Wade Burleson, on his blog, Grace and Truth to You, wrote this article entitled Church Authority: What It Is And What It Is Not in which he reprints this article, Authority in the Local Church, from his father Paul Burleson's blog.In response, Chuck Andrews wrote this article, Authority, Leadership, & Relationships.
Wade Burleson also wrote this article, Are We Southern Baptists Becoming a Benign Cult? The Danger of Casually Dismissing Scripture When Defining 'True' Christianity.
How do these ideas relate to the abuse of "church authority" being witnessed in churches today? Are we seeing this type of abuse of authority in Bellevue Baptist Church? Please cite specific examples.
Mac Brunson, pastor of FBC Jacksonville, Florida, recently modified their church's bylaws to include a church disciplinary committee.Dr. Adrian Rogers did something similar at Bellevue over ten years ago with the formation of a Church Displinary Council except that it's not a part of the bylaws. As we know, these are the bylaws of BBC, written in 1929, and for the most part they are ignored by the church administration. Here are the bylaws transcribed.
Has the Church Disciplinary Council ever been utilized since its formation?
Thanks to "junkster" for this topic idea.
672 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 672 Newer› Newest»Blogger New BBC Open Forum said...
It's interesting how the pastor saves these kinds of comments for his Sunday night sermons. These gems are from tonight's sermon:
"Do you practice storehouse tithing? Do you give 10% of your money to the budget of your church... in an undesignated fashion? I don't know how else to say this. It's as plain as I know how to say it. That's storehouse tithing. Are you doing that, or are you stealing from God? There's only two options. Either you're doing that, or you're stealing from God. It's hard to be intimate with somebody you're stealing from. It's impossible to be intimate with God when you're stealing from Him. Are you practicing storehouse tithing?"
Lynn's Response:
QUICK!!! Someone Call Senator Grassley!
THE ISSUE IS FINAL AUTHORITY
The final authority is?
MONEY, MONEY, MONEY!
Money is not all that important unless you don't have enough.
Now weather it is the world or the flesh or the Devil that is influencing members of BBC to disregard the consequences for not "storehouse tithing" I do not know, BUT could people be making a wise decision to give where they can give cheerfully? You know God loves a cheerful giver. Whoever gives unwillingly gives grudgingly and un-cheerfully.
I can not imagine that hilarious giving will follow such an obviously guilt inspiring, “arm twisting” admonition as we heard tonight. Whenever I hear statements about giving similar to this I remember the purpose of penance in the early Roman Catholic Church. Does the New Testament teach any sort of equivalent transaction? I do not think so. Yet are we to miss the point of Steve Gaines’ statements tonight that our choice in this matter is decided for us according to the witness of God’s word from the Old Testament alone?
Without getting into semantics as a ploy; what is it that I have which I have not been given? And of that which I have been given, which of that does not belong to God. So, as a steward of that which has been entrusted to me; if I hold back “my tithe” whose tithe is it I am withholding? As a steward of God’s money is there a New Testament way I could steal anything from God? I do not think so. Mmmmmmm?
I do realize that I am treading on “thin ice” certainly unfamiliar ground and I may not have much of a grasp on enough of scripture to address this with all wisdom and knowledge…. Yet the “spiritual” hairs on the back of my neck stand straight up when anyone tries to cajole me in to giving money to God “or else”.
May all Christians everywhere consider the choices. Give because you are still under the law or give hilariously because of God's unmerited favor and the thrill you experience when you have the opportunity to give…. God’s money back to God for His use and glory.
I love giving. I can laugh when I give. Some of the most amazing times in my life have been when I could give in secret. You see, I believe that as stewards of God’s money, God neither needs or wants anything we give grudgingly or conditionally based on “you do it or else” kind of thinking.
THE final Authority? God, as revealed in His holy word.
Man’s final authority…. You got it…. MONEY!
Who or what is your final authority?
I’ll admit to being guilty of swapping one for the other at times and then; I’m not laughing and the costs have been tremendous. This new year may you enjoy the opportunities you may have to give where and when you can do so obediently AND cheerfully.
May each of you have a blessed New Year,
Padroc
"Do you practice storehouse tithing? Do you give 10% of your money to the budget of your church... in an undesignated fashion? I don't know how else to say this. It's as plain as I know how to say it. That's storehouse tithing. Are you doing that, or are you stealing from God? There's only two options. Either you're doing that, or you're stealing from God. It's hard to be intimate with somebody you're stealing from. It's impossible to be intimate with God when you're stealing from Him. Are you practicing storehouse tithing?"
Oy vey. Here we go again. He sounds like Copeland.
There is nothing that requires us to 'tithe' in the New Testament (which means New Covenant)
Does Gaines even know what a 'tithe' is? My goodness, if he really taught what it was in the Old Covenant, people's eyes would cross. It gets very detailed and some are even excused from some of it but it adds up to much more than 10%. And to add to that, most of it was to keep the temple going. So bascially, we have brought in temple traditions to make sure we have or own temple buildings and can pay preachers/ Priests who live quite well...just as they did back then.
In the meantime, Paul made tents so as not to be a burden.
Jesus paid the temple tax while He was here. Remember the fish? But the remember what He said to Peter about it? (Remember, Jesus kept the law before the Cross) He told Peter it was so as not to 'offend'. But the sons are free!
After the cross what would be the point of paying tithe to the temple? The veil was torn in two? No more earthly priests.
The bottom line is the NT teaches giving. Helping a needy brother. Giving money to those going out on the Great Commission for expenses. Giving a (real humble servant) elder honor. Jesus actually raised the bar from tithing to giving from the heart.
Personally, for me, I am tired of giving to building programs and silly programs that mean nothing. In this new global economy we can give to missionaries directly. We can look around and see a brother or sister in need. Just like the NT when they took a collection to help the Body members in Jerusalem.
When the money dries up, these false teachers will have to get real jobs. Can anyone imagine Gaines in a real job?
Hey Padroc!
Been thinking about you. :-)
I really like the points you made....giving cheerfully is very important.
Take care.
(verification: socms Does this stand for soc is missing????? Where are you socwork???)
Am I the only one who feels it is suspicious that those who benefit most from certain teachings are the ones to proclaim them the loudest?
Whereas the New Testament teaches us simply to give freely according to our ability to those who have needs, professional church leaders tell us to give a minimum of 10%, and that all of that MUST go to the local church (which, interestingly, ensures that those professional church leaders will receive a certain salary and that their programs and buildings will be paid for).
Whereas the New Testament says there is neither male nor female in Christ, professional seminary leaders, who happen to be male, tell us that females can't do what they do.
Whereas the New Testament says we are all priests before God and that we are to submit to one another, those who control the finances of Christian institutions say we must submit to them because they are the "authorities".
This is not to say that the New Testament promotes anarchy or that there are no appropriate roles and obligations for different people or groups of people -- but I just can't help but find it exteremely convenient that those who insist the most that we follow certain rules are the ones that benefit most from them.
If we didn't have this blog...I may have always thought tithing 10% was IT!!
Mmmmmm....no wonder the "professional church leaders"
say the blogs are evil.
It IS very convenient, Junk.
Do other denominations emphasize tithing????...I haven't heard it at all in the Presbty. church I have been going to.
What makes it even worse is the way SG makes people think God won't bless them unless they GIVE to the church.
Just modern day scribes and pharisees doing the same thing they did. Nothing more...nothing less.
Leagalism, and it is all geared to those it benefits. Scribes and pharisees. All the way down to the added laws...leagalism... of no drinking, no gambling, no dancing....no women...except of course unless they come with their heads covered and keep their mouths shut...o)...
gmommy said...
If we didn't have this blog...I may have always thought tithing 10% was IT!!
Mmmmmm....no wonder the "professional church leaders"
say the blogs are evil.
It IS very convenient, Junk.
Do other denominations emphasize tithing????...I haven't heard it at all in the Presbty. church I have been going to.
What makes it even worse is the way SG makes people think God won't bless them unless they GIVE to the church.
5:34 PM, December 31, 2007
Thats why I make it a rule to give directly to those who need it. In most cases, I want to give it to the people who need it directly so I know its being used for what its for. Given whats happened at Bellevue, I do not know exactly how much is actually going towards missions and such. I don't want my money to be spent on Rolex Watches or Lexuses for the Moonbat Brigade.
Titheing is actually a blessing! In order to tithe, you have to lead a disciplined life and is a goal that all of us should seek, in love not out of obligation.
Unfortunately, Gaines and others of his kind use it as a club rather than a blessing.
I think Gaines getting a job in the real world would be a good thing. All he has known is working in a church.
Man, if yall keep talking this way about tithing, the SBC police will have their dark blue helicopters flying over your houses!
I have been pistol whipped in more than half of our 46 states, 21 states to be exact. I have heard that it pales in comparison to having 2 or 3 convention fatcats beat you over the head with their Scofield Large Print Bibles for besmirchifying 'the tithe'.
You could do as I do when you frequent your church...give cankle reduction coupons...not a legal medical practitioner?...never stopped me:)
William T. Loney, MD
PS...I really would love to see the look on the preacher's face if someone would put a bushel of corn or bundle of wheat in the plate!
"In order to tithe, you have to lead a disciplined life and is a goal that all of us should seek, in love not out of obligation."
