Interesting word "agenda" that you used in your 11:58 pm post from yesterday. I used that term in a letter I wrote to the pastor in February. He was kind enough to write back and among other things, tell me he doesn't have an agenda. Now you are using the word agenda. hmmmmmm.............
Does anyone know of the Tennessee Nonprofit Tax Act of 1998? I may be wrong on the year.
It's my understanding that in cases of nonprofits including churches that havn't updated their bylaws in the past 50 years, this set of bylaws steps in on any area the old bylaws don't address. Since our bylaws at BBC haven't been updated in 79 years, I would think this new set of bylaws will determine what can and can't be done at Bellevue. I've seen the 3/4 page document that is supposed to be the whole set of bylaws and there isn't anything to them. You can read them if you go to the savingbellevue.com site and enter into the sight and then go to Church Government. Any legaleagles out there that would know.
I am across the country for a while, but will be returning next year. I have been at Bellevue since I was 4. I was married there, and worked in the nursery. I still do when I visit. I have been out of the loop for a couple of years, though, for the most part. I am deeply, DEEPLY saddened by all of this. I check the saving Bellevue site regularly, and truly see the Light in Mark Sharpe's points, among others. I am praying over the situation. I would love to recongregate at Bellevue when we return, but I may have to consider Germantown, or something, as many others have. Thank you all for writing these things so that I have been able to know what has been going on.
Good Morning and loving greetings to you in the powerful name of Jesus, who is worthy to be praised!
I just wanted to recount the truth concerning the apology from the good deacon to the Whitmires.
In a quest for truth. Brother Charles and I made a decision to talk directly to brothers and sisters who were directly involved in any allegation that came to our attention.
During that time we spoke with one of the officer deacons and ask him to please tell us the truth about Brother Whitwire`s retirement and why he left Bellevue.
The deacon gave us much information in that conversation.
We then went directly to the Whitmire`s and found out that the information was incorrect.
We went back to the good deacon and told him that he was giving out false information and reminded him how important it was to be truthful in all things.
The good deacon told us that he thought he was being truthful.
We assured him that the information he was giving was false.
He spoke to the Whitmire`s directly.
After he spoke to the Whitmires, he let us know that he was indeed giving out false information and that he had never known the truth about the Whitmires.
We ask him if he was going to reconcile with his brother before he took the LORD`s supper, which was coming soon and the next day he shared that he had gone over to the Whitmire`s home and apologized in person.
When we learned this, we asked him if he was going to go to the other Bellevue Leaders and to the pastor to share that he had learned the truth about Brother Whitmire and ask them to do as he did, which was to reconcile with their brother. He said he was going to do just that.
We had great hopes and expectations that this good deacon would go and confront other brothers and sisters at the church and that everyone who was involved in abusing Brother Whitmire and his family would soon come forth. one by one, in true humility to admit what they had done, that it was wrong and then apologize to the Whitmires and to the congregation for the multitude of sins laid upon our dear Brother, Jim Whitmire and his family. We also expected apologies for passing along rumors and false informaion, and for willingly deceiving the entire congregation to come forth, but we have never heard from the good deacon again.
His apology was a personal apology for him giving out false information and perhaps things he did not share with us.
We were very blessed wirh the deacon`s apology but we also want to be quick to point out that no one should mistake the deacon`s personal apology for anything more than it was. Remember no one can apologize for another person`s sin.
We have the letters to prove everything I have written here and I am sure Josh can confirm that what I am sharing is the truth.
I hope that this adds some light to the deacon`s apology to the Whitmires.
Under HIS wings and in HIS love, Sister Pam
12:11 PM, November 29, 2006
ace said... JOshua Whitmire,
Steve Gaines wanted to bring Jamie Parker along as soon as he could, so my father decided to retire 6 months early.
Perhaps you can clear up something here. 1) Did your father decide to retire 6 months on his own will? or 2) Was he forced to retire 6 months earlier than planned?
You used the term 'decided to retire' like it was his decision and I want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly on that.
Thanks for your post, by the way!
12:19 PM, November 29, 2006
25+yrs@bbc said... Ace... You conveniently left off the part of the quotation that explained the obvious.
JoshuaDavidWhitmire said: "Second, My father was NOT planning on retiring long before Steve Gaines came to Bellevue. The family always talked long ago with my father that one day, after Dr. Rogers retired, that the new pastor might want to bring in his own Minister of Music. This is a fact that happens all the time with churches. My father was planning on retiring in June of this year. Steve Gaines wanted to bring Jamie Parker along as soon as he could, so my father decided to retire 6 months early."
12:35 PM, November 29, 2006
Comment Deleted This post has been removed by the author.
12:45 PM, November 29, 2006
WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said... I greet you again in Jesus` holy name!
On November 7th, Brother Charles and I brought our concerns about the racial remarks alleged to one of ministers at our church, to the attention of Pastor Steve, Deacon Chairman Chuck Taylor, and Deacon Secretary Mark Spiller and to date, we have recieved no reply from anyone.
We called the brother minister who allegedly made racial remarks and he said he has never spoken one racial word to anyone.
He also said that he does not know who the man that made these allegations could possibly be.
The man who made these allegations did so in a public way.
He said he was on staff at Bellevue for 6 years.
He said that this minister and I think one other minister were speaking in a prejudice manner towards African Americans.
He said he has witnesses.
Brother Charles amd I minister in West Africa, we have African children, but even if we didn`t we would still find these allegations offensive and worthy of investigation.
We want to proceed with trying to clear this up because it is the right thing to do.
We want to believe the Bellevue minister but if this man has proof of these allegations, we would like for him to bring it forward.
If it was not true, we would like for him to remove the brothers name from his open letter to the public.
If anyone knows the identity of the man who was on staff for 6 years, who made these allegations, we would greatly appreciate you letting us know so we can go to him in person and in love work towards truth and reconciliation for the Glory of GOD alone.
12:56 PM, November 29, 2006
Flatfoot said... I heard that Mark Sharpe was not an "active" deacon at the time this all started to boil. As I understand, deacons serve a 3 year term, then they go inactive for a time period. If anyone knows, including Mr. Sharpe, please answer, and then explain what an inactive deacons does. Thanks
1:09 PM, November 29, 2006
WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said... Dear Brothers and Sisters in Jesus, we were so blessed that the pastor apologized to Brother Mark Sharpe for his Hezzbolah remark and for trespassing private property!
His apology is a wonderful step toward complete reconciliation with our dear brother Mark!
We would like to encourage the pastor to take the rest of the steps that are required before true reconciliation can be celebrated.
One of those remaining steps is for Brother Mark Sharpe to be restored to his previous position as deacon.
It will be a wonderful day when all parties who have offended our brother, should come forth to apologize and be totally reconciled with him and his family.
We can not continue to take the LORD`s supper with all of these issues unresolved and without reconciliation among the brethren.
Let`s do the right thing today and get all of these issues under the Blood of Christ.
1:24 PM, November 29, 2006
swtt said... flatfoot,
A deacon serves for 3 years at Bellevue and then automatically rotates off for 1 year. I believe that is what you are referring to as innactive. This is done as to not burn a deacon out by overworking them. The duties are to counsel in the services, man the telephone lines when people call during the televised services, and serve the Lord's Supper.
Once your 1 year of being innactive is over, you are then offered an opportunity to return as a deacon as long as you still meet the qualifications of a deacon. The deacon and his wife are interviewed by a team of deacons who are on the Deacon nominating interview committee.
This is the committee that John Caldwill has chaired for the past 10 years in a row. There have been deacons in the past several years that have complained about John serving as chairman of this committee for this long but only to deaf ears. In fact, John Caldwill actually served as this chairman several years ago while he was the actual chairman of the deacons. This position is a very powerful position to have because they control who gets to be a deacon and who does not. John Caldwill also has a tremendous amount of power for not asking deacons back on to serve.
Once you are elected to be a deacon at Bellevue and any other SBC church, you are always a deacon for that church. You may not be an active deacon, but as long as you are a member of the church, you are considered a deacon. For years, inactive deacons were always invited to Dr. Rogers birthday party each year even if they hadn't been active for years.
If you are removed as a deacon, it's my understanding you have to be brought before the church body and be voted off.
Your question as to what does an inactive deacon do is probably that he enjoys the time off by not having to come to meetings or have to answer the telephone calls when people call in.
I think people are getting hung up on active vs. inactive. I don't think anyone ever said Mark Sharpe was kicked off being an active deacon. Ask Mark Sharpe and he'll tell you that Mark Dougharty just said "you are no longer a deacon at Belleuve any longer. Mark Dougharty knew Mark Sharpe wasn't active when he made that statement".
I don't beleive Mark Dougharty has the authority to remove any deacon from his position at Bellevue whether they are active or inactive.
I hope this clears things up for you flatfoot.
By the way, why do you call yourself flatfoot?
1:37 PM, November 29, 2006
Flatfoot said... yes it does clear up some things, thank you.
New BBC Open Forum said... OKAY, EVERYBODY! TIME TO TIE A KNOT IN THIS ONE AND MOVE TO THE NEXT TOPIC (AT THE TOP).
Thank you,
NBBCOF
1:50 PM, November 29, 2006
Diana Hart said... Flatfoot,
cJesusnme wasn't being sarcastic. I am referring to a post from last night. She(he?) was being serious. Have you read Sister Pam Gremillion's posts? She and her husband have been trying to get in touch with Steve for maybe months now. At least weeks. He seems to be unreachable. I'm remembering a time several months ago when a senior relative of mine spoke to Steve and told him she needed some counseling. I think she said he told her he didn't have time for that. I don't suppose he does but would it have killed him to offer her some support and maybe mention someone's name who could counsel with her? Maybe offer to pray with her? He was going to show us how to pray after all. Let's get real here. And I'm not being sarcastic either. I'm being quite serious. And no I didn't hear this from my sister in law's cousin's uncle. I heard it from this senior relative herself.
Thank you for going the sources you've persued for the truth. I agree that if we continue to gripe and moan, nothing will be accomplished. I REALLY admire Josh Whitmire for his post last night (thanks for your email, Josh!) I am praying and focusing on Jesus this week in the hope that Sunday night's church service will be a big step towards healing our church.
For those of you who wish to answer: If Steve Gaines shows true humily and a broken spirit on Sunday, will that be enough for you? Of course repentance (turning away) will have to be evident. I've never wanted him to leave; there are others in the leadership that I believe will continue on the same path of dividing the church into these "camps" so some of the leadership needs to change, but I don't think Steve needs to leave.
Any thoughts? And remember to be kind to each other; you don't know who's reading. :)
blessmewiththetruth, I'm sorry to confuse you. Mark S said Mark Dougharty told him he was kicked off the deacon roll at Bellevue. Mark Sharpe said Mark Dougharty told him he was no longer a deacon. Mark Sharpe asked him on who's authority he was speaking and Mark Dougharty would not give him an answer. That's when Mark Sharpe said he told Mark Dougharty he didn't have the authority to do that because only the church can remove someone from being a deacon at Bellevue. Hope this helps.
Karen, I will pray for repentance from the leadership, especially Steve Gaines, however I will be very cautious in regards to the words vs deeds. He has been know to speak "convenient truths". The proof is in the puddin as the old folks say:)
Did anyone notice that Mark Sharpe's name is absent from the "Lay Ministries 2006-2007" booklet that was handed out at Sunday's (11/26/06) CC meeting Look on page 2 "Active Deacons Years in Which Terms Expire" - the year's listed are 2006, 2007, 2008 - if Mark Sharpe was an active deacon in 2006, should not his name be listed? The booklet was published in 11/06. Draw your own conclsion. I'm just curious...
If the pastor admits ALL of the lies he has told, and ALL of the deception he has used to manipulate all of us with, and All of the intimidation tacics he has used to make other bend to his will, and All of the mean hateful words he has spoken in and out of meetings and in and out of church about all of us, and IF he admits that he was wrong to take money from the church for moving expenses when cheerleading expenses are definintly not moving expenses, and he admits it was wrong of him to cause many of his flock to stumble, stray, and scatter because of his own words and things that he has done, and If he admits that it was wrong for him to have ever used the church credit cards for any personal use, and if he admits it was wrong to allow others in leadership to tell lies to others when he knew they were lying, and if and if and if and if...........this list to so long that I will stop here.
And having done all of the above IF he then admits that he is unworthy to be a Shepherd of anyone`s pasture and he agrees to step down for counseling
AND
Order ALL financial books to be open to a group chosen by the church body
AND
IF he makes personal reconcilitaion with ALL of those he has personally offended
I am not going to reveal my name and I have my own security as well as that of my family to be concerned with. This is neither exaggeration or deceit. While I have chosen to post these things that you bring up on my blog it is because they are true and hurtful.
If you read my entire blog, you will see that my intent is not to smear or malign anyone's ministry. It is, however, to prove that these people who have the nerve to think they are above the Word and beyond the grasp of the church most certainly are not.
When I left my staff position I was maligned and threatened, called names and lied about, as have been countless others.
The actions of these people don't just effect their core group of friends but they spread through the church, causing many of the issues we see now.
To whom much is given, much shall be required.
I also have the freedom of speech to tell my story because that is what it is - MY story.
I have taken this "brother's" name out of my blog but the blog will remain and as I have done in the past I encourage everyone with stories - good, bad, ugly - to do the same.
I know also how this "brother" works and I want no part of his antics around my family or my home, period.
I had taken the race issue to the church on more than one occasion before leaving and each time it was squashed ... much like you are getting no response from the hierarchy now. It's also what ultimately led to my departure from the church.
Do not get me wrong, there are issues such as racism and adultery, etc, in churches everywhere - I am not trying to pick on BBC or dump on the church in it's dire time. But when these people come out with attacks against brothers who either disagree or have concerns, then the truth should come out as well.
I will say this again so everyone hears me - BBC is a GREAT PLACE and GOD WORKS THERE IN THOUSANDS OF HEARTS, in MYRIADS of ways! There are AMAZING MEN AND WOMEN OF GOD THERE whom are vessels of gold, useable and used.
We can and do respectfully agree many points, but squelching the freedom to speak is not one of them.
God bless you, sister Pam, for the reconcilitory spirit He has given you, and may He continue to use you mightily as well as this open forum of discussion for His glory and our good.
Never put your faith in men! said... NASS, forgive me for jumping in off topic.
Sister Pam:
I am not going to reveal my name and I have my own security as well as that of my family to be concerned with. This is neither exaggeration or deceit. While I have chosen to post these things that you bring up on my blog it is because they are true and hurtful.
If you read my entire blog, you will see that my intent is not to smear or malign anyone's ministry. It is, however, to prove that these people who have the nerve to think they are above the Word and beyond the grasp of the church most certainly are not.
When I left my staff position I was maligned and threatened, called names and lied about, as have been countless others.
The actions of these people don't just effect their core group of friends but they spread through the church, causing many of the issues we see now.
To whom much is given, much shall be required.
I also have the freedom of speech to tell my story because that is what it is - MY story.
I have taken this "brother's" name out of my blog but the blog will remain and as I have done in the past I encourage everyone with stories - good, bad, ugly - to do the same.
never put your faith in men
It is all too sad that so many of us have had to keep our names secret because the of what those in power can and will do to us.
I just have to ask you why you are going to take the man`s name down if you know he did this. I don`t think you should. If your story is true than stick to it and if I were you I would find a way to help those who want to put an end to this.
Maybe there is some way you can help without revealing who you are????
Since it is your story and you have the details, you should jumo at the chance to help put an end to this.
I do know personally from my own eyes that these things occurred. However, I took his name off of my blog out of respect of the members of the church.
These things happened a few years back, so of course I don't expect anyone who was involved to "remember".
I tried the reconciliation thing and used every avenue possible, to no avail 3 years ago. That is why I simply told my story and left it at that.
I did receive an email from the Gremillions a few weeks back and I am now (right now) in the process of responding in hopes that things have changed and these people do not still hold these views.
I am hoping I can help out and remain anonymous, and I am praying (and I would covet prayers from you all as well) about the best way to handle the entire situation.
That`s great! I will be praying and I hope those who hurt you will also come into the light and admit what they have done and seek forgiveness!
If every issue gets settled except for yours, then our church is still not healed.
If someone is going around using racial slurs about people God has made and people he loves and people who are equal to every other human being,then we have to include this on our list of question to the CC and get to the bottom of it!
The original issues started with humility, humbleness and apoligies being necessary. Unfortuantely, the issue has evolved to a question of credibility and integrity. Do I believe that Dr. Gaines can be forgiven? Absolutely! Do I believe that it is possible to restore credibility and integrity with an apology? No. Unfortunately, when someone destroys their integrity the only thing that can restore it is time. Also, our church can not spend months upon months still questioning the credibility of the apology and the integrity of the man behind it. By the way don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen either.
I understand what you're saying and agree with you about David and Peter becoming great leaders after some really dark times. Unfortunately, Steve Gaines treated Gardendale staff and members the same way he's treated BBC staff and members. I can forgive, but I know BBC will never forget this dark time. With my financial background, a popular phrase is "past performance does not indicate future results", but it seems that history is repeating itself in this case. I know God can perform miracles - I hope He will in this.
It's been said on this blog (I don't know if it was you or not) that BBC will never be satisfied with any pastor because that pastor won't be Dr. Rogers. I don't think that's true - I think Mike Spradlin or Ken Whitten or David Jeremiah (My personal wish as I attended his church when I lived in San Diego) would be wonderful fits in BBC. Again, I'm not saying I want Steve Gaines to step down; I'm just giving examples to reiterate my point.
I guess it just sounds like setting up an awful lot of hoops to me. And I don't personally think that's our job. What you're offering sounds like "conditional forgiveness," not "seventy times seven" or offering a cloak. Trust me, I believe you're entitled to your opinion, and if this is what God requires of you when you have wronged someone else, then that's between you and the Father. But respectfully, can we really bind this on someone else? Perhaps this reveals the greatest gulf of all -- and it exists not between pastor and people, but between fellow members and our many diverse interpretations, opinions, and belief systems.
Also, with all of these conditions you've outlined that he MUST meet in order to forgiveness to be given and restoration to be accomplished in your mind, is there any allowance made for the things that have been alleged that are NOT true, or may yet be proven to be not true?
Hey I wanted to say one more thing... I know I am one person, with one story and that this all boils down to my word against the word of these tenured "men of God".
I do not expect an apology nor an admission or anything from these people; that would be career suicide for them.
And for me, it doesn't matter who thinks what or who says what because at least people are THINKING NOW. I am in no way, shape or form trying to change anyone's view of anyone else.
I am most blessed to see all these posts, from all different people in all walks of life - because we are THINKING! God gives each of us common sense and a brain for a REASON and God bless everyone who is using that gift in dealing with and praying through these tough days!!!!!
moosergs said... I get lost in this blog thing from time to time. Is there a meeting of some type this Sunday?
It's been said there is supposed to be a MAJOR CHANGE being announced in Sunday's night service. Don't shoot the messenger (me!) if it doesn't happen. But I think something will be said, but I have no idea what or from whom will be said.
Theophilus said... Does anyone have insight into Bellevue's policy on social drinking? Staff and deacons in particular.
I would think social drinking is a sin. I would like to know what you're referring to, but please make sure you have undisputed proof of whatever you say. Thanks!
I do- very disturbing to me, but I want to check about a policy first. Under the "don't shoot the messenger" rule, and unrelated to the staff social drinking issue, I think MD is going to resign.
The major announcement Sun. is that the communication committee will be no more. This came from a deacon source. This should not come as a surprise. The growing concerned have outgrown the Sun. am meeting room. Hopefully, SG will address his congregation as many of the concerned have requested, asked and have been praying for.
Here's some scripture against drinking... Leviticus 10:8-10
Instructions for Priestly Conduct 8 Then the Lord said to Aaron, 9 “You and your descendants must never drink wine or any other alcoholic drink before going into the Tabernacle. If you do, you will die. This is a permanent law for you, and it must be observed from generation to generation. 10 You must distinguish between what is sacred and what is common, between what is ceremonially unclean and what is clean.
Numbers 6:3
3 they must give up wine and other alcoholic drinks. They must not use vinegar made from wine or from other alcoholic drinks, they must not drink fresh grape juice, and they must not eat grapes or raisins.
Judges 13:4
4 So be careful; you must not drink wine or any other alcoholic drink nor eat any forbidden food.[a]
Ezekiel 44:21
21 "No priest is to drink on the job—no wine while in the inside courtyard.
That would be a big mistake. If the CC disbanded now it would be too obvious that they were nothing more than window dressing. Were they completely disingenuous when they told concerned members that "we don't know/don't have the answer to that but will get back to you" if they pack up and move on?
They are definitely against drinking. The qualifications for Bellevue deacons plainly prohibit drinking of any kind.
Not only that, they prohibit smoking (it may actually prohibit all tobacco use).
I understand the traditional SB position on alcohol. However, many Southern Baptist leaders are now questioning the alcohol prohibition. It was the subject of some controversy at this years' Convention. It will be interesting to see what happens with it in the future.
While I am an ardent nonsmoker, I disagree with the tobacco ban. If we are prohibiting tobacco, the only reason is on health grounds. Why single out smoking? Why not add transfats? Perhaps sun bathing too? While we are at it, why don't we have a gluttony provision. After all the Bible names it as sin, whereas alcohol and tobacco use are not so labeled.
In times past, there were ashtrays in the deacon meetings. And many will remember that Dr. Pollard loved cigars.
I think this is an example of someone singling out sins they dislike while leaving sins they enjoy alone. I don't think it can be justified.
Theophilus said... I do- very disturbing to me, but I want to check about a policy first. Under the "don't shoot the messenger" rule, and unrelated to the staff social drinking issue, I think MD is going to resign.
Theophilus
Do you have information that D.C. has been wineing and dining folks too?????
I do believe consuming or buying alcohol is not an accepted practice in our church and neither is gambling.
When the leaders of the church don`t mind buying a little booze, then we might as well put a liquor store next to the church.
Does anyone here mind if I sit down and buy my buddy a beer while I try to witness to him?
I`m sick of all the charades at Bellevue.
They preach one thing and do another all the time!
What are we talking about here? Please be specific - I had a root canal today and my pain killers have kicked in and I'm kind of dorky tonight. Thanks!
we have a minister at Bellevue purchasing alcohol for his friends while our teens are being taught in sunday school to abstain from alcohol and other things and while our pastor preaches how terrible alocohol is.
"Under the "don't shoot the messenger" rule, and unrelated to the staff social drinking issue, I think MD is going to resign."
Seems we've heard that one before -- the Sunday it was announced David Coombs was coming on board. It didn't happen then, and I'll have to see it to believe it's going to happen Sunday.
