Please continue your discussions from the "About that 'Check'... " thread here.
A separate "favorite hymns" topic has been started below. Please try to keep that one "on topic."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- New BBC Open Forum
- 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.
411 comments:
1 – 200 of 411 Newer› Newest»Well, back to the board and the silly assumptions continue..
These are the facts as I know them to be:
The investigation has been completed.
The report was turned over to the personnel committee this afternoon.
There will be a meeting this week with Paul Williams for the personnel committee to present the findings to Paul Williams. Read into this what you'd like but assume that Paul Williams will resign or be terminated during this meeting. Whether he is fired or resigns he will only receive what anyone on staff receives upon termination. For those of you who have a 401K then you will know what happens.
Next Sunday evening the personnel committee and the investigative committee will present it's findings before the church.
There is no concern about our pastor facing arrest. The law is based on the assumption that the child molestation is active and a child under the age of 13 whereby it must be reported. There is no violation or expectation to report a past crime whereby the victim is now at a majority age and has the ability to self report. The crime was not active and the victim was an adult at the time of the confession. The victim can still press charges against Paul Williams as there is no limitations. I do not think this will happen considering the family.
Finally you guys and your speculation amaze me. The facts are not that hard to come by if you take the time to ask someone on the staff in a senior position. The time they took was to be through in their findings not an attempt to avoid any legal dealings. Also, a person who would be filing a civil suit against the church must show that they were damaged in someway. The church has offered to support in a constructive way anyone who has been damaged as a result of Paul Williams. The church position is that they will accept any liability caused by Paul Williams and have no intention of covering up the situation.
If you want to go back to your speculation and assumptions try this one. Another staff member resigned this week...he was in the counseling department.
By the way, the person who sued Bellevue was Michael Carrier. He was terminated for a moral failure as well. And yes the church paid to settle the lawsuit. You would be surprised how often someone sues the church (yes members) due to an injury occurred on the campus.
And don't get me started on you guys and your speculation about members leaving. It's no where near the number you'd think and the additions to our church far outpace those leaving. Not that it's about numbers but some of you just have your beliefs that are not so.
overflowing: "They are wanting to show that they investigated the claims and had good reason for terminating PW."
This makes NO sense at all! They DON'T need a reason according to the law.
overflowing: "As far as the couseling victims, I can't see how they could loose a civil case if they were not aware of PW's situation. If anybody knew what PW confessed in June that would help as their could be a window of time where Bellevue might have some risk. "
Based on this logic, they are handling this to HELP the plaintiff. Can you not see that?
"overflowinggrace said...
BR,
In the corporate world, folks that get into similar situations are always allowed to retire. I don't know what they will do here. That may be more of the reason why they are making their case as they know that PW will fight for his pension. There is a lot more to it than most people think and you can't make a knee jerk reaction. "
Does BBC have a pension plan through the SBC?
JMO,
Thanks for the post.
jmo: Why was this kept secret for so many months? How come your leaders did not follow 1 Corinthians from the very day they found out about PW?
Do you consider 1 Corinthians 5 to be silly?
Esther,
It's how they respond once they know. Just My Opinion did a good job of summing it up.
I have been listening to the recording from the communications meeting.
Your leadership is scary. They really do NOT know scripture. Please do not submit to these Biblically illiterate men that do NOT follow scripture.
overflowing wrote: It's how they respond once they know. Just My Opinion did a good job of summing it up. "
You did not answer my question. Why did your pastor ignore 1 Corinthians 5 from the first day he learned of PW's sodomy?
Just a note...
To assume that all those in "senior leadership" are being transparent and honest in their communication is naive, don't ya think?
Esther,
We don't know what he was told by PW. Believe me if PW admitted to outright sodomy back in June, then you and I are on the same side. I personally think PW told SG a very twisted watered down version of the truth.
JMO
Is it Jamie Fish that resigned?
I've been praying for him this week.
overflowing: "We don't know what he was told by PW. Believe me if PW admitted to outright sodomy back in June, then you and I are on the same side. I personally think PW told SG a very twisted watered down version of the truth."
Whatever his presentation of 'sin' or 'moral failure' as your pastor prefers, why was he kept on staff and the congregation not told about it? Does not make sense. EVen if he told him it was a 17 year old affair or something. Gaines made a very poor decision that ought to give you pause. Are we forgetting that PW was a MINISTER under the guidelines of Titus and Timothy?
Piglet,
A lot of us have been praying for Jamie Fish this week. He is in a precarious position and could be set up for a fall if he is not careful. I would not blame him if he resigned, but if he did, I would say that it was probably for cause.
The staff that have resigned have all left for a reason, one that did not exist under the former leadership. Whether the minister in question was Jamie or not, we still need to lift him up in prayer.
esther
Not to mention that Gaines stated that what had been a problem in June was found just recenlty "not to be resolved". He never lead us to believe he was told something different 6 months ago. It will be hard to go back and try to convince us of that.
So what brought all this up in June?
Can you at least give SG a little credit. Don't you think PW could have come up with a good story. Admitting something very mild happened, said that Dr. Rogers knew and the had been getting counseling for the past 17 years. Let me be clear, I'm not saying Dr. Rogers knew, only that PW could have said that to SG.
JMO said...
"And don't get me started on you guys and your speculation about members leaving. It's no where near the number you'd think and the additions to our church far outpace those leaving. Not that it's about numbers but some of you just have your beliefs that are not so."
A lot of members are not attending, but have not moved their membership. I for one do not intend to move my membership until the Lord moves me. So just because the numbers you value so highly are reflecting what you assume is correct, does not make it so. Former Gardendale and WJX members have posted on this blog that the reason Steve Gaines stayed as long as he did was because they claimed the numbers were up and now we are finding out that that is not so.
Time always tells, it will tell here as well.
Thanks for your report by the way. It was good to finally hear from the senior management.
1 Cor 5 is about active, ongoing, open, public sin that has been pointed out and not repented of. It simply does not apply to the PW situation.
Also, Baptist pastors/ministers are able to participate in Guidestone Financial Resource's (formerly the Baptist Annuity Board) annunity program, which is a self-funded form of retirement, similar to a 401k, and which fully belongs to the contributor. Churches usually also contribute to the fund, just as employers often do with a 401k. The church does not own the account, so there is no way for the funds to be withheld from the pastor/minister, no matter why they leave employment.
Just My Opinion said...
Well, back to the board and the silly assumptions continue..
I don't consider child molestation silly,and would not kept it from the pew warmersfor six months, but then I do believe in old fashion morality.
Just want to make sure I haven't missed something, junk99mail. Has PW repented? Perhaps he has, but I just wanted to make sure I hadn't missed something.
Thanks.
Overflowing Grace
No. Either he was told 6 months ago or he wasn't. If he was lied to 6 months ago then he could have said that already. He told us he found it had not been resolved.
That means the same thing he was told 6 months ago came up again.
Oh man, is this what we're going to hear?
(eyes rolling)
socwork,
I don't that any of us know the answer to that one.
I would like you to consider this blog conversation from three weeks ago.
4545 said...
nthepew- You do not know the facts anymore than anyone else.
11:28 PM, December 30, 2006
nthepew said...
I only know what Sg himself said before the church and that was he has known for six months about PW.Are you trying to tell me that SG did not know about PW since June . HMMMMM that would make SG a lier. Well I could agree with you that SG lies.
11:35 PM, December 30, 2006
4545 said...
NO, I am saying we do not know what PW's told Dr. Gaines and what he new etc. We will know soon.
11:38 PM, December 30, 2006
Tim said...
4545,
So you are saying that Steve Gaines should have said that Paul Williams told him of a moral failure six months ago. Then several weeks ago he became aware that it was a completely different moral failure than what Paul Williams had told him about.
For example the statement could have been. Six months ago Paul Williams came to me and told me that 17 years ago he had an adulterous affair. Several weeks ago I became aware that he had lied to me and that Paul Williams was a pedophile. We are now placing Paul Williams on leave to determine if he is a liar, an adulter or a pedophile.
Give me a break! If Steve Gaines believes that will fly with the church, the police or the media then he's crazy. As carefully a prepared statement as he made there is no way that I would believe that he wouldn't have made that clear on December 15.
11:49 PM, December 30, 2006
I stand by that final paragraph. The statement that was made to the church was very carefully prepared it would have been made completely clear if deciet had been involved 6 months earlier.
piglet,
How do you know that? I'm serious! How do you know what happened in a room that you were not in. Either you spoke with SG or PW.
