook.
Publisher: LifeWay Church Resources
Pub. Date: January 2007
Type: Paperback
ISBN: 1415852146
Product No.: 005035459
Price: $14.95
I like the title of her book:
There's Gotta Be More
That must be what she said to Steve when he told her what he had negotiated for a salary with BBC....
watchdog wrote:
"Is Donna really a 'sought after speaker and published author'?"
I believe she's a published author.
"Is she a paid staff member at BBC?"
Not officially.
Andrew,
You make a great point. One of the things recovered in the Reformation was the sacredness of ALL callings. We work as "unto the Lord" whatever that calling is. The work the janitor does is just as sacred a work as the one filling the pulpit.
watchdog wrote:
"Is she a paid staff member at BBC?"
NASS answered:
Not officially.
SOTL's REPLY:
snickering
10:48 PM, September 25, 2007
OC,
Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said we would butt slap God or anything to near that but I guess you need to make your point somehow, even if it fabricates what someone else has said.
A high five is not always synonymous with butt slapping. It can be and is often used by many as a sign of agreement and friendship.
I am sorry your God is not big enough to be your friend.
I like Abraham am a friend of God.
OC,
I guess you don't understand what real life is. It has nothing to do with where we are at now.
Think bigger. You might find some real jewels looking up.
I have often heard it said that many preachers are called and many are sent, but that some just went.
Concerned said,
"I do think we have to be very careful with the casualness with which we approach God. Jesus even talked to him with respect and awe."
Comment: Concerned, I seldom post anymore, but just had to commend you for this remark. The words just don't come to me to reply to this properly. Shame on anybody who would speak casualy of the Lord, our God. Solemn and sober are words that come to me when I think of being in the presence of Him. Honorable. In awe. Reverence. To speak of our God, Jesus Christ in any other tone would show the fruit of one who holds an opinion or belief that contradicts established biblical teaching.
"I am sorry your God is not big enough to be your friend."
Does God change? Go through the OT and read through every single encounter an OT Prophet/Patriarch had with God or one of His angels.
Lin,
Scripture teaches us that Abraham was God's friend.
Take the time and study the festivals and discover how God's chosen people worshiped Him. Dance, exciting song, movement... When God's people got it right, they were anything but somber but they were never disrespectful.
David danced before the Lord naked. Where's the forever somber attitude in that moment?
Jacob wrestled in His struggle with God.
Of course we do have the guy in the NT that just kept saying... Lord you ought to be glad I am not like that man.
There is a time for each of these elements, not just the stoic ones you want. Ecc. 3:4
Lin: Excellent point. Even beholding the angels seem to bring the reaction of being "Sore Afraid." In other words.....just being in the presence of angels made humans tremble, bow, and be in awe. Just think what being in God's presence will be like.
After all, He is our Creator, our Father, and our God. He is big; we are little. Loved, but little.
11+,
It has not escaped me that you have been on this blog defending Gaines saying you do not see where he has ignored or twisted scripture. I take that into account when reading your comments.
I am not going to debate this with you anymore. You can take a few examples and turn them into 'high fiving' God if you want. Personally, I cannot ignore the other hundred where they fell on their face in reverence and awe. Nor can I ignore Rev 4 and 21 which gives us a glimpse of what it will be like.
BTW: Take a look at Ecc 3:14
Andrew said....
Can someone please explain to me why a Godly man of any office - president or janitor - is referred to as "God's man"? It seems to drip with 'He's the Chosen one'. Is the janitor not "God's man" for his job too if he's following God vocationally? Why are we so stupid and foolish to elevate the pulpit over the plunger. Can not both be wielded by a man who loves God and His followers. Honestly, in God's eyes, is the Godly janitor less-than just because he's a janitor. NO!
I truly wonder if David or John the B, or a host of other lowly nobodies would stand a chance with our - "Oh come on everybody, let's find us a big handsome, strong, manly, experienced, lettered, diplomaed, charming gentleman who tells us how good he is and how we need him to speak so we can hear from God."
JTB: Andrew, I don't have time to full answer but I had to say something. There is a HUGH difference between being a godly janitor and being a godly pastor.
A janitor might take care of God's building which is very noble & shouldn't be looked down on.
A pastor is a God created, God called position in which that man that God has called is to feed and protect God's "sheep". He is held to a higher standard by God Himself. While we will all give an account of ourselves to God, the pastor will have a give an account of how he fed and protected the sheep. That is why a congregation just can't look the other way or just say "it was an mistake of the head and not of the heart". Besides the fact there isn't such a thing as that, unconfessed sin in a pastor not only affects his walk with God, but also the people he pastors. The pastor is supposed to be God's man, preaching God's Word to God's people. I am afraid that what some think the pastor is and should be/do is a far cry from what the Bible teaches.
I probably never stood a chance in peoples eyes of getting a "large" church but make no mistake about it, if God wanted me there, it would have happened. God seems to have an unique ability to over-ride committees. I look at it as God is protecting me.
My heart is for the little church anyway.
