To All - consider that while all of this blogging goes on, and we all make points and argue with his trolls, SG and his lovely wife, DG, live in opulence and luxury, buy the finest clothes, eat at the finest restaurants, and live in the finest homes while driving luxury vehicles, all on that tithed money to BBC. And if that doesn't bother you enough, SG will soon be preaching at an Identity Conference and then later at a Pastor's Conference, where he will be an honored speaker and paid handsomely for both. I expect he will receive more standing ovations at each one. He also will prepare for those sermons while being paid by BBC. So continue on blogging and arguing BBC sheep. Those doing the fleecing can wait as long as it takes for this to all die down.
***In the meantime, you can do two things that will make a difference: 1)stop giving any money to BBC and (2) email Tim Ellsworth and Mac Brunson and let them know in a polite manner that you believe it is poor judgment on their parts to have SG speaking at such conferences while he is under investigation. Even if they don't reply to anonymous emails, your point will have been made. These mega-church pastors all cover for each other, and your email voice WILL be heard. The web sites for Union University and FBC Jacksonville have the contact information. Don't just blog...DO SOMETHING!
Derick Calcote - I just finished reading your posts from earlier on the other thread. You seem to have a lot of credibility and facts given you disclose your name and position and invite others to email you. I say all that to say this: If you know of information on here that is blatantly false, either intentionally or unintentionally, you will do many of us that "are not on either side" a great service. Keep posting brother...many are listening.
Many people recently asked about Jim Haywood and if he really was legally allowed to record in the BBC services.
I want to clear up something surrounding that issue. He posted his story at http://www.savingbellevue.com/camcorderincident.htm
Then he posted copyright exceptions at http://www.savingbellevue.com/copyrightslaw.htm
For those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property. And because of that, recording restrictions CAN indeed be placed on the premises and there is absolutely no legal backing saying that they are forced to allow someone to record.
Then that's when Mr. Haywood's "copyright exception" page comes into play. It should be noted that Jim is no expert in the field of law, so I'll clear this up for everyone here and him as well. The page he put up only describes what can be done with a work ALREADY CREATED to which one does not own the copyright, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not somebody can create a work and where.
I hope this clears up the issue that was raised up on the blog. I have already notified Jim Haywood about this, but all I received was a response saying, "And you are a coward Mr. No Name" - oh well, I tried. Hopefully people here will find interest to that info!
Do you not see how 'worldly' your comment is? How can the Words of the Sword of Truth be copyrighted? Legal standing? What is this? Legal standing with Pagan courts?
"For those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property. And because of that, recording restrictions CAN indeed be placed on the premises and there is absolutely no legal backing saying that they are forced to allow someone to record."
I weep for these words. Don't we want every word uttered in the pulpit exclaimed to the world?
I was really worried about Jim taping the things the pastor says from the pulpit. It is good to know we can go into secret session and keep the world from knowing what is going on. Sure light has come into the world and all, but we need to keep our options open to get the pastor’s words out of the light into the darkness every now and then.
I am simply answering questions that people asked on the forums recently.
Jim Haywood was not going to be recording the Gospel...you and I both know that (he even stated he wanted to record the standing ovation on his site). And if he was going to record the Gospel, maybe he should have gone through the proper channels to get the approval. He isn't more special than the news channels or anyone else.
If you don't like what I have to say, I am not asking for you to reply. I am providing that information for other people on this blog. I kindfully ask that you respect my posts and don't address them if you can't do that in a civil way. Thank you.
I was really worried about Jim taping the things the pastor says from the pulpit. It is good to know we can go into secret session and keep the world from knowing what is going on.
You know, I really don't understand why people here have to turn everything into an argument. There was nothing but love in my first post, so I expect nothing less from anyone else in reply to my message. If you can't be respectful, please don't address me in your posts at all. Thank you.
I used to poke fun at a program called Searching the Scriptures and call it Twisting the Scriptures. The scripture quotes used to defend videoing an announcement is definitely twisting the scriptures; and this is from someone who is very disappointed in the way the "other side" is handling things. Of the ten per cent legtimate issues presented in this forum, the scriptures quoted certainly are not among it!
Ace, Are you Jim Barnwell, the one who has misspoken on numerous occasions on behalf of Bellevue as a paid employee? IF you are a paid employee at Bellevue, I don't believe you should be speaking on behalf of the church and blogging behind a name. If you are not on staff speaking on behalf of the church, then I think it's fine.
The Communications Committee booklet that was mailed out had numerous things that are not the truth. I know current staff and former staff that have said the book is loaded with half-truths.