Overflowing Grace
I'm going by what he SAID to the church and taking it literally.
Are you the propoganda chairman or what?
We have it on audio.
nthepew wrote: I don't consider child molestation silly,and would not kept it from the pew warmersfor six months, but then I do believe in old fashion morality.
And neither do I. It's the silly assumptions like the above that does a disservice to all. Surely you would not think for a minute that I condone what Paul did nor do I condone that the pastor failed to act upon the information. I believe in the morality that our Lord asks of us whether it's old fashioned or new. May I ask why you feel it necessary to be critical of something...my post was factual and honest.
He said a moral failure...that could be a lot of things. What if he admitted to an affair and he said Dr. Rogers knew about it. Wouldnt that put him in a difficult situation.
"1 Cor 5 is about active, ongoing, open, public sin that has been pointed out and not repented of. It simply does not apply to the PW situation."
Just another reason why I do not trust 'man's' teaching anymore. But tell me, Junk, why did the guidelines of Titus and Timothy
not apply for all those months he was on staff and the pastor knew about his 'moral failure' (sin)????
Got a rationalization for that one?
br and andrew,
This is me speculating, but the son had to be threatening to come foward and PW was trying to beat him to the punch with a different version.
Socwork,
Sorry, I should have been more specific. I don't know if PW has repented or not. My point is that 1 Cor 5 commands "disfellowshipping" a sinning brother if the sin is publically known and the brother refuses to repent. It didn't really apply as an appropriate response from SG when he first learned of the PW situation, because it was not a public sin. By that I am NOT saying that SG was right to not address the situation immediately. And had SG addressed the situation immediately, and if doing do resulting in the matter becoming public, and then if PW refused to repent and face the appropriate discipline and consequences for his sin, then 1 Cor 5 would apply as the right course of action. But all of those "ifs" didn't happen ... which is why I said 1 Cor 5 doesn't apply.
overflowinggrace said...
piglet,
How do you know that? I'm serious! How do you know what happened in a room that you were not in. Either you spoke with SG or PW.
9:37 PM, January 21, 2007
There were many others in the room. It wasn't just SG and PW. Others know the truth.
Overflowing Grace
Dr. Gaines always referred to it as one incident that was not resolved. If he was mislead as to the nature of the moral failure he had the oppotunity to make that clear.
His statement was that the incident was found not to be resolved. If an affair was the moral failure then this must mean the affair is still ongoing.
Well, we know it's not an affair that was unresolved....
Another minister was present when this meeting occurred. Could this possibly be the one resigning? Maybe so he wouldn't be placed in a position of lying about that first meeting?
I hope there is a chance we might get the truth....
AOG wrote: Transparency kills speculation....secrecy breeds it.
Never a more true statement have I read on this board. This board has been a breeding ground and the leadership of our church has to accept accountability. I believe that there is some resolve to do that but some of the questions will never be answered to the satisfaction of all. Individual salaries will not be posted for public consumption. Steve Gaines will only be speaking on Wednesday nights if he so decides.
Someone mentioned today that God has used this situation to strengthen the Germantown Baptist Church with staff and excellent bible teachers. Those of whom may not have been available had we not had some problems at our church are now helping to rebuild Germantown. I think that our church has been and is being humbled by these problems. But we have a big God and he is in control even when our leadership or members may not be.
Can't we wait just a few more days to hear the report? Why speculate? It could be anything that you've said or nothing you've said. It's only 10 more days until the end of the month, with only 1 more Sunday, so i would expect to hear something next Sunday.
Karen,
ACE, FYI - during baptism at 9:30 a guy was taking digital pictures of the baptism....Or does this directive only apply to certain people? Just wondering.
First of all, was he disrupting the service like Mr. Haywood? No. His motive was because his son/daughter was being baptised....Jim's was to cause trouble.
And who's to know whether or not he didn't get permission from Barnwell on not? Did anyone ask this guy? I'm just sayin'...
overflowinggrace said...
br and andrew,
This is me speculating, but the son had to be threatening to come foward and PW was trying to beat him to the punch with a different version.
9:44 PM, January 21, 2007
The son has been involved from the beginning. Steve knew it all in June. Do not believe anything else because he knew it.
One more try,
Can we all agree that none of us know what was said in that meeting or what PW confessed to.
Thats all I'm saying. Let's wait and see what the investigation came up with.
piglet said:
"Another minister was present when this meeting occurred. Could this possibly be the one resigning? Maybe so he wouldn't be placed in a position of lying about that first meeting?"
Response: It could be the man on the moon...or we could wait a few days and find out.
"I hope there is a chance we might get the truth...."
Response: I trust we will get the truth. Will that be enough for some here? That remains to be seen too.
overflowinggrace said...
One more try,
Can we all agree that none of us know what was said in that meeting or what PW confessed to.
Thats all I'm saying. Let's wait and see what the investigation came up with.
9:53 PM, January 21, 2007
No, we cannot agree to that. Some know what was said.
junk wrote: "It didn't really apply as an appropriate response from SG when he first learned of the PW situation, because it was not a public sin."
Are you kidding me? You REALLY believe that? A minister is having some sort of moral failure and that is NOT a PUBLIC sin? Most people do not have affairs or sodomize in public. But, they DO affect the 'public' as in the congregation!
I am floored that you really believe what you are writing. Just floored. Please Please Please tell me you do not teach scripture to anyone. Please!
Is this what Gaines told you?
overflowinggrace said...
One more try,
Can we all agree that none of us know what was said in that meeting or what PW confessed to.
Thats all I'm saying. Let's wait and see what the investigation came up with."
Response: I agree. Just a few days and then they can all rip it apart as a coverup etc,
Thanks for clarifying junk99...
My understanding was that PW's son *made* his dad's sin public, and then PW "confessed" to SG.
The only other way I can see that would make a sin "public" is if the sin was committed in public.
My point is just that I can't as easily dismiss 1 Corinthians 5 as being relevant to this situation. Perhaps you can help me understand your position better.
ILMC,
Oh please give me names. You don't have a clue.
I love my church said...
overflowinggrace said...
One more try,
Can we all agree that none of us know what was said in that meeting or what PW confessed to.
Thats all I'm saying. Let's wait and see what the investigation came up with.
9:53 PM, January 21, 2007
"No, we cannot agree to that. Some know what was said. "
Response: Then let them post, not those who were not there.
Overflowing grace
I know what I heard Dr. Gaines say and I won't accept something different.
"Thats all I'm saying. Let's wait and see what the investigation came up with."
You all are putting lots of faith in people who have shown themselves to be less than truthful or forthcoming to date. And these are people who have shown very bad judgement and a lack of biblical literacy.
There is NO good reason to keep the full truth from the congregation.
Just My Opinion said...
And neither do I. It's the silly assumptions like the above that does a disservice to all. Surely you would not think for a minute that I condone what Paul did nor do I condone that the pastor failed to act upon the information. I believe in the morality that our Lord asks of us whether it's old fashioned or new. May I ask why you feel it necessary to be critical of something...my post was factual and honest.
9:40 PM, January 21, 2007
Explain this to me before I go to bed at 10:00. You don't condone that SG did not act on the information that PW gave him.Yet you support him ,I believe that he acted in a completely irresponsible manner with no reguard for the safety of my children.
How can you support a man who put children in danger ?
Esther,
Ok
Thanks
Piglet & Overflowinggrace:
I have a transcript of the statements that both Dr. Gaines and Bryan Miller about the PW situation. It is lenghty so NASS might want me to e-mail it and let her make a link to it. NASS would you want it?
I haven't had the opportunity to do links yet and don't have the time tonight to learn.
Interestingly, Bryan Miller was the first person to use "moral failure"...Gaines didn't use that phrase that night.
lin,
As I have often done while lurking here for the past month, I was thinking of the first response to come to mind when I read something. (I know folks here don't know me, but it feels as if I know the regulars from having read their posts and seen them interact with one another for so long.) So when I finally decided to go to the trouble of the getting a blogger account, I just jumped in midstream without getting specific. I didn't mean to rationalize anything ... of course you are right that other Scriptures do apply. And though I do not wish to speculate on anyone's motives at this point, I do think it likely that one who saw the true nature and depth of their sin and was truly repentant of that sin would choose to remove themselves from ministry as an acknowledgment to themselves (if no one else) that they are not where they should be morally to be ministering to others.
overflowinggrace said...
br and andrew,
This is me speculating, but the son had to be threatening to come foward and PW was trying to beat him to the punch with a different version.