God has a job for all of us whether it is pastor, janitor, deacon or whatever. We will all give an account of ourselves before God.
How can a man who says "I will destroy your church" be God called? I would never hire a pastor or a janitor who says I will destroy your company. Go to the Bible, who comes to destroy the church? Not God.
Likewise, go to the Bible and read about those who have seen heaven or encountered God, no where do I see someone sitting in the lap of God. None of us will be going to God and say give me five!
JTB, Where in scripture do you find the 'office' of pastor? This whole issue has me perplexed.
What I see in scripture is a 'gifting' of teaching, evangelizing, prophesying, etc.
All gifts are equal and important to the Body. What I also see is that those who teach the Word will be judged for how that Word is accurately handled.
The ONLY office (if that Word is even in the original Greek which is debated) I see is of "Bishop/Elder/Overseer' depending on which translation you are looking at:
For YLT it is described:
1Stedfast [is] the word: If any one the oversight doth long for, a right work he desireth;
The Greek can even mean 'visitation'. But it is someone mature in the faith. It is not a 'position' or 'office' but a function.
episkeptomai
ep-ee-skep'-tom-ahee;
Middle voice from G1909 and the base of G4649; to inspect, that is, (by implication) to select; by extension to go to see, relieve: - look out, visit.
This is servanthood.
I realize this is NOT taught in mosts seminaries. For 2000 years it has been in the interest of many to teach a 'chain of command' structure of the Body that looks more like a Jewish temple. And Catholic!
A Holy Priesthood denotes that all those who are saved are 'ministers' of some sort. So the sheep as they mature are shepherds to others.
Jesus is the ONLY head of the Church. All others are equal but some who teach will be judged by how they handle the Word. That should make them fear not puffed up with power and position.
(I know it is radical...but so was Jesus Christ and that is why the Pharisees hated Him)
I have been sounding like a meanie all day today. Consider the above comment delivered in chocolate syrup with whipped creme, nuts and a cherry!!! :O)
BBC 11yrs said...
I am sorry your God is not big enough to be your friend.
11:22 AM, September 26, 2007
Reply:
All due respect 11, but by the same token, I could say this:
I am sorry your God isn't big enough to be properly revered and respected by His creation. Furthermore, I'm sorry your God is small enough be high-fived.
And as to your comment at 2:19 PM, September 26, 2007, nobody is saying that our worship of the Almighty is going to be somber. Far from it. But then again, that is the thinking of the world. How can worshipping God all the time be fun? How could that be anything but boring? Such is the thinking of the world. As mere humans, it may be hard to comprehend such matters, but worshipping God 24/7 with respect, reverance and awe will NOT be somber.
For those reading the poppyjoy blog, Copeland is in the arms of Jesus.
Wow. I come home from work, turn on my computer, and what do I see but '11 yrs at bbc' telling me that my God is too small because I don't have the arrogance to elevate myself to godhood and thus feel equal to 'high five' the Almighty. It made no sense to me. So I had a lot to say about that, but others beat me to it and did it with so much more grace and with much less venom than I would have used. I'm so glad you did. I consider that God's intervention for me, so that's the place where I get off, and let the argument go.
Thanks to those who revere God.
PS. A 'high five' to ya'll.
But worship, praise, reverence, honor and glory to Him.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Lin,
Your complete 5:04 post. Right on.
(Except for the 'meanie' part.) :)
There is a Baptist university in Abilene Texas that taught the very truths you are speaking of...at least as late as 92.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Hey folks--When you start to wondering how important mankind is in God's eye, just remember this. Man is a small speck on the planet earth. Planet earth is an even smaller speck in our own galaxy and there are untold numbers of other galaxies in the vast darkness of outer space.
Are we all still feeling significant?
Ex 33:17And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.
18And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.
19And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.
20And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
21And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock:
22And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
23And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.
Ez: Thank you for those words from scripture.
I think that speaks much better than anything I can say.
Ex 34:29And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.
30And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.
31And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.
32And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that the LORD had spoken with him in mount Sinai.
33And till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face.
34But when Moses went in before the LORD to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out. And he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel that which he was commanded.
35And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him.
"God's man."
The term is no more or less applicable to anyone who is obediently and faithfully following the Lord.
A pastor doesn't get special privileges, but he does get extra special evaluation.
I believe we should all strive to meet those basic and fundamental qualifications of a minister. Those aren't high standards for a lover of God and one who is living in the power of the Holy Spirit. They're just entry level qualifications for one who wants to lead and set a worthy example; in fact it's an indictment that the standard had to even be written out. Beyond that, whom God gifts and calls is up to Him.
We should honor those who serve the Lord well, no matter what their title or office.
Does God have less honor towards the lowly and righteous servant - or is that just us?
A friend summarized it well when she warned that too much of man's honor often leads to idolatry. Be on guard and test yourselves to see if this is true in you.
Love and Peace to you all.
1 Chron 16:29Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come before him: worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.
30Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Housewife,
Thanks for your 5:59 post.
Simple, true, and to the point. You rock!
Post a Comment