**The list is growing... Some of the congregation has awakened to the reality that our church is elder ruled by a close knit group of men who manage to be appointed to key positions year after year. The congregation needs to be awakened to this. I agree with Bin Wonderin:
We need:
1. An apology to the congregation for mocking us at Union City. After all, some of us didn't fall off the cabbage truck yesterday!
2. An admission the cheerleader tickets are not a legit moving expense and reimbursement to BBC.
3. An admission Dr. Gaines should have never given $25k to FUMC and an explanation of policy changes to prevent a repeat.
4. A policy for open books on Holy land trips and no overcharging of members. Free tickets for the host and wife are fine but not for anybody else
5. A quarterly business meeting with open mike Q&A with each committee chairman. Transcripts on the web within a week
**The current bylaws mention "monthly" business meetings! When were they changed??
6. A transparent committee selection process.
7. A good updated set of bylaws similar to GBC.
8. The signing of a public conflict of interest form for any member that has any business contract to provide services to the church. These people should be recused from committees that review bids for their services.
9. No church credit cards. Pay your own way and then turn in an expense report like I do at my job.
AND I would like to add...
10. A business meeting in accord with Matthew 18 to deal with the issues that remain related to Mark Sharpe and "the Dream"... AND any other loose ends that should have been dealt with months ago!!
11. The END of heavy handed dealing with ministers, staff, and members.
12. A whistle blower policy for ministers, staff, and members. Also:
13. Full disclosure of ministerial compensation: salary + benefit breakdown, etc.
14. Much greater congregational oversight of the current budget with a transparent policy for consideration of non-budgeted expenditures exceeding a reasonable amount.
15. Forgiveness for those in leadership who have allowed this to deteriorate to this point--AND consequences for their actions.
16. Building prayer buildings or any other type of building should be brought through proper channels to the congregation for prayerful consideration--not coerced "rubber stamping."
By the way, Dr. Rogers taught us quite a bit about prayer. As a matter of fact, I believe all of the current buildings ARE prayer buildings already. He and Dr. Whitmire also taught us quite a bit about worship also... but that's another topic.
17. Bellevue needs to reject Warrenism fully and finally.
18. Congregational nomination of and election of all of the Board of Directors as called for in the 1929 bylaws.
19. Public apologies to and restitution (compensation, office, freedom to speak freely) if necessary made to former staff and deacons who have been treated roughly, unfairly, been intimidated, or who have resigned due to concerns of conscience.
All in my opinion as usual.
Revival, reform, congregational oversight... for there is level ground at Calvary and "he who would be great among you shall be the servant of all."
What we have here are a couple of new bloggers (Theophilus & Crunch). It seems that they are intent on starting a little rumor and trying to get us to bite on it. The intent is to convince everyone of how easily rumors get spread. Well, fellas or ladies as the case may be. So far the folks on the blog here have spoke of things that they have personally, seen or heard or acquired from first hand sources.
Nice try, but we do our homework here and verification has been a must. So far, there have been many, many verified and precious little refuted.
I have them, but I will check on the policy first. If you are the one who saw him in the restaurant and talked with the waitress, speak out. If not, let's end this part of the thread.
We need to be cautious in all things for we are commanded so. Interesting that our old friends HisServant and ACE are not here and some new fellow Theopolus and Crunch have shown up.
If this is a plan to decieve, then #1) It is pathetic #2) Some have sank to new lows.
If it is not, then you better be sure that your info is verifiable because it will be checked out.
I recognize the alcohol question is a sticky wicket for Southern Baptists, but I am unsure a biblical case for total abstinence can be made. I suspect the SBC position on alcohol has more to do with tradition arising out of the American temperance movement of the late 1800's and early 1900's than the Bible.
If we examine John 2:1-11 and Luke 7:33-34, Jesus clearly used alcohol. Certainly He was not ungodly so how can we be ungodly for doing something Christ did? The Bible clearly says drunkenness is sinful, but where does it say drinking is sinful?
I'm not an advocate for alcohol. Rather, I am advocate for the sufficiency of Scriptures. Is our doctrine based solely on Scripture, or do we also incorporate tradition and history?
This question will continue to come up among Southern Baptists. It is a natural outgrowth of the Battle for the Bible.
The policy lately is like the writing on the barn wall in the book animal house... It tends to change with no notice to the rest of the barnyard animals...
So far as past policy was concerned, it was absolutely, positively, totally BBC dry county.
Who remembers "the finished product of the brewers art"(drunkard pictured in gutter passed out) billboard story??
I have got to post a few things... 1. Tithing records are reviewed- Who cares??? I won't boast about my giving to others, but if anyone wants to look it up, why would it bother me? No one knows my finances, so how could they determine if I give 10%? Maybe they want to ensure people who serve the church actually give...without tax records no one knows where its 10% or not. I don't see a problem with it. Considering how the majority of folks on here demanded to see every financial detail of the church, why would they then be bothered if the church reviewed there giving? It's a double standard any way you play it, but I know I am not convincing anyone anyhow, because everyone here "loves BBC" and "feels hurt". Good to know everyone is so consumed with the damage to themselves and not the thousands of people being hurt by this side show. (Please don't respond by telling me since you give(tithe) you have a right to know everything. How about putting trust in those who serve and handle the BBC business. Better yet, walk into your CEO's office tommorrow and demand to see his financial records because after all you do contribute to company stock right??? Better check his credit card purchases, benefits package, and moving expenses to ensure the money you are contributing to stock or 401k.) 2. Has even one person noticed the snowball effect going on here...Mark Sharpe (whom I have the pleasure of not knowing) is offended..demands everything from an apology to an all out resignation. He has a few issues. As those are addressed, the "truth seekers" pick apart the answers in order to construct new issues. With each answer, at least one additional (If not about 20) is brought up. You wonder why people shy away from the people here who only ask questions to seek out further issues??? Gee I wonder. I would love to answer a question honestly only to get thrown under a bus...a carivan of buses. 3. The Communication Committee is formed to give everyone a voice, a platform for their concerns. Do people remember complaining how they had no voice? Now they have a voice, but huge surprise here, its not good enough. Its never enough. The truth is, nothing will ever be enough. No you shouldn't leave. You should stay and continue to divide and try to destroy. Why let people worship the Lord in peace and love? Nah...hang around and make trouble. Oh its trouble your seeking right, its the truth? Does it actually feel good to sit around here and complain and feel so mistreated? I have read some incredible posts...including a bunch from a woman who needs more than an apology, she needs some serious counceling. Don't help her out though...pour some gas on the fire. Oh I know you are doing it for the greater good right...well after reading these posts I hope the Lord I serve does not judge me like others have chosen to judge leaders of the church. How does it feel to demand apologies and even set out conditions of those in order to "forgive them". Whatever...this is going to be deleted, but at least I can stand behind my words with my real name.
Ricky Dyer PS I really enjoyed the posts concerning how low the love offering was. Way to celebrate.
One of the things that long time members of Bellevue might remember that we were taught concerning wine.
The passover supper consisted of unleavened bread and wine.
Would it not be inconsistent to have unleavend bread with leavened wine. Leaven was always spoken of to represent sin and leaven is a key ingredient in the fermenting process of alcholic wine.
"I have them, but I will check on the policy first. If you are the one who saw him in the restaurant and talked with the waitress, speak out. If not, let's end this part of the thread."
Well, you're the one who brought it up! As I said before, spill it or drop it.
If we examine John 2:1-11 and Luke 7:33-34, Jesus clearly used alcohol. Certainly He was not ungodly so how can we be ungodly for doing something Christ did? The Bible clearly says drunkenness is sinful, but where does it say drinking is sinful?
I don't think it does, so I agree with your position that drunkeness is a sin but a drink is not. Still I think it is a wise polciy to forbid drink for staff, deacons and teachers so they do not cause others to stumble.
I personally do not drink because of alcoholism in my immediate and extended family. I want to teach my children total abstinance is the only choice for our family given our history. There is very little good that comes from booze, but loads of heartache does.
We need to be cautious in all things for we are commanded so. Interesting that our old friends HisServant and ACE are not here and some new fellow Theopolus and Crunch have shown up.
I was not here because I was at the GREAT BBC for church tonight. And you're implying that we're one of those people? You're wrong, Tim. Why would we post lies concerning our leadership? That wouldn't make any sense at all.
If this is a plan to decieve, then #1) It is pathetic #2) Some have sank to new lows.
I don't know what their intentions are, were they got their info, etc. But how do we know that you didn't post that to try to make myself look bad by blaming me? We don't.... You see, this could go both ways.
If it is not, then you better be sure that your info is verifiable because it will be checked out.
I'm actually from Seattle but stumbled upon these blog threads and as a brother in Christ felt I needed to give you an unbiased perspective on what you look like to the outside world. You look like a bunch of grumbling Isrealites who are unhappy with your leadership and trying to find fault with anything and everything. I've never been to Memphis but made a mental note to stay as clear from this church as is physically possible if business brings me that way. I suspect the Isrealites would have had overactive blogs if the technology was available. Unfortunately the whole world has to see this ungodly murmuring. For Christ's sake, please stop it.
I just came from church myself. You must have a longer drive home than I do.
And no I am not saying you and they are the same. But I do believe that there is a group of "itty-bitty" deacons that would love to come here start some wild-eyed rumor and then glory in the fact that it was so readily received.
John 2 and the other passage... most translations read "wine" but the word can indicate unfermented grape juice as well. Since at the wedding he made about 150+ gallons of the stuff... You have a theological problem if you say that it was alcoholic... drunkards will not be in heaven!!
I just came from church myself. You must have a longer drive home than I do.
Nope, only 10-15 minutes...I have other stuff to take care of than just the service...I just don't go for that. Glad to hear you attended tonight, though!
Be ashamed of giving an honest assessment of the truth??? hardly... and who is crunch? Sorry I don't get the whole "blog" nickname thing. Notice I didn't have to judge your actions with my personal opinion? Notice I didn't even ask you to stop or demand an apology? Whether or not I am offended isn't the point when it comes to serving the Lord or an excuse not to. If me simply highlighting the movements and words of this forum that I find interesting is something to be ashamed of...wow you got me...will there be a thread of posts outlining how i need to apologize now? maybe even with the conditions? By the way, if Pastor Steve wants to come to my house, I will welcome his fellowship annouced or unannounced. It would not be trespassing at my house. Speaking of...how could Pastor Steve intimidate another grown man??? Are we 5 and he threatened to take his lunch money or something??? (The last part is a light hearted joke- don't throw me under the bus..
Who cares about someone checking on tithing?? I'd say staff at Bellevue have a little different problem than you do. Perhaps the administration of Bellevue doesn't know what your 100% is... But they know what their employees make... Hmmmmmmm.... How would you feel about your giving?? compulsion? intimidated?? It would really free you up to feel like you were giving from the heart wouldn't it?
Just a thought on what could be coming about on Sunday, pure speculation, but something that I believe we need to consider.
I have a suspicion that there might be a vote to confirm Dr. Gaines as our pastor in an attempt to silence those that oppose him by presenting an overall majority of the church supporting him and attempting to shame those that do not.
If we are told Sunday morning that a business meeting is being held that night, then you better hold on to your seat.
Purely an opinion, but it I believe that it is worthy of thought. I also, do not believe that anyone within the leadership or upper crust deacon set are ready to cave in and admit anything at this point.
I find it interesting that Pastor Tom Ascol’s resolution on church discipline was not voted on at this years Southern Baptist Convention, yet Resolution 5 (the alcohol resolution) was voted on and passed. Church discipline has explicit biblical support while banning of moderate drinking of alcohol does not (it is at least debateable). Even Al Mohler agrees there is no biblical support for a complete alcohol ban.
WTB, I think Dr. Ascol's proposed resolution also called for integrity in reporting membership numbers as well...discounting those that are "inactive" or can't be found.
Back to RW, Bill Hybels and their church-growth ilk.
Did you know the founder of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. James Boyce, actually decried the initial SBC alcohol resolutions as being "not germane to the business of the Convention?"
WTB, Paige Patterson has expressed concerns over unregenerate church members as well...I think his estimates are somewhere around 33% of the average SB church being born again believers.
Can I have your attention, please? Tim was right about crunch and theopolus (or whatever his name is)...They've got us discussing the alcohol policy of the SBC instead of issues specific to BBC. Nice try, you two!
I suppose my speculation on Sunday is lost in the discussion. Look at this from a political stand point and you might be able to see why it is that I have come to be suspicious.
I caught it and think you could be on to something. We need to be prepared for anything.
Most of all we need to find out about a new set of bylaws.
Did anyone catch the post earlier today about a Tennessee nonprofit tax act of 1998? Someone posted that a law was passed that if the bylaws had not been updated in 50 years that the new law would replace the old bylaws.
I guess that even that could be a diversion but it would no thurt to see in anyone heard the same thing.
I did see that earlier on the non profit act of 1998. I had forgot about it. Give me a moment and I can do some quick research. I have stored Tenn tax info on my laptop here. Be right back.
In the meantime, suppose that this does come out as a shrewd political move. We need to be prepared as to how we intend on responding. I realize that it is not a pleasant thought, however, none of this has been pleasant so far and I don't expect the road to become any less bumpy.
I guess we just need to have as many of us there as we can so that we will be able to show that everyone is not ready, willing and able to jusp on the first crumb that is thrown to us.
The charter act of was effective Jan 1, 1988. It required that certain documents be filed to qualify as a non-profit organization. Non-profit organizations that existed prior to Jan 1, 1988 did not have to update their record to include a charter.
Personally I have no issue with a glass of wine at dinner; however I would be shocked to see my pastor drinking a glass of wine. Now that may be a double standard, but that's how life is sometimes.
Also I heard that same rumor that mD would be stepping down (and no I have no proof)
Well, I don't necassarily believe that we need to keep our seat, but I do believe that we need to be prepared to stand even if it is against the crowd.
I also, believe that what is being seen as politically shrewd will wind up being political sucide, especially for those that may just be going along because they believe that no one would stand in oppostion.
In regards to your suggestion about standing in opposition- I will have to stand behind someone. I'm not sure if I'm scared of Steve Gaines but I have always been afraid of Phil Weatherwax.
Just a few thoughts and question that need to be answered whenever our next business meeting may occur. I believe that we should be prepared to ask these questions concerning any motions that may or may not be presented if a business meeting does occur.
What constitutes a quorum of membership that must be present to validate a vote? Is this stated in our by-laws?
What constitutes the margin by which a motion must be approved in order to be adopted by our church? Is this stated in our by-laws?
What authority is given to bring a vote before the church? Is this stated in our by-laws?
The list could be endless and these questions need to be answered before a congregational vote is made on any issue. The intent being to insure that there is any validity to a vote that is not defined in our by-laws.
Again, I would like to reiterate that the timing or occurance of a business meeting is purely speculative.
I do believe that we need to be prepared to have questions answered concerning the validity of a vote, according to our current by-laws, even if it takes until 3:00am to answer them all and finally reach the point of calling for a vote.
I am not a member of Bellevue, but I just want to suggest to you all please call "Peacemaker Ministries". The website is www.hispeace.org You can go to the link get help with conflict at the top of the web page. I am praying. For this trouble to end for you. I am praying you all grow in forgiveness to one another, and love with all sincerity and I pray you will show each other mercy. Don't talk bad to the authority at Bellevue even if they are doing wrong, speak to them gently as one should speak kindly is explaining something to a parent. And don’t forget to cry to the L-RD, they hurt me; they are hurting all of Bellevue. Maybe the authority and all of Bellevue might want to think why this is happening, let everyone examine themselves; did they do something that should be repented of?
I attend a sister church in Alabama that is having identical issues as those of Bellevue. If one took Carol Pemberton's letter #2 and changed the name to my church it would apply 100%. Satan has chosen to attack our churches in this manner. In looking at those in leadership throughout this attack there is a common name, HARRY SMITH. I know nothing personnally about Mr. Smith. But noticed that he was on Pastor Search Committee, Communications Team, Finance Committee, Deacon and reviewed the credit card. With 30000 members I think one should diversify and not allow one individual to be part of so many important organizations. It would protect him and the body...It raised too many eyebrows....
"I attend a sister church in Alabama that is having identical issues as those of Bellevue. If one took Carol Pemberton's letter #2 and changed the name to my church it would apply 100%. Satan has chosen to attack our churches in this manner. In looking at those in leadership throughout this attack there is a common name, HARRY SMITH. I know nothing personnally about Mr. Smith. But noticed that he was on Pastor Search Committee, Communications Team, Finance Committee, Deacon and reviewed the credit card. With 30000 members I think one should diversify and not allow one individual to be part of so many important organizations. It would protect him and the body...It raised too many eyebrows...."
Thank you for stating what several thousand BBC members seem to be missing! NASS passes the coveted "Sherlock Holmes Award for Most Astute Grasping of the Obvious" to our Alabama brother/sister. May God bless you in waging this battle we're both facing. And please keep us up to date on how it's going.
It is also worthy of mentioning that this same fellow answers all of the questions posed to the communication committee. And most of the time the answer is "I don't know". It looks like if any one would know that this would certainly be the man.
"Remember Dr. Rogers preached on 2 separate occasions that he feared as much as 80% of BBC is NOT saved; Dr. Gray Allison preached 75% and Billy Graham has said he fears that as little as 15% of the Church is saved."
If those men were correct, we have our explanation for the colossal apathy and lack of discernment of so many Bellevue members.
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
NASS, this is under the "Whatever" thread: Unless I missed something, I did not hear how this year's love offering compared to years past. Does someone know?
A warning for all of those so opposed to Pastor Gaines. Remember he is the Lord's anointed servant. Something not taken lightly in the eyes of God.
Psalm 89:19-24
19 Once You spoke in vision to Your godly ones, And said, “I have given help to one who is mighty; I have exalted one chosen from the people. 20 “I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him, 21 With whom My hand will be established; My arm also will strengthen him. 22 “The enemy will not deceive him, Nor the son of wickedness afflict him. 23 “But I shall crush his adversaries before him, And strike those who hate him. 24 “My faithfulness and My lovingkindness will be with him, And in My name his horn will be exalted.
I thought the Love Offering was a great blessing. It seems many on here are hoping that giving was way down. Pretty sad. anything to further your agenda. Mom4, I am not directing this at you, just at those on the blog in general.
Nehemiah: I agree and have posted this several times. Brother Steve is God's anointed and it is VERY SCARY to see amd hear how some talk about him and even to him. It is not just their "concerns", but the horrible, dispectful manor in which it is done.
I posted this a few days ago, but I think Nehemiah and hisservant-1 should read it. At one time Saul was God's annointed and then God was sorry he made Saul king.
Karen said... I don't know if this passage with speak to anyone, but it speaks to me. My favorite verse has been verse 14 - don't you hate it when you hide things from God and then somebody finds out and calls your bluff??? If God can be sorry that He made someone a king, can't I be sorry that He appointed the leadership at Bellevue? Just wondering....Karen
1 Samuel 15:10-40 (The Message)
10-11 Then God spoke to Samuel: "I'm sorry I ever made Saul king. He's turned his back on me. He refuses to do what I tell him."
11-12 Samuel was angry when he heard this. He prayed his anger and disappointment all through the night. He got up early in the morning to confront Saul but was told, "Saul's gone. He went to Carmel to set up a victory monument in his own honor, and then was headed for Gilgal."
By the time Samuel caught up with him, Saul had just finished an act of worship, having used Amalekite plunder for the burnt offerings sacrificed to God.
13 As Samuel came close, Saul called out, "God's blessings on you! I accomplished God's plan to the letter!"
14 Samuel said, "So what's this I'm hearing—this bleating of sheep, this mooing of cattle?"
15 "Only some Amalekite loot," said Saul. "The soldiers saved back a few of the choice cattle and sheep to offer up in sacrifice to God. But everything else we destroyed under the holy ban."
16 "Enough!" interrupted Samuel. "Let me tell you what God told me last night."
Saul said, "Go ahead. Tell me."
17-19 And Samuel told him. "When you started out in this, you were nothing—and you knew it. Then God put you at the head of Israel—made you king over Israel. Then God sent you off to do a job for him, ordering you, 'Go and put those sinners, the Amalekites, under a holy ban. Go to war against them until you have totally wiped them out.' So why did you not obey God? Why did you grab all this loot? Why, with God's eyes on you all the time, did you brazenly carry out this evil?"
20-21 Saul defended himself. "What are you talking about? I did obey God. I did the job God set for me. I brought in King Agag and destroyed the Amalekites under the terms of the holy ban. So the soldiers saved back a few choice sheep and cattle from the holy ban for sacrifice to God at Gilgal—what's wrong with that?"
22-23 Then Samuel said, Do you think all God wants are sacrifices—empty rituals just for show? He wants you to listen to him! Plain listening is the thing, not staging a lavish religious production. Not doing what God tells you is far worse than fooling around in the occult. Getting self-important around God is far worse than making deals with your dead ancestors. Because you said No to God's command, he says No to your kingship.
24-25 Saul gave in and confessed, "I've sinned. I've trampled roughshod over God's Word and your instructions. I cared more about pleasing the people. I let them tell me what to do. Oh, absolve me of my sin! Take my hand and lead me to the altar so I can worship God!"
26 But Samuel refused: "No, I can't come alongside you in this. You rejected God's command. Now God has rejected you as king over Israel."
27-29 As Samuel turned to leave, Saul grabbed at his priestly robe and a piece tore off. Samuel said, "God has just now torn the kingdom from you, and handed it over to your neighbor, a better man than you are. Israel's God-of-Glory doesn't deceive and he doesn't dither. He says what he means and means what he says."
30 Saul tried again, "I have sinned. But don't abandon me! Support me with your presence before the leaders and the people. Come alongside me as I go back to worship God."
31 Samuel did. He went back with him. And Saul went to his knees before God and worshiped.
32 Then Samuel said, "Present King Agag of Amalek to me." Agag came, dragging his feet, muttering that he'd be better off dead.
33 Samuel said, "Just as your sword made many a woman childless, so your mother will be childless among those women!" And Samuel cut Agag down in the presence of God right there in Gilgal.
34-35 Samuel left immediately for Ramah and Saul went home to Gibeah. Samuel had nothing to do with Saul from then on, though he grieved long and deeply over him. But God was sorry he had ever made Saul king in the first place.
Can't you just see Saul trying to back peddle when Samuel asks about the bleating of sheep and lowing of cattle (the stuff that was left over when Saul was supposed to have slain EVERYTHING)
Use the itty bitty trashcan at the lower left just below your comment. You have to be logged in for it to show. Click on it and follow the instructions.