9:44 PM, January 21, 2007
-------
How do we KNOW the son was involved?
Andrew,
By involved do you mean now or 17 years ago.
I think it was posted on here that the son came foward in November.
Just My Opinion said...
These are the facts as I know them to be:
Sir, I did not read a single fact in your post. What facts are you talking about?
Is this a fact?
"There is no concern about our pastor facing arrest. The law is based on the assumption that the child molestation is active and a child under the age of 13 whereby it must be reported. There is no violation or expectation to report a past crime whereby the victim is now at a majority age and has the ability to self report. The crime was not active and the victim was an adult at the time of the confession. The victim can still press charges against Paul Williams as there is no limitations. I do not think this will happen considering the family."
Sir, you don't know what you are talking about. Why don't you call the assistant DA and ask him about the enforcement of child abuse law?
Sir, are you someone on the staff in a senior position, and are you a practicing Lawyer?
My opinion of what you have written as "facts" is a lot of balooney. Period.
The entire "church inquiry" does not substitute for the legal investigation underway at Bellevue. I for one recognize the "church inquiry" as nothing more than a part of the cover-up and a delay tactic. When the authorities have completed their investigation there will be "facts". And not in anything you have written or the report will state next week. As for Paul Williams, he should have been fired from Bellevue over six months ago when Gaines began keeping Williams secrets. And, Gaines should have been fired on the day it was found out that he had his MORAL FAILURE.
So, MR.JMO - Stop calling this a "SILLY ASSUMPTION" - Child abuse is not a "silly assumption". It a crime so very UGLY.
overflowinggrace said...
ILMC,
Oh please give me names. You don't have a clue.
9:56 PM, January 21, 2007
You don't know who you are talking to. Mess with me and I will spoil their little party next Sunday night. I am tired of watching them play games. Same goes for you!
I know the names of who was in the room, including the wives and friends!
mom4 wrote: A lot of members are not attending, but have not moved their membership. I for one do not intend to move my membership until the Lord moves me. So just because the numbers you value so highly are reflecting what you assume is correct, does not make it so.
I don't value numbers at all. I was just stating that there is not the exodus of members that some are reporting. Mom4, I have a question for you..."how will you know when the Lord moves you to leave?". I am not trying to be cute here but the Lord tells us in His Word that we are to:
Love one another John 13:34
Be devoted to one another Romans 12:10
Don't judge one another Romans 14:13
Admonish one another Col 3:16
Accept one another Romans 14:13
Don't slander one another James 4:11
Don't grumble against one another James 5:9
So if we are not following His written Words then how can we follow our "feelings". One thing that Dr. Rogers told us was not to allow our "feelings" to direct us. We needed to be directed by the Word. Bro. Steve had a wonderful message on forgiveness today that spoke to me clearly. But then I read on this board where it was just another self-serving message. God's Words are Truth whether spoken by a believer or a non-believer. The point being is that the message today was from God's Word and cannot be considered self-serving.
JMO,
If you are still out there, could you please email me?
acefrombbc@gmail.com
Thanks
Let's all just meet in the morning at Perkins in Germantown. I'm sure we can all resolve this over some pancakes and coffee.
Junk: And though I do not wish to speculate on anyone's motives at this point, I do think it likely that one who saw the true nature and depth of their sin and was truly repentant of that sin would choose to remove themselves from ministry as an acknowledgment to themselves (if no one else) that they are not where they should be morally to be ministering to others."
No, they don't have to 'choose' to remove themselves. They ARE removed for the purity of the Bride, The Body of Christ.
They can be forgiven, loved, etc., etc., but they MUST be removed from a ministry position.
Ask Ted Haggard's church.
ILMC,
You don't know anything about the meeting other than what you have dreamed up in your twisted mind. You couldnt spoil a month old jug of milk.
ILMC,
That is a lie. The son did not come to SG in June.
Folks,
Go and listen to the audio concerning the PW matter. It is very clear that the Pastor mentions that six months ago PW confessed to an "activity" concerning a family member that occurred seventeen years ago. He underwent counseling with a THEN retired staff member and confessed to and apparently reconciled with his family. Two months before talking with the pastor he again underwent counseling with an outside source and ALSO with a member of the counseling dept of BBC. Two weeks before the December announcement CW and two of his friends approached the Pastor for a meeting. In the course of that meeting SG found out that there were still issues that were unresolved with the family. That's when he decided to bring it before the church. There is absolutely no reason to believe PW confessed to one thing and the family told the Pastor of another thing.
overflowinggrace said...
ILMC,
You don't know anything about the meeting other than what you have dreamed up in your twisted mind. You couldnt spoil a month old jug of milk.
10:13 PM, January 21, 2007
Believe what you want to believe. I know what I know and you don't. I have firsthand information from someone who was in the room. You guys come on here bullying everyone and spewing nonsense and it gets old.
ILMC,
You lied about the son coming foward in June and you are lying about knowing who was in the room.
I love my church said...
overflowinggrace said...
ILMC,
Oh please give me names. You don't have a clue.
9:56 PM, January 21, 2007
You don't know who you are talking to. Mess with me and I will spoil their little party next Sunday night. I am tired of watching them play games. Same goes for you!
I know the names of who was in the room, including the wives and friends!
10:10 PM, January 21, 2007
Well can I guess are you Harry Smith, nah how about Steve Gaines now he has no fear especially of "itty bitty fences"at any rate you have me terrified
jmo wrote: So if we are not following His written Words then how can we follow our "feelings". One thing that Dr. Rogers told us was not to allow our "feelings" to direct us."
The WORD was NOT followed. Why can't you see that?
Titus, Timothy, 2 Peter, 1 Corinthians and MORE were NOT followed. And NOT followed by YOUR PASTOR and leaders. Why are you holding the commenters on this thread to a higher standard than your own pastor who is teaching you scripture?
BTW: Go and read each one in context...the WHOLE book.
overflowinggrace said...
Andrew,
By involved do you mean now or 17 years ago.
-------
Now that you mention it - both.
overflowing grace to ILMC
"you coulbn't spoil a month old jug of milk.."?
I don't understand your insult but it sounded like one.
How do you know? Were you there and know different.
I don't know who ILMC is so I can't say they do or don't know. How can you?
Remember, SOMEBODY informed the blog in the beginning. THEY know...
Are you just mad cuz nobody wants to go to breakfast?
hecanhear but can he read?
The investigation is completed - fact
The report was turned over to the personnel committee today - fact....shall I go on?
And no I do not think child abuse is silly...but I would find your assumptions and erroneous posting silly. By the way, why don't you call the DA and ask why no arrest has been made? You obviously are not the least educated in the judicial system. Read the law and then come back and explain what part Bro. Steve violated.
You are either a liar yourself or sadly misinformed, maybe both. Tell your friends this for me...if they do not tell the truth, the truth will come out and they will be worse off than they are tonight. I promise you that much. It's only by grace they have not been publicly called on the lies about the PW situation already.
I'm going to watch the football game on my TIVO and let you argue with yourself.
Andrew,
I don't know anything for sure...which I have made pretty clear.
Folks,
I just e-mailed the transcript of the PW announcement to NASS. Perhaps she will link it and you can read the entire statment by both Miller and Gaines and settle your disagreement.
Piglet,
Did you hear ILMC threat to me?
Folks,
By the way, did anybody see BBC on ABC24 AND Channel 50 this morning?
Was I right or was I right? Another rumor laid to rest.
i love my church said- You don't know who you are talking to. Mess with me and I will spoil their little party next Sunday night. I am tired of watching them play games. Same goes for you!
REPLY- HATE filled threats? You post says it all, nothing else is needed.
And you have the audacity to point fingers at others?
Overflowing grace
Did you hear ILMC threat to me?
Piglet says:
Well, it doessound like ILMC is threatening to come forward orspeak the truth if there is a cover-up.
Am I right ILMC?
If that's so, you needn't be afraid unless you're part of a cover-up....:)
10:23 PM, January 21, 2007
overflowinggrace said...
Piglet,
Did you hear ILMC threat to me?
10:23 PM, January 21, 2007
Don't flatter yourself. I made no threat against you. I am saying if the church leadership lies they will be help accountable. Others will correct the record and they will do so loudly. That is all I meant. Get over yourself.