I think just the opposite. It was too easy for me to believe I had 'done my duty' and that is that. You make it the first check you write (how many times have you heard taht one?) and you are done.
Giving is harder. Like giving up cable so you can help someone in need. Giving up something to help a missionary. Or driving a 20 year old car so that money can go to the Great Commission.
Or selling it all to help a brother in serious financial need. Those are 'disciplines' and that is Faith.
In the end, all of the above are a heart thing. It is done with joy. But it is a far cry from what is taught in churches today.
Amen Lin!
Good morning o purveyor of dirt, hope you are ready for a new year. Maybe you will repent and change your ways in 2008.
Just wondering why you haven't attacked or commented about Charles and his ungodly comments about Adrian Rogers? Maybe its because he's not busy spreading dirt about BBC.
Does anyone have any thoughts on the recent BBC messenger????
just askin.....
gmom wrote:
"Does anyone have any thoughts on the recent BBC messenger????"
As someone near and dear to me commented, "I knew R.G. Lee. Steve Gaines is no R.G. Lee." WWMIS....
brady wrote:
"Good morning o purveyor of dirt, hope you are ready for a new year. Maybe you will repent and change your ways in 2008.
"Just wondering why you haven't attacked or commented about Charles and his ungodly comments about Adrian Rogers? Maybe its because he's not busy spreading dirt about BBC."
Charles has made no comments here in ages. He was banned, in part, because of his ungodly comments about Dr. Rogers.
Considering the content of most of the comments of yours that I've rejected, I wouldn't be accusing others of being "purveyors of dirt." That's like the pot calling the kettle... names.
You have a Happy New Year, too, sweetie!
Brady said...
Good morning o purveyor of dirt, hope you are ready for a new year. Maybe you will repent and change your ways in 2008.
Just wondering why you haven't attacked or commented about Charles and his ungodly comments about Adrian Rogers? Maybe its because he's not busy spreading dirt about BBC.
12:03 PM, January 01, 2008
Brady,
Are you a current or former member of BBC?
Regarding the "two to tango" comment - it's a common point of view. Former SBC president Paige Patterson expressed the same viewpoint in this article - last paragraph. He said this about a man against whom over 25 women made complaints, about a man who had been forced to leave his 4th church in 4 years, about a man against whom a rape allegation was made, and another woman said he shoved her to the floor of the church. And now that minister has been accused of sending sexually explicit text messages to an underage teen. Why don't other SBC leaders hold Paige Patterson accountable for turning a blind eye and failing to protect people? And what about Jerry Vines, another former SBC president, who "agreed to forgive"? With men like that in SBC leadership, is it any wonder there's so little accountability?
Happy New Year to all of you on this blog!
Happy New Year, Brady!
My wish for you in 2008: discernment.
Christa Brown,
Thank you for shedding light on these so-called leaders of the SBC...
I notice that AMAZED is strangely quiet.
To All:
I have been out shopping today, and much to my dismay, I have been " accosted" by present BBC members..wanting me to tell them what is really going on there..
Ok, I'm going to say this again:
When I ask you if you knew about PW, and your answer is " yes"...please understand that the " deer in the headlights" look that you give me with regard to that tells me all I need to know.
Pleae leave me alone. You need to stay at BBC. It is painfully obvious that pedophilia is no big deal to you, so please, join in with those of your kind and stay there.
When you see me out, please refrain from discussing BBC with me. I have nothing to say to you.
It is very hurtful to me that you do not give much credence to a pedophile being set loose by your pastor.
Stay in your Holy Huddle. Ya'll all deserve one another.
Oh, and P.S. Please don't pay lip service to me about how awful you think pedophilia is. If you are sitting under a pastor to whom it was no big deal, your actions betray your words.
From Christa's link:
"Vines told the Times-Union Sunday that he was co-pastor of the church when he worked with Gilyard, prior to his move to Texas. He said Gilyard came to him about three or four years ago asking for forgiveness for his out-of-state troubles, and Vines agreed to forgive him.
Vines said the latest allegations must get a full review before any judgments are made.
"I would never condone any sexual improprieties of any kind," Vines said. "At this point, though, the facts will have to tell what the truth is."
So, Vines does not counsel him to step down as a minister? At the very least? He needs more 'facts' than a plea for forgiveness...and admission? He does not counsel this minister to turn himself into the authorities?
Patterson, Vines, Gaines, and all the rest of their ilk are not ministers...they are hirlings.
From the Patterson link:
"Dr. Patterson said he did not turn over information to poli ce - authorities about any of the complaints he investigated.
The Baptist official said he did not believe there was any conduct "substantially unlawful.'
Dr. Patterson said that after the Concord incident four years ago, he counseled Mr. Gilyard, who is married, to "avoid temptations' in his contact with women. Dr. Patterson said he advised Mr. Gilyard to avoid meeting alone with women and to avoid lengthy personal counseling sessions that might breed gossip. "The point is that you don't do it. You don't put yourself in that position,' Dr. Patterson said. Mr. Gilyard did not heed his advice, Dr. Patterson said."
This is his advice to a PASTOR who has a serious problem? He did not advise him to get out of ministry? Just to avoid temptation.
Paige Patterson has a 'pattern' of disrespecting women. Just like when he told the woman who was being abused by her husband to go home and pray and submit more.
Another hirling who is a wolf. He loves the money and the high life of his position too much. He needs to go. Perhaps the Klouda lawsuit will convince the trustees but I doubt it.
Oh, did anyone see that
Patterson asked for the trail to be moved because it was to take place during the SBC convention in Indy? Is that irony or what?
I wish people would stop following men and follow Christ. If they did, these men would not last in their positions for 10 minutes.
Lin said...
Patterson, Vines, Gaines, and all the rest of their ilk are not ministers...they are hirlings.
gmommy asks...
So what is it that these men have that other Baptists seem to want and need?????
Can't be wisdom...
Can't be obedience to scripture...
SG thought keeping the confidence of a sexual predator more important than the safety of the innocent or the dignity and healing of a victim,
PP thought the charisma of a "gifted" minister more important than his being above reproach,
Vines thought so much of himself that he ignored the confession of a predator and wanted MORE FACTS!!
Can't be integrity...
they all lost that a long time ago...(somewhere among the credit cards, doggie tombstones, and free trips)....
Baptists now have a new meaning for integrity thanks to these guys.
They are as corrupt as the politicians.
We let these men run the churches...what's the big shock if Hillary wins the presidency????
Selected quotes from...
Article 1
A leader at Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church told the Florida Times-Union in 1993 the church wasn't concerned with Gilyard's past. "He has taken the church from a dying church to a very progressive one," Ella Marie Sykes, the director of church ministries told the newspaper. "We're going to stand by him. We do love him and believe in him."
The 1991 Dallas Morning News story that documented Gilyard's fall from grace at Victory Baptist Church listed previous allegations of sexual misconduct at three churches in Oklahoma and Texas. The article accused Patterson of glossing over Gilyard's 1985 firing as an assistant pastor from one of the churches for sexual misconduct and quoted multiple former Criswell College students who said they reported Gilyard--including one woman who said Gilyard tried to rape her--to Patterson and he told them to refrain from speaking about it unless they had substantive proof.
Patterson, who went on to serve as SBC president and now is president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, denied being confronted more than once, telling the Associated Baptist Press that particular woman "gave me reason to doubt it was true."
Article 2
Articles in the Dallas Morning News in 1991 described not only the fact that Gilyard walked away from four churches in four years over allegations of sexual misconduct but also complaints from women who said church leaders did little to protect them.
One woman who said she had had a long-term affair with Gilyard said phone calls requesting a meeting with Paige Patterson, then Gilyard's mentor and promoter and today president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, were not returned.
A woman who was a student at Criswell College said she made an appointment with Patterson, a leader in the Southern Baptist Convention fundamentalist movement, to talk about Gilyard in 1989.
"Darrell was there with his wife and an attorney," the woman said in a story published July 14, 1991. "He confronted me and said I wore suggestive clothing. I don't even own suggestive clothing."
"Paige Patterson asked me to refrain from speaking to anybody about this," she said. "He said unless I came back with two witnesses or proof that something had happened, not to come back."
****
The article said Gilyard preached two years at Concord Missionary Baptist Church in Oak Cliff, Texas, before being fired for sexual relationships with women members. Pastor E.K. Bailey said he heard allegations from "around 25" church members.
Bailey said invitations to Gilyard from black churches dried up as word of his firing spread, but First Baptist Church of Dallas continued to promote him in predominantly white churches of the Southern Baptist Convention.
The paper said Gilyard had trouble getting hired as assistant pastor of Hilltop Baptist Church in Norman, Okla., because the church's pastor had heard rumors about him, but Patterson assured him he had talked to the women and there was nothing to substantiate the allegations.
Another article said Gilyard eventually acknowledged wrongdoing to Patterson, but Patterson did not turn information over to the police because he did not believe any conduct was "substantially unlawful."
Prior to that, the Dallas Morning News said, Patterson said he was unwilling to believe allegations against Gilyard without "demonstrable evidence." He said Scripture teaches that action cannot be taken against a minister accused of adultery unless there are two or three witnesses and that he also asked for other proof like photographs, videotapes or laboratory tests.