I took care of this one for you. Everybody's comment has a little trash can on my screen.
Stick around. We'll probably make you laugh again.
Nehemiah said... A warning for all of those so opposed to Pastor Gaines. Remember he is the Lord's anointed servant. Something not taken lightly in the eyes of God.
Psalm 89:19-24
19 Once You spoke in vision to Your godly ones, And said, “I have given help to one who is mighty; I have exalted one chosen from the people. 20 “I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him, 21 With whom My hand will be established; My arm also will strengthen him. 22 “The enemy will not deceive him, Nor the son of wickedness afflict him. 23 “But I shall crush his adversaries before him, And strike those who hate him. 24 “My faithfulness and My lovingkindness will be with him, And in My name his horn will be exalted.
11:30 AM, November 30, 2006
CHURCHMOUSE asks: David was annointed King of Israel. How does this apply to a New Testament Church? Can you find a verse in the New Testament that warns New Testament Church members not to question the actions or doctrine of teachers or preachers that come their way?
"A warning for all of those so opposed to Pastor Gaines. Remember he is the Lord's anointed servant. Something not taken lightly in the eyes of God... ...“I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him,"
And Hisservant wrote:
"Nehemiah: I agree and have posted this several times. Brother Steve is God's anointed and it is VERY SCARY to see amd hear how some talk about him and even to him."
RESPONSE:
Pastor Gaines is not "the" Annointed One (Jesus), or an Old Testament king, or a High Priest, or a prophet in the biblical sense. His office at times may be prophetic as he declares the Word of God, but he does not foretell the future or give new revelation.
He is a pastor which is an office to which he was called by God to serve and lead Christ's sheep. He was also called by BBC and should be accountable to the sheep.
There is nothing wrong with church members disagreeing with their pastor. The pastor should listen carefully to them and never bully them. They should be able to comunicate with him without a committee, without constant threats of sickness or death or fear mongering of the type quoted above.
Yes they should be respectful of his office. But he is to be accountable to the congregation and he is not above the Word of God (Mt. 18).
All of the members of the congregation are priests. In that they are equal to him and have the same access to God. The sheep and all they have belong to Jesus--not to the pastor. The pastor is an undershepherd entrusted with caring for ALL of the sheep.
I'm so glad that Jesus doesn't send any of His sheep away from His fold (John 6:37).
We follow Jesus because we know He truly loves us. When sheep do not follow an undershepherd closely, perhaps they have reasons that would interest the True Shepherd.
King Saul was the Lord's anointed servant, and let's see what David did to him. David gathered up a group of armed men, and was pursued by Saul(the anointed one) and his army. Given the opportunity to kill Saul, David just used his knife to cut off part of his robe. David eventually fled to the land of the Philistines, if I remember correctly, and was even willing to fight with their army until the Philistines decided against using him for fear of him turning against them.
I think it is pretty clear that David was opposed to the Lord's anointed servant, Saul, and the bible clearly said that David was a man after God's own heart. Furthermore, even though David waited on God to kill King Saul, David still didn't serve in Saul's army, or participate in helping prop up Saul's reign as king.
Granted, by the time of the above events, Saul had disobeyed God and lost favor with God.
If the below person wants to try and make an Old Testament application here, the question he/she should be asking is if the actions of pastor Gaines in response to the issues being raised equates him with a disobedient and unrepentant King Saul, or if it equates him with a repentant King David after Nathan confronted him regarding his murder and adultery. Does Gaines response to the issues he is being confronted with align him more closely with King Saul's response or King David's response?
Although David brings up the Ark of the Covenant to Mount Moriah, he is not allowed by God to build the Temple. A number of reasons are given. One is that the Temple is a house of God and a house of peace and David has blood on his hands from subduing the enemies of Israel. However, he is promised that his son will build it.
You reminded me of the parable of the lost sheep. Not only did the shepherd care enough about his sheep to know that one was missing (he counted them), he also cared enough to go out and get the one that was lost. It bothers me when shepherds take a "if you don't like it then leave" mentality.
Shepherds are concerned when they lose their sheep.
Am I wrong to continue to use 1 Samuel to bolster my point about God being sorry that he appointed Saul as king? I don't want to cause a brouhaha about Old and New Testament teachings. Doesn't the Old Testament point to the New Testament.
The commandment test says: if you can willfully and knowingly sin against the will of God with no conviction, no compunction, and no remorse, you need to get saved. A lot of people say, "Well, I walked down an aisle somewhere, and I got saved. I know I'm just an old backslider now, but I'm still saved and going to heaven."
No, you are not. If you are living that way--high, wide, and handsome--and it does not break your heart, then you do not know the God of the Bible.
Notice it doesn't say, he who has believed; it says He who believes. It is always present tense. Have you ever asked someone, "Are you saved?"
They say, "Yes, I'm saved. I remember walking down the aisle when I was nine years old, giving my hand to my pastor and my heart to Jesus Christ. Now, I may not be living for God right now, I'll admit. But I know I'm saved, because I remember what I did when I was a nine-year-old boy. I remember believing on Jesus Christ." The Bible never uses such an experience as proof of salvation. It never points back to some time when you believed on Jesus Christ.
I even hear people say, "If you cannot show me the place and the moment when you received Jesus Christ, you are not saved." That is not biblical. The Bible never says you know when or if you are saved by something you remember in the past. It says, "He that believes."
I am not saying there is not a time when you received Christ. There was a day. Absolutely. But that is not the test. The test is, do you believe in Jesus Christ now? Are you trusting in Him today? Is there evidence in your life today that you are the offspring of the living God? That is the proof of your salvation.
Whoo Hooo! Pastor David likes me! :) Seriously, though....I know Steve Gaines must have a heart turned toward God - how can we as a people help him with his attitude towards us and the staff? Any thoughts on that? Don't tell us to go to him as individuals or write letters or emails; there are too many examples on this blog and SB that have proven that those methods don't seem to work. Also, from emails I've received and posts I've read from Gardendale members, they are glad Steve Gaines is gone. One email I got says the "staff is refreshed" since Steve's absence. I just have to know that Steve's attitude and actions are not "against Bellevue" so to speak, but it's hard to convince me that his attitude is in check. Does that make sense?Thanks!
choice,
I'm sorry you got hurt. I wish I knew how to help you, but since you forgave david, you must being doing okay. Email me if you need me.
No one I know disagrees submission to authority is taught in Scripture. Believe me, we all know what Hebrews 13:17 says. But if theat authority becomes anti-biblical, we have the responsibility to obey the word of God.
The obedience suggested in Hebews 13:17 comes as a result of persuasion, not dictation. The Hebrews were to allow themselves to be persuaded to obedience. Their obedience was not to be blind obedience, but obedience that came by persuasion from those who have the rule.
This passage has been illegitimately used to set up ministerial dictatorships that take prisoner-of-war anyone who sincerely questions the teachings and practices of the ministry. This is not the point of the verse. In context the author seems to imply that the authority given to those who have the rule is the authority of the Word of God (Hebrews 13:7). If it is the Word of God, and the passage implies that those who have the rule are to do some persuading, then the obedience being spoken of not some uncritically accepted, blind obedience to anything anyone in the ministry says, but the responsibility of the saint to heed to the authority of the Word of God being spoken by the man of God. Nowhere does the Bible teach that the saints must obey those who are not teaching God's Word, but rather their own doctrines. Jesus called these the doctrines of men and rebuked those who advocated them and followed them as though they were God's Word (Mark 7:7-8; See also Matthew 15:9; Colossians 2:22). The authority of the ministry is rooted in the Word of God.
Nowhere does the Bible teach that a man's opinion becomes as binding as the Word of God simply because of his position, yet some illegitimately teach from Hebrews 13:17 that if the ministry says "Jump," the response of the congregation should be "How high?". Such a teaching is unbiblical. The ministry is not equal with God so that they can teach and do whatever they like without accountability to someone. They are shepherds over God's flock to lead it and guide it to Him, not to themselves. They are under-shepherds to the Great Shepherd, and thus cannot simply make up their own rules for all to follow. Their teachings must be rooted in the teachings of the Great Shepherd.
The saints are to be submissive to those who have the rule, following them as they follow Christ, but they are also to be convinced that they are following the direction and truth of God being expressed through the man of God, and not the man himself.
Adrian Rogers Warns Pastors: Sin Fascinates, Then Assassinates
by Debbie Moore
WAKE FOREST, N.C. (BP)--Sin often is a combination of three things: an undetected weakness, an unexpected temptation and an unprotected life. "Put those three together and you have the making of tragedy," says Adrian Rogers, pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church, Cordova, Tenn.
If pastors don't stay on guard, Rogers says, they can easily fall into sin, creating a chain reaction of consequences. The sin of casualness leads to carelessness, which develops into callousness, he says, for "sin fascinates and then assassinates. Sin is so deceitful."
Over the years, a person may become careless, especially those who have been in the ministry a long time because "we can think that we'll never be overcome by that sin or this sin."
"Then I've seen strange alchemy, a devilish metamorphosis takes place," Rogers says, of watching pastors stumble. "I've seen them do and say things that they would never have dreamt of doing or saying before they were hardened by the deceitfulness of sin."
Rogers challenges pastors to study the lives of the great men of God who committed sin. When they fell, "you'll find almost every one of them fell not at the point of their weakness but at the point of their strength," such as Abraham, who is known for his great faith, but did not have faith to trust God for the care of his wife, and Simon Peter, who is known for his courage but was reduced to cursing and denying Christ "at the finger-pointing of a little girl."
A Christian can be used for evil "if you take your eyes from Jesus Christ and become casual and careless," Rogers says. Before long that person will become callous, and that's when disaster can strike, including death.
Sin has a cost, so "deal with sin quickly," for a life of unconfessed sin leads to "spiritual dryness" and a lack of joy, Rogers says.
When a Christian sins, Rogers says God has four steps he can take that person through:
Conviction. Conviction is a feeling of being dirty, along with a desire for cleansing. However, "If you're living in sin and there's no conviction, let me just tell you plainly, you need to get saved," Rogers says. "If God's hand is not heavy upon you, you are lost." If a person does not get his life right with God because of conviction, then God uses a second step.
Chastisement. Chastisement can take a variety of forms, Rogers says, citing sickness, sorrow, failure and heartache. If after conviction and chastisement the Christian has not turned from his sin, Rogers says God uses a third step.
Challenge. "You don't want to be there," Rogers said. Usually a challenge "will come only one time," from either a preacher, a family member, a tragedy or a sermon, "but God in some way will say, 'You are the man'" who did something wrong, as the prophet Nathan told King David. If a Christian still has not repented after conviction, chastisement and challenge, Rogers says God brings about a fourth and final step.
Consummation. At this point, Rogers says, God is saying, "Something is going to be done about this" because if a person is truly a child of God he cannot continue in sin. "I'm telling you, there is a line that you cannot cross," Rogers says. "God will kill you because you're his child. If you're living in sin and God kills you, you'd better thank God for it because if you're living in sin and God doesn't kill you, you've never been saved."
Rather than being casual, careless and then becoming callous toward sin, Rogers says, "I want to plead with you from my heart: Pay the price, stay pure." Though other ministers may give way to sin, "you cannot," and, he adds, "When you've been on the trail as long as I've been on the trail, I can promise you, you'll be so glad you did."
Great comments from my previous “anointing” post. Interesting to see how many views there may be between Christians. My belief is the Old and New Testaments are both valid. The entire Word is alive and we, as Christians, have a personal Savior in Jesus who has fulfilled, is fulfilling and will fulfill Scripture. With all of these various view points it is no wonder disagreements arise in church. As Christians we need to focus on our common foe in Satan. He is our real enemy.
1 Peter 5:8-11
8 Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. 9 But resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your brethren who are in the world. 10 After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen and establish you. 11 To Him be dominion forever and ever. Amen.
It was not my intent to mischaracterize or distort your thoughts. My response went beyond your post. Instead of responding to you I was actually responding to a particular line of thought.
For months some have used Hebrews 13:17 as proof we are not even to question our pastor. We have been told to "swallow and follow."
I received an email from someone who argued that even if we know a hypothetical pastor had lied, embezzled funds, and had affairs, we are not to question him or attempt to remove him. He believes God will take care of that pastor and our responsibility is to submit to his authority as long as God leaves him in his position.
Now that is hogwash!
God clearly uses human agents to accomplish His purposes all the time. He might even use a free blog and a tiny remnant of concerned laymen.
Several weeks ago someone emailed me the article pasted below. Sadly, I have no idea who wrote it. He goes beyond what is happening at Bellevue, but some of it is applicable.
A nervous church member has just been asked to step into the pastor's office after church. He knows what the pastor wants to talk about. Recently, he privately expressed reservations about the pastor's plan to sell the church building and relocate the congregation to another community. As they sit down, the pastor launches right into his subject. He declares that this church member, by questioning his plans, has been guilty of "challenging the authority of the pastor," and is "destroying the ministry of the church." For hours, he lashes into the culprit with angry, embittered, emotional accusations, epithets and putdowns. In conclusion, the member is admonished that he needs to demonstrate his repentance by doing whatever his preacher tells him to do.
The dazed church member mutters some weak apologies, staggers out and heads home, tail dragging behind his legs, while the pastor rubs his hands together in satisfaction - another recalcitrant follower has been brought under control. But in the weeks to come, his smug triumph turns to dismay and consternation as he realizes that the whipped church member has not returned to services, and will never return. He has joined a mass exodus of long-time members who have left that church, sending attendance and offerings down to dangerously low levels.
That church and its members have become casualties of the doctrine known among some Baptists as "preacher rule" - the notion that the pastor is to be an all-powerful. dictator over the members, who are bound to follow and obey him fully in all matters of faith and practice, blindly and without question. Is this idea scriptural?
The favorite proof-texts for preacher rule are Hebrews 13:7 and 13:17, which are instructions to church members, that they should obey those who rule over them. Many commentators regard 13:7 as an exhortation to emulate the faith of Christian leaders who have died and "ended their conversation," while 13:17 clearly refer to living spiritual leaders. The teaching of Hebrews 13:17 must be taken in context with all that the New Testament teaches on the subject. First, it is addressed to church member, and does not confer on pastors a divine right to be a dictator or a bully. In Matthew 20:25-27. Mark 10:42-44. Luke 22:25-26 and 1 Peter 5:3, pastors are specifically for-bidden to exercise lordship over their flocks, like worldly leaders do. The exhortation of Hebrews 13:17 is given with the understanding that those who receive it will be under a proper New Testament ministry of servanthood and example-setting, not a worldly, tyrannical. Hitler-type dictator.
Second, most Baptists will agree that church members are not under any obligation to submit to a pastor who is a false teacher of any kind. If we are not obligated to obey a liberal or Roman Catholic priest, surely we are not bound to abject servitude to a pastor using the Baptist label whose doctrine or practice has veered from the New Testament standards, including the command that preachers should not lord it over the flock.
Third, the Apostle Paul advised his converts not to submit themselves to an abusive ministry, 2 Corinthians 11:19-20. If the Corinthians were not expected to submit themselves to pastors who would bring them into bondage, devour their substance, exalt themselves and beat up on their followers, why should any Baptist church member today be expected to knuckle under to such tactics?
Fourth, if the pastor establishes himself as an unquestioned dictator and can say "I am the church" just as French King Louis XIV said "I am the state," then the New Testament principle of congregational rule is nullified.
If the pastor’s will is to be taken as law and no church member can dare question it, then the cherished Baptist principle of congregational rule becomes a dead letter, and one has to wonder why God made provision for it In the New Testament, if the pastor is meant to decide everything anyway.
Today's Bible-thumping bullies and tin-horn tyrants in the pulpit claim more authority for themselves than the Apostles did. In doctrinal matters, the Apostles never said, "You must accept whatever I teach, no matter what, without question, based on my personal authority, because I say so." Paul specifically renounced such grandeur of authority in Galatians 1:8, and we are not told that he ever rebuked the Bereans who searched the scriptures to see if what Paul said was so. Acts 17:11.
What about the claim that a pastor must be obeyed in all his directives over the believer's lifestyle and personal actions? Peter disclaimed any authority over his members' finances and property. Acts 6:4. In 1 Corinthians 16:12, we find that Paul asked Apollos to go to Corinth on a special mission, and that Apollos refused he just didn't feel like going. Apollos was not rebuked by Paul, but he would have been bitterly denounced as a miserable rebel in some churches today which have embraced the lordship model of leadership which Jesus condemned. (If Jesus is the Lord and head of each true church, Ephesians 5:23, then who is in charge of a church where the pastor is barking commands and demanding absolute obedience? Has not that pastor usurped the Lordship of Christ?)
Preacher rule is a dangerous heresy that should be rebuked, reproved and opposed whenever it rears up its ugly head within Baptist ranks. Most of the readers of this article will be personally aware of one or several churches that have been wrecked by pastors who attempted to establish a coercive, abusive dictatorship over their congregations. The dictatorial preacher is a self-centered man who caters to his worldly desires under the guise of true religion and feeds his own ego instead of his flock, thus negating by his way of life the central Christian principle of self-denial, Luke 9:23.
An even greater tragedy takes place on the foreign mission field, where some American missionaries, ostensibly sent to attract converts to true New Testament Christianity, instead drive nationals away from the truth and the true church by their unscriptural, domineering methods. Such false shepherds end up scattering the flocks that they were sent to gather at such great expense, and bring down reproach upon all Americans while sowing the seeds of bitterness against the Christian religion of which they have given such a false representation.
Some preachers would like to follow Elijah and Elisha as role models, calling down fire or wild bears to destroy those who rub them the wrong way, but we no longer live in the theocracy of the Old Testament prophets. We are now in an age where believers live under Christian liberty and where all citizens enjoy religious freedom, including the freedom to avoid preachers and religions that make themselves obnoxious. We would do much better to emulate the example of Christ and His Apostles, who while on earth dealt gently and tenderly with their followers, leading them by example rather than by harangue and military-style commands.
Some charismatic churches have earned for themselves a bad press by their version of divine-right-of-pastors, which they call "shepherding" or "discipleship." It is time for Baptists to speak up and renounce such unspiritual and anti-scriptural tactics, and to let it be known that we respect the freedom, individuality and Christian liberty of those who affiliate with our churches.
I have read over the by-laws from GBC and believe that they are an extremely well thought out model. It would be good if we could post them somewhere and discuss any changes that we feel might be necessary.
It will not ultimately matter what changes are made if our by-laws are not changed to prevent this from happening again.
I just read your post and I do not have time to respond to David right now. However, I will point out those percentages were apparent estimates of godly Christian leaders (as reported by Mr. Ellis in his email exchange with Deacon Teutsch), not my estimates. I have nothing to base any estimates on.
I can also say those men are not the only ones concerned the SBC is a largely unregenerate denomination. Many pastors have written extensively on the topic.
We should admit we have no idea who is saved and who isn't. Every man must work out his own salvation with fear and trembling before the Lord. Only He knows who has truly done that and who hasn't.
MOM4 said... NASS, this is under the "Whatever" thread: Unless I missed something, I did not hear how this year's love offering compared to years past. Does someone know?
HisServant-1 said... "I thought the Love Offering was a great blessing. It seems many on here are hoping that giving was way down. Pretty sad. anything to further your agenda. Mom4, I am not directing this at you, just at those on the blog in general"
Well sir, the blog in general includes me and you and I am not trying to further an agenda. I have no agenda but the truth. This is an honest question and should receive an honest answer. I have asked several times and no one seems to know or is not willing to say. Do you know and are not willing to say? If so, why??
Here are some references to drinking that were discussed on a earlier blog. Hope this helps. Anytime wine is mentioned in the Bible, it's speaking of it not fermented.
Proverbs 20:1
1. Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler; whoever conceicvth therefore is not wise.
Proverbs 20:31-35
31. Do not gaze at the wine when it is red, when it sprakles in the cup,when it goes down smoothly!
32. In the end it bites like a snake, and poispns like a viper.
33. Your eyes will see strange sights and your mind will imagine confusing things.
34. You will be like one sleeping on the high seas, lying on top of the rigring.
35. They hit me, you will say, but I'm not hurt!They beat me, but I don't feel it! When will I wake up so I can find another drink?
I am sorry but I cannot believe you are all here ACTUALLY DISCUSSING the assumed percentage of saved people in BBC!!!!
WHO ARE ANY OF YOU TO SAY WHO IS SAVED OR WHO IS NOT? How can you even SPECULATE with a good conscience?!!!!? Where is this a mandate for us in Scripture?
I am all about testing of fruits, but in a church the size of BBC how can you say that 80%, 75%, or whatever percentage are not/may not be saved? How arrogant a discussion!!!!
While I don't doubt Dr. Rogers said this, because he said in the morning Easter service of 1997 (pointing at the assembly): "If you are not telling at least one person a day about Jesus, I doubt your salvation sir ... I doubt your salvation, ma'am." (I have the audio)
I thought he was out of line then and I think this discussion is absolutely insane now. No where are we told in Scripture to read the Romans road to one person a day - our job is to LIVE our faith before people and use the opportunities God places in front of us to share what He has done in and to us!!!!!
Our job is not to go around and determine who is saved, who is not, and to tout how much better we are because we "know" we are saved.
Our job is to reach out to people in need, people who are hurting, people who have fallen - regardless of their status, sinfulness, or stature (for some good Baptist aliteration).
Why can't we get back to the basics? How many more people will be turned off?
As Paul said, "Have I become your enemy because I tell you the truth?"
Here are some references to drinking that were discussed on a earlier blog. Hope this helps. Anytime wine is mentioned in the Bible, it's speaking of it not fermented.
Proverbs 20:1
1. Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler; whoever conceicvth therefore is not wise.
Proverbs 23:31-35
31. Do not gaze at the wine when it is red, when it sprakles in the cup,when it goes down smoothly!
32. In the end it bites like a snake, and poispns like a viper.
33. Your eyes will see strange sights and your mind will imagine confusing things.
34. You will be like one sleeping on the high seas, lying on top of the rigring.
35. They hit me, you will say, but I'm not hurt!They beat me, but I don't feel it! When will I wake up so I can find another drink?
I really believe you are confused about what I said. Please read what I write carefully.I think you read something into what I said that was not there or you are incorrectly attributing something to me. That 80% figure did not come from me.
In response to someone mentioning Paige Patterson's estimate of the true number of Southern Baptists who are saved, I merely referenced a portion of the email exchange between Alvin Ellis and Rob Teutsch dealing with the percentage of saved individuals.