I hear a lot of bickering and squabbling that is going nowhere fast, and mainly over the usual when did he say, hear, know, tell, type-stuff and related semantics. I post this not be abrasive nor to fuel any emotional response, but in sincerety, hoping to get a response in the same spirit.
A question to any: did you have a one on one confrontation with GOD today? Not you confronting him, (for we must be careful not be presumptive in our approaches to GOD) but did He confront you? As you worshipped in spirit and in truth (for there is no other way), did He confront you with your sinfulness, your wretchedness, your wicked and vile thoughts and deeds. Did you melt before your Creator as you cried out to Him, 'LORD, be merciful to me, a sinner' ? Or did He confront you about your weak faith and unbelief (not necessarily in Christ), and did you cry out to Him, 'LORD, heal my unbelief' ? Did He confront you about about you about your indifference towards His dear Son, and did you cry out, 'LORD, give me fresh affections for my Savior' ?
Did He confront you about your general lack of concern for your neighbor, and did you cry out, 'LORD, help me to love people more, that they might see You in me' ? And did you just spend some time thanking Him, because He first loved you? My answer to all of the above is Yes (I say this not braggardly). And my heart was a million miles away from this stuff. May the LORD be pleased to give you much grace.
overflowinggrace said...
Piglet,
Did you hear ILMC threat to me?
10:23 PM, January 21, 2007
Get over it ,it was a "mistake of the mind not the heart" and "covered under the blood" and it was just a "itty bitty little threat"
Ace- Look for them to ignore you. When we prove some of their rumors to be JUNK, they choose to talk about something else. They choose to move on to some other rumor or lie.
By "spoil their party" I meant I will spill the entire story on the blog so no one has to wait for next Sunday.
What is hateful about that?
ILMC,
I forgive you for you actions. It is in the past and I am moving on.
NASS
4545 is here! Make them be good!
lin,
I didn't mean that the sin doesn't have ramifications or consequences to the rest of the church. The "public" nature of the sin in 1 Cor 5 was that a man was well known by the church to be involved in an ongoing immoral relationship. PW's sin was kept hidden. Once known, and if not repented of, 1 Cor 5 would apply. It is the same as Matt 18--the initial sin may have been between two individuals, and it may even be kept that way if those two work it out with the offender repenting. Not every sin must be made public. But if the offender does not repent, the issue is to be escallated until it would eventually become a public matter (before the church). At that point, 1 Cor 5 would apply, as it is saying the same as the end result of Matt 18 -- treat the unrepentant offender as an unbeliever (and thus outside of the church's fellowship). BTW, I don't know and have never talked to Steve Gaines. And I don't normally teach, but I don't think I am wrong in my interpretation. I can see you are frustrated by what I've said, but I can try to explain my position further if you'd like. I admit I could be mistaken in my understanding of Scripture and would welcome correction of my "exegesis".
Socwork,
Hope this also helps clarify what I mean. I don't know for certain if PW's son made the issue public, and I don't know if PW was "repentant", except that I can't help but question why he would think it was okay to remain in ministry in light of his sin. Even if no one else ever knew, God did , and PW and his victim also did, and I can't see how his conscience wouldn't lead him to remove himself from ministry when the sin occured, much less remain in the position for another 17 years. At the very least once would think he would have resigned when it all became public, whether or not the church administration was conducting an investigation. But I don't know everything, and I do know it is easy for each of us to minimize our own sins.
4545,
Ace- Look for them to ignore you. When we prove some of their rumors to be JUNK, they choose to talk about something else. They choose to move on to some other rumor or lie.
Yep, that's what I figured would happen. It's so sad, wouldn't you say? Oh well...
Pity poor 4545 so much hate to spew and no one wants to hear it
I think ILMC is telling the truth! I know of others who know the truth who are willing to "spill the beans" so to speak, if the leadership try to cover this up and personally, I stand behind whoever brings the truth! God Bless you ILMC and my prayers are with you for you carry a heavy burden on you right now!
i love my church said- Don't flatter yourself. I made no threat against you. I am saying if the church leadership lies they will be help accountable. Others will correct the record and they will do so loudly. That is all I meant. Get over yourself.
REPLY- I hate to tell you, but God will hold all of us accountable.
So you are you saying that you and others are going to make a scene next Sunday night at church??
1. How mature!
2. It will only further destroy your "cause"
3. It will be more proof of the true heart behind the JUNK.
ILMC,
By "spoil their party" I meant I will spill the entire story on the blog so no one has to wait for next Sunday.
I'm listening, post away. Be sure to post facts to verify your story.
Ace:
You were right about the Ch24/Ch50 issue. You, or someone, brought up that Ch50 and Impact Logistics have offices in the same building.
Whoever said that is also correct.
Google Yellow Pages and you find the following addresses:
Impact Logistics
7200 Goodlett Farms Pkwy
Cordova, TN 38016
901-377-5298
and
My 50 Memphis WPXX
7200 Goodlett Farms Pkwy
Cordova, TN 38016
901-384-6650
Just another of those "good old boy" connections! Sure pays to have good friends.
ILMC said:
By "spoil their party" I meant I will spill the entire story on the blog so no one has to wait for next Sunday.
What is hateful about that?
Piglet says:
Boy! I really do like you. Can we be friends? :0)
Overflowing,
I have thought about what you said. I will back up and say you may be right about one thing. It is possible the son was not in the room in June. However, that is not how it was described by a participant. I will allow for the possibility that was a miscommunication because it was lengthy and somewhat confusing conversation. However, I believe some knew of this BEFORE June. SG is the only person who said he found out in June.
My only goal is for the truth to be known.
piglet- So i love my church and their threats and attacks are ok?
AllOfGrace,
Pat yourself on the back and have a cookie precious :)
I already had my celebration party this afternoon, but thanks.
In the meeting 6 months ago there were two others present that were witnesses to the conversation.
I am aware of at least one of the four in that meeting that has spoken to others about the content of that meeting. That is indirectly how the content of the meeting became known on the blog.
The administration might want to take into consideration as well that there was already a growing distrust even within the leadership and many meetings have been recorded over the past year.
I don't believe that the staff members that know the truth are going to back down or back up this time around.
Dear JMO: I do not know where you have gotten your legal advise about reporting but you have just posted something that is not even close to correct.
There are NO conditions wherein you would not report suspected child abuse. NONE.
Certainly you have heard the asst D.A speak out on more than one ocassion about this. Why do you refuse to believe what the primary prosecutor for these crimes says? When you state misinformation as fact that is wrong you run the risk of endangering children. That is not acceptable. There are no age provisions. ANYTIME SOMEONE SUSPECT CHILD ABUSE YOU MUST REPORT IT. PERIOD!
If we ever err in these matters, we must make that mistake on the behalf of the children.
Since you seem to know so much about this situation, I would like you to address my two questions I posed earlier.
Will there be an admission that there was a policy manual/procedure at BBC in place since 2001 to handle these matters?
Wiil there be an admission that there was a seminar at BBC put on by DCS last year in what is required in reporting these matters?
I would like to hear the answers to those questions by the Personnel Committee.
Those are not rummors or speculation. Yes I am angry. Once again we have someone making excuses for not reporting this when they first became aware of it in June. And those involved were aware of what is was about.
Dear Ace: I too commend you for your statement about transparency. I also want to thank you for your assistance a few weeks ago. You aren't the bad guy folks have tried to make you out.
4545: I am still waiting.
Please be in prayer for the Personnel Committee this week.
David Brown
SNAP coordinator of West Tennessee and Memphis
David Brown
ILMC
Someone is saying they are committed to the truth.
That is music to my ears!
(time for the piggie polka!)
"So you are you saying that you and others are going to make a scene next Sunday night at church??
1. How mature!
2. It will only further destroy your "cause"
3. It will be more proof of the true heart behind the JUNK."
What a load of hooey. I would never disrupt a service nor would I suggest anyone else do it.
I think the Commerical Appeal or Mike Fleming would be a better way to go. Maybe channels 3, 5, 7, 13 too. We can call Michael Reagan. I bet he would be interested in a followup. Greta Van Susteren and Nancy Grace too. They love to crusade for kids. See, there are a lot of ways to raise a stink without disrupting a worship service. I think those would be much more effective anyway.
If you have "facts" and the "truth", why wait?
David,
Dear Ace: You aren't the bad guy folks have tried to make you out.
Another quote to frame for myself! Thank you.