Patterson also indicated he viewed Gilyard as a victim. "It's amazing how jealousy, frustration and racism can be motives for making accusations," he said.
Please pass me the duct tape!
"So what is it that these men have that other Baptists seem to want and need?????"
I am learning that most people follow some earthly leader. They assume the title and position confers competence and in Christian cirlces, spirituality. They don't know enough scripture to understand. They are told: Oh sinners sin. They are just human. And stuff like that.
The ones who KNOW and do nothing want to be around the seat of power. Since they do not want to lose their positions or the chance of a position, they keep their mouths shut. If these leaders fell, they would be quick to strengthen their own position. Others who are not that close but look up to these guys so much would be devestated and may make excuses for them.
VERY FEW are willing to lose their income or position to speak out.
I have also seen quite a few commenters talk about all the good Patterson has done in the past as if that makes up for everything now. As if there is a balance sheet or something. As if his treatment of Dr. Klouda was just a tiny mistake. And of course, they tell us we could never understand what a truly great man he is. That is my favorite.
Ya know....
right now, I can't tell if the SBC is itself or the Catholic Church.
And the sad thing is....with all of these tales of abuse and corruption....I think I'm better off in a bowling alley on Sunday than church.
Old Truth and Slice sure have good posts up...
the voice of the devil is a little scary..just sayin....
Lin wrote:
"As if his treatment of Dr. Klouda was just a tiny mistake."
Sadly, quite a few don't even consider it a "tiny mistake." They agree with him.
Several here have done an excellent job in exposing the hypocrisy of the SBC. I for one am over it. I for one do not agree with the direction it has taken and so, I for one want nothing to do with the SBC.
The SBC continues to cover sin, continues to uphold THE MAN over the Word of God. As far as I can discern, there is no difference from the current SBC and the antichrist.
A portion of Paige Patterson's address to the seminary graduates on 12/19/07. I was especially taken by the words "most of you will never make much money".
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
Paige Patterson, the seminary's president, reminded graduates that their callings differ from the thousands of other graduates across the nation who will be stepping out to pursue lucrative careers.
"Your calling is very different," Patterson said. "Most of you will never make much money.... Most of you will never be widely known. A few of you will, but most of you will work in relative oblivion.... But like Isaiah, the message that you go forth to proclaim is the only one that has the prospect of changing the lives of men and women, both for time and eternity."
Nearly 800 years before the birth of Christ, Isaiah stood out as a prophet of God among the people of Israel, Patterson said. At the time, the nation of Israel was overwhelmed with religious pluralism, much like the United States is today.
Isaiah's message rings as true today as it did then, Patterson said. As recorded in Isaiah 7 and 9, Isaiah prophesied the birth of a child who would bring worldwide peace. Patterson encouraged Southwestern graduates to proclaim the message of the child, Jesus, who is the Wonderful Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father and the Prince of Peace.
"You are venturing forth into a world more troubled than any world previous to this one," Patterson said. "Not in all the annals of human history have people been as confused and as misguided and as concerned as to what their future may be.... And your assignment is to take to the 7 billion people on the face of this globe the wonderful message that there is a way to have peace in your heart and in your life and to guarantee the peace of eternity."
In order to proclaim the message effectively, Patterson said graduates must be committed completely to God and dedicated to morally and ethically sound lifestyles. If Southwestern graduates guard their Christian walk closely, Patterson said, unbelievers will know that they are men and women of God who have a message from God.
Lynn,
No matter what the corrupt do wrong...we still need to obey God's Word... we can't "forsake our assembling" :)
Satan wins when we allow their disobedience to keep us from worshiping.
Happy first day of 2008 to all.
A special thank you to those Bereans who post with such insight and knowledge, your post encourage me to study and delve into His Word. Another special thank you to those I have met in person and who I am honored to call friend. May we grow in grace and the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ in this new year we are entering.
His Grace is greater!!!
Old Truth
Slice
:-)
Good morning "oh purveyor of dirt." I do appreciate your calling me "sweetie" but I still prefer your moniker.
Thanks for adding my post. That must mean that you love me again.
I'm still waiting on all those who read Mike's blog to start attaching Charles for his sickening attacks on Dr. Rogers. Wonder why you women have been so silent???
Have a good one OPOD....
Dear OPOD (o purveyor of dirt),
Now that we have a beautiful new year before us I was wondering if you had given any serious thought to actually going to meet with Dr. Gaines in person and/or publishing your real name.
Might be a good way to start the new year with the "openness and transparency" that all of you spiritual giants seem to want.
Have a good one OPOD.
Brady,
I do not read Mike's blog. I do not want to be devastated by the postings of Charles. He's a sick man, and needs help, and he needs our prayers.
I am not a professional counselor, and there is nothing good that can come from subjecting my soul to
Charles' perverted posts.
You ask why the women have been so silent?
I have already lived thru dealing with one adult pervert, I will not voluntarily subject myself to it again. Unlike when I was a child, I DO have the power now not to have to tolerate such behavior.
To you, Charles' rantings may be fun and games, to women like myself, it's painful, and all too familiar.
My goodness...
Brady seems like such a pleasant person...so full of good will for everyone!
Must be his deep spiritural depth pouring over...
Brady: I for one do not read Bratton's blog. I find the attitude "over there" most disturbing for a Christian site and I prefer to check in with site that debate the issues facing Christians today.
CP is ill and his posts are so scary, I find it best to follow 1 Thessalonians 5:22 "Abstain from all appearance of evil."
:-)
Dear Brady: Why do you come over here and attack these people? They are not bothering you. If something offends you, you can choose to just ignore it and not get your blood pressure up. It would appear to most you have come over here spoiling for a fight but alas you did not get it.
As for the challenge to them post using their real name why don't you take the first step? I have been using my full name, email address and cell phone number from day one. Your profile only says BRADY. How does anyone know who you are really are? And you don't even have an email address listed. I remember Mike admonished you to email Charles directly if you had a question. Instead you keep up the posting to him on the blogs.
Many of us are through with Charles. He is in need of serious help and prayers. Many of us are in prayer for him instead of going after him. I have had many more battles with him than you. Where were you during those times? He is not going to change anytime soon. It is going to take much fervent prayer and Charles repenting before he changes. Never the less we continue to pray for him.
As for challenging others, show them the way by giving a real name and email address. And don't give me this death threat bull. Trust me I have gotten my share of them and I am still posting. Check out my contact information below if you are not sure what to do.
Brady it is time you ‘man’ up. I am waiting.
David Brown
davidbrown@bigriver.net
901/569-4500
Here is an excellent article concerning authority and discipline.
David Brown used a phrase which is so needed today - "man-up". How the outcome could be so different if we had those individuals that would "man-up". It takes those that are in position to "man-up" in order to see the needed change at BBC and within the SBC.
In regards to Bradys 9:03 post---what is "attaching Charles" mean? And who is Charles and why would someone attach to him?
Lily,
Will we see anyone actually make a difference????
or just professional clergy????
Stopthemaddness,
LOL!!!!!
Brady, Happy New Year!
I'm just curious. Are you now or have you ever been a member of Bellevue?
Were you really a personal friend of Adrian Rogers?
Just wonderin' all this stuff.
oc.
Good morning all of you spiritual giants. Its always refreshing to begin the day reading your love notes.
David, in case you don't keep up with the blogs I have previously posted my name and email address for the public's reading. Go back and check around and you'll find it and then you can write me personally.
Until then, ya'll keep up the wonderful work you are doing for the Kingdom.
David,
Before I leave for work, I don't regularly read this blog. I just check it out when fellow church members tell me more of the dirt that is being spread here as well as the rantings and ravings of Charles. I prefer reading Mike's blog since he is a man who is committed to the life and ministry of BBC instead of the destruction of BBC and her legacy.
GMOMMY- WHAT?? '; }
But it is funny where he/she said "all the women" like Dr. R. was a pop star. Kind of "reeeeely reeeely" disrespectful huh?
brady,
I believe Lynn and "oc" had some questions for you.
Have a nice day!
I'll work on answering those questions when you reveal your true name and address and email address.
Dear Loved Ones,
Since Lynn and OC and NASS (OPOD) have so many personal questions about me and I certainly wouldn't want to disappoint you, I will make you the following proposal:
If you post your real name and email address I will gladly email you and answer your questions. I would even be willing to trade real face pictures so we can recognize each other in public.
If you're not interested in the deal, then it tells me you're just blowing your spiritual smoke.
RE: Brady's post about " all the women" .....
It would appear that Paige Patterson is sharing his playbook with Brady.
As a matter of fact, I do share Paige's Biblical view of women. I seriously doubt that any of you "dear sisters" even know what that is though.
Sorry, "brady." I don't make deals with the devil. It's the existence of people like you in the world which is precisely why I don't reveal my "real" name here. Call it "blowing smoke" or whatever name you choose. You're only showing your true colors.
I have no problem admitting I'm a member of Bellevue. I'm not particularly proud of it anymore, but I will admit it. Why is it so upsetting for someone to ask you such a simple question? I didn't ask you anything, but I believe that was the question Lynn and "oc" asked. It's simple really. Your choices are:
A. I am currently a member of BBC.
B. I am a former member of BBC.
C. I have never been a member of BBC.
How about it, "brady"?