Everyone here has had access to those emails for weeks. There is an entire thread on the blog where you can read everything they said to each other. I did not make any of that up nor did I ever hear Dr. Rogers or any of those other men say that.
As for me, I am concerned over the fate of all who are unsaved. But, I would never presume I know who is and is not saved. Nor have I ever expressed an opinion here or anywhere else on the number of saved people at Bellevue.
"You reminded me of the parable of the lost sheep. Not only did the shepherd care enough about his sheep to know that one was missing (he counted them), he also cared enough to go out and get the one that was lost. It bothers me when shepherds take a "if you don't like it then leave" mentality.
Shepherds are concerned when they lose their sheep."
Response: Thanks for the encouragement. Of the sheep given Him, Jesus did not loose one (John 17:12). I believe that is the standard--and that standard is very high. He loved them all.
It is late and I have had a very long day. Before heading to bed I decided to check the blog to see what I might have missed tonight. I found your comment where you said to me, "Next time, please feel free to provide this earlier in the day as david and I just had quite a bit of misunderstanding. He and I would have appreciated you pointing out your reference to us when david started asking about my post."
I corrected the record the instant I realized what was going on between you. I would not have allowed that much friction to occur based on a misreading of my post.
I do not know how to explain it, but the glory of God came down on our church when we fasted, prayed, and asked God to forgive our sins and the sins of this country. That is how.
And who? First, the leaders, the pastors. It starts in the pulpit. Can I tell you what would help America? If we could have some men who would stand in the pulpits and be more afraid of God than they are of their congregations, we could have revival in our country. I pray that God will rid us of wimpy preachers. Some of these guys come up and they are so pretty, and they are so polite, and they are so sweet and they are telling everybody how good they are. I heard W.A. Criswell say, “I like to come up behind them and say, ‘Boo!’ and watch those sissies jump! It scares them to death.” We need some men of God back in our pulpits. We don’t need preacherettes preaching sermonettes to Christianettes. God give us some prophets who will preach and say, “Thus, saith the Lord,” and let the chips fall where they may. If some deacon doesn’t like it, good. If some Sunday School teacher doesn’t like it, so what? We must preach for an audience of one – the Lord Jesus Christ! And not only the leaders but the laity. You are going to have to get filthy magazines out of your home. You are going to have to get Hell’s Box Office (HBO) out of your home. Consecrate yourself before God. Leaders and laity; everyone involved.
And when? Right now! Break up the wedding if you have to. There is something more important than you getting married. We need to have revival. We need to wake up.
And where? In our hearts, and in these beautiful sanctuaries of our churches. Thank God for prayer rails. I pray that God will let these beautiful wooden and carpeted steps and these rails be stained with hot tears for revival. I am convinced that if the Lord could awaken a few of our larger churches, He could send revival to the entire Southern Baptist Convention and then to all of America. If we will allow God to get a hold on our hearts; if we would rend our hearts and not our garments; if we would weep and fast and pray and say, “O God, spare Thy people,” I tell you He would do it! .........
Would it not be wonderful if God sent another spiritual awakening to America? If He does, it will come with fasting, it will come with weeping, it will come with brokenness, it will come with repentance, and it will come by getting right with God. Christians, hear me today. God is not playing games. God is not asking you to wake up, God is saying, “Do it or else! I will give you over to My wrath if you don’t!” Thus saith the Lord. He that has ears to hear let him hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches.
Why can`t our pastor hear and obey the words he generously offers to others?
Rev. Steve Gaines, pastor of First Baptist Church in Gardendale, Alabama, railed against homosexuality, by saying, "God characterized homosexuality as an abomination in Leviticus 18, and He sandwiched it right between adultery, child sacrifice and having sex with an animal." He urged Southern Baptists to contact their congress-people to lobby for approval of the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Why wan`t our pastor careful about spearheading a $25000.00 donation to a church who supports gay marriages and homosexuality?
This is my open letter to Bellevue - feel free to copy it and send to any and all Bellevue members:
Dear Bellevue Member,
I would like to ask you a favor. Would you please attend the Communications Committee meeting this Sunday, December 3rd at 8:00 am. No one will ask you anything and you don't have to sign a roster to register your attendance. You also don't have to ask any questions unless you want to. Last week's attendance at the meeting was over 100 people. This week we'd like to double, triple even quadruple that number. Please forward this request to any and all Bellevue members. If people will just listen and then seek the truth for themselves, truth will be revealed. They don't have to take my word for it, or the blog or savingbellevue.com, but truth will be revealed.
Also, if you don't feel comfortable in asking people via email, will you make phone calls this weekend and invite people? I would do it for you if I could - feel free to send me any emails or phone numbers you wish and I promise to contact them.
jcsuitt, hisservant1, If you two don't want to believe that Bellevue is following a seeker sensitive/church growth model, then that's your prerogative. We're a little more informed about this movement than you think. Some of us have been following this stuff since before Rick Warren even came on the scene..so don't assume no one knows about it but you, or that your opinion is somehow more valid than ours. As for ..."To be honest Rick Warren is seeing people genuinely saved at a rate far higher than most SBC churches but that is for another day."....Acts 2:23 "....And the LORD added to their number daily those who were being saved." (emphasis mine) I don't see Rick Warren or his program getting any credit for that..do you? In fact, I dare say the Lord adds to His church quite often, not because of what any man does, but in SPITE of what any man does.
I have stood on firm Biblical principles. I am not unsure of my footing. It is rock solid. What you may percieve as arrogance on my part is my faith in Jesus Christ and his command to search the scriptures. I do not have to doubt on what basis I place my trust. The Word of God abides forever.
1 Timothy 4:1, 6 “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;…If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.”
I am taking seriously your invitation to post here if one has something which might aid in the understanding of what is taking place at BBC. Taking this into consideration in that I have ‘been there, done that’, I do have a few things to say which I hope will be beneficial to you. Please understand that what I am about to say is done with the intent to help rather than to hurt anyone. The people who are responsible in having ‘driven’ fellow church members out of their churches need to repent and make public apologies to their victims in making right the wrongs they have done to the Body of Christ. Having said this, I want to tell you that there is little doubt in my mind that your church is being highjacked by the purpose driven movement. I have spent the last one and one half years doing extensive research into this movement and others similar to it. It is my prayer that those initiating this movement in your church will repent and that the scales will be removed from the eyes of those members who are being manipulated by them. Please understand that what I am about to say only touches the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more to our story and there is so much more to be said of the devastation brought on by the PDM. This is not just about Bellevue Baptist Church, Germantown Baptist Church, Gardendale Baptist Church of Corpus Christi, Iuka Baptist Church, and hundreds of others…this is about the dishonor being brought about to our Lord Jesus Christ through this movement.
Since the beginning of savingbellevue.com, I have been reading and keeping up with things at BBC. My heart breaks for all of you, especially those of you considered to be 'resistors' or 'pillars' or ‘leaders from hell’. If these terms mean nothing to you, this probably means that you are not educating yourselves on the purpose driven movement enough to understand what is happening in your church. These terms refer to those who resist the movement and are asked to leave or are voted out (or worse) by those who are in control and are bringing the movement into the church. The harder these people resist, the harder they are dealt with. The blows can be devastating. These people, the resistors, have discerned that there is a serious problem in the church, even though they have not or cannot identify its root cause initially. Or it might be that these people are just no longer wanted in the church for whatever reason. This transitional movement is done in total secrecy. It is transitioned into an established church in darkness. More often than not it is a ‘slow boil’ and is often carried out over a period of several years. I have come to learn that often times the plans are fouled because those in the lead become impatient. Once they lose control, things run amuck. I believe there is a strong possibility you are witnessing this at Bellevue. Let me add here…if you have read Transitioning an Established Church by Chuck McAllister in Rick Warren’s Toolbox and it sends up red flags, then you best listen to your innermost being.
My blog name, “Been there”, bears witness to the fact that my husband and I are victims of this horrible movement which has invaded churches all over the world. My husband was voted out of his church of fifty-nine years, as an active deacon in a business meeting that defies anything even remotely known as ‘Christian’ behavior. I could never have taken part in treating another human being in the manner in which my husband and these two other deacons were treated on that fateful day/evening on April 5th of this year. People who call themselves Christians actually stood and applauded, cheered, and rejoiced at what they perceived to be the spiritual destruction of three Godly men, not to even mention the damage to their character that could have manifested in their community as a result of this heinous act. The people taking part in this atrocity were jubilant, seemingly overjoyed with what I perceive to be the equivalent of a modern day lynching. That morning the other two deacons were approached by members of the active deacon board with typed resignations on church letter head stationary and were told that if they didn’t sign these typed resignations, they would be voted out that night at the business meeting. They signed. People have been led to believe that they willfully decided to resign and did so…this is not true. It was a well planned and orchestrated nefarious plot. My husband was not available so they could not ask him to sign his typed, church letter head resignation. I found two deacons that afternoon, including the chairman, in our secluded backyard, certainly not gated but private nevertheless, looking for my husband. I had seen one of these men driving slowly back and forth in front of our home earlier that day several times looking our way with a fixed stare. I felt like we were being ‘cased’. It was the most eerie, unnerving feeling I have ever had. These three deacons have yet to be told what they were guilty of. One of the deacons voted out was told by one of these deacons that they just didn’t ‘have the same ideas’. And, in fact, just shortly before they were ousted, the chairman of the deacons told my husband that if he wanted to remain fundamental Baptist, then he would need to get out and find himself a fundamental Baptist church. He said this is the direction the Southern Baptist Convention is taking. I can tell you what these three deacons were guilty of…they were guilty of loving their church enough to try and stop the invasion of the purpose driven movement into it by bringing it to the attention of the deacon board. I asked one of these deacons who took part in removing these three men at that business meeting on the evening of April 5th, just this past Sunday night for the first time since the business meeting just exactly what it was that these three men did to be removed from their church and his answer to me was, “I don’t know.” How pathetic this is. Tragic! Let me just add here, that it is possible to listen to this business meeting online. You can go to ‘abrahamic-faith.com/false-teachers.html and look near the bottom at ‘part 1 and part 2’ and listen to that April 5th meeting. My prayer for all of you is that you can find an answer before something like this happens in your church. I could write a book on what led up to all of this in our lives and it still continues on. The feeling of betrayal remains...it has left a bad taste. One of the most devastating things used to discredit these three deacons and their families from the onset and throughout all of this was the rumors they spread, total untruths…and people swallowed them. People who were our friends won’t speak now….we are avoided. It has divided families. The aftermath of this atrocity has been truly as remarkable as the events leading up to and including the night of April 5th, 2006. This is part of the plan of the purpose driven movement….the Hegelian dialectic. Pragmatism. Whatever it takes. There exists a picture of Rick Warren holding up a sign with this written on it, “Whatever It Takes.” Understand that these people will stop at nothing to get their way. You are already witnessing this at Bellevue. When I first started reading all of these things on your savingbellevue website about Mark Sharpe, I could not believe the similarities of the things that happened to him to those of my husband. It is truly incredible…the similarities. There was no doubt in my mind that Mark Sharpe was telling the truth. Truth is not a part of the purpose driven agenda. I could never have imagined I would have ever seen the things transpire in our former church, or any church for that matter, that I have witnessed.
In September, the Wall Street Journal featured an article by Suzanne Sataline titled, Veneration Gap-A Popular Strategy for Church Growth Splits Congregants. The front page carried a picture of my husband, the article written about both of us along with other congregants in other areas of our country. This was the first time a secular media has openly discussed anything in opposition involving Rick Warren and the purpose driven movement, aka church growth movements. For the first time, an avenue was opened where people could email a source voicing their opinions about the betrayal they had undergone in their churches. Ms. Sataline was inundated with emails from people like you and like us from all over the world…telling their horror stories about abuse coming from their churches. I pray that there will continue to be avenues opened up where people can voice their grievances on these issues and unite in the hope that people will return to the faith, turning from the seducing spirits and doctrines of devils so prevalent today. Your website, your blog are such avenues and I see this as an area of accountability. You are to be commended for this. We have been asked to write our story for publication. We must all tell our stories…we must fight this demonic transition overtaking our churches and our people. “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”- (Jesus Christ)-Mark 8:36.
I read one of your entries by a Germantown Baptist member, who stressed to all of you to educate yourselves on these movements so prevalent today, especially the Rick Warren movement. He is giving you excellent advice. This is truly the only way to learn what is going on in your church. I find that to be the main problem in churches…that members are unwilling to read about it, unwilling to educate themselves about it. It is not going to self destruct. One of the deacons in our former church, inactive at the time, told my daughter he didn’t know what purpose driven is, he didn’t want to know what purpose driven is, and had no intention of trying to find out. This man has since been voted back in as a deacon in said church. I find it to be total ignorance to refuse to educate oneself on something so crucial. It is truly tragic. One could fall prey easily when they don’t understand what is going on. This is a responsibility we owe ourselves. Mr. Haywood has ample information for you to read on savingbellevue.com. and at the beginning of this thread. I would like to include these which I find to be good sources and in no particular order: ‘crossroads.to’ by Andy and Berit Kjos; ‘sliceoflaodicea.com’ by Ingrid Schlueter; ‘lighthousetrailsresearch.com’ by David and Deborah Dombrowski; ‘abrahamic-faith.com/false-teachers.html’ by James Sundquist; ‘newswithviews.com’ Paul Proctor; ‘erwm.com’ (Eastern Regional Watch) by Steven Muse; ‘swrc.com’ Dr. Larry Spargimo and Noah Hutchings, ‘deceptioninthechurch.com’ and look under purpose driven. I would also like to recommend the books Redefining Christianity-Understanding the Purpose Driven Movement by Bob DeWaay, Who’s Driving the Purpose Driven Church? and Rick Warren’s Global Peace Plan vs. Scriptural Teachings on Peace by James Sundquist, Ashamed of the Gospel by John MacArthur, and Deceived on Purpose by Warren Smith. The book, Transitioning-Leading Your Church Through Change by Dan Southerland is one you should read…paying particular attention to Step 6, page 110 on Dealing with Opposition; the foreword is written by Rick Warren and instructs pastors on how to take your church into the purpose driven church by deception. You can also find similar reading in The Purpose Driven Church and of course, you can find all sorts of information of pastors.com, Rick Warren’s own website. You might want to pay particular attention to Dealing with Opposition, Step 6 under the thread, Transitioning, Dan Southerland. Please read and educate yourselves on this movement. It is true that you need to be careful what you read; however the footwork has been provided for you by Mr. Haywood and myself, as well. It is credible and validated.
The most important thing in all of this is…you must stand for what is right. You must take a stand for Jesus Christ at all costs. That is what my husband and the other two deacons who stood with him have done. There were others with us…small in number but big in heart and discernment. Standing for what is right is not always popular. The majority is not always right. Remember the crucifixion. This purpose driven movement is all about changing the church to become worldly…the Bible tells us in Romans 12:2 “Be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”
“If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head…But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take [any] person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.” Ezekiel 33:3,4,6
Yours in Christ, Nena Jones
“That very church which the world likes best is sure to be that which God abhors.”-Charles H. Spurgeon, 1859
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, as is anyone else and I appreciate that. Understand that I did not post on this forum in order to debate this issue. I have walked through this fire and understand it perfectly. I offered enough scripture to back up what I said not only on my post, but in suggesting information available from various sources that is full of scripture to help you. I would refer you to this information.
The quote from Dr. Rogers was written as an endorsement for The Purpose Driven Church by Rick Warren and can be found on page three. The book was published in 1995. W. A. Criswell wrote the foreword for this book.
This forum was created to provide a place where those who are seriously concerned about the issues facing Bellevue Baptist Church and the SBC can come to comment and exchange ideas.
Anonymous comments are welcome, but it is respectfully requested that instead of choosing the "Anonymous" option those who want to post comments without logging in select a unique screen name. This lets everyone tell the difference between one anon and another without revealing any personal information.
Under the box where you compose your comment where it says "Choose an identity," just check "Name/URL" and type in the screen name of your choice. You can leave the URL field blank. It would be helpful if you'd use the same screen name for any subsequent comments.
This makes reading and following discussions easier, helps avoid confusion, and doesn't result in one person being credited for writing something s/he didn't.
Comments by posters whose only purpose is to disrupt (i.e. trolls) will be subject to deletion. Your cooperation will be appreciated.
191 comments:
25+ years,
Interesting word "agenda" that you used in your 11:58 pm post from yesterday. I used that term in a letter I wrote to the pastor in February. He was kind enough to write back and among other things, tell me he doesn't have an agenda. Now you are using the word agenda. hmmmmmm.............
Diana
Does anyone know of the Tennessee Nonprofit Tax Act of 1998? I may be wrong on the year.
It's my understanding that in cases of nonprofits including churches that havn't updated their bylaws in the past 50 years, this set of bylaws steps in on any area the old bylaws don't address. Since our bylaws at BBC haven't been updated in 79 years, I would think this new set of bylaws will determine what can and can't be done at Bellevue. I've seen the 3/4 page document that is supposed to be the whole set of bylaws and there isn't anything to them. You can read them if you go to the savingbellevue.com site and enter into the sight and then go to Church Government.
Any legaleagles out there that would know.
This may address the problem of every man (handful of men) doing what's right in his own eyes.
I am across the country for a while, but will be returning next year. I have been at Bellevue since I was 4. I was married there, and worked in the nursery. I still do when I visit. I have been out of the loop for a couple of years, though, for the most part. I am deeply, DEEPLY saddened by all of this. I check the saving Bellevue site regularly, and truly see the Light in Mark Sharpe's points, among others. I am praying over the situation. I would love to recongregate at Bellevue when we return, but I may have to consider Germantown, or something, as many others have. Thank you all for writing these things so that I have been able to know what has been going on.
In Him,
Jessica Harvey Fiveash
WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said...
Dear Ones,
Good Morning and loving greetings to you in the powerful name of Jesus, who is worthy to be praised!
I just wanted to recount the truth concerning the apology from the good deacon to the Whitmires.
In a quest for truth. Brother Charles and I made a decision to talk directly to brothers and sisters who were directly involved in any allegation that came to our attention.
During that time we spoke with one of the officer deacons and ask him to please tell us the truth about Brother Whitwire`s retirement and why he left Bellevue.
The deacon gave us much information in that conversation.
We then went directly to the Whitmire`s and found out that the information was incorrect.
We went back to the good deacon and told him that he was giving out false information and reminded him how important it was to be truthful in all things.
The good deacon told us that he thought he was being truthful.
We assured him that the information he was giving was false.
He spoke to the Whitmire`s directly.
After he spoke to the Whitmires, he let us know that he was indeed giving out false information and that he had never known the truth about the Whitmires.
We ask him if he was going to reconcile with his brother before he took the LORD`s supper, which was coming soon and the next day he shared that he had gone over to the Whitmire`s home and apologized in person.
When we learned this, we asked him if he was going to go to the other Bellevue Leaders and to the pastor to share that he had learned the truth about Brother Whitmire and ask them to do as he did, which was to reconcile with their brother. He said he was going to do just that.
We had great hopes and expectations that this good deacon would go and confront other brothers and sisters at the church and that everyone who was involved in abusing Brother Whitmire and his family would soon come forth. one by one, in true humility to admit what they had done, that it was wrong and then apologize to the Whitmires and to the congregation for the multitude of sins laid upon our dear Brother, Jim Whitmire and his family. We also expected apologies for passing along rumors and false informaion, and for willingly deceiving the entire congregation to come forth, but we have never heard from the good deacon again.
His apology was a personal apology for him giving out false information and perhaps things he did not share with us.
We were very blessed wirh the deacon`s apology but we also want to be quick to point out that no one should mistake the deacon`s personal apology for anything more than it was. Remember no one can apologize for another person`s sin.
We have the letters to prove everything I have written here and I am sure Josh can confirm that what I am sharing is the truth.
I hope that this adds some light to the deacon`s apology to the Whitmires.
Under HIS wings and in HIS love,
Sister Pam
12:11 PM, November 29, 2006
ace said...
JOshua Whitmire,
Steve Gaines wanted to bring Jamie Parker along as soon as he could, so my father decided to retire 6 months early.
Perhaps you can clear up something here. 1) Did your father decide to retire 6 months on his own will? or 2) Was he forced to retire 6 months earlier than planned?
You used the term 'decided to retire' like it was his decision and I want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly on that.
Thanks for your post, by the way!
12:19 PM, November 29, 2006
25+yrs@bbc said...
Ace... You conveniently left off the part of the quotation that explained the obvious.
JoshuaDavidWhitmire said:
"Second, My father was NOT planning on retiring long before Steve Gaines came to Bellevue. The family always talked long ago with my father that one day, after Dr. Rogers retired, that the new pastor might want to bring in his own Minister of Music. This is a fact that happens all the time with churches. My father was planning on retiring in June of this year. Steve Gaines wanted to bring Jamie Parker along as soon as he could, so my father decided to retire 6 months early."
12:35 PM, November 29, 2006
Comment Deleted
This post has been removed by the author.
12:45 PM, November 29, 2006
WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said...
I greet you again in Jesus` holy name!
On November 7th, Brother Charles and I brought our concerns about the racial remarks alleged to one of ministers at our church, to the attention of Pastor Steve, Deacon Chairman Chuck Taylor, and Deacon Secretary Mark Spiller and to date, we have recieved no reply from anyone.
We called the brother minister who allegedly made racial remarks and he said he has never spoken one racial word to anyone.
He also said that he does not know who the man that made these allegations could possibly be.
The man who made these allegations did so in a public way.
He said he was on staff at Bellevue for 6 years.
He said that this minister and I think one other minister were speaking in a prejudice manner towards African Americans.
He said he has witnesses.
Brother Charles amd I minister in West Africa, we have African children, but even if we didn`t we would still find these allegations offensive and worthy of investigation.
We want to proceed with trying to clear this up because it is the right thing to do.
We want to believe the Bellevue minister but if this man has proof of these allegations, we would like for him to bring it forward.
If it was not true, we would like for him to remove the brothers name from his open letter to the public.
If anyone knows the identity of the man who was on staff for 6 years, who made these allegations, we would greatly appreciate you letting us know so we can go to him in person and in love work towards truth and reconciliation for the Glory of GOD alone.
12:56 PM, November 29, 2006
Flatfoot said...
I heard that Mark Sharpe was not an "active" deacon at the time this all started to boil. As I understand, deacons serve a 3 year term, then they go inactive for a time period. If anyone knows, including Mr. Sharpe, please answer, and then explain what an inactive deacons does. Thanks
1:09 PM, November 29, 2006
WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said...
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Jesus, we were so blessed that the pastor apologized to Brother Mark Sharpe for his Hezzbolah remark and for trespassing private property!