4545,
If you have "facts" and the "truth", why wait?
If they wait, I think it's only because they don't really have the "facts" and the "truth."
i love my church- You do not have to convince me, it is obvious that you and many others are EXPERTS at cause a stink.
AoG,
you and I have 'conversed' before, I sorta thought that maybe you would be the 'one' to respond. Hope you know what I was getting at...actually, I think you do.
I was definitely 'confronted', and the somberness lingers still...I hope it does all week!
junk, Thanks for responding. It worries me to see so much scripture misused on this blog. The problem as I see it is that PW was a Minister and not a random member. As such his sin is public in nature because of that fact and when you add in the guidelines for a minister/elder it gets worse. Then you add in the fact that it is found out that it is made public simply because it was not resolved, then we get into a whole bunch more scripture that involve fruit, walking in the light, etc.
I take Hebrews 10:26 very seriously. PW is a minister and should know scripture. He has no excuse, just as Ted Haggard, for willfully sinning when knowing truth. He has been in some sort of church service for 34 years. I assume he read scripture in that 34 years and even taught it to others?
This was kept secret for 17 years by not only PW but someone else in the church. Maybe a counselor? But then, Gaines is told 'something' 6 mos prior to the public announcement and does nothing. Everyone in this scenerio has mocked God's Holy Word.
My goal only here is to point this out and urge people not to follow the teaching of those who so willfully ignore God's Holy Word. We will account for this at the Throne.
They teach a cheap grace, repentless christianity, churchianity (making church the idol) and do it all by using 'forgiveness' as a club to beat people up. It is shameless.
They mock the Cross that my Redeemer took the WRATH that I deserved. I do not take that lightly and never will.
Call that hateful and mean if you want. What happened at the Cross is foolishness to those that are perishing.
4545
There'sa new thread on favorite hymns. Don't you have any?
4545 wrote:
When we prove some of their rumors to be JUNK, they choose to talk about something else."
And just when are you going to do that, Mr. Deacon? "That's a lie!" hardly qualifies as "proof" of anything.
NASS
You go!:D
lin,
You wrote, "No, they don't have to 'choose' to remove themselves. They ARE removed for the purity of the Bride".
I was only saying that if a minister that committed such a sin was truly repentant, I would expect they would demonstrate that repentance by stepping down rather than waiting to be removed involuntarily. But, yes, if they did not do the right thing and resign, they must be removed.
As important as is the purity and holiness of the church, as I understand 1 Cor 5 and other Scriptures, the primary reason for exercising church discipline on an unrepentant immoral church member is to lead them to repentance and ultimately reconciliation and restoration. (Again, not that there would not still be consequences of their sin in terms of what sort of position or role the person should have in church leadership.)
NBBCOF,
What about MY facts that have proven the junk talk as lies here? We can't forget about them. But, like 4545 said, they are ignored.
AOG,
2 people have acknowledged you were right about the broadcasts...go ahead and have that cookie..on me.
1) I'm out of cookies.... 2) If I was wrong, I would have 20 people attacking me, just like they were originally when I was posting my facts...so... I am waiting on 18 more people to congratulate me and then I'll be satisfied.
You know what? Just having NBBCOF say I posted facts and I was right would be good enough for me.
How about it, NBCCOF, can you find it within yourself to congratulate me?
AoG,
Knew you would...kind of a sad comment...there is in plain view from this side of the screen a whitewater rapid of religiosity and personal piety, yet I seriously wonder how many drink from the flavor of kool aid from which I know that you and I drink?
and do they 'get it'
ace said...
4545,
If you have "facts" and the "truth", why wait?
If they wait, I think it's only because they don't really have the "facts" and the "truth."
10:43 PM, January 21, 2007
I wait out of respect for Chris Willams, the forgotten victim. Steve said he wanted us all to "love on" Paul. What about Chris?
I also wait because I believe David Coombs is not as bad a guy as most here believe he is. I've known him to be a man with a heart. I pray he does the right thing. He was thrust into an impossible situation. I feel for him.
Those are my reasons to wait.
AllOfGrace,
count your blessings dude...meet me at Starbucks sometime and I'll buy you a cookie...and a DP
MORE LIES! Starbucks doesn't sell DP... do they? I've never seen cokies and stuff there.
Errr..."cokes" is what I meant to say.
im a bbc mole said
In the meeting 6 months ago there were two others present that were witnesses to the conversation.
I am aware of at least one of the four in that meeting that has spoken to others about the content of that meeting. That is indirectly how the content of the meeting became known on the blog.
The administration might want to take into consideration as well that there was already a growing distrust even within the leadership and many meetings have been recorded over the past year.
I don't believe that the staff members that know the truth are going to back down or back up this time around.
Piglet says:
Do you know that the meeting was recorded, and if so, have you heard it?
David Brown
Are recordings admissable evidence?
David,
I respect what you do and agree that all child abuse should be reported. But the reason we have lawyers and courts are that reasonable people view the law as to it intent. The intent of the law was to force (encourage) doctors, ministers, counselors, and all to report suspected cases of child abuse. The intent of this law was to delivery the child from this situation in a timely manner. We have a different case in this instance whether you would agree or not.
The abuse occurred over 17 years ago, the minor is now an adult. The victim was/is in a position to self report this crime. The provisions of the law was to protect the minor. The time to have protected that minor is far removed. The inaction's of Bro. Steve did not continue to subject this victim to continued sexual abuse. His inaction's did, I would agree, allow a potential abuse to happen however unlikely.
I ask you the same question...if the crime is present then why hasn't the DA acted? I would surmise two things: 1. the case is not about to be sustained in a court and 2. the DA realizes that outside the adverse publicity that no good would come from a charging a minister for failure to report a crime of 17 years past
The key thing to remember is that the victim was fully capable of reporting the crime and was not a situation that prevented him from doing so. Secondly if Bro. Steve had been told that all was forgiven within the family he may have felt to make this a public matter would be far worse than doing nothing. I am not saying I agree with the decision he made. What I am saying is this was not an active situation that required immediate action. And that is the intent of the law...and I have read over 40 pages of documentation to realize that intent. Again, that's why we have lawyers, judges and a jury system.
Most of the people who are wanting Bro. Steve arrested for this have motivations which are not solely about not reporting child abuse. They want to see him hurting...and that is wrong. I believe that your motives are pure and I applaud you for your efforts. But this is not a clear cut violation of the law.
ace wrote:
"What about MY facts that have proven the junk talk as lies here? We can't forget about them."
I guess I can (and did) forget. Seems like there was a minor detail or two about a couple of things (for which your reward awaits below), but I don't remember anything of any real significance.
Here, fetch!
NBBCOF,
Just because you don't remember it, doesn't mean it's not true. :) Thanks for the cookie!
JMO said
The abuse occurred over 17 years ago, the minor is now an adult. The victim was/is in a position to self report this crime. The provisions of the law was to protect the minor. The time to have protected that minor is far removed. The inaction's of Bro. Steve did not continue to subject this victim to continued sexual abuse. His inaction's did, I would agree, allow a potential abuse to happen however unlikely.
Piglet says:
Howcan you say that?!!
The laws to report pedophiles are strict because repeat offenses are HIGHLY likeIy!!!
I wouldn't push things too far guys! Don't think for a minute that you are not being watched closely and personally, I think I love my church sounds like he knows what he is talking about. If not him, you may hear the truth from CW himself! I wouldn't blame him either! This has gone on far long enough and for what that poor guy has gone through and then to see it try to be covered up by someone who should be willing to protect him!
4545, or should I call you Mr. Deacon, what will it take for you to see what we've been saying to you? If PW gets to remain at BBC, even if he takes a year or two sabbatical, is that okay with you? If so, then you will never see the truth if it reached up and bit you on your nose!
I agree that we need to be in prayer for a lot of people this week, but especially Chris Williams!
AoG,
completely agreed on that fact
Thought and idea: recall every CP foreign missionary, retrain (reteach) in systematic biblical theology and doctrine(which is by the way, historical and Baptist) and dispatch them, not to foreign countries, but to local churches.
What do you think?
EK,
Grace to you!
JMO
Most of the people who are wanting Bro. Steve arrested for this have motivations which are not solely about not reporting child abuse. They want to see him hurting...and that is wrong. I believe that your motives are pure and I applaud you for your efforts. But this is not a clear cut violation of the law.