SOTL wrote:
"It would appear that Paige Patterson is sharing his playbook with Brady."
Yeah, SOTL, I get the distinct impression "brady" doesn't like women.
Brady: Well let me be the first to take you up on your offer. Since you don't want to post that information here except to call people names. Would you please email the answers to me the questions that Lynn and OC have asked you?
As for wasting my time looking back for your name, that is not going happen. Didn't Mike admonish folks on his blog for name calling and you dare come over here and do the very thing he has asked you not to do? I don't understand.
As for contacting Dr. Gaines, I have been there and was denied. But hey, if he wasn't willing to talk to the victim of the PW mess, fat chance he would consider any of us worthy of his time. Are you tying to tell us you have his time?
And for the personal friend of Dr. Rogers we will see. There are several that post on here that were actually personal friends of his. But from what I remember no one remembers a BRADY. That is why we ask the questions we have. What did you pass him the hall and he said hi to you?
Brady, the offer still stands, "Man-up." Heard your excuses before and they are still lame. Besides as a "member-in-good standing" of the Bratton Blog you owe several here an apology. After all that is what we are required to do aren't we? We are STILL waiting.
David Brown
davidbrown@bigriver.net
901/569-4500
Thank you for your comment about "making deals with the devil." It explains a whole lot about your spiritual maturity and why this blog is like it is.
As far as answering your questions, I already told you the deal. Either do it or quit asking.
I do think if you revealed your true name there would be actions taken to remove you from the membership of BBC. Perhaps you should keep it secret.
"brady" wrote:
"Thank you for your comment about "making deals with the devil."
You're most welcome. I've already stated I don't make deals, but I believe David Brown just took you up on it.
"I do think if you revealed your true name there would be actions taken to remove you from the membership of BBC."
I'm quivering. If Steve Gaines didn't have the intestinal fortitude to try to remove Mark Sharpe, Jim Haywood, and other "troublemakers," he's not going to bother with some lowly woman. I really couldn't care less.
"As a matter of fact, I do share Paige's Biblical view of women."
I'm not surprised, but I don't believe PP's view of women is Biblical. Unless you consider the Gospel According to Paige Patterson "Biblical."
I haven't seen anything from David Brown so not sure what you are talking about.
Don't underestimate the power of Steve Gaines to have you removed but then if you're really not bothering him, I doubt if he will even give you the time of day.
Since I doubt if you have ever even talked in person with Paige Patterson I seriously doubt if you know what his view is concerning women. I do know he would not support a woman sponsoring a blog that does nothing but stir up dirt in the church. You should call him sometime and visit with him. You two would have a great time!
Brady: I just checked my email in-box and it is empty. Why is that? I have done what you asked.
Are you going to do as you said you would? I sure hope so because if don't you know what that makes you. I am not going to call you that name because some might consider that a label. And that would not be very nice?
David Brown
Brady said...
As a matter of fact, I do share Paige's Biblical view of women. I seriously doubt that any of you "dear sisters" even know what that is though.
4:19 PM, January 03, 2008
First off, not all of us are women. But then again, you like to assume and you know what assuming does.
Second, if you share Paige Patterson's view of women, your no better than muslim extremeists over in the Middle East. Just like Muslim extremeists are dangerous, Christian extremists like you and Patterson are also dangerous to society.
NASS,
I must apologize to you. I just read David's wonderfully edifying post. I have responded to him in kind.
"brady" wrote:
"I haven't seen anything from David Brown so not sure what you are talking about."
Just scroll up to 4:24 p.m. today and read.
Is Brady going first in naming himself? I mean if the people decided to reveal themselves to him, who would go first? Hmmmmm. Theres a new debate. I feel sorry for him, because he thinks he is gaining power of some sort being mean on this blog. Lets just go back to the way we were and pray for him, really pray for him. He seems like an angry child. I am NOT calling BRADY an angry child, I am saying he seems very troubled.
David,
I wrote you over 10 minutes ago and have yet to hear back from you.
By the way, my offer to reveal all is only good for those who hide their names and identity on here. (SOTL, NASS, Lynn, OC, etc). Not to someone like you who puts your name everywhere.
I did send you my picture though. Hope you enjoy...
Apology accepted, "brady." I guess all that smoke was probably blocking your view.
Give David time. I'm sure he'll respond.
I hate to disappoint you all but alas, I must go eat supper with some of my brethren. I do however enjoy our little exchanges on here. They are so uplifting. I especially enjoy watching you people froth at the mouth and call me all kinds of names.
I'll be back later tonight so I'll get to read all your wonderful comments then. Until then, God bless you as you seek to edify Him and His church.
Oh, and by the way, if you want to know about me, then you have to reveal your real name, address, and email before I tell you a thing. Someone does have to go first don't they???
Bye for now dear ones.
Gang: Brother Brady did email me with a photo. He has ass-u-med incorrectly that I would immediatley post his hateful comments on the blog. Well that is not going to happen.
And for what is worth Brady really did not reveal anything or answer any questions. He just changed the rules. And he went on the attack and made assumptions about me that are wrong.
Good for you Brady. I hope that makes you feel better. Does it? And what all you said to me will be our little secret. I do expect an apology someday when you are ready. But when you talk about blowing Spiritual smoke that must be coming from experience.
What you come over here to challenge us to post and use our real name and when I do you make stupid comments about my name being everywhere? Duh? What is that about?
You have a good day little man, opps a label. My bad.
David Brown
Oh this is too good to be true. Mr. Bray emailed again and made more stupid assumptions because I did not respond as quickly as he thought I should. He went on the smart a-- attack again.
As far as edify the Body; Brady you are doing a good job aren't you telling these folks and me off in the name of Jesus. You are right and we are all wrong. You sound very much like another favorite of yours. Sure makes a great witness. And your words to Cakes show a very mean-spirited person. But yet another example of your great witness. Go for it Brady tell all of them off that don’t agree with you. Show them you are right. That will teach them and make them want to repent or better yet turn to Christ.
It is still man-up time. I sure hope that does not spoil your dinner. By the way don’t bother emailing me with your trash again. You are now on the same blocked list as the man you were ranting over a few days ago.
David Brown
No need to rush home from that supper, "brady." You won't be posting here again tonight, so take your time.
"And for what is worth Brady really did not reveal anything or answer any questions. He just changed the rules. And he went on the attack and made assumptions about me that are wrong."
Rule #1 of Liberalism....instead of discussing the facts....Liberals attack those who disagree.
David Brown,
Brady and I had several email exchanges in September. So he already knows my name and email address. Anyone can get that on my profile. Several have.
And it's very strange, I told him exactly the same thing that you told him. I told him to "man up". Don't hold your breath for that to happen though. Just expect more nasty emails, and put them in a folder called "crap".
Just sayin'.
oc.
oc,
You mean you've got one of those folders, too?
oc said...
David Brown,
Brady and I had several email exchanges in September. So he already knows my name and email address. Anyone can get that on my profile. Several have.
And it's very strange, I told him exactly the same thing that you told him. I told him to "man up". Don't hold your breath for that to happen though. Just expect more nasty emails, and put them in a folder called "crap".
Just sayin'.
oc.
6:17 PM, January 03, 2008
Doesn't one have to show some sort of maturity in order to "man up"? Thats why Brady can't man up. He's immature.
"As a matter of fact, I do share Paige's Biblical view of women."
LOL. You believe every man should own one?
NASS,
Well sure I have one of those folders. You think someone like me gets nothing but love letters?
Just sayin'.
oc.
"brady" wrote:
"I must go eat supper with some of my brethren."
As I said, "brady" doesn't like women.
Lin wrote:
"You believe every man should own one?"
Yeah, that's a real "Biblical" view if I've ever heard one.
Hey blog buds,
Just got my computer back up to find all these silly exchanges with Brady.
Brady...who cares who you are????
Why would that matter to any of us???
You're the one that seems to care who we are.
You're one of the last people I would like to meet so get over yourself.
It certainly doesn't matter to me about Paige Patterson's opinion of anything on this blog.
Meeting with Steve Gaines is laughable....who cares!!
Brady, WE know each other.
WE have relationships.
Run along little man....not interested in anything you think you have.
NASS said:
"brady" wrote:
"I must go eat supper with some of my brethren."
As I said, "brady" doesn't like women.
oc aays:
Oh, now I get it! Dude's in a monastery!!!! Why didn't he tell us???
Where the heck does one go to supper with the bretheren anyway????
That sounds so silly.
Where is Mary??? Anyone hear from her????
BTW....talked to a man today that didn't leave BBC until the summer....
I called his business and have never met him.
as usual, the BBC scandle came up.
This very professional man who one minute was discussing business ...
told me how much it hurts everytime he drives by BBC.
He is now going to Faith.
Where's all that love SG and BBC has for Memphis???
What does that little marketing slogan mean, anyway????
And that, folks, really needs to be the end of the discussion of that subject, please. "Brady's" 15 minutes are up.