His apology is a wonderful step toward complete reconciliation with our dear brother Mark!
We would like to encourage the pastor to take the rest of the steps that are required before true reconciliation can be celebrated.
One of those remaining steps is for Brother Mark Sharpe to be restored to his previous position as deacon.
It will be a wonderful day when all parties who have offended our brother, should come forth to apologize and be totally reconciled with him and his family.
We can not continue to take the LORD`s supper with all of these issues unresolved and without reconciliation among the brethren.
Let`s do the right thing today and get all of these issues under the Blood of Christ.
1:24 PM, November 29, 2006
swtt said...
flatfoot,
A deacon serves for 3 years at Bellevue and then automatically rotates off for 1 year. I believe that is what you are referring to as innactive. This is done as to not burn a deacon out by overworking them. The duties are to counsel in the services, man the telephone lines when people call during the televised services, and serve the Lord's Supper.
Once your 1 year of being innactive is over, you are then offered an opportunity to return as a deacon as long as you still meet the qualifications of a deacon. The deacon and his wife are interviewed by a team of deacons who are on the Deacon nominating interview committee.
This is the committee that John Caldwill has chaired for the past 10 years in a row. There have been deacons in the past several years that have complained about John serving as chairman of this committee for this long but only to deaf ears. In fact, John Caldwill actually served as this chairman several years ago while he was the actual chairman of the deacons. This position is a very powerful position to have because they control who gets to be a deacon and who does not. John Caldwill also has a tremendous amount of power for not asking deacons back on to serve.
Once you are elected to be a deacon at Bellevue and any other SBC church, you are always a deacon for that church. You may not be an active deacon, but as long as you are a member of the church, you are considered a deacon. For years, inactive deacons were always invited to Dr. Rogers birthday party each year even if they hadn't been active for years.
If you are removed as a deacon, it's my understanding you have to be brought before the church body and be voted off.
Your question as to what does an inactive deacon do is probably that he enjoys the time off by not having to come to meetings or have to answer the telephone calls when people call in.
I think people are getting hung up on active vs. inactive. I don't think anyone ever said Mark Sharpe was kicked off being an active deacon. Ask Mark Sharpe and he'll tell you that Mark Dougharty just said "you are no longer a deacon at Belleuve any longer. Mark Dougharty knew Mark Sharpe wasn't active when he made that statement".
I don't beleive Mark Dougharty has the authority to remove any deacon from his position at Bellevue whether they are active or inactive.
I hope this clears things up for you flatfoot.
By the way, why do you call yourself flatfoot?
1:37 PM, November 29, 2006
Flatfoot said...
yes it does clear up some things, thank you.
and: FLATFOOT
Definition: slang for investigator
Synonyms: G-man, P.I., Sherlock Holmes*, agent, analyst, beagle, bird dog*, bloodhound*, bull*, constable, cop, copper, eye*, fed*, ferret, fink*, flatfoot*, fly ball, gumshoe*, informer, nark*, peeper*, plainclothesman, policeman, private eye, private investigator, prosecutor, reporter, roper, scout, sergeant, shadow*, shagger, shamus*, shoofly*, sleuth, slewfoot*, snoop*, spy, tail*
1:44 PM, November 29, 2006
New BBC Open Forum said...
OKAY, EVERYBODY! TIME TO TIE A KNOT IN THIS ONE AND MOVE TO THE NEXT TOPIC (AT THE TOP).
Thank you,
NBBCOF
1:50 PM, November 29, 2006
Diana Hart said...
Flatfoot,
cJesusnme wasn't being sarcastic. I am referring to a post from last night. She(he?) was being serious. Have you read Sister Pam Gremillion's posts? She and her husband have been trying to get in touch with Steve for maybe months now. At least weeks. He seems to be unreachable. I'm remembering a time several months ago when a senior relative of mine spoke to Steve and told him she needed some counseling. I think she said he told her he didn't have time for that. I don't suppose he does but would it have killed him to offer her some support and maybe mention someone's name who could counsel with her? Maybe offer to pray with her? He was going to show us how to pray after all. Let's get real here. And I'm not being sarcastic either. I'm being quite serious. And no I didn't hear this from my sister in law's cousin's uncle. I heard it from this senior relative herself.
Diana
2:02 PM, November 29, 2006
swtt said...
I am not sure if I understand everything in your post.
Are you saying that Mark Sharpe did not say he was kicked off the deacon body?
Sister Pam,
Thank you for going the sources you've persued for the truth. I agree that if we continue to gripe and moan, nothing will be accomplished. I REALLY admire Josh Whitmire for his post last night (thanks for your email, Josh!) I am praying and focusing on Jesus this week in the hope that Sunday night's church service will be a big step towards healing our church.
For those of you who wish to answer: If Steve Gaines shows true humily and a broken spirit on Sunday, will that be enough for you? Of course repentance (turning away) will have to be evident. I've never wanted him to leave; there are others in the leadership that I believe will continue on the same path of dividing the church into these "camps" so some of the leadership needs to change, but I don't think Steve needs to leave.
Any thoughts? And remember to be kind to each other; you don't know who's reading. :)
Thanks! Karen
blessmewiththetruth,
I'm sorry to confuse you. Mark S said Mark Dougharty told him he was kicked off the deacon roll at Bellevue. Mark Sharpe said Mark Dougharty told him he was no longer a deacon. Mark Sharpe asked him on who's authority he was speaking and Mark Dougharty would not give him an answer. That's when Mark Sharpe said he told Mark Dougharty he didn't have the authority to do that because only the church can remove someone from being a deacon at Bellevue.
Hope this helps.
Karen,
I will pray for repentance from the leadership, especially Steve Gaines, however I will be very cautious in regards to the words vs deeds. He has been know to speak "convenient truths". The proof is in the puddin as the old folks say:)
Did anyone notice that Mark Sharpe's name is absent from the "Lay Ministries 2006-2007" booklet that was handed out at Sunday's (11/26/06) CC meeting Look on page 2 "Active Deacons Years in Which Terms Expire" - the year's listed are 2006, 2007, 2008 - if Mark Sharpe was an active deacon in 2006, should not his name be listed? The booklet was published in 11/06. Draw your own conclsion. I'm just curious...
Karen
If the pastor admits ALL of the lies he has told, and ALL of the deception he has used to manipulate all of us with, and All of the intimidation tacics he has used to make other bend to his will, and All of the mean hateful words he has spoken in and out of meetings and in and out of church about all of us, and IF he admits that he was wrong to take money from the church for moving expenses when cheerleading expenses are definintly not moving expenses, and he admits it was wrong of him to cause many of his flock to stumble, stray, and scatter because of his own words and things that he has done, and If he admits that it was wrong for him to have ever used the church credit cards for any personal use, and if he admits it was wrong to allow others in leadership to tell lies to others when he knew they were lying, and if and if and if and if...........this list to so long that I will stop here.
And having done all of the above IF he then admits that he is unworthy to be a Shepherd of anyone`s pasture and he agrees to step down for counseling
AND
Order ALL financial books to be open to a group chosen by the church body
AND
IF he makes personal reconcilitaion with ALL of those he has personally offended
AND
then asks for forgiveness and repents.
I think Bellevue can be restored.
NASS, forgive me for jumping in off topic.
Sister Pam:
I am not going to reveal my name and I have my own security as well as that of my family to be concerned with. This is neither exaggeration or deceit. While I have chosen to post these things that you bring up on my blog it is because they are true and hurtful.
If you read my entire blog, you will see that my intent is not to smear or malign anyone's ministry. It is, however, to prove that these people who have the nerve to think they are above the Word and beyond the grasp of the church most certainly are not.
When I left my staff position I was maligned and threatened, called names and lied about, as have been countless others.
The actions of these people don't just effect their core group of friends but they spread through the church, causing many of the issues we see now.
To whom much is given, much shall be required.
I also have the freedom of speech to tell my story because that is what it is - MY story.
I have taken this "brother's" name out of my blog but the blog will remain and as I have done in the past I encourage everyone with stories - good, bad, ugly - to do the same.
I know also how this "brother" works and I want no part of his antics around my family or my home, period.
I had taken the race issue to the church on more than one occasion before leaving and each time it was squashed ... much like you are getting no response from the hierarchy now. It's also what ultimately led to my departure from the church.
Do not get me wrong, there are issues such as racism and adultery, etc, in churches everywhere - I am not trying to pick on BBC or dump on the church in it's dire time. But when these people come out with attacks against brothers who either disagree or have concerns, then the truth should come out as well.
I will say this again so everyone hears me - BBC is a GREAT PLACE and GOD WORKS THERE IN THOUSANDS OF HEARTS, in MYRIADS of ways! There are AMAZING MEN AND WOMEN OF GOD THERE whom are vessels of gold, useable and used.
We can and do respectfully agree many points, but squelching the freedom to speak is not one of them.
God bless you, sister Pam, for the reconcilitory spirit He has given you, and may He continue to use you mightily as well as this open forum of discussion for His glory and our good.
Thanks again NASS.
NPYFIM
And If he given back all the things he has taken away from members of the church as in:
Mark Sharpe`s deaconship
and makes sure that every deacon who resigned over the Loyalty Letter gets called back to their deaconship
And If he calls back every member he ran off and invited them back home
And if he sends a written letter of apology to Union City and asks them to forgive him for cutting down his own flock in their presence
There is so much he will need to do to reverse what he has done to so many people!
Never put your faith in men! said...
NASS, forgive me for jumping in off topic.
Sister Pam:
I am not going to reveal my name and I have my own security as well as that of my family to be concerned with. This is neither exaggeration or deceit. While I have chosen to post these things that you bring up on my blog it is because they are true and hurtful.
If you read my entire blog, you will see that my intent is not to smear or malign anyone's ministry. It is, however, to prove that these people who have the nerve to think they are above the Word and beyond the grasp of the church most certainly are not.
When I left my staff position I was maligned and threatened, called names and lied about, as have been countless others.
The actions of these people don't just effect their core group of friends but they spread through the church, causing many of the issues we see now.
To whom much is given, much shall be required.
I also have the freedom of speech to tell my story because that is what it is - MY story.
I have taken this "brother's" name out of my blog but the blog will remain and as I have done in the past I encourage everyone with stories - good, bad, ugly - to do the same.
never put your faith in men
It is all too sad that so many of us have had to keep our names secret because the of what those in power can and will do to us.
I just have to ask you why you are going to take the man`s name down if you know he did this. I don`t think you should. If your story is true than stick to it and if I were you I would find a way to help those who want to put an end to this.
Maybe there is some way you can help without revealing who you are????
Since it is your story and you have the details, you should jumo at the chance to help put an end to this.
I do know personally from my own eyes that these things occurred. However, I took his name off of my blog out of respect of the members of the church.
These things happened a few years back, so of course I don't expect anyone who was involved to "remember".
I tried the reconciliation thing and used every avenue possible, to no avail 3 years ago. That is why I simply told my story and left it at that.
I did receive an email from the Gremillions a few weeks back and I am now (right now) in the process of responding in hopes that things have changed and these people do not still hold these views.
I am hoping I can help out and remain anonymous, and I am praying (and I would covet prayers from you all as well) about the best way to handle the entire situation.
Thank you for your candor and response.
never put your faith in men
That`s great! I will be praying and I hope those who hurt you will also come into the light and admit what they have done and seek forgiveness!
If every issue gets settled except for yours, then our church is still not healed.
If someone is going around using racial slurs about people God has made and people he loves and people who are equal to every other human being,then we have to include this on our list of question to the CC and get to the bottom of it!
blessme,
Is this the way you have been loved, treated, and "forgiven" by others? Just curious.
Karen,
The original issues started with humility, humbleness and apoligies being necessary. Unfortuantely, the issue has evolved to a question of credibility and integrity. Do I believe that Dr. Gaines can be forgiven? Absolutely! Do I believe that it is possible to restore credibility and integrity with an apology? No. Unfortunately, when someone destroys their integrity the only thing that can restore it is time. Also, our church can not spend months upon months still questioning the credibility of the apology and the integrity of the man behind it.
By the way don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen either.
I think love confronts sin and holds the person`s hand while they do what the Bible tells them to do.
I would be happy to make phone calls to find a good counselor for our pastor.
I would support him as he gets help.
I would help him anyway I can
BUT
I will also be truthful to him or anyone else that asks.
He needs to reverse everything he has done if he can and get some well needed help.
The Lord requires me to do just what I believe it require our pastor to do.
blessmewiththetruth,
Regarding all your "ifs"... it would take a lot longer than an after-the-Sunday-night-service meeting.
As for the "brother" NPYFIM referred to...
1. There's a whole thread devoted to a letter he wrote to Josh Manning in the October archives of this blog.
2. Anybody remember Mark Fuhrman?
NASS
David, There was also a consequence for David`s sin and I as recall Moses was not allow to enter the promise land for his sin.
david,
I understand what you're saying and agree with you about David and Peter becoming great leaders after some really dark times. Unfortunately, Steve Gaines treated Gardendale staff and members the same way he's treated BBC staff and members. I can forgive, but I know BBC will never forget this dark time. With my financial background, a popular phrase is "past performance does not indicate future results", but it seems that history is repeating itself in this case. I know God can perform miracles - I hope He will in this.
It's been said on this blog (I don't know if it was you or not) that BBC will never be satisfied with any pastor because that pastor won't be Dr. Rogers. I don't think that's true - I think Mike Spradlin or Ken Whitten or David Jeremiah (My personal wish as I attended his church when I lived in San Diego) would be wonderful fits in BBC. Again, I'm not saying I want Steve Gaines to step down; I'm just giving examples to reiterate my point.
Karen
I guess it just sounds like setting up an awful lot of hoops to me. And I don't personally think that's our job. What you're offering sounds like "conditional forgiveness," not "seventy times seven" or offering a cloak. Trust me, I believe you're entitled to your opinion, and if this is what God requires of you when you have wronged someone else, then that's between you and the Father. But respectfully, can we really bind this on someone else? Perhaps this reveals the greatest gulf of all -- and it exists not between pastor and people, but between fellow members and our many diverse interpretations, opinions, and belief systems.
Also, with all of these conditions you've outlined that he MUST meet in order to forgiveness to be given and restoration to be accomplished in your mind, is there any allowance made for the things that have been alleged that are NOT true, or may yet be proven to be not true?
New BBC Open Forum said...
blessmewiththetruth,
Regarding all your "ifs"... it would take a lot longer than an after-the-Sunday-night-service meeting.
As for the "brother" NPYFIM referred to...
1. There's a whole thread devoted to a letter he wrote to Josh Manning in the October archives of this blog.
2. Anybody remember Mark Fuhrman?
NASS
NASS i think a thread should be started about the racial slur allegations. May if enough attention is given to it, they will really clean house!
You all should be smiling. I just thought before publishing and deleted a whole post.
Let's keep praying for each other, okay?
Hey I wanted to say one more thing... I know I am one person, with one story and that this all boils down to my word against the word of these tenured "men of God".
I do not expect an apology nor an admission or anything from these people; that would be career suicide for them.
And for me, it doesn't matter who thinks what or who says what because at least people are THINKING NOW. I am in no way, shape or form trying to change anyone's view of anyone else.
I am most blessed to see all these posts, from all different people in all walks of life - because we are THINKING! God gives each of us common sense and a brain for a REASON and God bless everyone who is using that gift in dealing with and praying through these tough days!!!!!
maybejustmaybe wrote:
"You all should be smiling. I just thought before publishing and deleted a whole post."
NASS certainly is!
"Let's keep praying for each other, okay?"
Amen.
At least praying for each other gives us something to do while we're sitting here "forsaking the assembly," huh?
(maybe sneaks a peek to see if NASS is blogging from a laptop in the sanctuary ...)
Does anyone have insight into Bellevue's policy on social drinking? Staff and deacons in particular.
theophilus wrote:
"Does anyone have insight into Bellevue's policy on social drinking? Staff and deacons in particular."
Goin' somewhere with this, are ya?
NASS
maybe bestows on NASS the Sherlock Holmes Award for Most Astute Grasping of the Obvious ...
maybejustmaybe wrote:
"At least praying for each other gives us something to do while we're sitting here "forsaking the assembly," huh?"
(maybe sneaks a peek to see if NASS is blogging from a laptop in the sanctuary ...)
Oops! NASS got caught bloggin' in the balcony.
(MJM looks up)
I wanted to know Bellevue's policy before saying anything definitive.
maybejustmaybe wrote:
"maybe bestows on NASS the Sherlock Holmes Award for Most Astute Grasping of the Obvious ..."
Why, thank you, maybe! But weren't you wondering the same thing?
Actually, yes. Stop that!
theophilus,
Just a guess really, but I'd say they're probably against it.
NASS
I've heard there's going to be "something" Sunday evening after the worship service. Don't know what.
moosergs said...
I get lost in this blog thing from time to time. Is there a meeting of some type this Sunday?
It's been said there is supposed to be a MAJOR CHANGE being announced in Sunday's night service. Don't shoot the messenger (me!) if it doesn't happen. But I think something will be said, but I have no idea what or from whom will be said.
Theophilus said...
Does anyone have insight into Bellevue's policy on social drinking? Staff and deacons in particular.
I would think social drinking is a sin. I would like to know what you're referring to, but please make sure you have undisputed proof of whatever you say. Thanks!
Karen
I do- very disturbing to me, but I want to check about a policy first. Under the "don't shoot the messenger" rule, and unrelated to the staff social drinking issue, I think MD is going to resign.
I feel sure it's a teetotaling policy..I'm curious too...what's up?
The major announcement Sun. is that the communication committee will be no more. This came from a deacon source. This should not come as a surprise. The growing concerned have outgrown the Sun. am meeting room. Hopefully, SG will address his congregation as many of the concerned have requested, asked and have been praying for.
theophilus,
Here's some scripture against drinking...
Leviticus 10:8-10
Instructions for Priestly Conduct
8 Then the Lord said to Aaron, 9 “You and your descendants must never drink wine or any other alcoholic drink before going into the Tabernacle. If you do, you will die. This is a permanent law for you, and it must be observed from generation to generation. 10 You must distinguish between what is sacred and what is common, between what is ceremonially unclean and what is clean.
Numbers 6:3
3 they must give up wine and other alcoholic drinks. They must not use vinegar made from wine or from other alcoholic drinks, they must not drink fresh grape juice, and they must not eat grapes or raisins.
Judges 13:4
4 So be careful; you must not drink wine or any other alcoholic drink nor eat any forbidden food.[a]
Ezekiel 44:21
21 "No priest is to drink on the job—no wine while in the inside courtyard.
I heard from a deacon's wife that the deacons are meeting on Sunday afternoon to elect new officers.
Karen
WTB,
Good and well informed points as always. Good to see you back.
That would be a big mistake. If the CC disbanded now it would be too obvious that they were nothing more than window dressing. Were they completely disingenuous when they told concerned members that "we don't know/don't have the answer to that but will get back to you" if they pack up and move on?
Theophilus,
They are definitely against drinking. The qualifications for Bellevue deacons plainly prohibit drinking of any kind.
Not only that, they prohibit smoking (it may actually prohibit all tobacco use).
I understand the traditional SB position on alcohol. However, many Southern Baptist leaders are now questioning the alcohol prohibition. It was the subject of some controversy at this years' Convention. It will be interesting to see what happens with it in the future.
While I am an ardent nonsmoker, I disagree with the tobacco ban. If we are prohibiting tobacco, the only reason is on health grounds. Why single out smoking? Why not add transfats? Perhaps sun bathing too? While we are at it, why don't we have a gluttony provision. After all the Bible names it as sin, whereas alcohol and tobacco use are not so labeled.
In times past, there were ashtrays in the deacon meetings. And many will remember that Dr. Pollard loved cigars.
I think this is an example of someone singling out sins they dislike while leaving sins they enjoy alone. I don't think it can be justified.
Theophilus said...
I do- very disturbing to me, but I want to check about a policy first. Under the "don't shoot the messenger" rule, and unrelated to the staff social drinking issue, I think MD is going to resign.
Theophilus
Do you have information that D.C. has been wineing and dining folks too?????
I do believe consuming or buying alcohol is not an accepted practice in our church and neither is gambling.
When the leaders of the church don`t mind buying a little booze, then we might as well put a liquor store next to the church.
Does anyone here mind if I sit down and buy my buddy a beer while I try to witness to him?
I`m sick of all the charades at Bellevue.
They preach one thing and do another all the time!
Where are our leaders leading us?
ezekiel,
I couldn't find a New Testament verse against drinking, but I'll look harder. :)
Karen
I guess it is no secret then.
2000 years before Mylanta...
Theophilus said...
I guess it is no secret then.
What's no secret?
Karen
Ask crunch
Theophilus said...
I guess it is no secret then.
Theophilus
How in the world is D.C. going to straighten our church out while he goes around using provisions from God to wine and dine folks.
He obvious doesn`t care who knows or he would not be doing it in public!
The dining is fine but the wineing is sinful and shameful and doubly so when it is a new minister at Bellevue or any minister at Bellevue.
Is Bellevue beyond being shamed by it`s ministers?
Crunch,
What are we talking about here? Please be specific - I had a root canal today and my pain killers have kicked in and I'm kind of dorky tonight. Thanks!
Karen
karen
we have a minister at Bellevue purchasing alcohol for his friends while our teens are being taught in sunday school to abstain from alcohol and other things and while our pastor preaches how terrible alocohol is.
What kind of leadership is this?
Yes, guys. Spill it if you have proof -- i.e. names, places, dates. Otherwise, don't spread rumors.
NBBCOF
crunch,
You really have to put some more details out there. That is a HUGE issue, if true, and you need to be able to back it up.
Thanks! Karen
theophilus wrote:
"Under the "don't shoot the messenger" rule, and unrelated to the staff social drinking issue, I think MD is going to resign."
Seems we've heard that one before -- the Sunday it was announced David Coombs was coming on board. It didn't happen then, and I'll have to see it to believe it's going to happen Sunday.
NASS
**The list is growing...
Some of the congregation has awakened to the reality that our church is elder ruled by a close knit group of men who manage to be appointed to key positions year after year. The congregation needs to be awakened to this. I agree with Bin Wonderin:
We need:
1. An apology to the congregation for mocking us at Union City. After all, some of us didn't fall off the cabbage truck yesterday!
2. An admission the cheerleader tickets are not a legit moving expense and reimbursement to BBC.
3. An admission Dr. Gaines should have never given $25k to FUMC and an explanation of policy changes to prevent a repeat.