Piglet says:
I don't think anyone on this blog would object to Steve Gaines' blissful happiness...somewhere else.
I wish him no harm. But he should pay yhe consequences for his actions and I wish all our members knew enough about him to demand he be fired.
lindon,
No, I don't think it is at all hateful and mean for you to stand for the purity and fullness of the gospel and against "cheap grace" (there's an oxymoron if ever there was one, eh?). It would be mean to speak anything less than the truth -- real love demands that we proclaim just exactly what it cost for us to be forgiven.
But (and this isn't directed at you or any one else specifically on this blog, more at "us all" as less than perfect believers) I also think that we often show how little we realize the depth of our own sin when we are quick to show "righteous indignation" at the sins of others. We forget the mercy shown to us "while we were yet sinners" and how that mercy shown us demands that we show it to others, even those who are unrepentant. Sin breaks the heart of God for the damage that it does to the sinner as well as those sinned against. It seems that many folks react with "aha! aha!" at the sins of others rather than being reminded of their own sin, that "there but for the grace of God go I." Sin is so devastating, so costly -- God showed us just how much it costs at Calvary -- so when we see the failings of another, whether minister, pastor, deacon, or Joe Pew, I feel we should react with compassion and tenderness, just as God has shown us.
I think we agree on more than we disagree...
piglet wrote: The laws to report pedophiles are strict because repeat offenses are HIGHLY likeIy!!!
Please refer me to that law. There is a law about reporting abuse but the only law about reporting pedophiles exist within the law that states that persons convicted of sex crimes must report where they reside. And that information is made public. You can find many websites which will provide you the names of any sex offenders living in your zip code.
One thing to keep in mind about quoting statistics...there are also instances of single abuse and this may well be one of those cases. You do not know so anything other is just your opinion.
AOG,
Looks like I missed quite a party in here tonight.
About recalling the missionaries...I've always found it ironic that Ravi Zacharias left India to serve as a Christian apologist in the United States. India is overwhelmingly pagan.
JMO
David Brown would be a better person to handle this question, but when I was a Lifechoices counselor, we were told we had to report ANY suspected child abuse, past or present. No exceptions.
This was never questioned. Pedophilia requires alot of treatment and the attraction to children almost never goes away.
Even if there are isolated cases of single victim abuse, just who gets to decide this is the case?
Do you ask the pedophile and take HIS word for it?
o
AoG, Ez,
my comments were only a suggestion as a former member...the local church in my biblical opinion should be 'distinctly' missionary, not 'cooperatively' missionary. Oversight is one reason, and BBC is finding out that a lack of it among the 'administration' can do great harm.
my suggestion was made because of the lack of doctrinal depth among 'faceless' assembly line missionaries and the increased number of unregenerate church members and the suggestion could kill two birds with one stone in theory, but I know that you two understand that, but the passive reader might not have. Anyway, blessings and a good night.
Ace,
Thanks for responding to my post about the picture taking guy - it could have been you for all I know. :)
I want to apologize to you for the tone of my post - it was kind of snotty, so I apologize.
It's not a big issue and I'm pretty tired of talking about it, aren't you? Let's focus on the issues and move forward, k?
karen
Karen,
It wasn't me...so that eliminates one person for you.
You don't need to apologize, I didn't think your post was snotty...I just don't think it's right to assume that he was breaking any rules because we'll never know....but I'm sure you get my point.
I hope you enjoyed the show tonight...
JMO:
You said someone resigned this week in the counciling department. Is this person's identity a secret? Why?
Just wondering...
westtn
please dont misunderstand my comments; it wasn't an anti foreign missionary thing at all...it was just to emphasize the alarming rate of unregenerate church membership, at well, particularly SB churches nowadays.
and the cooperate part, is well in my opinion unbiblical...when it gets to the point where a church cannot have proper one on one oversight with the missionary they are sending, then it is at the wrong point. SB have always emphasized that bigger is better, and yes we should go into all the world...but bigger is not always better...being biblically right is always better. anyway, those were the points I was trying to make
Karen
Must be nice to be newly married and going out on a romantic date.
Oh, the memories.....
One thing to keep in mind about quoting statistics...there are also instances of single abuse and this may well be one of those cases. You do not know so anything other is just your opinion.
Our standard of conduct is the Word, not the T.C.A. Whether or not PW or SG is charged with a crime is out of our hands. The authorities will take care of that. What is in our hands is standing up for the truth and making sure the dictates of Scripture are followed.
In my estimation the legal part of this is getting us away from the real issue for us as members of BBC. The real issue is PW's suitability for ministry. Using Scripture as our guide, even if this is one of those single abuse cases, he disqualified himself from ministry at BBC. We must demand ministers that meet biblical guidelines for service.
China Shop,
I knew what you meant. We are on the same page.
People get upset when you mention unregenerate membership, but it is certainly a problem. I was thinking about that issue earlier tonight as I listened to one of Henry Mahan's sermons.
JMO SAID:
"By the way, why don't you call the DA and ask why no arrest has been made? You obviously are not the least educated in the judicial system. Read the law and then come back and explain what part Bro. Steve violated."
Response:
Sir, the authorities have not completed their investigation in the alleged child abuse by Paul Williams who met with Gaines and confessed his crime. Gaines kept it secret for six months and did not report it to the authorities.
He reported it to the church by reading a statement written by legal counsel.
Sir, when the authorities complete their investigation - the DA will then determine should charges be brought against whomever including Gaines, if appropriate.
So, Sir, just hang on, and we will see.
Furthermore, I said Williams should have been fired after confessing to Gaines - and Gaines should have been fired for keeping Williams "moral failure" a secret.
You sir in your post announced there was no concern about Gaines facing arrest. I never said he would be arrested. Did I?
Sir, your response to my post is OK. Just get your facts and do it accurately.
JMO: Just because someone that is an offender tells me there are no more victims, I will not make that mistake and believe them. I know from experience that is wrong. Taking that course is too dangerous for our children.
I don't care who the offender is. It is not our job to make a judgment if it should be reported. IT MUST BE REPORTED.
As far as the DA and DCS, their investigations are still ongoing. I do not want to see Dr. Gaines charged but the DA on two different ocassions has made it clear REGARDLESS of when the abuse happened, REGARDLESS of the age of the victim now, it must be reported. And in this particular situation it was not. And he was left on staff.
Often victims do not come forward till years later. Kevin Rardin has had his battles with the Catholic Church in the past over this very issue. They take the same arguments you are making.
From a victims point of view and defending our children, that is not acceptable. Two defenders of children have also been quoted in a rather long article it was wrong not to have reported it in June. We must do all we can to protect our children from harm.
There is not a clear cut pattern in trying to identify these perps. There is no model we can use to tell if someone has that bent. So then it is our duty to use the strictest rules possbile.
I will say this again, what should have happened in June, was the minister should have been removed at that time. I am not saying a firing but taken out of position and contact. Report it to DCS immediately. You can tell them I don't think there is immediate danger but you let the professionals determine that. You get all the help for the victim you can and the prep too. But you don't sit on it for over 6 months till it is posted on some blog. That is a very dangerous path to follow.
If it had been handled in June as it should have, I would singing praises of Dr. Gaines. I would hail him as a hero for children. But he didn't. And I would like to know why.
I regret it has all came out as it has. I will say this some of the speculation as to what went on is flat wrong. When people insist on wanting to know the details, you aren't doing any good. I wish people would quit trying to find out those things they really don't need to know. Sufficed to say something bad happened. That is all that you really need to know.
Focus on why it was not reported in spite of having the procedures in place to deal with it and in addition there was training that apparently not everyone attended.
Please if we ever make a mistake in this type of situation, let's make in on behalf of the children. That way we can all sleep at night.
I want to thank many of you for your support and help. No one is going to be a winner in this situation. I will continue to speak out against this horrible crime.
I want to publically praise the Lord for allowing me to have gone thru what I suffered so I can be strong to help others. We do serve a Mighty Lord. I love HIM so much!
Pleae be in prayer.
David Brown
SBAP coordinator of West Tennessee and Memphis.
AOG,
Three weeks ago I burned a Mahan CD for my brother. Obviously he grew up in the SBC just as I did. After listening to Mahan he rushed out and bought books by MacArthur, Packer, and Sproul.
Yesterday he started a class on reformed theology. The man teaching the class went through the philosophical movements that influenced Jacob Arminius' thinking. He referred to the Arminian position as "spiritualized humanism." I've never heard that characterization before, but I understand how he got there.