David Brown, I love you brother. You are precious. I am not letting boredom lead me to read anything past the words "BRADY said..." from now on. He has bet someone, no doubt, that he would be the big hero to draw out the secret society-- of rare and special individuals-- who do this thing we Americans call, the blogging of one's thoughts, among their peers. Wow. Thank you for taking everyones chewing out. I think that tithing, and the like, were the issues of friendly, spirited debate before you guys were so RUDELY interrupted...why did BRADY want the subject turned back to Dr. Gaines? Odd at best. N-E-Waze thanks and perfect peace to you.
STM wrote:
"... why did BRADY want the subject turned back to Dr. Gaines?"
He didn't. He wanted it turned to himself. His 15 minutes are up. It's time to change the subject now.
GMOMMY, If you are really asking what we think the slogan might mean... Doesn't it mean that: Bellevue ran off the people from Shelby and Fayette Counties, (at any rate, from the "burbs") but, they don't care, because they were ready for some city folks anyway?
I don't know what else it could mean-- since they are seeking new relationships with City of Memphis already churched citizens. There are just as many unchurched people in the eastern part of the county, as anywhere. I don't know what else it could mean?
What do you think?
Sounds to me like we need to order a couple of black turbans for PP and his little mini-me.
:)
STM
I think it's sad when the church has bogus ads like the poiliticians....
of all things to use for their slogan.... The last thing SG and his crew have shown is love.
It's as truthful as the report read by DC concerning the "investigation" of PW and those that covered for him.
I am proud of my city and my ethnic friends who are raising quite an eyebrow at the entire thing... The distraction isn't working all that well. Equally as proud that the people from the "city" that I know are being quite "polite" and gracious about the overtures..."No thank you very much..."
Good morning OPOD. Good to see that I have been banned against. I do enjoy all your hate filled reprobates and their many pontifications. What a joke you people are!
The sad thing is that you are going to come under the judgment of God for what you are doing to God's man and God's church.
It was at least fun for a while but reassuring to know that you all are still the asses that you have always been.
May God be merciful to you and your wicked ways.
Re the above...
Let it go, everyone. It is what it is and doesn't warrant a response.
Happy New Year from the New Age Christ !!
Compliments of Oprah and Friends on XM Sattelite radio.
OPRAH AND FRIENDS SATTELITE RADIO PROGRAM PUSHES FALSE JESUS AND FALSE GOSPEL TO NATIONS ADORING FANS
Hey Watchman!
Happy New Year!
Gang: attached below is the email I received from Mr. Brady this morning. On Bratton he is taking Cakes to task for not being a Christian and quoting Scripture. If this is how Christains act it is a pretty sad day. Please add this mis-guided brother to your prayer list.
Here is my post on Bratton
David Brown said...
Brady you claim to be a Christain? Please explain
From: Brady Davis brady_jock@yahoo.com
To: davidbrown@bigriver.net
Subject: Brady
Date: Fri 01/04/08 08:17 AM
Good morning o wise one,
Enjoyed your little rantings on the blog when I got up today. For a man who is busy telling people to "man up" you don't have the balls for much of anything. Must come from your weird past.
Keep up the good work. All those weird women on that bog think you are their hero and I'm sure you love that position.
I'm glad nASS has returned me to no blogging status. At least we gave a little respite to Dr. Gaines from all you hate mongers.
Be sweet if that's possible.
Brady
Very edifying isn't Brady
David Brown
11:23 AM, January 04, 2008
David Brown,
I hate to say "I told you so",
so I won't. :)
Just sayin'.
oc.
It seems Brady's "Christian" attitude/thinking is very reflective of SG and that whole twisted way of beating others with scripture.
They both seem to pull out what is convenient for their purposes when it suits them but no reflection anywhere of love, respect, or humility for anyone.
Thanks, David and Nass, for shining light on darkness.
Didn't Lin say light was the best disinfectant?????
David, Well awwwwwwwwww you are kind of our hero, and I guess I am a tad strange. Just not letting go of all the loss and pain and lies and being okay asap...Hey umm anyone got a bar of SOAP for Brady's MOUTH? Wow.
Today's 15 minutes are up.
Thank you!
To any of my
"damaged but not broken" sisters(or brothers) out there...
Christa's blog has a link in her current post that is interesting. Hope you'll check it out.
Remember.
Helloooooooo out there in blog land....
Hellllllooooo... hellllllooooo... hellllllllloooooooooo....
Hello back at ya. I've been doing one of those 3 day reading catch ups. And that little wonder who blogs as Brady - what an entertainer he/she/it is!! My, my will wonders never cease.
Although he provides that odd type of entertainment, I'd rather pass on inane posts and rude insults from a punk.
Let's get back on track.
Lily,
Please get right to the point!!!
:)
ConcernedSBCer must be working too much!
What a quiet day I have had....sat in my chair and read all day...sick days can be nice.
Nass, anything eventful???
Seems like David B. has a special gift with people.
some changes have come about from David's counciling...2 in fact.
thank you David...
OKay ANYWAAAAAAY, did I read on here that there really are legitimate and differing points of view on what the Bible, our authority, says about tithing? No Kidding I really didn't know that. Anyone care to break that down for me? I have never heard it other than this way: 10% unless you are in debt, then give what you can until you can go back to 10%. IS that what Dave Ramsey says? I respect your knowledge and opinions.
Same for me...knew nothing else but what the Baptists taught me!!
Stopthemadness,
I suggest a google search of tithe...tithing and new testament.
Bottom line is that 10% storehouse tithe is leagalism. If you are attempting to aquire righteousness via obedience to the Law then you may want to look at Leviticus for all of them...
If you hear a guy telling you that if you don't give 10% you are stealing from God and quoting Malachi and using Abraham as an example...run. That aint the only leagalism he is selling.
Ez,
Just my opinion here ...but I feel like with ALL the wonderful scripture that COULD be taught at church...why hammer the tithing so much??...or some of the other topics that get so much discussion....unless for the purpose that seems so apparent.
I think the majority of people will not be convicted but turned off.
It's just too obvious.
But on the blog...I have really enjoyed all the different theology discussions we've had....who knew?????
gmom wrote:
"I feel like with ALL the wonderful scripture that COULD be taught at church...why hammer the tithing so much??"
Psst... gmom!
---------> Remember?
New BBC Open Forum said...
Hellllllooooo... hellllllooooo... hellllllllloooooooooo....
Helllllooooooo NAAAAAASSSSSS!
(I can't pronounce NBBCOF without making the dogs bark.)
It has been a blog-jam out here. My server can't handle the traffic on weekends and holidays.
On tithing: Rmemmber, we are not under Jewish law. (There is a constant effort by "Old Scratch" to bring us back into captivity. DON'T GO!) Why would we be required to obey the tithing laws and not the rest? We were commanded to give of our means with a glad heart. A word study of GIVING in the New Testament Church is helpful. Dr. Rogers used to say something like: "Don't let an Old Testament Jew under the Law give more than you are willing to give under Grace."
Dr. Rogers also used to say this:
"False religion is characterized by force. True religion is characterized by faith."
Question: How were those OT Jews, if any, justified?
Like Abraham... by faith.
Like me...by faith.
oc,
Ok. Then if they were justified by faith, were they not also under grace?
Of course they were.
Like me.
oc,
If then, they were under grace, and there is a distinction between being "under law" and "under grace", how could they (the OT Jews) be both under law and under grace at the same time and in the same sense?
Be specific about what you mean practically when you say "under grace".
As a baptist I didn't always think that thru.....I just said it and accepted it without understanding it.
There may be other ADD people out there!
So, AOG - are you saying that we are commanded to tithe under grace?
Because God said so.
We don't need to understand, and He doesn't count on us to understand. He's God. Not me. That's faith.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Gmommy:
God’s
Riches
At
Christ’s
Expense
That is what we are talkin’ about!
Comment:
In Acts 15, in a letter to the church at Antioch, after a group of Pharisees had come from Jerusalem and were trying to teach circumcision, Paul wrote:
“10. Now, therefore, why put God to the test, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11. But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.”
“28. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29: That ye abstain from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which, if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.”
This was for the church at Antioch, where Gentiles were sharing the table with Jews. Yet, isn’t all scripture for US, too?
Am I wrong about this?
Churchmouse...
No. You are under Grace, no longer commanded to do anything. God is counting on your heart to beat in rhythm with His. He is counting on the fact that His heart is transplanted into your chest, and that both of those hearts beat together in in His rhythm. It's all about Love, not Law.
Just sayin'.
oc.
I'm not speaking to tithing. I'm speaking to what constitutes being "under law" and "under grace", and how the OT Jews could be both "under law" and "under grace" both at the same time and in the same sense. If both are true for the OT Jews, then there has to be some exegetical framework for that. I'm trying to understand the logic of making a separation between law and grace, while at the same time holding that the Jews were under both. Logic itself would dictate that "A" cannot be "A" and "non-A" both at the same time and in the same sense. For any doctrine there has to be some scriptural/exegetical framework from which it is derived. I'm simply trying to find out what that framework is.
AOG,
I'll tell you my take on it...
The Law WAS Grace. God didn't need to bother with mankind at all. I wouldn't have.
He only did it by His love. GRACE.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Does this disgust anyone else as much as it does me? The G.O.B. network is indeed alive and well, and it's running the SBC -- straight into the ground. And the sad thing is, most Southern Baptists are blissfully ignorant about it.