4. A policy for open books on Holy land trips and no overcharging of members. Free tickets for the host and wife are fine but not for anybody else
5. A quarterly business meeting with open mike Q&A with each committee chairman. Transcripts on the web within a week
**The current bylaws mention "monthly" business meetings! When were they changed??
6. A transparent committee selection process.
7. A good updated set of bylaws similar to GBC.
8. The signing of a public conflict of interest form for any member that has any business contract to provide services to the church. These people should be recused from committees that review bids for their services.
9. No church credit cards. Pay your own way and then turn in an expense report like I do at my job.
AND I would like to add...
10. A business meeting in accord with Matthew 18 to deal with the issues that remain related to Mark Sharpe and "the Dream"... AND any other loose ends that should have been dealt with months ago!!
11. The END of heavy handed dealing with ministers, staff, and members.
12. A whistle blower policy for ministers, staff, and members. Also:
13. Full disclosure of ministerial compensation: salary + benefit breakdown, etc.
14. Much greater congregational oversight of the current budget with a transparent policy for consideration of non-budgeted expenditures exceeding a reasonable amount.
15. Forgiveness for those in leadership who have allowed this to deteriorate to this point--AND consequences for their actions.
16. Building prayer buildings or any other type of building should be brought through proper channels to the congregation for prayerful consideration--not coerced "rubber stamping."
By the way, Dr. Rogers taught us quite a bit about prayer. As a matter of fact, I believe all of the current buildings ARE prayer buildings already. He and Dr. Whitmire also taught us quite a bit about worship also... but that's another topic.
17. Bellevue needs to reject Warrenism fully and finally.
18. Congregational nomination of and election of all of the Board of Directors as called for in the 1929 bylaws.
19. Public apologies to and restitution (compensation, office, freedom to speak freely) if necessary made to former staff and deacons who have been treated roughly, unfairly, been intimidated, or who have resigned due to concerns of conscience.
All in my opinion as usual.
Revival, reform, congregational oversight... for there is level ground at Calvary and "he who would be great among you shall be the servant of all."
Folks,
What we have here are a couple of new bloggers (Theophilus & Crunch). It seems that they are intent on starting a little rumor and trying to get us to bite on it. The intent is to convince everyone of how easily rumors get spread. Well, fellas or ladies as the case may be. So far the folks on the blog here have spoke of things that they have personally, seen or heard or acquired from first hand sources.
Nice try, but we do our homework here and verification has been a must. So far, there have been many, many verified and precious little refuted.
theophilus
You may have the floor and give the details since you already said you had them.
I don`t have time right now.
Yes, theophilus. By all means do. The floor's all yours. Spill it or drop it.
NBBCOF
I have them, but I will check on the policy first. If you are the one who saw him in the restaurant and talked with the waitress, speak out. If not, let's end this part of the thread.
We need to be cautious in all things for we are commanded so. Interesting that our old friends HisServant and ACE are not here and some new fellow Theopolus and Crunch have shown up.
If this is a plan to decieve, then
#1) It is pathetic
#2) Some have sank to new lows.
If it is not, then you better be sure that your info is verifiable because it will be checked out.
I recognize the alcohol question is a sticky wicket for Southern Baptists, but I am unsure a biblical case for total abstinence can be made. I suspect the SBC position on alcohol has more to do with tradition arising out of the American temperance movement of the late 1800's and early 1900's than the Bible.
If we examine John 2:1-11 and Luke 7:33-34, Jesus clearly used alcohol. Certainly He was not ungodly so how can we be ungodly for doing something Christ did? The Bible clearly says drunkenness is sinful, but where does it say drinking is sinful?
I'm not an advocate for alcohol. Rather, I am advocate for the sufficiency of Scriptures. Is our doctrine based solely on Scripture, or do we also incorporate tradition and history?
This question will continue to come up among Southern Baptists. It is a natural outgrowth of the Battle for the Bible.
or worse, deacon plants
The policy lately is like the writing on the barn wall in the book animal house... It tends to change with no notice to the rest of the barnyard animals...
So far as past policy was concerned, it was absolutely, positively, totally BBC dry county.
Who remembers "the finished product of the brewers art"(drunkard pictured in gutter passed out) billboard story??
But if they're fishing for takers to jump on a rumor... let's not be biting.
I have got to post a few things...
1. Tithing records are reviewed- Who cares??? I won't boast about my giving to others, but if anyone wants to look it up, why would it bother me? No one knows my finances, so how could they determine if I give 10%? Maybe they want to ensure people who serve the church actually give...without tax records no one knows where its 10% or not. I don't see a problem with it. Considering how the majority of folks on here demanded to see every financial detail of the church, why would they then be bothered if the church reviewed there giving? It's a double standard any way you play it, but I know I am not convincing anyone anyhow, because everyone here "loves BBC" and "feels hurt". Good to know everyone is so consumed with the damage to themselves and not the thousands of people being hurt by this side show.
(Please don't respond by telling me since you give(tithe) you have a right to know everything. How about putting trust in those who serve and handle the BBC business. Better yet, walk into your CEO's office tommorrow and demand to see his financial records because after all you do contribute to company stock right??? Better check his credit card purchases, benefits package, and moving expenses to ensure the money you are contributing to stock or 401k.)
2. Has even one person noticed the snowball effect going on here...Mark Sharpe (whom I have the pleasure of not knowing) is offended..demands everything from an apology to an all out resignation. He has a few issues. As those are addressed, the "truth seekers" pick apart the answers in order to construct new issues. With each answer, at least one additional (If not about 20) is brought up. You wonder why people shy away from the people here who only ask questions to seek out further issues??? Gee I wonder. I would love to answer a question honestly only to get thrown under a bus...a carivan of buses.
3. The Communication Committee is formed to give everyone a voice, a platform for their concerns. Do people remember complaining how they had no voice? Now they have a voice, but huge surprise here, its not good enough. Its never enough. The truth is, nothing will ever be enough. No you shouldn't leave. You should stay and continue to divide and try to destroy. Why let people worship the Lord in peace and love? Nah...hang around and make trouble. Oh its trouble your seeking right, its the truth? Does it actually feel good to sit around here and complain and feel so mistreated? I have read some incredible posts...including a bunch from a woman who needs more than an apology, she needs some serious counceling. Don't help her out though...pour some gas on the fire.
Oh I know you are doing it for the greater good right...well after reading these posts I hope the Lord I serve does not judge me like others have chosen to judge leaders of the church. How does it feel to demand apologies and even set out conditions of those in order to "forgive them". Whatever...this is going to be deleted, but at least I can stand behind my words with my real name.
Ricky Dyer
PS I really enjoyed the posts concerning how low the love offering was. Way to celebrate.
One of the things that long time members of Bellevue might remember that we were taught concerning wine.
The passover supper consisted of unleavened bread and wine.
Would it not be inconsistent to have unleavend bread with leavened wine. Leaven was always spoken of to represent sin and leaven is a key ingredient in the fermenting process of alcholic wine.
Do a word study on "oinos", the word used for wine in the NT and you'll change your opinion.
It looks like rickey gave up his attempt to start a rumor as "crunch" and reveal himself.
Of course it could be that a lot of us just aren't used to a pastor that lies to us.
Tim...
bravo (sound of clapping).
Also, who would want to place temptation at the Lord's Supper before a recovering alcoholic.
It is not for kings (Prov. 31), It is not for the wise (Prov. 20:1), It is not for priests (Lev. 10)...
By the way, what the Jews did then and what they do now are two different stories also. As Tim's post points out.
theophilus wrote:
"I have them, but I will check on the policy first. If you are the one who saw him in the restaurant and talked with the waitress, speak out. If not, let's end this part of the thread."
Well, you're the one who brought it up! As I said before, spill it or drop it.
ricky dyer wrote:
"Whatever...this is going to be deleted, but at least I can stand behind my words with my real name."
Wouldn't dream of it, Ricky. That was classic!
NBBCOF
If we examine John 2:1-11 and Luke 7:33-34, Jesus clearly used alcohol. Certainly He was not ungodly so how can we be ungodly for doing something Christ did? The Bible clearly says drunkenness is sinful, but where does it say drinking is sinful?
I don't think it does, so I agree with your position that drunkeness is a sin but a drink is not. Still I think it is a wise polciy to forbid drink for staff, deacons and teachers so they do not cause others to stumble.
I personally do not drink because of alcoholism in my immediate and extended family. I want to teach my children total abstinance is the only choice for our family given our history. There is very little good that comes from booze, but loads of heartache does.
Tim,
We need to be cautious in all things for we are commanded so. Interesting that our old friends HisServant and ACE are not here and some new fellow Theopolus and Crunch have shown up.
I was not here because I was at the GREAT BBC for church tonight. And you're implying that we're one of those people? You're wrong, Tim. Why would we post lies concerning our leadership? That wouldn't make any sense at all.
If this is a plan to decieve, then
#1) It is pathetic
#2) Some have sank to new lows.
I don't know what their intentions are, were they got their info, etc. But how do we know that you didn't post that to try to make myself look bad by blaming me? We don't.... You see, this could go both ways.
If it is not, then you better be sure that your info is verifiable because it will be checked out.
Good advice.
I'm actually from Seattle but stumbled upon these blog threads and as a brother in Christ felt I needed to give you an unbiased perspective on what you look like to the outside world. You look like a bunch of grumbling Isrealites who are unhappy with your leadership and trying to find fault with anything and everything. I've never been to Memphis but made a mental note to stay as clear from this church as is physically possible if business brings me that way. I suspect the Isrealites would have had overactive blogs if the technology was available. Unfortunately the whole world has to see this ungodly murmuring. For Christ's sake, please stop it.
NASS,
And I thought that I had posted some stuff to be ashamed of. Ricky (Crunch) just wrote a book of them.
Seattlebrother...excellent post and you are so true....
Bin Wonderin,
I agree there is much wisdom in abstaining from alcohol, I just don't believe the Bible mandates it.
I also think it is perfectly fine to hold staff and deacons to a higher standard.
bin wonderin, wtb, tim, et al.,
It's a diversion tactic. Interesting discussion but not going anywhere.
(I don't think ace was involved.)
So... think if they're disbanding the CC they'll still meet this Sunday morning?
Ace,
I just came from church myself. You must have a longer drive home than I do.
And no I am not saying you and they are the same. But I do believe that there is a group of "itty-bitty" deacons that would love to come here start some wild-eyed rumor and then glory in the fact that it was so readily received.
bin wonderin
John 2 and the other passage... most translations read "wine" but the word can indicate unfermented grape juice as well. Since at the wedding he made about 150+ gallons of the stuff... You have a theological problem if you say that it was alcoholic... drunkards will not be in heaven!!
NBBCOF,
(I don't think ace was involved.)
Thank you. You are correct in that statement.
Tim,
I just came from church myself. You must have a longer drive home than I do.
Nope, only 10-15 minutes...I have other stuff to take care of than just the service...I just don't go for that. Glad to hear you attended tonight, though!
Be ashamed of giving an honest assessment of the truth??? hardly... and who is crunch? Sorry I don't get the whole "blog" nickname thing. Notice I didn't have to judge your actions with my personal opinion? Notice I didn't even ask you to stop or demand an apology? Whether or not I am offended isn't the point when it comes to serving the Lord or an excuse not to. If me simply highlighting the movements and words of this forum that I find interesting is something to be ashamed of...wow you got me...will there be a thread of posts outlining how i need to apologize now? maybe even with the conditions? By the way, if Pastor Steve wants to come to my house, I will welcome his fellowship annouced or unannounced. It would not be trespassing at my house. Speaking of...how could Pastor Steve intimidate another grown man??? Are we 5 and he threatened to take his lunch money or something??? (The last part is a light hearted joke- don't throw me under the bus..
Ricky Dyer,
Who cares about someone checking on tithing?? I'd say staff at Bellevue have a little different problem than you do. Perhaps the administration of Bellevue doesn't know what your 100% is... But they know what their employees make... Hmmmmmmm.... How would you feel about your giving?? compulsion? intimidated?? It would really free you up to feel like you were giving from the heart wouldn't it?
NASS,
Just a thought on what could be coming about on Sunday, pure speculation, but something that I believe we need to consider.
I have a suspicion that there might be a vote to confirm Dr. Gaines as our pastor in an attempt to silence those that oppose him by presenting an overall majority of the church supporting him and attempting to shame those that do not.
If we are told Sunday morning that a business meeting is being held that night, then you better hold on to your seat.
Purely an opinion, but it I believe that it is worthy of thought. I also, do not believe that anyone within the leadership or upper crust deacon set are ready to cave in and admit anything at this point.
I find it interesting that Pastor Tom Ascol’s resolution on church discipline was not voted on at this years Southern Baptist Convention, yet Resolution 5 (the alcohol resolution) was voted on and passed. Church discipline has explicit biblical support while banning of moderate drinking of alcohol does not (it is at least debateable). Even Al Mohler agrees there is no biblical support for a complete alcohol ban.
WTB,
I think Dr. Ascol's proposed resolution also called for integrity in reporting membership numbers as well...discounting those that are "inactive" or can't be found.
Allofgrace,
It did indeed. Ascol is concerned we have an unregenerate denomination, which is a sobering thought.
Ezekiel,
On the surface, enforcement of church discipline and a seeker-sensitive strategy do not seem complimentary.
Back to RW, Bill Hybels and their church-growth ilk.
Did you know the founder of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. James Boyce, actually decried the initial SBC alcohol resolutions as being "not germane to the business of the Convention?"
WTB,
Paige Patterson has expressed concerns over unregenerate church members as well...I think his estimates are somewhere around 33% of the average SB church being born again believers.
Can I have your attention, please? Tim was right about crunch and theopolus (or whatever his name is)...They've got us discussing the alcohol policy of the SBC instead of issues specific to BBC. Nice try, you two!
Karen
karen & nass,
I suppose my speculation on Sunday is lost in the discussion. Look at this from a political stand point and you might be able to see why it is that I have come to be suspicious.
Well I just posted my final thoughts on the PD issue at Bellevue on that thread..if you want to occupy a few minutes.
Also, think of the other political posturing and postioning that has already taken place...if form holds true...
Wow, sudden cold still silence.
tap..tap..tap...anyone home
Tim
I caught it and think you could be on to something. We need to be prepared for anything.
Most of all we need to find out about a new set of bylaws.
Did anyone catch the post earlier today about a Tennessee nonprofit tax act of 1998? Someone posted that a law was passed that if the bylaws had not been updated in 50 years that the new law would replace the old bylaws.
I guess that even that could be a diversion but it would no thurt to see in anyone heard the same thing.
nhisname,
I did see that earlier on the non profit act of 1998. I had forgot about it. Give me a moment and I can do some quick research. I have stored Tenn tax info on my laptop here. Be right back.
In the meantime, suppose that this does come out as a shrewd political move. We need to be prepared as to how we intend on responding. I realize that it is not a pleasant thought, however, none of this has been pleasant so far and I don't expect the road to become any less bumpy.
Did the Rapture happen???
I'm all alone!!!!!
:)
WHEW!!!!
I thought I was the only one left.
I am so happy. :)
nhisname,
Sorry, I had to scan thru 64 pages of an adobe document.
tim wrote:
"In the meantime, suppose that this does come out as a shrewd political move. We need to be prepared as to how we intend on responding."
How do you "prepare" to keep your seat?
I guess we just need to have as many of us there as we can so that we will be able to show that everyone is not ready, willing and able to jusp on the first crumb that is thrown to us.
The charter act of was effective Jan 1, 1988. It required that certain documents be filed to qualify as a non-profit organization. Non-profit organizations that existed prior to Jan 1, 1988 did not have to update their record to include a charter.
jump
I believe that this is probably what someone was referring to concerning TN tax law act of 1988 for non-profits.
Well, I guess we are back to square one.
Personally I have no issue with a glass of wine at dinner; however I would be shocked to see my pastor drinking a glass of wine. Now that may be a double standard, but that's how life is sometimes.
Also I heard that same rumor that mD would be stepping down (and no I have no proof)
And I also thought the service was great tonight!
GNite All!!!
See you in the funny papers or back here tomorrow.
Well, I don't necassarily believe that we need to keep our seat, but I do believe that we need to be prepared to stand even if it is against the crowd.
I also, believe that what is being seen as politically shrewd will wind up being political sucide, especially for those that may just be going along because they believe that no one would stand in oppostion.
Tim, no offense, but I really do not think anyone will stand in opposition if given a chance.
OK, so I have either completely depressed an entire group or all have gone to bed. I think that I will head to bed myself.
Goodnight, Ya'll. We'll talk more tomorrow.
flatfoot,
I Will, even if I stand alone.
and Tim, I will not try to convince you otherwise. I respect that you have strong feelings and will represent yourself.
I appreciate that. I am headed to bed. Everyone try to sleep well.
G'night, Tim!
Karen,
Oink! You have mail!
Tim,
In regards to your suggestion about standing in opposition- I will have to stand behind someone. I'm not sure if I'm scared of Steve Gaines but I have always been afraid of Phil Weatherwax.
Just a few thoughts and question that need to be answered whenever our next business meeting may occur. I believe that we should be prepared to ask these questions concerning any motions that may or may not be presented if a business meeting does occur.
What constitutes a quorum of membership that must be present to validate a vote?
Is this stated in our by-laws?
What constitutes the margin by which a motion must be approved in order to be adopted by our church?
Is this stated in our by-laws?
What authority is given to bring a vote before the church?
Is this stated in our by-laws?
The list could be endless and these questions need to be answered before a congregational vote is made on any issue. The intent being to insure that there is any validity to a vote that is not defined in our by-laws.
Again, I would like to reiterate that the timing or occurance of a business meeting is purely speculative.
I do believe that we need to be prepared to have questions answered concerning the validity of a vote, according to our current by-laws, even if it takes until 3:00am to answer them all and finally reach the point of calling for a vote.
piglet,
are you sure you emailed me? I don't have any new email.
Thanks! Karen
I am not a member of Bellevue, but I just want to suggest to you all please call "Peacemaker Ministries". The website is www.hispeace.org
You can go to the link get help with conflict at the top of the web page. I am praying. For this trouble to end for you. I am praying you all grow in forgiveness to one another, and love with all sincerity and I pray you will show each other mercy. Don't talk bad to the authority at Bellevue even if they are doing wrong, speak to them gently as one should speak kindly is explaining something to a parent. And don’t forget to cry to the L-RD, they hurt me; they are hurting all of Bellevue. Maybe the authority and all of Bellevue might want to think why this is happening, let everyone examine themselves; did they do something that should be repented of?
Communications Committee Membership.
Brothers and Sisters in Christ
I attend a sister church in Alabama that is having identical issues as those of Bellevue. If one took Carol Pemberton's letter #2 and changed the name to my church it would apply 100%. Satan has chosen to attack our churches in this manner. In looking at those in leadership throughout this attack there is a common name, HARRY SMITH. I know nothing personnally about Mr. Smith. But noticed that he was on Pastor Search Committee, Communications Team, Finance Committee, Deacon and reviewed the credit card. With 30000 members I think one should diversify and not allow one individual to be part of so many important organizations. It would protect him and the body...It raised too many eyebrows....
cd ward wrote:
"I attend a sister church in Alabama that is having identical issues as those of Bellevue. If one took Carol Pemberton's letter #2 and changed the name to my church it would apply 100%. Satan has chosen to attack our churches in this manner. In looking at those in leadership throughout this attack there is a common name, HARRY SMITH. I know nothing personnally about Mr. Smith. But noticed that he was on Pastor Search Committee, Communications Team, Finance Committee, Deacon and reviewed the credit card. With 30000 members I think one should diversify and not allow one individual to be part of so many important organizations. It would protect him and the body...It raised too many eyebrows...."
Thank you for stating what several thousand BBC members seem to be missing! NASS passes the coveted "Sherlock Holmes Award for Most Astute Grasping of the Obvious" to our Alabama brother/sister. May God bless you in waging this battle we're both facing. And please keep us up to date on how it's going.
NASS
It is also worthy of mentioning that this same fellow answers all of the questions posed to the communication committee. And most of the time the answer is "I don't know". It looks like if any one would know that this would certainly be the man.
Choice,
From the Alvin Ellis/Rob Teutsch email exchange:
"Remember Dr. Rogers preached on 2 separate occasions that he feared as much as 80% of BBC is NOT saved; Dr. Gray Allison preached 75% and Billy Graham has said he fears that as little as 15% of the Church is saved."
If those men were correct, we have our explanation for the colossal apathy and lack of discernment of so many Bellevue members.
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Matthew 7:21-23
Tim posted: Again, I would like to reiterate that the timing or occurance of a business meeting is purely speculative.
REPLY: purely speculative?? you paint a false picture and a POSSIBLE false motive by Brother Steve and others with nothing to back it up?
purely speculative? it seems that most of this blog and info on it falls under that same catagory
NASS, this is under the "Whatever" thread:
Unless I missed something, I did not hear how this year's love offering compared to years past. Does someone know?
A warning for all of those so opposed to Pastor Gaines. Remember he is the Lord's anointed servant. Something not taken lightly in the eyes of God.
Psalm 89:19-24
19 Once You spoke in vision to Your godly ones, And said, “I have given help to one who is mighty;
I have exalted one chosen from the people.
20 “I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him,
21 With whom My hand will be established; My arm also will strengthen him.
22 “The enemy will not deceive him, Nor the son of wickedness afflict him.
23 “But I shall crush his adversaries before him, And strike those who hate him.
24 “My faithfulness and My lovingkindness will be with him,
And in My name his horn will be exalted.
I thought the Love Offering was a great blessing. It seems many on here are hoping that giving was way down. Pretty sad. anything to further your agenda. Mom4, I am not directing this at you, just at those on the blog in general.
Nehemiah: I agree and have posted this several times. Brother Steve is God's anointed and it is VERY SCARY to see amd hear how some talk about him and even to him. It is not just their "concerns", but the horrible, dispectful manor in which it is done.
Karen,
Sorry. Check your mail again...
Nehemiah .. HisServant-1,
We are each anointed in the New Testament.
Also, I am so glad that you came to teach us how to be disrespectful.
piglet,
got it! :)
I posted this a few days ago, but I think Nehemiah and hisservant-1 should read it. At one time Saul was God's annointed and then God was sorry he made Saul king.
Karen said...
I don't know if this passage with speak to anyone, but it speaks to me. My favorite verse has been verse 14 - don't you hate it when you hide things from God and then somebody finds out and calls your bluff??? If God can be sorry that He made someone a king, can't I be sorry that He appointed the leadership at Bellevue? Just wondering....Karen
1 Samuel 15:10-40 (The Message)
10-11 Then God spoke to Samuel: "I'm sorry I ever made Saul king. He's turned his back on me. He refuses to do what I tell him."