David Brown,
Thank you, brother. I appreciate and love you. I admire your boldness. The Lord has helped you turn personal tragedy into triumph.
Piglet said...
Karen
Must be nice to be newly married and going out on a romantic date.
Oh, the memories.....
BLUSH!! It was pretty romantical -if I do say so myself. Mr. Piglet will take you out if you ask him. May I offer my services to babysit when you go?
Ace, you were right about Channel 50. I don't know what a DP at Starbucks is, but I'd buy you a Chai Latte for your efforts.
karen
JMO if you would email me I would prefer it. I will try to answer some of your questions. There is way too much speculation going on right now and I do not want to add to it.
Right now we should be in prayer for this Committee. They have a tough job ahead. I am sure they understand their role. I pray they do the right thing.
Gang it is way past my bedtime. And at my age, I need all the beauty rest I can get.
Love you all.
I've been out of town and just spent the last several hours catching up.
It appears that many on this blog think they are students of the law. David Brown appears to be the only person would speaks with strong understanding of law.
I think the bloger who posted as, "just my opinion" is trying to influence people for what the church wants people to believe next sunday.
If we are prepared in advance that "this is the way" it is "legally" people's reactions will be more understanding.
What has become of our Church?
I heard Richard Emerson speak maybe last April on the problems Bellevue could have in the future if we do not have better policies and procedures and bylaws. I will admit I was a little hard on him then but now I am fully in agreement with him that we need changes now. And I believe Richard Emerson may also be an attorney.
Which service will the committee give it's report at next Sunday?
When will we get the DA's final report, as that's the report that should have no spin.
Karen,
Ace, you were right about Channel 50.
Thank you. 3 down, 17 to go.
I don't know what a DP at Starbucks is, but I'd buy you a Chai Latte for your efforts.
DP = Dr. Pepper
AOG,
Right. They attempted to accomodate the prevailing philosophical thought in Holland and the Scriptures took a beating.
Nice Call Ace (Channel 50)
and no Starbucks doe snot carry Dr. Pepper, but occasionally they do sale cookies.
ace,
I never doubted what you said - I'm just tired of people being mean to each other over stuff that ain't gonna matter in eternity. We still have to love each other and there will be no winners.
God is in control and if there are people participating on this blog just to zing it to "us" or "them" or the "antis" or the "pros", please go away. No one is going to win in this except Jesus when he comes for his Bride. We will still be brothers and sisters in Christ whether or not Steve Gaines or Joe Blow in preaching at BBC.
PLEASE - don't feed on speculation, but don't be a jerk if speculation is given and you don't agree with it. Just pray for the person blogging and don't respond. It just ain't worth it.
karen
memphis said,
doe snot - HA!!!! Ok, nobody picked on my for my lack of grammar yesterday, so I'll give you some slack on that one.
But I must ask: Is that like Bucksnort?
karen (getting loopy)
pardon me, should read does not! Never claimed I was a great typer..i use the seek and peck method to type! LOL
heartbroken,
Richard Emerson is not a lawyer. However, I have spoken with him at length about the legal issues and he has a very good grasp of these matters, particularly for nonlawyer.
I have also spoken to David Brown almost daily the last few weeks. He has been involved with the legal issues pertaining to child abuse for years. He knows Tennessee law as it pertains to child molestation.
In case you don't know, I am a lawyer. I've read a lot of ridiculous statements and theories concerning the law on the blog. I don't know if it is intentional or if folks are misinformed.
I'm still laughing at that one!
Karen, I was curious if Trollcates showed up to meet you this morning?
Memphis,
Yes he did - he sat with my husband and I. He's a wonderful person. He appeared to enjoy the sermon; he took notes anyway. He said he'd be back next week. YAY!
karen
Karen, that's great, i also enjoyed the service today.
Ok, I'm too twisted for color TV! (my fave movie is Steel Magnolias) so I'm going to bed.
karen
I know this post is a bit late, but I'm just catching up...
I bought an ESV Reformed Study Bible at Family Christian Store. I really like it (so far... I just got it)
I'm reading, so I guess that would be a qualified yes
I sent email :)
Here are a few important changes that would help restore the trust of many members during these days of crisis in leadership:
I. Pastoral Accountability to the Congregation:
1. A business meeting in accord with Matthew 18 to deal with the issues that remain related to Mark Sharpe and "the Dream"... and any other loose ends that should have been dealt with months ago!!
2. The giving records of the membership and the ministers on staff at Bellevue should never be for pastoral review in any shape, form, or fashion.
3. Due to concern for potential abuse, no church credit cards.
4. An admission Dr. Gaines should have never given $25k to FUMC and an explanation of policy changes to prevent a repeat.
5. A policy for open books on Holy land trips and no overcharging of members.
6. Full disclosure of ministerial compensation: salary + benefit breakdown, etc.
7. Removal from office of ministers guilty of sexual immorality with immediate coordination with the appropriate authorities if any laws have been broken by a minister (no matter how long ago), including thorough investigation of the matter when the minister’s conduct may have affected other church members or their children.
II. Congregational Church governance:
Some of the congregation has awakened to the reality that our church has a set of "lay-elders," a close knit group of men who manage to be appointed to key positions year after year. The rest of the congregation needs to be awakened.
1. Those who are part of this lay-elder "power block" need to step down from positions of influence for a long time. Bellevue needs “new blood” in these key positions.
2. There needs to be the signing of a public conflict of interest form for any member that has any business contract to provide services for the church. These people should not be allowed to serve on committees that review bids for their services.
3. Congregational nomination of and election of all of the Board of Directors as called for in the 1929 bylaws.
4. A quarterly business meeting with open mike Q&A with each committee chairman. **The current bylaws mention "monthly" business meetings! When were they changed??
5. A good updated set of bylaws similar to GBC.
6. A transparent committee selection process.
7. Much greater congregational oversight of the current budget with a transparent policy for consideration of non-budgeted expenditures exceeding a reasonable amount.
8. Thorough communication with the Congregation for ANY capital project well in advance of any vote. Building prayer buildings or any other type of building should be brought through proper channels to the congregation for prayerful consideration--not coerced "rubber stamping." [By the way, Dr. Rogers taught us quite a bit about prayer. As a matter of fact, I believe all of the current buildings ARE prayer buildings already. He and Dr. Whitmire also taught us quite a bit about worship also... but that's another topic].
9. Bellevue needs to reject Warrenism fully and finally.
10. Higher standards should be put in place for the hiring of "ministers." Seminary training should be considered a normal prerequisite.
III. Treatment of ministers on staff at BBC and members:
1. A whistle blower policy for ministers, staff, and members.
2. The end of heavy handed dealing with ministers, staff, and members; and the end of signing non-disclosure statements. All ministers who have been pressured or asked to sign such non-disclosure statements should be released from them in writing by BBC! Former staff should be allowed to address the congregation and/or the deacon body either in writing or in person without any fear of reprisal regarding their exit from BBC. The congregation needs to know how their leadership has treated and is treating ministers who leave the service of our Lord through BBC.
3. Forgiveness for those in leadership who have allowed this to deteriorate to this point--AND consequences for their actions.
All in my opinion as usual.
We are to be “providing things honestly in the sight of all men” (Rom. 12:17). Revival, reform, congregational oversight... for there is level ground at Calvary and "he who would be great among you shall be the servant of all."
The Truth is important to God imo:
Deuteronomy 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
1 Samuel 12:24 Only fear the LORD, and serve him in truth with all your heart: for consider how great things he hath done for you.
1 Kings 2:4 That the LORD may continue his word which he spake concerning me, saying, If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail thee (said he) a man on the throne of Israel.
Psalm 25:10 All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.
Psalm 26:3 For thy lovingkindness is before mine eyes: and I have walked in thy truth.
Psalm 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.
Psalm 51:6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
Psalm 57:10 For thy mercy is great unto the heavens, and thy truth unto the clouds.
Psalm 86:11 Teach me thy way, O LORD; I will walk in thy truth: unite my heart to fear thy name.
Psalm 119:30 I have chosen the way of truth: thy judgments have I laid before me.
Psalm 146:5-6 Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the LORD his God:
Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever.
Proverbs 12:19 The lip of truth shall be established for ever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment.