Bellevue is but a microcosm of what's happening in the SBC today. Rich, powerful men (or wannabes) who have denied and hidden and swept these problems under the rug for years, and still people follow these guys and place them on pedestals.
Wake up, people! Bellevue Baptist Church has been hijacked, and so has the SBC. And hardly anyone seems to care.
Nass,
Why were the ministers and seminary students from our blog offended when we used that term? (GOB)
Obviously, it didn't originate with us here on the blog.
No wonder the likes of SG and PP speak out against blogs and the internet.
These "evil" blogs are making it more difficult for these self annointed ministers to keep their dirty little secrets!
Keep the church members intimidated,ignorant and under control!
Keep the women quiet!
Can anyone reading this blog explain to us what good the SBC is currently doing for the churches?
For the denomination?? For the country??
I guess instead of trying to expose the truth about the ministers that are sexual predators...
we just need to catch them drinking or using a private prayer language ...
then the SBC leadership would be concerned.
AOG and OC
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are One, yet each has unique attributes and a unique purpose. They are One, but separate.
Likewise, the Law and Grace are one, yet each has a unique attributes and a unique purpose. They, also, are one but separate.
How you put that into a formula - I don't have a clue.
Churchmouse,
No formula. Just Love.
And who really understands that???
Just sayin'.
oc.
This is what is sad...
People have been conditioned to guard themselves from ... Love.
So now it's hard for them to let you love them... and it's hard to let God love them too.
I pray that the real definition of "Love" be made manifest.
Just sayin'.
oc.
You know, gmom, what gets me about the PPL controversy is why it's such a big deal. I mean it's a PRIVATE prayer language, right? So why are those who practice it talking about it at all if it's PRIVATE? Maybe the SBC should adopt the military's stance on homosexuals (not saying I agree with that position) and just "don't ask, don't tell." For those who practice a PPL (and I won't go into my opinions about that either), don't go around talking about it, don't answer questions about whether you do or don't, and it shouldn't be an issue for anyone. I almost get the impression some who practice PPL want to boast about it.
As for why certain people were offended by the G.O.B. network reference, I think they thought we were lumping ALL pastors into that category. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Most pastors are NOT like that. But unfortunately, many of the ones who have achieved mega-church-pastor status and those running the SBC today are card-carrying members of the club. Examples are Paige Patterson, Mac Brunson, Steve Gaines, Charles Stanley, Frank Page, Darrell Gilyard (who's skating on thin ice right now)... you get the idea.
NASS said:
You know, gmom, what gets me about the PPL controversy is why it's such a big deal. I mean it's a PRIVATE prayer language, right? So why are those who practice it talking about it at all if it's PRIVATE?
oc says:
Those who want to keep their "privates" private, do.
Just sayin'.
oc.
I think that when people say "private prayer language", meaning praying in tongues, the word "private" doesn't mean that it is something to be kept a secret; it just means it is something done by the individual when in their own personal prayer time. "Private" in this case is used to differientiate from the exercise of tongues in a public worship service.
I don't think the policy should be "don't ask, don't tell", any more than would be the case with any other spiritual gift. If someone believes God has given them a supernatural gift, that certainly isn't something he or she should feel a need to be ashamed of. Instead, I think a good policy would be "If your weren't asked about it, don't brag about it". In fact, "Don't brag about it" would be a sensible policy regarding anything one was given as a gift.
oc says:
Those who want to keep their "privates" private, do.
Words of wisdom, bro.
junk wrote:
"... it just means it is something done by the individual when in their own personal prayer time."
I think you just proved my point! :-)
"Personal" or "private"... it's the same thing. If you (not you personally, but "you" in the general sense) practice PPL, I don't want or need to hear about that any more than I want to hear about Dr. Loney's vestigial tail(s) or body hair issues. It's TMI.
AOG,
The way I read it, there was never anyone justified under the law...or by the law. No one outside of Jesus ever fulfilled the law.
We have to remember, Abraham preceded the law. So did his salvation. Grace was there then just as it is now. It was Jesus there with him then. There were people saved in the OT. We have to remember that they were saved by grace through faith, the same way we are. David, Solomon or any of the prophets ever fulfilled the Law. But David, along with the others were saved by grace, through faith.
Gal 3:8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, In you shall all the nations be blessed. 9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. 10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them. 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for The righteous shall live by faith.
I think Romans 3 speaks to this as well. All of it.
Romans 3:20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
All the law does today is expose sin. That is all it did in the past as well. It is what we do with that knowledge that is important. Do we turn to Him for salvation and mercy or do we harden our hearts and rebel against Him. The same choices Moses, Elijah, and Jesus preached to them....and us.
There is only one gate...and He is all there ever has been.
Yep, uh huh. Keep your privates private. How many times must I say that ???.
Here's a bit of off-topic trivia for the day... and no fair Googling!
Who wrote these words? Extra credit for the year it was written.
"Can we wonder at the mortal weariness and disgust, the sense of wasted powers and the conviction that her life is a failure, that comes over a woman when, instead of the ever broadening activities that she had planned, she finds herself tied down to the petty work of teaching a few girls?"
And that's not to say that teaching girls (or children in general) is not an honorable calling nor would I consider it "petty" for those who do, but it should be a calling, not the only opportunity available.
I KNOW I KNOW....
Lottie Moon.
Depite participating in the Lottie Moon offering, I never knew anything about her. (I know pathetic.) So, we actually studied her this year to learn about her ministry. And that quote stood out to me.
My bro Zeke says:
The way I read it, there was never anyone justified under the law...or by the law. No one outside of Jesus ever fulfilled the law.
oc says:
You read well, my friend. And your comprehension is excellent. It is only Him. Share it.
Ezekiel said:
All the law does today is expose sin. That is all it did in the past as well. It is what we do with that knowledge that is important. Do we turn to Him for salvation and mercy or do we harden our hearts and rebel against Him. The same choices Moses, Elijah, and Jesus preached to them....and us.
There is only one gate...and He is all there ever has been.
Reply:
So you are saying that grace wasn't in the law, it was in Jesus. My husband just pointed that out to me - that Abraham preceded the law.
The sacrifices were propitiation for sin in the OT. The sacrifices were made because of faith and obedience. Faith was counted to them as righteousness, right?
Jesus’ death on the cross was propitiation for our sin. (and theirs) By faith we accept Him. So, salvation has always been by faith through grace.
James 1:25 – “But, whosoever looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth in it, he being not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.”
Grace was always there. He meant it from the start. We never "got it". He did, and He loved us anyway. How can you not love Him after all that???
Just sayin'.
oc.
NASS said:
Wake up, people! Bellevue Baptist Church has been hijacked, and so has the SBC. And hardly anyone seems to care.
Then NASS posted:
Here's a bit of off-topic trivia for the day... and no fair Googling!
Who wrote these words? Extra credit for the year it was written.
.....
Churchmouse to NASS:
Who said these words: Extra credit for the year they were said:
"We don't have to get together. The Southern Baptist Convention doesn't have to survive. I don't have to be the pastor of Bellevue. I don't have to live! But I'm NOT going to compromise the WORD OF GOD."
That's where we are NASS. It is lonely out here - without our church - without our old friends - without the familiar security of being a Southern Baptist. NASS, we haven't changed what we believe - they have.
Our Father sees us. HE CARES!
Ding! Ding! Ding!
And the new poster, "bkwormgirl," is correct! The year was 1883. Bet you never heard that in G.A.s or the W.M.U. (Do they still have Sunbeams, G.A.s, R.A.s, and the W.M.U.? Or did those organizations go the way of the Broadman Hymnal?)
What Would Lottie Say?
What would Paige Patterson say?
Do you think that the Ram in the Thicket wasn't Grace...???
Argue with Abraham about that...
as he lifts the knife and prepares to plunge it into his son's chest...in total faith...
just sayin'.
oc.
The sacrifices were propitiation for sin in the OT. The sacrifices were made because of faith and obedience. Faith was counted to them as righteousness, right?
Jesus’ death on the cross was propitiation for our sin. (and theirs) By faith we accept Him. So, salvation has always been by faith through grace.
The book of Hebrews tells us that "the blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin." So, the sacrifice of the OT could not propitiate. Salvation has always and only been on the basis of "the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world". Also...salvation has always been by GRACE through FAITH...not the other way around..."For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--not by works, so that no one can boast." Eph. 2:8-9 Grace is the causation, repentance and faith are the inseparable works of grace. Acts 20:21 "testifying both to Jews and to Greeks repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ."
Neither Jew nor Gentile, or anyone who lived before Israel was a nation, has ever been saved except by grace..through faith...on the basis of Christ's blood. As for the law: "After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people." Jer. 31:33
CHURCHMOUSE, I watched the entire service again, and saw the videos and HEARD those infamous words again. It is so disturbing how RIGHT Dr. Rogers was! "Compromise" (ignoring sin) HAS been the ruination.
We can feel okay about being let down and OVER the SBC, as he predicted it in a sense. As for tithing, I have read and studied; and paid attention today as well, and, we ARE giving all we can right now. I can't believe I EVER got paranoid that we weren't. I mean Dr G. says the same thing over and over and over, maybe he knows that if you throw enough mud from the pulpit, eventually some of it will stick.