11-12 Samuel was angry when he heard this. He prayed his anger and disappointment all through the night. He got up early in the morning to confront Saul but was told, "Saul's gone. He went to Carmel to set up a victory monument in his own honor, and then was headed for Gilgal."
By the time Samuel caught up with him, Saul had just finished an act of worship, having used Amalekite plunder for the burnt offerings sacrificed to God.
13 As Samuel came close, Saul called out, "God's blessings on you! I accomplished God's plan to the letter!"
14 Samuel said, "So what's this I'm hearing—this bleating of sheep, this mooing of cattle?"
15 "Only some Amalekite loot," said Saul. "The soldiers saved back a few of the choice cattle and sheep to offer up in sacrifice to God. But everything else we destroyed under the holy ban."
16 "Enough!" interrupted Samuel. "Let me tell you what God told me last night."
Saul said, "Go ahead. Tell me."
17-19 And Samuel told him. "When you started out in this, you were nothing—and you knew it. Then God put you at the head of Israel—made you king over Israel. Then God sent you off to do a job for him, ordering you, 'Go and put those sinners, the Amalekites, under a holy ban. Go to war against them until you have totally wiped them out.' So why did you not obey God? Why did you grab all this loot? Why, with God's eyes on you all the time, did you brazenly carry out this evil?"
20-21 Saul defended himself. "What are you talking about? I did obey God. I did the job God set for me. I brought in King Agag and destroyed the Amalekites under the terms of the holy ban. So the soldiers saved back a few choice sheep and cattle from the holy ban for sacrifice to God at Gilgal—what's wrong with that?"
22-23 Then Samuel said, Do you think all God wants are sacrifices—empty rituals just for show? He wants you to listen to him! Plain listening is the thing, not staging a lavish religious production. Not doing what God tells you is far worse than fooling around in the occult. Getting self-important around God
is far worse than making deals with your dead ancestors.
Because you said No to God's command, he says No to your kingship.
24-25 Saul gave in and confessed, "I've sinned. I've trampled roughshod over God's Word and your instructions. I cared more about pleasing the people. I let them tell me what to do. Oh, absolve me of my sin! Take my hand and lead me to the altar so I can worship God!"
26 But Samuel refused: "No, I can't come alongside you in this. You rejected God's command. Now God has rejected you as king over Israel."
27-29 As Samuel turned to leave, Saul grabbed at his priestly robe and a piece tore off. Samuel said, "God has just now torn the kingdom from you, and handed it over to your neighbor, a better man than you are. Israel's God-of-Glory doesn't deceive and he doesn't dither. He says what he means and means what he says."
30 Saul tried again, "I have sinned. But don't abandon me! Support me with your presence before the leaders and the people. Come alongside me as I go back to worship God."
31 Samuel did. He went back with him. And Saul went to his knees before God and worshiped.
32 Then Samuel said, "Present King Agag of Amalek to me." Agag came, dragging his feet, muttering that he'd be better off dead.
33 Samuel said, "Just as your sword made many a woman childless, so your mother will be childless among those women!" And Samuel cut Agag down in the presence of God right there in Gilgal.
34-35 Samuel left immediately for Ramah and Saul went home to Gibeah. Samuel had nothing to do with Saul from then on, though he grieved long and deeply over him. But God was sorry he had ever made Saul king in the first place.
8:37 PM, November 27, 2006
Can't you just see Saul trying to back peddle when Samuel asks about the bleating of sheep and lowing of cattle (the stuff that was left over when Saul was supposed to have slain EVERYTHING)
Karen's own interpretation follows:
"But Samuel, it was just a little bitty sheep!"
Just a suggestion for Bellevue's new animated logo.
NASS (with tongue in cheek)
headoutofthesand,
Please e-mail me.
NBBCOF
Tim,
I sent you mail....
NASS,
I'm cold - give me back my wool! :) BRRRR, BAAAA, BRRRRR!
Hey, that "itty bitty sheep" thing was funny! How come nobody spits coffee when I make a funny! :(
Karen (feeling needy and unvalidated!)
Karen,
I laughed...
How do you delete a post? I only laughed once.
piglet,
Use the itty bitty trashcan at the lower left just below your comment. You have to be logged in for it to show. Click on it and follow the instructions.
I took care of this one for you. Everybody's comment has a little trash can on my screen.
Stick around. We'll probably make you laugh again.
You didn't e-mail me. :-(
NASS
Communication Committee Meeting is on for this Sunday at 8:30 a.m. in Fellowship Hall-Fellowship Meeting Room #3
I called the church and spoke with Linda in the pastor`s office and she said she thought the last CC meeting was this past sunday.
Then she offered to call Harry Smith to make sure as I held on the phone and I accepted the offer.
She came back and said that there will be a CC meeting this sunday. I already posted the particulars above.
Nehemiah said...
A warning for all of those so opposed to Pastor Gaines. Remember he is the Lord's anointed servant. Something not taken lightly in the eyes of God.
Psalm 89:19-24
19 Once You spoke in vision to Your godly ones, And said, “I have given help to one who is mighty;
I have exalted one chosen from the people.
20 “I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him,
21 With whom My hand will be established; My arm also will strengthen him.
22 “The enemy will not deceive him, Nor the son of wickedness afflict him.
23 “But I shall crush his adversaries before him, And strike those who hate him.
24 “My faithfulness and My lovingkindness will be with him,
And in My name his horn will be exalted.
11:30 AM, November 30, 2006
CHURCHMOUSE asks: David was annointed King of Israel. How does this apply to a New Testament Church?
Can you find a verse in the New Testament that warns New Testament Church members not to question the actions or doctrine of teachers or preachers that come their way?
Nehemiah said:
"A warning for all of those so opposed to Pastor Gaines. Remember he is the Lord's anointed servant. Something not taken lightly in the eyes of God...
...“I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him,"
And Hisservant wrote:
"Nehemiah: I agree and have posted this several times. Brother Steve is God's anointed and it is VERY SCARY to see amd hear how some talk about him and even to him."
RESPONSE:
Pastor Gaines is not "the" Annointed One (Jesus), or an Old Testament king, or a High Priest, or a prophet in the biblical sense. His office at times may be prophetic as he declares the Word of God, but he does not foretell the future or give new revelation.
He is a pastor which is an office to which he was called by God to serve and lead Christ's sheep. He was also called by BBC and should be accountable to the sheep.
There is nothing wrong with church members disagreeing with their pastor. The pastor should listen carefully to them and never bully them. They should be able to comunicate with him without a committee, without constant threats of sickness or death or fear mongering of the type quoted above.
Yes they should be respectful of his office. But he is to be accountable to the congregation and he is not above the Word of God (Mt. 18).
All of the members of the congregation are priests. In that they are equal to him and have the same access to God. The sheep and all they have belong to Jesus--not to the pastor. The pastor is an undershepherd entrusted with caring for ALL of the sheep.
I'm so glad that Jesus doesn't send any of His sheep away from His fold (John 6:37).
We follow Jesus because we know He truly loves us. When sheep do not follow an undershepherd closely, perhaps they have reasons that would interest the True Shepherd.
King Saul was the Lord's anointed servant, and let's see what David did
to him. David gathered up a group of armed men, and was pursued by
Saul(the anointed one) and his army. Given the opportunity to kill
Saul, David just used his knife to cut off part of his robe. David
eventually fled to the land of the Philistines, if I remember correctly,
and was even willing to fight with their army until the Philistines
decided against using him for fear of him turning against them.
I think it is pretty clear that David was opposed to the Lord's anointed
servant, Saul, and the bible clearly said that David was a man after
God's own heart. Furthermore, even though David waited on God to kill
King Saul, David still didn't serve in Saul's army, or participate in
helping prop up Saul's reign as king.
Granted, by the time of the above events, Saul had disobeyed God and
lost favor with God.
If the below person wants to try and make an Old Testament application
here, the question he/she should be asking is if the actions of pastor
Gaines in response to the issues being raised equates him with a
disobedient and unrepentant King Saul, or if it equates him with a
repentant King David after Nathan confronted him regarding his murder
and adultery. Does Gaines response to the issues he is being confronted
with align him more closely with King Saul's response or King David's
response?
Are annointed men called to do harm to the flock that Christ puts them in charge of?
Although David brings up the Ark of the Covenant to Mount Moriah, he is not allowed by God to build the Temple. A number of reasons are given. One is that the Temple is a house of God and a house of peace and David has blood on his hands from subduing the enemies of Israel. However, he is promised that his son will build it.
Well said 25+yrs-
You reminded me of the parable of the lost sheep. Not only did the shepherd care enough about his sheep to know that one was missing (he counted them), he also cared enough to go out and get the one that was lost. It bothers me when shepherds take a "if you don't like it then leave" mentality.
Shepherds are concerned when they lose their sheep.
Anyone,
Am I wrong to continue to use 1 Samuel to bolster my point about God being sorry that he appointed Saul as king? I don't want to cause a brouhaha about Old and New Testament teachings. Doesn't the Old Testament point to the New Testament.
25yrs+,
I liked your post.
The commandment test says: if you can willfully and knowingly sin against the will of God with no conviction, no compunction, and no remorse, you need to get saved. A lot of people say, "Well, I walked down an aisle somewhere, and I got saved. I know I'm just an old backslider now, but I'm still saved and going to heaven."
No, you are not. If you are living that way--high, wide, and handsome--and it does not break your heart, then you do not know the God of the Bible.
Notice it doesn't say, he who has believed; it says He who believes. It is always present tense. Have you ever asked someone, "Are you saved?"
They say, "Yes, I'm saved. I remember walking down the aisle when I was nine years old, giving my hand to my pastor and my heart to Jesus Christ. Now, I may not be living for God right now, I'll admit. But I know I'm saved, because I remember what I did when I was a nine-year-old boy. I remember believing on Jesus Christ." The Bible never uses such an experience as proof of salvation. It never points back to some time when you believed on Jesus Christ.
I even hear people say, "If you cannot show me the place and the moment when you received Jesus Christ, you are not saved." That is not biblical. The Bible never says you know when or if you are saved by something you remember in the past. It says, "He that believes."
I am not saying there is not a time when you received Christ. There was a day. Absolutely. But that is not the test. The test is, do you believe in Jesus Christ now? Are you trusting in Him today? Is there evidence in your life today that you are the offspring of the living God? That is the proof of your salvation.
Whoo Hooo! Pastor David likes me! :) Seriously, though....I know Steve Gaines must have a heart turned toward God - how can we as a people help him with his attitude towards us and the staff? Any thoughts on that? Don't tell us to go to him as individuals or write letters or emails; there are too many examples on this blog and SB that have proven that those methods don't seem to work. Also, from emails I've received and posts I've read from Gardendale members, they are glad Steve Gaines is gone. One email I got says the "staff is refreshed" since Steve's absence. I just have to know that Steve's attitude and actions are not "against Bellevue" so to speak, but it's hard to convince me that his attitude is in check. Does that make sense?Thanks!
choice,
I'm sorry you got hurt. I wish I knew how to help you, but since you forgave david, you must being doing okay. Email me if you need me.
Karen
FYI,
SB is asking if anyone didn't get their questions answered by the CC.
Karen
David,
No one I know disagrees submission to authority is taught in Scripture. Believe me, we all know what Hebrews 13:17 says. But if theat authority becomes anti-biblical, we have the responsibility to obey the word of God.
The obedience suggested in Hebews 13:17 comes as a result of persuasion, not dictation. The Hebrews were to allow themselves to be persuaded to obedience. Their obedience was not to be blind obedience, but obedience that came by persuasion from those who have the rule.
This passage has been illegitimately used to set up ministerial dictatorships that take prisoner-of-war anyone who sincerely questions the teachings and practices of the ministry. This is not the point of the verse. In context the author seems to imply that the authority given to those who have the rule is the authority of the Word of God (Hebrews 13:7). If it is the Word of God, and the passage implies that those who have the rule are to do some persuading, then the obedience being spoken of not some uncritically accepted, blind obedience to anything anyone in the ministry says, but the responsibility of the saint to heed to the authority of the Word of God being spoken by the man of God. Nowhere does the Bible teach that the saints must obey those who are not teaching God's Word, but rather their own doctrines. Jesus called these the doctrines of men and rebuked those who advocated them and followed them as though they were God's Word (Mark 7:7-8; See also Matthew 15:9; Colossians 2:22). The authority of the ministry is rooted in the Word of God.
Nowhere does the Bible teach that a man's opinion becomes as binding as the Word of God simply because of his position, yet some illegitimately teach from Hebrews 13:17 that if the ministry says "Jump," the response of the congregation should be "How high?". Such a teaching is unbiblical. The ministry is not equal with God so that they can teach and do whatever they like without accountability to someone. They are shepherds over God's flock to lead it and guide it to Him, not to themselves. They are under-shepherds to the Great Shepherd, and thus cannot simply make up their own rules for all to follow. Their teachings must be rooted in the teachings of the Great Shepherd.
The saints are to be submissive to those who have the rule, following them as they follow Christ, but they are also to be convinced that they are following the direction and truth of God being expressed through the man of God, and not the man himself.
Adrian Rogers Warns Pastors: Sin Fascinates, Then Assassinates
by Debbie Moore
WAKE FOREST, N.C. (BP)--Sin often is a combination of three things: an undetected weakness, an unexpected temptation and an unprotected life. "Put those three together and you have the making of tragedy," says Adrian Rogers, pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church, Cordova, Tenn.
If pastors don't stay on guard, Rogers says, they can easily fall into sin, creating a chain reaction of consequences. The sin of casualness leads to carelessness, which develops into callousness, he says, for "sin fascinates and then assassinates. Sin is so deceitful."
Over the years, a person may become careless, especially those who have been in the ministry a long time because "we can think that we'll never be overcome by that sin or this sin."
"Then I've seen strange alchemy, a devilish metamorphosis takes place," Rogers says, of watching pastors stumble. "I've seen them do and say things that they would never have dreamt of doing or saying before they were hardened by the deceitfulness of sin."
Rogers challenges pastors to study the lives of the great men of God who committed sin. When they fell, "you'll find almost every one of them fell not at the point of their weakness but at the point of their strength," such as Abraham, who is known for his great faith, but did not have faith to trust God for the care of his wife, and Simon Peter, who is known for his courage but was reduced to cursing and denying Christ "at the finger-pointing of a little girl."
A Christian can be used for evil "if you take your eyes from Jesus Christ and become casual and careless," Rogers says. Before long that person will become callous, and that's when disaster can strike, including death.
Sin has a cost, so "deal with sin quickly," for a life of unconfessed sin leads to "spiritual dryness" and a lack of joy, Rogers says.
When a Christian sins, Rogers says God has four steps he can take that person through:
Conviction. Conviction is a feeling of being dirty, along with a desire for cleansing. However, "If you're living in sin and there's no conviction, let me just tell you plainly, you need to get saved," Rogers says. "If God's hand is not heavy upon you, you are lost." If a person does not get his life right with God because of conviction, then God uses a second step.
Chastisement. Chastisement can take a variety of forms, Rogers says, citing sickness, sorrow, failure and heartache. If after conviction and chastisement the Christian has not turned from his sin, Rogers says God uses a third step.
Challenge. "You don't want to be there," Rogers said. Usually a challenge "will come only one time," from either a preacher, a family member, a tragedy or a sermon, "but God in some way will say, 'You are the man'" who did something wrong, as the prophet Nathan told King David. If a Christian still has not repented after conviction, chastisement and challenge, Rogers says God brings about a fourth and final step.
Consummation. At this point, Rogers says, God is saying, "Something is going to be done about this" because if a person is truly a child of God he cannot continue in sin. "I'm telling you, there is a line that you cannot cross," Rogers says. "God will kill you because you're his child. If you're living in sin and God kills you, you'd better thank God for it because if you're living in sin and God doesn't kill you, you've never been saved."
Rather than being casual, careless and then becoming callous toward sin, Rogers says, "I want to plead with you from my heart: Pay the price, stay pure." Though other ministers may give way to sin, "you cannot," and, he adds, "When you've been on the trail as long as I've been on the trail, I can promise you, you'll be so glad you did."
STILLWATERS! Where did you find that? That is soooooo good! Thanks for sharing that. Even in death, Dr. Rogers heart still rings true.
Karen
My last three posts need to be credited to Dr.Adrian Rogers.
Great comments from my previous “anointing” post. Interesting to see how many views there may be between Christians. My belief is the Old and New Testaments are both valid. The entire Word is alive and we, as Christians, have a personal Savior in Jesus who has fulfilled, is fulfilling and will fulfill Scripture. With all of these various view points it is no wonder disagreements arise in church. As Christians we need to focus on our common foe in Satan. He is our real enemy.
1 Peter 5:8-11
8 Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.
9 But resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your brethren who are in the world.
10 After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen and establish you.
11 To Him be dominion forever and ever. Amen.
karen I found it on pastors.com
David,
It was not my intent to mischaracterize or distort your thoughts. My response went beyond your post. Instead of responding to you I was actually responding to a particular line of thought.
For months some have used Hebrews 13:17 as proof we are not even to question our pastor. We have been told to "swallow and follow."
I received an email from someone who argued that even if we know a hypothetical pastor had lied, embezzled funds, and had affairs, we are not to question him or attempt to remove him. He believes God will take care of that pastor and our responsibility is to submit to his authority as long as God leaves him in his position.
Now that is hogwash!
God clearly uses human agents to accomplish His purposes all the time. He might even use a free blog and a tiny remnant of concerned laymen.
Several weeks ago someone emailed me the article pasted below. Sadly, I have no idea who wrote it. He goes beyond what is happening at Bellevue, but some of it is applicable.
A nervous church member has just been asked to step into the pastor's office after church. He knows what the pastor wants to talk about. Recently, he privately expressed reservations about the pastor's plan to sell the church building and relocate the congregation to another community.
As they sit down, the pastor launches right into his subject. He declares that this church member, by questioning his plans, has been guilty of "challenging the authority of the pastor," and is "destroying the ministry of the church." For hours, he lashes into the culprit with angry, embittered, emotional accusations, epithets and putdowns. In conclusion, the member is admonished that he needs to demonstrate his repentance by doing whatever his preacher tells him to do.
The dazed church member mutters some weak apologies, staggers out and heads home, tail dragging behind his legs, while the pastor rubs his hands together in satisfaction - another recalcitrant follower has been brought under control. But in the weeks to come, his smug triumph turns to dismay and consternation as he realizes that the whipped church member has not returned to services, and will never return. He has joined a mass exodus of long-time members who have left that church, sending attendance and offerings down to dangerously low levels.
That church and its members have become casualties of the doctrine known among some Baptists as "preacher rule" - the notion that the pastor is to be an all-powerful. dictator over the members, who are bound to follow and obey him fully in all matters of faith and practice, blindly and without question. Is this idea scriptural?
The favorite proof-texts for preacher rule are Hebrews 13:7 and 13:17, which are instructions to church members, that they should obey those who rule over them. Many commentators regard 13:7 as an exhortation to emulate the faith of Christian leaders who have died and "ended their conversation," while 13:17 clearly refer to living spiritual leaders.
The teaching of Hebrews 13:17 must be taken in context with all that the New Testament teaches on the subject. First, it is addressed to church member, and does not confer on pastors a divine right to be a dictator or a bully. In Matthew 20:25-27. Mark 10:42-44. Luke 22:25-26 and 1 Peter 5:3, pastors are specifically for-bidden to exercise lordship over their flocks, like worldly leaders do. The exhortation of Hebrews 13:17 is given with the understanding that those who receive it will be under a proper New Testament ministry of servanthood and example-setting, not a worldly, tyrannical. Hitler-type dictator.
Second, most Baptists will agree that church members are not under any obligation to submit to a pastor who is a false teacher of any kind. If we are not obligated to obey a liberal or Roman Catholic priest, surely we are not bound to abject servitude to a pastor using the Baptist label whose doctrine or practice has veered from the New Testament standards, including the command that preachers should not lord it over the flock.
Third, the Apostle Paul advised his converts not to submit themselves to an abusive ministry, 2 Corinthians 11:19-20. If the Corinthians were not expected to submit themselves to pastors who would bring them into bondage, devour their substance, exalt themselves and beat up on their followers, why should any Baptist church member today be expected to knuckle under to such tactics?
Fourth, if the pastor establishes himself as an unquestioned dictator and can say "I am the church" just as French King Louis XIV said "I am the state," then the New Testament principle of congregational rule is nullified.
If the pastor’s will is to be taken as law and no church member can dare question it, then the cherished Baptist principle of congregational rule becomes a dead letter, and one has to wonder why God made provision for it In the New Testament, if the pastor is meant to decide everything anyway.
Today's Bible-thumping bullies and tin-horn tyrants in the pulpit claim more authority for themselves than the Apostles did. In doctrinal matters, the Apostles never said, "You must accept whatever I teach, no matter what, without question, based on my personal authority, because I say so." Paul specifically renounced such grandeur of authority in Galatians 1:8, and we are not told that he ever rebuked the Bereans who searched the scriptures to see if what Paul said was so. Acts 17:11.
What about the claim that a pastor must be obeyed in all his directives over the believer's lifestyle and personal actions? Peter disclaimed any authority over his members' finances and property. Acts 6:4. In 1 Corinthians 16:12, we find that Paul asked Apollos to go to Corinth on a special mission, and that Apollos refused he just didn't feel like going. Apollos was not rebuked by Paul, but he would have been bitterly denounced as a miserable rebel in some churches today which have embraced the lordship model of leadership which Jesus condemned. (If Jesus is the Lord and head of each true church, Ephesians 5:23, then who is in charge of a church where the pastor is barking commands and demanding absolute obedience? Has not that pastor usurped the Lordship of Christ?)
Preacher rule is a dangerous heresy that should be rebuked, reproved and opposed whenever it rears up its ugly head within Baptist ranks. Most of the readers of this article will be personally aware of one or several churches that have been wrecked by pastors who attempted to establish a coercive, abusive dictatorship over their congregations. The dictatorial preacher is a self-centered man who caters to his worldly desires under the guise of true religion and feeds his own ego instead of his flock, thus negating by his way of life the central Christian principle of self-denial, Luke 9:23.
An even greater tragedy takes place on the foreign mission field, where some American missionaries, ostensibly sent to attract converts to true New Testament Christianity, instead drive nationals away from the truth and the true church by their unscriptural, domineering methods. Such false shepherds end up scattering the flocks that they were sent to gather at such great expense, and bring down reproach upon all Americans while sowing the seeds of bitterness against the Christian religion of which they have given such a false representation.