Isaiah 59:14-15 And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
Jeremiah 5:3 O LORD, are not thine eyes upon the truth? thou hast stricken them, but they have not grieved; thou hast consumed them, but they have refused to receive correction: they have made their faces harder than a rock; they have refused to return.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
The Lord Jesus said:
As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. (Rev. 3:19)
Proverbs 12:19 The lip of truth shall be established for ever: but a lying tongue is but for a moment.
A New Beginning in Simulacra (but oh, the production values)
Simulacrum (plural: simulacra), from the Latin simulare, "to make like, to put on an appearance of", originally meaning a material object representing something (such as a cult image representing a deity, or a painted still-life of a bowl of fruit). By the 1800s it developed a sense of a "mere" image, an empty form devoid of spirit, and descended to connote a specious or fallow representation.~Wikipedia
Dr Gaines should have titled his message, “fuggetaboudit.”
This bears repeating:
The conflict at Bellevue, if you'll allow me to editorialize, is fairly cut and dry. The church leadership will always conflate and sermonize, use scripture, pawns and sycophants, but based on what the church has admitted, laws have been broken and a serious breach of trust has been introduced into the congregation.
At the very least, it should be expected that a virtuous, compassionate and transparent acknowledgement of the harms inflicted is in order, and a forum within the church, by its articles of faith, to manage the family's business regarding ethics, rehabilitation and incompetence inside its government.
Then, those matters of a wider legal, civic or community concern--criminal activity, public safety issues, the invitation and care to victims, transparency of government, etc.--would be adjudicated in accommodating language outside of a particular religious context, where it belongs.
This too:
Since most of you are going to tune me out anyway and everyone is beddy-by too, I thought I’d monologue regarding rules of rhetorical engagement. If the tone there seems kind of martial, well, it is only to the measure of the present atmosphere. There’s a whole lot of endless verbiage spent shaming each other for a sharp quip, the sting of sarcasm (how bad does it hurt, really now?), and the requisite back and forth that ensues.
If, for example, you equate going over the speed limit with trespassing on the home a perceived troublemaker, then yes, you have a right to express such an opinion, but you also have a responsibility to pay the price, on the chin, for lobbing such a turnip. So too, if you insult the intelligences of those on this forum with straw arguments, exhibit contempt for, and question the sincerity and motives of, the truly dispossessed and injured, then they should freely-- tongue in cheek--let you have it.
Sarcasm and wit are indispensable in rhetoric, and to displace them constrains the writer to bite his lip, whine, repeatedly cut and paste the “godly” response, or pretend the antagonism is not there. Truth-seekers, do not tie your shoelaces together before doing battle, rhetorically speaking, with visitors who are obviously not here as liaisons to reconciliation, but in order to introduce psychological warfare.
Wrathfulness is the grimace of a mother, with no thought of herself, lunging before the path of an oncoming vehicle to rescue her child. Don’t let anyone confuse a little wrathfulness for hatred.
memphis wrote:
"and no Starbucks doe snot carry Dr. Pepper, but occasionally they do sale cookies."
I believe you're the person who stated that you utilize the "hunt and peck" method of typing. We don't discriminate here, but after reading the above comment, I would recommend you at least preview your comments before hitting "Publish." You had me wiping the water off my screen with that one!
NASS
David Brown wrote: Often victims do not come forward till years later. Kevin Rardin has had his battles with the Catholic Church in the past over this very issue. They take the same arguments you are making.
Actually that is not a correct statement. My argument doesn't concern the victim's abuser but specifically the person that learns of the abuse. The battles over years concern the prosecution of the victim's molester, not anyone who failed to report the incident.* My argument is one that is supported by the attorney general's opinion in regard to a third party reporting. I believe that the molester should have no rights as to the limitation of years for prosecution of the crime.
Secondly, I agree with westtnbarrister that Paul Williams should have been fired on the spot because he was unfit scripturally to be a minister. I agree that Bro. Steve as I've stated was wrong in his decision making process. My point was as it related to a pending arrest of Bro. Steve for his failure to disclose the information 6 months ago to DCS.
For those who want to know the findings of the committee then be at church Sunday evening for the reports. Then you can come and decide for yourself if a cover-up has taken place.
A side note to westtnbarrister. While I may not be a lawyer by trade I come from a family of lawyers and know enough about the law that reasonable people differ as to the interpertations. And that is why you guys stay gainful employed.
* This is not an assumption on my part, it's fact. The law that requires people to report sexual abuse wasn't available in the past especially when it concerned ministry personnel. The problem with the Catholic church is not the same situation as there would be with Bro. Steve. The problem with the Catholic church was that they were involved in the cover-up during and after while knowing that sexual abuse was actively taking place.
JMO: You make one bad assumption. Attorney General opinions are not the law, they are simply an opinion. The legislature in Nashville makes the law, the judges uphold it. That is how that works and though I am not an attorney, I have worked in this professsion for many years. Opinions are just that. They are not the law.
I will say this to you once more, everyone must report suspected abuse. PERIOD. When you add qualifiers as you are you are setting up children to be harmed.
You keep defending Dr. Gaines in implying he broke no laws. Did you read the two articles by the District Attorney and the Commercial Appeal article by those two ladies that defend and protect children also? What did they say?
You go on to say the problem with the Catholic Church was different from Dr. Gaines in the the Catholic Church was involved in a cover-up. Pray tell. Please answer me this then, what do you call hiding the facts of this case for over 6 months is then? You imply it was poor judgment. That is being very mild and kind. I have another term for it.
For the record part of the problems recently with the Catholic Church was over the reporting of it. They wanted to be the ones who decided what priests were reported and which ones were not. The DA strongly disagreed with that. As a result of those meetings the names of ten priests that were abusers were released. If we follow your logic and argument, none of the ten would ever be known.
David Brown
SNAP coordinator for West Tennessee and Memphis
charis wrote:
"I bought an ESV Reformed Study Bible at Family Christian Store. I really like it (so far... I just got it)"
If you're looking for a Bible (or just about anything else), try eBay. I bought two brand new, factory-sealed Bibles on eBay that sell for $89.99 in bookstores (including Bellevue's) for about $31 a piece on eBay. Shipping was about $7-8 for the two.
NASS
P.S. For anyone who doesn't mind someone else's name(?) being engraved on the front of an otherwise brand new Bible, this could be a real steal.
jmo: One last point. You say something that the law on reporting these abuses cases didn't apply to ministry personnel in the past. I disagree but whatever it certainly was in place 6 months ago.
Serious question? What did some of you think about Dr. Gaines sermon on Forgiveness yesterday? How does it apply to the issues at hand and this blog and our lives?
"Sin is so devastating, so costly -- God showed us just how much it costs at Calvary -- so when we see the failings of another, whether minister, pastor, deacon, or Joe Pew, I feel we should react with compassion and tenderness, just as God has shown us.
I think we agree on more than we disagree... "
I do not disagree with a thing you said, brother. Except, let us have all the compassion and love we can shower on the pedophile minister when he is out of his position. That is really the issue here. That has been the issue from day one. Seems people want to keep ignoring it. However, I agree with everything you said ONCE the pedophile minister is removed.
By the way, does it not concern you there has been no confession to or rebuke from the church body since this became public. Considering he has been there 34 years, I find this astonishing.
The grave sin and how it affects us and mocks the cross is being treated very lightly here...in a worldly way.
PS: No one is more depraved than I but that does not mean I should not point out scriptural truth. Same with everyone here.
EZ,
Amen...
Additionally, our apologies should defend the honor of Christ and less our own reputations.
Ezekiel said: Why can't we agree that sin has occurred, and is occurring by failure to follow scripture? Then insist our leaders plot a course to right the ship.
EXCELLENT! It won't be easy to right the ship but I believe it can be done. We can follow God's Word (all of it!) and apply His Truth and these ships can be on the correct path again. Don't give up! Keep standing for the truth and demand the whole Word be followed and taught.
ez said: Those in positions to have facts are too concerned about loss of position, authority, power or money to make a stand. MS is an anomoly....
I guess that's where faith comes in. If they are standing for the cause of Christ, He will protect them and take care of them; and we need to as well. Those who are facing persecution for their stand need to be encouraged and supported (in any way necessary) by us. Kind of a "put your money where your mouth is" situation...
How can the members of BBC know if our Church is settling financially with Chris Williams or any of the PW consuling victims? Imean it is our Church.
Do we have a right to know?
Can we call the Church and ask these questions and if so who do we ask?
Will we be able to ask questions next Sunday night to the persnnel committee?
Post a Comment