"We don't have to get together. The Southern Baptist Convention doesn't have to survive. I don't have to be the pastor of Bellevue. I don't have to live! But I'm NOT going to compromise the WORD OF GOD."
Well, I guess we can rule out Steve Gaines. It was Adrian Rogers! Don't remember the exact year, but I'm thinking around 1979. It was during the "conservative takeover" of the SBC which considering where the SBC is today might not have been the best idea. It may have started out right, but IMO PP and his followers have gone off the deep end.
Not sure my two cents will be welcomed... but thought I would toss them in the ring none the less.
It seems to me that OT was more about obedience (which required faith) to God's spoken word. And now, we act under grace. We do not have the opportunity to hear God speak to us in an audible tone. But He has made the way of Redemption clear through scripture and through the work of Christ. Only through the perfect blood of Jesus can there be redemption.
Under the law (OT) people had to behave in a specific manner and have faith that God was who He said He was. It seems to me that he tested them more blatantly. (The blood on the door post or your oldest child dies, Abraham with Issac, Daniel in with the Lions... just to name a few.)
Now though we also are tested. Will we stand against evil? (Both in the church and outside? And I think the answer is clear how the majority of those on this blog feel.) Will we find ways to demonstrate the love of Jesus to a world who often could not care less. Will we still be devout followers of Jesus even though we don't understand where have all the people of integrity have gone? When it seems we stand alone? I think God is still testing, and our faith in God is what keeps us focused.
The Holy Spirit dwells within us, and it is the Holy Spirit who should be doing the job of convicting. Something I have never understood with the Seeker Sensitive moment is the elimination of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is no longer able to draw people to the Redeemer. That's why we must reduce our churches to clubs that resemble nothing worthy to be called a sanctuary of God. The Holy Spirit no longer convicts that is why we must threaten Christians with how to behave.
I wonder how long it will be before God (like in the days of the OT) will say no more...
Just my thoughts at the moment...
AOG says:
Neither Jew nor Gentile, or anyone who lived before Israel was a nation, has ever been saved except by grace..through faith...on the basis of Christ's blood.
oc says:
Oh man, you bet bro !!!!
Who is arguing against that???
Shall he meet me in three rounds???
What up? Christ's blood far exceeds...
Just sayin'.
oc.
bkwormgirl,
Welcome and thank you for your two cents worth!!!!
BkWormGirl
You know we love ya...
That should be enough...
It's enough for Him, He loves us...
Just sayin,
oc.
Bkworm said...
Will we still be devout followers of Jesus even though we don't understand where all the people of integrity have gone?
When it seems we stand alone?...... our faith in God is what keeps us focused.
Even tho 2007 was one of the worse years for me financially, emotionally ,and medically...
I learned the answer to your question.
I would rather stand alone...
I would rather stand for my Faith in God's Word
than be comfortable or accepted by the majority who compromise for man made unity.
oops...I missed the police.
AOG - Yeah, by grace through faith, that's what I was trying to say...sputter,
OC - The lamb in the thicket was named Grace - just sayin'.
BKWORMGIRL - I like what you say!
NASS - good friend - I have heard others say that Dr. Rogers made a mistake taking that stand with the SBC. Yet, he was defending the inerrancy of the scriptures, the incarnation, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, the resurrection and ascension and Second Coming of Christ. For the life of me, I don't understand how he could have done anything else.
If then, they were under grace, and there is a distinction between being "under law" and "under grace", how could they (the OT Jews) be both under law and under grace at the same time and in the same sense?
12:28 PM, January 05, 2008
I just did a 30 week study on the 'law' alone. it was very interesting. Of course there was no "law of Moses" until Moses. But wasn't anything God commanded before then "law" so to speak? Like not eating from the tree?
So was Adam saved? We are not told clearly but we have clues that he probably was. So there is not other way to say it but that God saved Him by Grace even though he did not deserve it?
Did Noah receive grace by being spared? There was no 'law' but it says he was righteous.
So what else could it be but Grace because of Faith?
The more I read the OT, the more I am stunned at the clues God gives us at how few were saved in the OT. He saved a 'remnant' for Himself.
Am I even in the same conversation?
oc,
Nobody CAN argue with that ;). I was making a point after reading a few posts which seemed to me to be saying that the law and the gospel are in opposition some how. True, I made my point in long fashion, but as I said, any doctrine or belief has to have a scriptural/exegetical framework which it's derived from, in order to have any validity. I simply set up the framework by asking rhetorical questions. I brought it up because much of what folks believe about law and grace these days is based on a dispensational framework which makes a hard distinction between law and gospel, Israel and church. Within that framework whenever the Bible speaks of Israel, it is believed that it speaks only of physical Israel. However the Scriptures declare that not all Israel is true Israel...and if the presuppositions of a law/grace Israel/church distinction is true, then that passage (as well as Jer. 31:33) necessarily raises the questions: who, or what, is the Israel of God? Does God have 2 peoples, or 1? Does God have 1 plan of salvation for the Jews and another for the Gentiles? In my view these are questions of great import.
BTW, bookworm, I've never asked anyone to agree with me. I'm quite accustomed to being disagreed with ;) However I have been known to try and make folks think and rethink ;)
Grace and Peace
I think bkwormgirl is quite intellegent and didn't need the warning.
Is anyone watching the debates?????
allofgrace....didn't mean your warning. :)
"So you are saying that grace wasn't in the law, it was in Jesus. My husband just pointed that out to me - that Abraham preceded the law.
The sacrifices were propitiation for sin in the OT. The sacrifices were made because of faith and obedience. Faith was counted to them as righteousness, right?"
Yikes. If Grace was in the 'law of Moses' then read Leviticus sometime! Ouch.
The law was a 'tutor' which in Greek (Paul used this word to describe the law of Moses) is describing a servant that families hired to watch their children. Not to teach them but to make sure they did not get in trouble or get hurt. There were other servants who taught or cooked but this servant had a special task with children and stayed with them all the time even when they played.
Viewed in that sense...the law was to keep them focused on God so to speak. Remind them of how sinful they were.
AOG
exegetical framework - Could you draw me one of those?
dispensational framework - yup,I have one of these in my Schofield King James Bible notes
the Israel of God - some believe the diaspora took many exiled Jews to Britain, but how can we really know for sure
Sorry, AOG, just messin' around with you.
Larry said,
Boy, they must have sensed bk's hesitance and homed right in on it!
Wow, I'm glad I encouraged bk to post no matter what!
So many people are being unfairly and angrily slammed, condemned, and being branded with silly labels for no reason whatsoever these days, I think we should all take every chance we get to offer encouragement.
Larry,
What are you talking about??????
Everyone that responded to Bkwormgirl welcomed her.
You were the only one that felt it necessary to warn her.
There has been no slamming here unless you feel pity for Brady's bitter name calling.
Even then...we were all cordial to him.
take yor badge off, Larry.
Hey,
Who is the dark haired big man on the debates???
Did yall just hear Hillary get bent out of shape??
Man, she makes my stomach hurt!!!!
churchmouse,
I'm sure I could build you one, but I'm not artistically inclined enough to draw one ;) Scofield...perish the thought! ;)
Hillary is such an angry lady.
'mouse wrote:
"NASS - good friend - I have heard others say that Dr. Rogers made a mistake taking that stand with the SBC. Yet, he was defending the inerrancy of the scriptures, the incarnation, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, the resurrection and ascension and Second Coming of Christ. For the life of me, I don't understand how he could have done anything else."
Oh, I've heard people say that, too, but I didn't say that. To repeat, the "conservative takeover" of the SBC, considering where the SBC is today, might not have been the best idea -- not from the initial ideological standpoint but from the methods employed. It may have started out right, but IMO PP and his followers have gone off the deep end with their additions to Scripture.
I applaud Dr. Rogers' stance for inerrancy and the other things he stood for. (I do take issue with his involvement in drafting the BFM 2000, but that's a different subject.) I don't think the way the whole "takeover" was orchestrated by some of those involved was something to be proud of. Let's face it. It was ugly! And again, considering where the SBC is today, perhaps what we're seeing now is a good example of the ends not necessarily justifying the means.
This is but one example. (And I'm no defender of Joel Gregory who had his own issues, most of his own making.)
From that article:
"I think I could live with a Deist version of Paige Patterson, an architect or a clockmaker if you will, who wound up the conservative resurgence and then stepped back and let it run by itself. Instead, Southern Baptists have been left with an unmoved mover, an unseen hand, whose capricious tinkering has left the convention unable to define words like “autonomy,” “priesthood,” “competence,” and “liberty” in ways that our Baptist forbears would recognize."
lin,
Did you see how this all started?
at 10:28 this morning:
Churchmouse posted:
On tithing: Rmemmber, we are not under Jewish law. Why would we be required to obey the tithing laws and not the rest? We were commanded to give of our means with a glad heart.
The comment you saw was my trying to repeat back what someone else had said to see if I understood correctly.
I think you and I are on the same page. I think we have been labeled dispensationalists, but I am not sure. =)
larry,
Everyone's "two cents" are welcome as long as the intent isn't to attack other people who post here. I didn't sense that in anyone's response to "bkwormgirl," so I'm unsure what you're talking about.
To make it official...
Welcome, "bkwormgirl"!
larry & gmom,
Work it out offline, please.
gmommy said...
oops...I missed the police.