Some preachers would like to follow Elijah and Elisha as role models, calling down fire or wild bears to destroy those who rub them the wrong way, but we no longer live in the theocracy of the Old Testament prophets. We are now in an age where believers live under Christian liberty and where all citizens enjoy religious freedom, including the freedom to avoid preachers and religions that make themselves obnoxious. We would do much better to emulate the example of Christ and His Apostles, who while on earth dealt gently and tenderly with their followers, leading them by example rather than by harangue and military-style commands.
Some charismatic churches have earned for themselves a bad press by their version of divine-right-of-pastors, which they call "shepherding" or "discipleship." It is time for Baptists to speak up and renounce such unspiritual and anti-scriptural tactics, and to let it be known that we respect the freedom, individuality and Christian liberty of those who affiliate with our churches.
NASS,
I have read over the by-laws from GBC and believe that they are an extremely well thought out model. It would be good if we could post them somewhere and discuss any changes that we feel might be necessary.
It will not ultimately matter what changes are made if our by-laws are not changed to prevent this from happening again.
Choice,
I just read your post and I do not have time to respond to David right now. However, I will point out those percentages were apparent estimates of godly Christian leaders (as reported by Mr. Ellis in his email exchange with Deacon Teutsch), not my estimates. I have nothing to base any estimates on.
I can also say those men are not the only ones concerned the SBC is a largely unregenerate denomination. Many pastors have written extensively on the topic.
We should admit we have no idea who is saved and who isn't. Every man must work out his own salvation with fear and trembling before the Lord. Only He knows who has truly done that and who hasn't.
MOM4 said...
NASS, this is under the "Whatever" thread:
Unless I missed something, I did not hear how this year's love offering compared to years past. Does someone know?
HisServant-1 said...
"I thought the Love Offering was a great blessing. It seems many on here are hoping that giving was way down. Pretty sad. anything to further your agenda. Mom4, I am not directing this at you, just at those on the blog in general"
Well sir, the blog in general includes me and you and I am not trying to further an agenda. I have no agenda but the truth. This is an honest question and should receive an honest answer.
I have asked several times and no one seems to know or is not willing to say. Do you know and are not willing to say? If so, why??
Here are some references to drinking that were discussed on a earlier blog. Hope this helps. Anytime wine is mentioned in the Bible, it's speaking of it not fermented.
Proverbs 20:1
1. Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler; whoever conceicvth therefore is not wise.
Proverbs 20:31-35
31. Do not gaze at the wine when it is red, when it sprakles in the cup,when it goes down smoothly!
32. In the end it bites like a snake, and poispns like a viper.
33. Your eyes will see strange sights and your mind will imagine confusing things.
34. You will be like one sleeping on the high seas, lying on top of the rigring.
35. They hit me, you will say, but I'm not hurt!They beat me, but I don't feel it! When will I wake up so I can find another drink?
I am sorry but I cannot believe you are all here ACTUALLY DISCUSSING the assumed percentage of saved people in BBC!!!!
WHO ARE ANY OF YOU TO SAY WHO IS SAVED OR WHO IS NOT? How can you even SPECULATE with a good conscience?!!!!? Where is this a mandate for us in Scripture?
I am all about testing of fruits, but in a church the size of BBC how can you say that 80%, 75%, or whatever percentage are not/may not be saved? How arrogant a discussion!!!!
While I don't doubt Dr. Rogers said this, because he said in the morning Easter service of 1997 (pointing at the assembly): "If you are not telling at least one person a day about Jesus, I doubt your salvation sir ... I doubt your salvation, ma'am." (I have the audio)
I thought he was out of line then and I think this discussion is absolutely insane now. No where are we told in Scripture to read the Romans road to one person a day - our job is to LIVE our faith before people and use the opportunities God places in front of us to share what He has done in and to us!!!!!
Our job is not to go around and determine who is saved, who is not, and to tout how much better we are because we "know" we are saved.
Our job is to reach out to people in need, people who are hurting, people who have fallen - regardless of their status, sinfulness, or stature (for some good Baptist aliteration).
Why can't we get back to the basics? How many more people will be turned off?
As Paul said, "Have I become your enemy because I tell you the truth?"
My bad all, I apologize. I really do try to read everything before responding, guess I missed something.
Thanks for the continuing engaging discussion!
Sorry need to refax this.
Change the above scripture to Proverbs 23:31-35
Here are some references to drinking that were discussed on a earlier blog. Hope this helps. Anytime wine is mentioned in the Bible, it's speaking of it not fermented.
Proverbs 20:1
1. Wine is a mocker and beer a brawler; whoever conceicvth therefore is not wise.
Proverbs 23:31-35
31. Do not gaze at the wine when it is red, when it sprakles in the cup,when it goes down smoothly!
32. In the end it bites like a snake, and poispns like a viper.
33. Your eyes will see strange sights and your mind will imagine confusing things.
34. You will be like one sleeping on the high seas, lying on top of the rigring.
35. They hit me, you will say, but I'm not hurt!They beat me, but I don't feel it! When will I wake up so I can find another drink?
Choice,
I really believe you are confused about what I said. Please read what I write carefully.I think you read something into what I said that was not there or you are incorrectly attributing something to me. That 80% figure did not come from me.
In response to someone mentioning Paige Patterson's estimate of the true number of Southern Baptists who are saved, I merely referenced a portion of the email exchange between Alvin Ellis and Rob Teutsch dealing with the percentage of saved individuals.
Everyone here has had access to those emails for weeks. There is an entire thread on the blog where you can read everything they said to each other. I did not make any of that up nor did I ever hear Dr. Rogers or any of those other men say that.
As for me, I am concerned over the fate of all who are unsaved. But, I would never presume I know who is and is not saved. Nor have I
ever expressed an opinion here or anywhere else on the number of saved people at Bellevue.
Psalm 43:3 said:
"You reminded me of the parable of the lost sheep. Not only did the shepherd care enough about his sheep to know that one was missing (he counted them), he also cared enough to go out and get the one that was lost. It bothers me when shepherds take a "if you don't like it then leave" mentality.
Shepherds are concerned when they lose their sheep."
Response: Thanks for the encouragement. Of the sheep given Him, Jesus did not loose one (John 17:12). I believe that is the standard--and that standard is very high. He loved them all.
Hey Brother Choice,
It is late and I have had a very long day. Before heading to bed I decided to check the blog to see what I might have missed tonight. I found your comment where you said to me, "Next time, please feel free to provide this earlier in the day as david and I just had quite a bit of misunderstanding. He and I would have appreciated you pointing out your reference to us when david started asking about my post."
I corrected the record the instant I realized what was going on between you. I would not have allowed that much friction to occur based on a misreading of my post.
Steve Gaines said.....
I do not know how to explain it, but the glory of God came down on our church when we fasted, prayed, and asked God to forgive our sins and the sins of this country. That is how.
And who? First, the leaders, the pastors. It starts in the pulpit. Can I tell you what would help America? If we could have some men who would stand in the pulpits and be more afraid of God than they are of their congregations, we could have revival in our country. I pray that God will rid us of wimpy preachers. Some of these guys come up and they are so pretty, and they are so polite, and they are so sweet and they are telling everybody how good they are. I heard W.A. Criswell say, “I like to come up behind them and say, ‘Boo!’ and watch those sissies jump! It scares them to death.” We need some men of God back in our pulpits. We don’t need preacherettes preaching sermonettes to Christianettes. God give us some prophets who will preach and say, “Thus, saith the Lord,” and let the chips fall where they may. If some deacon doesn’t like it, good. If some Sunday School teacher doesn’t like it, so what? We must preach for an audience of one – the Lord Jesus Christ! And not only the leaders but the laity. You are going to have to get filthy magazines out of your home. You are going to have to get Hell’s Box Office (HBO) out of your home. Consecrate yourself before God. Leaders and laity; everyone involved.
And when? Right now! Break up the wedding if you have to. There is something more important than you getting married. We need to have revival. We need to wake up.
And where? In our hearts, and in these beautiful sanctuaries of our churches. Thank God for prayer rails. I pray that God will let these beautiful wooden and carpeted steps and these rails be stained with hot tears for revival. I am convinced that if the Lord could awaken a few of our larger churches, He could send revival to the entire Southern Baptist Convention and then to all of America. If we will allow God to get a hold on our hearts; if we would rend our hearts and not our garments; if we would weep and fast and pray and say, “O God, spare Thy people,” I tell you He would do it! .........
Would it not be wonderful if God sent another spiritual awakening to America? If He does, it will come with fasting, it will come with weeping, it will come with brokenness, it will come with repentance, and it will come by getting right with God. Christians, hear me today. God is not playing games. God is not asking you to wake up, God is saying, “Do it or else! I will give you over to My wrath if you don’t!” Thus saith the Lord. He that has ears to hear let him hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches.
Why can`t our pastor hear and obey the words he generously offers to others?
Steve Gaines railed about homosexuality,,,,,,
Rev. Steve Gaines, pastor of First Baptist Church in Gardendale, Alabama, railed against homosexuality, by saying, "God characterized homosexuality as an abomination in Leviticus 18, and He sandwiched it right between adultery, child sacrifice and having sex with an animal." He urged Southern Baptists to contact their congress-people to lobby for approval of the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Why wan`t our pastor careful about spearheading a $25000.00 donation to a church who supports gay marriages and homosexuality?
A MUST READ ON RICK WARREN
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53135
Be sure to also read the links to other Rick Warren articles at the bottom of this article.
THIS IS AMAZINGLY WICKED!
ok, just not sure why you and others keep posting the Rick Warren stuff on this blog etc. why? this is not about Rick Warren
Has the Ad-Hoc Committee Overlooked your Question?
We have received email from people who did not get a response from the committee.
Please send the question to us.
If you have already asked the question and have received no reply only.
We will post it here for you.
Only those that sign there names and allow us to use it will be posted.
Please provide
1. Date asked committee.
2. Was it before a committee?
3. Name some of those present in the committee.
4. Was it in writing or oral.
5. Email it to questions@savingbellevue.com
hisservant-1 wrote:
"ok, just not sure why you and others keep posting the Rick Warren stuff on this blog etc. why? this is not about Rick Warren"
I agree, Mr. Deacon. It's about how Rick Warren's methods and that mindset have infiltrated BBC. Rick Warren himself doesn't concern me.
NASS
This is my open letter to Bellevue - feel free to copy it and send to any and all Bellevue members:
Dear Bellevue Member,
I would like to ask you a favor. Would you please attend the Communications Committee meeting this Sunday, December 3rd at 8:00 am. No one will ask you anything and you don't have to sign a roster to register your attendance. You also don't have to ask any questions unless you want to. Last week's attendance at the meeting was over 100 people. This week we'd like to double, triple even quadruple that number. Please forward this request to any and all Bellevue members. If people will just listen and then seek the truth for themselves, truth will be revealed. They don't have to take my word for it, or the blog or savingbellevue.com, but truth will be revealed.
Also, if you don't feel comfortable in asking people via email, will you make phone calls this weekend and invite people? I would do it for you if I could - feel free to send me any emails or phone numbers you wish and I promise to contact them.
Love in Jesus,
Karen Turk Marshall
jcsuitt,
I'd like to invite you to the Communication Committee meeting on Sunday, December 3rd at 8:00 am. Would you meet me there?
Karen
jcsuitt: GREAT posts. please keep it up. I am also amazed at what I read and here.
jcsuitt, hisservant1,
If you two don't want to believe that Bellevue is following a seeker sensitive/church growth model, then that's your prerogative. We're a little more informed about this movement than you think. Some of us have been following this stuff since before Rick Warren even came on the scene..so don't assume no one knows about it but you, or that your opinion is somehow more valid than ours. As for ..."To be honest Rick Warren is seeing people genuinely saved at a rate far higher than most SBC churches but that is for another day."....Acts 2:23 "....And the LORD added to their number daily those who were being saved." (emphasis mine) I don't see Rick Warren or his program getting any credit for that..do you? In fact, I dare say the Lord adds to His church quite often, not because of what any man does, but in SPITE of what any man does.
jcsuitt said...
tim,
You are misguided and your arrogance is amazing.
1:46 PM, December 01, 2006
Reply:
I have stood on firm Biblical principles. I am not unsure of my footing. It is rock solid. What you may percieve as arrogance on my part is my faith in Jesus Christ and his command to search the scriptures. I do not have to doubt on what basis I place my trust. The Word of God abides forever.
jcsuitt said...
tim,
You are misguided and your arrogance is amazing.
REPLY: I would like to know what it is that gives you that opinion. Your last post was obviously directed at someone else.
Tim,
That comment was directed to me.
NBBCOF,
1 Timothy 4:1, 6 “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;…If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.”
I am taking seriously your invitation to post here if one has something which might aid in the understanding of what is taking place at BBC. Taking this into consideration in that I have ‘been there, done that’, I do have a few things to say which I hope will be beneficial to you. Please understand that what I am about to say is done with the intent to help rather than to hurt anyone. The people who are responsible in having ‘driven’ fellow church members out of their churches need to repent and make public apologies to their victims in making right the wrongs they have done to the Body of Christ. Having said this, I want to tell you that there is little doubt in my mind that your church is being highjacked by the purpose driven movement. I have spent the last one and one half years doing extensive research into this movement and others similar to it. It is my prayer that those initiating this movement in your church will repent and that the scales will be removed from the eyes of those members who are being manipulated by them. Please understand that what I am about to say only touches the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more to our story and there is so much more to be said of the devastation brought on by the PDM. This is not just about Bellevue Baptist Church, Germantown Baptist Church, Gardendale Baptist Church of Corpus Christi, Iuka Baptist Church, and hundreds of others…this is about the dishonor being brought about to our Lord Jesus Christ through this movement.
Since the beginning of savingbellevue.com, I have been reading and keeping up with things at BBC. My heart breaks for all of you, especially those of you considered to be 'resistors' or 'pillars' or ‘leaders from hell’. If these terms mean nothing to you, this probably means that you are not educating yourselves on the purpose driven movement enough to understand what is happening in your church. These terms refer to those who resist the movement and are asked to leave or are voted out (or worse) by those who are in control and are bringing the movement into the church. The harder these people resist, the harder they are dealt with. The blows can be devastating. These people, the resistors, have discerned that there is a serious problem in the church, even though they have not or cannot identify its root cause initially. Or it might be that these people are just no longer wanted in the church for whatever reason. This transitional movement is done in total secrecy. It is transitioned into an established church in darkness. More often than not it is a ‘slow boil’ and is often carried out over a period of several years. I have come to learn that often times the plans are fouled because those in the lead become impatient. Once they lose control, things run amuck. I believe there is a strong possibility you are witnessing this at Bellevue. Let me add here…if you have read Transitioning an Established Church by Chuck McAllister in Rick Warren’s Toolbox and it sends up red flags, then you best listen to your innermost being.
My blog name, “Been there”, bears witness to the fact that my husband and I are victims of this horrible movement which has invaded churches all over the world. My husband was voted out of his church of fifty-nine years, as an active deacon in a business meeting that defies anything even remotely known as ‘Christian’ behavior. I could never have taken part in treating another human being in the manner in which my husband and these two other deacons were treated on that fateful day/evening on April 5th of this year. People who call themselves Christians actually stood and applauded, cheered, and rejoiced at what they perceived to be the spiritual destruction of three Godly men, not to even mention the damage to their character that could have manifested in their community as a result of this heinous act. The people taking part in this atrocity were jubilant, seemingly overjoyed with what I perceive to be the equivalent of a modern day lynching. That morning the other two deacons were approached by members of the active deacon board with typed resignations on church letter head stationary and were told that if they didn’t sign these typed resignations, they would be voted out that night at the business meeting. They signed. People have been led to believe that they willfully decided to resign and did so…this is not true. It was a well planned and orchestrated nefarious plot. My husband was not available so they could not ask him to sign his typed, church letter head resignation. I found two deacons that afternoon, including the chairman, in our secluded backyard, certainly not gated but private nevertheless, looking for my husband. I had seen one of these men driving slowly back and forth in front of our home earlier that day several times looking our way with a fixed stare. I felt like we were being ‘cased’. It was the most eerie, unnerving feeling I have ever had. These three deacons have yet to be told what they were guilty of. One of the deacons voted out was told by one of these deacons that they just didn’t ‘have the same ideas’. And, in fact, just shortly before they were ousted, the chairman of the deacons told my husband that if he wanted to remain fundamental Baptist, then he would need to get out and find himself a fundamental Baptist church. He said this is the direction the Southern Baptist Convention is taking. I can tell you what these three deacons were guilty of…they were guilty of loving their church enough to try and stop the invasion of the purpose driven movement into it by bringing it to the attention of the deacon board. I asked one of these deacons who took part in removing these three men at that business meeting on the evening of April 5th, just this past Sunday night for the first time since the business meeting just exactly what it was that these three men did to be removed from their church and his answer to me was, “I don’t know.” How pathetic this is. Tragic! Let me just add here, that it is possible to listen to this business meeting online. You can go to ‘abrahamic-faith.com/false-teachers.html and look near the bottom at ‘part 1 and part 2’ and listen to that April 5th meeting. My prayer for all of you is that you can find an answer before something like this happens in your church. I could write a book on what led up to all of this in our lives and it still continues on. The feeling of betrayal remains...it has left a bad taste. One of the most devastating things used to discredit these three deacons and their families from the onset and throughout all of this was the rumors they spread, total untruths…and people swallowed them. People who were our friends won’t speak now….we are avoided. It has divided families. The aftermath of this atrocity has been truly as remarkable as the events leading up to and including the night of April 5th, 2006. This is part of the plan of the purpose driven movement….the Hegelian dialectic. Pragmatism. Whatever it takes. There exists a picture of Rick Warren holding up a sign with this written on it, “Whatever It Takes.” Understand that these people will stop at nothing to get their way. You are already witnessing this at Bellevue. When I first started reading all of these things on your savingbellevue website about Mark Sharpe, I could not believe the similarities of the things that happened to him to those of my husband. It is truly incredible…the similarities. There was no doubt in my mind that Mark Sharpe was telling the truth. Truth is not a part of the purpose driven agenda. I could never have imagined I would have ever seen the things transpire in our former church, or any church for that matter, that I have witnessed.
In September, the Wall Street Journal featured an article by Suzanne Sataline titled, Veneration Gap-A Popular Strategy for Church Growth Splits Congregants. The front page carried a picture of my husband, the article written about both of us along with other congregants in other areas of our country. This was the first time a secular media has openly discussed anything in opposition involving Rick Warren and the purpose driven movement, aka church growth movements. For the first time, an avenue was opened where people could email a source voicing their opinions about the betrayal they had undergone in their churches. Ms. Sataline was inundated with emails from people like you and like us from all over the world…telling their horror stories about abuse coming from their churches. I pray that there will continue to be avenues opened up where people can voice their grievances on these issues and unite in the hope that people will return to the faith, turning from the seducing spirits and doctrines of devils so prevalent today. Your website, your blog are such avenues and I see this as an area of accountability. You are to be commended for this. We have been asked to write our story for publication. We must all tell our stories…we must fight this demonic transition overtaking our churches and our people. “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”- (Jesus Christ)-Mark 8:36.
I read one of your entries by a Germantown Baptist member, who stressed to all of you to educate yourselves on these movements so prevalent today, especially the Rick Warren movement. He is giving you excellent advice. This is truly the only way to learn what is going on in your church. I find that to be the main problem in churches…that members are unwilling to read about it, unwilling to educate themselves about it. It is not going to self destruct. One of the deacons in our former church, inactive at the time, told my daughter he didn’t know what purpose driven is, he didn’t want to know what purpose driven is, and had no intention of trying to find out. This man has since been voted back in as a deacon in said church. I find it to be total ignorance to refuse to educate oneself on something so crucial. It is truly tragic. One could fall prey easily when they don’t understand what is going on. This is a responsibility we owe ourselves. Mr. Haywood has ample information for you to read on savingbellevue.com. and at the beginning of this thread. I would like to include these which I find to be good sources and in no particular order: ‘crossroads.to’ by Andy and Berit Kjos; ‘sliceoflaodicea.com’ by Ingrid Schlueter; ‘lighthousetrailsresearch.com’ by David and Deborah Dombrowski; ‘abrahamic-faith.com/false-teachers.html’ by James Sundquist; ‘newswithviews.com’ Paul Proctor; ‘erwm.com’ (Eastern Regional Watch) by Steven Muse; ‘swrc.com’ Dr. Larry Spargimo and Noah Hutchings, ‘deceptioninthechurch.com’ and look under purpose driven. I would also like to recommend the books Redefining Christianity-Understanding the Purpose Driven Movement by Bob DeWaay, Who’s Driving the Purpose Driven Church? and Rick Warren’s Global Peace Plan vs. Scriptural Teachings on Peace by James Sundquist, Ashamed of the Gospel by John MacArthur, and Deceived on Purpose by Warren Smith. The book, Transitioning-Leading Your Church Through Change by Dan Southerland is one you should read…paying particular attention to Step 6, page 110 on Dealing with Opposition; the foreword is written by Rick Warren and instructs pastors on how to take your church into the purpose driven church by deception. You can also find similar reading in The Purpose Driven Church and of course, you can find all sorts of information of pastors.com, Rick Warren’s own website. You might want to pay particular attention to Dealing with Opposition, Step 6 under the thread, Transitioning, Dan Southerland. Please read and educate yourselves on this movement. It is true that you need to be careful what you read; however the footwork has been provided for you by Mr. Haywood and myself, as well. It is credible and validated.
The most important thing in all of this is…you must stand for what is right. You must take a stand for Jesus Christ at all costs. That is what my husband and the other two deacons who stood with him have done. There were others with us…small in number but big in heart and discernment. Standing for what is right is not always popular. The majority is not always right. Remember the crucifixion. This purpose driven movement is all about changing the church to become worldly…the Bible tells us in Romans 12:2 “Be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”
“If when he seeth the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; Then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head…But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take [any] person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.” Ezekiel 33:3,4,6
Yours in Christ,
Nena Jones
“That very church which the world likes best is sure to be that which God abhors.”-Charles H. Spurgeon, 1859
David,
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, as is anyone else and I appreciate that. Understand that I did not post on this forum in order to debate this issue. I have walked through this fire and understand it perfectly. I offered enough scripture to back up what I said not only on my post, but in suggesting information available from various sources that is full of scripture to help you. I would refer you to this information.
The quote from Dr. Rogers was written as an endorsement for The Purpose Driven Church by Rick Warren and can be found on page three. The book was published in 1995. W. A. Criswell wrote the foreword for this book.
I wish you well.
Post a Comment