Ah yes ... "Roxanne", "Don't Stand So Close To Me", "Every Breath You Take" ... who doesn't miss The Police?
But take heart, we still have Sting -- and The Police Reunion Tour isn't quite over, I think.
:)
Gmommy - I think the dark haired man is Bill Richardson. (I don't have the debates on right now, I am taping them to watch later - but Mr. Richardson is the only person who does not have a "common" face in the democratic debates. He ranked 4th in Iowa cacus earning him a spot tonight.
I too feel I have learned the same thing. I would rather stand alone than be ashamed before God.
Larry - thanks for the words of wisdom. It is important to remember sometimes when it feels like we are being attacked that it is not an attack as much as an opportunity to articulate our beliefs and possibly learn.
OC - thanks, you are right I didn't feel attacked by anyone... thanks for the welcome... Yes, you are right - as long as we keep the proper perspective, only how God feels about us is what matters.
Awww...shucks Churchmouse... you made me blush... thanks.
"I was making a point after reading a few posts which seemed to me to be saying that the law and the gospel are in opposition some how."
You are tricky!~ :o)
Now, I don't think they are in opposition at all. Jesus fulfilled the law. the ONLY one perfectly to do so. But, We are under a NEW Covenant. (New Testament)
" I brought it up because much of what folks believe about law and grace these days is based on a dispensational framework which makes a hard distinction between law and gospel"
Because there is! I did a deep word study on 'law' in both the OT and NT. Everytime the NT mentions the 'law of moses' it is specific as in 'The Law", the law of moses, the law of prophets, etc. If it mentions 'law' in another context, there is always a qualifying word that lets us know it is not 'the law of Moses" ther are tons of examples if you want me to post them.
As I study, I am concerned more and more that covenant theology always leads to legalism in some form or another. Just one small example: Mohler wants to put an 'S" on the end of Priesthood of Believer. That is significant if you think long and hard about it. PPL is another example.
I have a new rule about bible study: I refuse to read INTO scripture anymore. Take off all your filters and read Genesis 1-4 again. Forget everything we have ever been taught! It is an eye opener! We have put INTO scripture much taht is NOT there.
God promised a New Covenant in Jer 31. Jesus told the apostles in the upper room that He was bringing in the NC. When He was NOT in that tomb, the NC began. The law was OUT. And all that was left is what we were told specifically in the NT. Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself, etc. and all the 'one anothers' in the NT. that is our new 'law' (just kidding) but the bar was raised. It MUST be in our hearts because of regeneration. It is NOTHING we can do. I can pretend to love you outwardly for the sake of what others may think but if I am regenerated, I really do and God knows it.
2 Corinthians 3:5-8
"5(A) Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but(B) our sufficiency is from God, 6who has made us competent[a] to be(C) ministers of(D) a new covenant, not of(E) the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but(F) the Spirit gives life.
7Now if(G) the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory(H) that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?"
The letter 'kills'
"Israel and church. Within that framework whenever the Bible speaks of Israel, it is believed that it speaks only of physical Israel."
this is where I think CT has to make scripture into allegory. Is that the right word? Or is it metaphor? I read Revelations literally.
I could turn this same question around and ask you if you think Israel has NO significance at all during the church age? Or if all the prophecies in the OT with the second coming are allegory or have already been fulfilled.
Just because Dispys attract all the kooks like Jack and Rexella, Hal, Hagee and the like, does not mean there is NOTHING there.
(I am not a die-on-this-hill dipsy so I welcome debate. I just cannot get my head around Satan being bound in this '1000' years we are supposedly in right now")
larry,
My 8:49 response was to your 8:22 comment. I hadn't seen your later comment when I posted.
NASS,
Honestly, I never heard much about all that - except that it was ugly. We weren't as interested back in those days - trusted others to take care of business, etc. =) Yeah....we did.
I think you and I are on the same page. I think we have been labeled dispensationalists, but I am not sure. =)
8:44 PM, January 05, 2008
Haven't they told you? I am dumb blonde. You must not have gotten the memo.
Labels. I just wish they could have made up something shorter. Let's go with 'dipsy'. AFter all, the New Covenant folks get NCT and the just plain Covenant folks get CT. They wouldn't let us be DT's for some reason.
(Disclaimer: If you are not a dipsy, disregard the last paragraph. :o)
Ahhh, Jack and the lovely Rexella.... That Y2K thing kinda backfired on them, didn't it?
Nass -
Why thank you.
Your thoughts are more than welcome. Don't hesitate to share whenever you feel like it. Just be aware that some of the regulars might disagree with you and are VERY well versed in both Scripture and theology.
Don't misinterpret any 'opposing' response to your posts (or no response at all) as a sign that your thoughts are unwelcome.
7:17 PM, January 05, 2008
BK, I am as dumb as a fence post and rarely get the jokes, either. If I know anything it is because the Holy Spirit taught me in scripture. And keeps on teaching and teaching and teaching. Ain't it great!
Now, I may be smarter than AOG, Junkster, OC, or EZ, but they STILL love me. :o) (That is simply an inside joke for the gals.)
Heh heh heh...
Careful there Lin, saying you're smarter than me ain't saying a whole lot for yourself ;)
Ok, I see what is happening...comment moderation is off...no wonder I am missing stuff....gee whiz...this is like...total freedom...instantly! my head is spinning out of control!@!!
See? Dumb as a fence post.
Shhhhhhhhh!!! Trolls, ya know.
Ahhh, Jack and the lovely Rexella.... That Y2K thing kinda backfired on them, didn't it?
9:00 PM, January 05, 2008
What is even more bizarre is many Covenant folks like Sproul, Jr were telling folks to dig in store grain, canned goods, guns, ammo, etc, etc. Oh, yeah, it backfired in lots of places. What does one do with 150 lbs of flour but start a business making cakes?
junk said:
Ah yes ... "Roxanne", "Don't Stand So Close To Me", "Every Breath You Take" ... who doesn't miss The Police?
Reply: I don't miss The Police. Never have - not even once!
I miss Paul Simon.
Good grief Larry.
I don't think I ever referred to you as the sheriff. I think I always call you the blog police.
Seems silly that you won't post until I explain or won't post anymore if I ask you not to....I don't control you or this blog. And I don't feel strongly enough to want you not to post.
I agree that you try to be fair and measured.
I just think it's funny that you don't really "get to know us" but jump on the blog (do you have an alarm?) when you even THINK something is or might happen or appear a certain way.
Bkworm didn't need your defense. We like to dialog with well spoken opinionated people.
If you believe in what you have to say...don't be so willing to not say it just because you happen to bug me.
It's not that big a deal.
There was another person who claimed never to blog and said negative things about the blog
(not saying you do that)....
then the second someone posted anything she didn't approve ...
she popped up and told that person what to do. No dialog before that...just orders ...she patrolled.
It's possible that has something to do with why it bothers me that you pop out of no where and tell people to email you or warn them about us.
You seem to put yourself above us.
JMO...shouldn't be a major deal to you.
"You have to admit, some of the round table discussions here can get somewhat intimidating"
ATTENTION COMRADES: From now on all posts must be laced with whipped creme and chocolate sauce. End them with a cherry on top. (I prefer two if you are conversing with me)
And that is an order!
:o)
Larry, what are you talking about...intimidating? I am as soft as a furry little teddy bear. YOu must be thinking of churchmouse. Can't you tell by her name how intimnidating she really is?
I miss Paul Simon.
9:16 PM, January 05, 2008
YOu're scaring me here.
What? No Art Garfunkle? What about him? He gets no respect?
(I promise to get back on topic...what was it again?)
Pouring Chocolate sauce....
Spraying out a nice rosette of whip cream....
One.. and Two Cherries....
Lin - what a thing to tempt with... only five days in our our new diet and trying to hard to be good.....
I can't hold off the carmel sauce much more... its calling my name...
hahaha
YOu are right. I should not have used food metaphors. I have a few to lose myself.
How about....hmmmm...lace doilies, sad puppies and finger puppets?
No, Junk would have a challenge with the finger puppets. And AOG loathes sad puppies.
I'll have to get back with you. I seem to only know food metaphors. :o)
bkwormgirl....
thanks for joining us tonight!
Junk,
you always crack me up!! What a mind!!!!
Lin,
The LAST thing you are is a dumb blonde!!!!
and usually AOG is the only one that gets a little cranky :)
lin,
who won the debates????
Lin said...
What? No Art Garfunkle? What about him? He gets no respect?
(I promise to get back on topic...what was it again?)
And you say you don't get the jokes!!
Lin said...
No, Junk would have a challenge with the finger puppets.
I'm ok with finger puppets ... so long as they keep to their proper place and don't usurp the authority granted to other kinds of puppets.
;)
G'nite all. Thanks for the interesting discussion.
lin,
who won the debates????
9:57 PM, January 05, 2008
On this blog or for president? :o)
(I am NOT watching. I just cannot watch them anymore. I was a political junkie for 20 years and it got me NO wheresville. this time, I plan on asking the Holy Spirit to tell me how to vote. Ought to be interesting...shhh...don't tell watchman I am voting.....)
Larry,
Where's your badge when I say something that's really bad????
I just intimidated AOG...he's upset!!!
Post a Comment