The booklet was full of deception just like your last post about Jim Haywood. I would like for Jim Haywood to publish all of the emails under the name "Ace" you have mailed him for the world to see.
What is the Church policy for members taking pictures or video inside the sanctuary? I've taken video many times in the sanctuary and nobody has ever told me to put my camera away.
What's being said or done inside the building from the pulpit that the world doesn't need to see? It's an interesting day when a church member can't take a picture inside their own church.
A member is just that. They are a member of the organization called Bellevue Baptist Church. What would happen if 200 people with video cameras showed up Sunday and started filming like I've seen done before at a children’s performance or the SCT or the Passion Play? I think we need to have new members sign a document prohibiting them from taking video/pictures inside the church.
lindon, This is ACE's idea of being CIVIL. NUFF SAID!!
ace said... An open letter from Ace to Jim Haywood
Without a doubt, most people here visit savingbellevue.com often. I know that site is not affiliated with this one, but site visitors here also go there on a regular basis. Because of that, many people here often praise Jim Haywood for his website and for "revealing the truth." People act like Jim is so great and all-knowing but I've learned about about Jim over the past few months and he is far from that. Instead, I have learned that he is a deceiver and liar. Below is an open letter to Mr. Haywood to show others exactly where his motives currently are. If anyone has comments on the letter, please feel free to send them to acefrombbc@gmail.com - Thank you.
An Open Letter To Jim Haywood:
Dear Jim,
I can't help but keep thinking about your website. Often I wonder what your purpose behind the site is. You claim in your website's mission statement your desire for the site is to "honor Jesus Christ." You also claim that it exists to "provide members of Bellevue Baptist Church of Memphis, Tennessee with a greater degree of visibility of the government of our church." After reading those two statements, I chuckled to myself because your site has not done either of those items, but quite the opposite. I have compiled a list of points to address with you from the past several months just to show you where your true intentions are or at least how they are coming across to many people.
The first point I'd like to address is the "popularity" of your website. You sure are enjoying it, aren't you? Fact: Who called Action News 5 to tell them about the site and issues surrounding Bellevue Baptist Church? Why...it was none other than you. Fact: Who contacted the Commercial Appeal and other media outlets? Why...it was none other than you. You have your little website, so why did you need to feel the need to contact the media? Oh wait, it's because you want the attention. That's exactly your problem. You are starved for attention. Not many people knew your name prior to the controversy you started. But now, you seem to be a household name for Bellevue members. Honesty - do you enjoy that attention? Of course you do, it's only natural...and that's where the bigger problem is. You can't "let go" of the attention. You feel like you are celebrity and everyone admires you....I can assure you, Jim, that is not the case. So, suggestion number one from me to you....lose the ego. It's not about you, Jim.
More proof that you are enjoying the attention: Recently after the news media reported some more information, your site got a lot of hits. So what do you do the next day? Post in big red letters the main page: "Over 10,000 hits Thursday." That showed to me, among many others, that your desire is to not show others the truth, but this is a publicity and attention thing for you. Think about it, Jim...that's pathetic. Just like your site counter. Why don't you post a little message on your website saying about 200,000 of those hits were from the same person because your counter wasn't tracking unique visitors when it first started off (and it still doesn't) and somebody exposed that on your site. Oh wait - that would make yourself look bad...and we wouldn't want that, would we?
Now, let’s shift the focus to the lies that have come from your website. I love it how you have all your 50 point font, color red headlines for your lies. You keep it up to destroy the church, yet once it’s proven wrong you remove it and act like you’re all about the truth. Do you not verify your information before you post it? Or just because you get something “juicy” it has to be posted immediately? You really don’t make much sense, Jim. What about the credit card charges that you claimed Gaines used for personal stuff? You were proven wrong, buddy. Have you ever apologized to anyone for the people you hurt by posting this rumor? What about the time when you posted someone’s name and then a statement saying, “He has chosen not to return our phone calls.” Maybe that person didn’t return your phone calls, because you never made any calls in the first place? Your website is deceiving, and YOU are a deceiver, Jim. I have you figured out, though, and soon others will realize that you are a liar. Oh, and what about that time when you posted that highly offensive picture of the Nazi salute and compared that to Gaines and the people of BBC??? How many people know of that?
Another point to talk about – how do you choose which of your emails you respond to? Because I have it from a number of people that when people criticize your site, you don’t reply. When people send you a question about yourself or site, you don’t reply. When people give you site suggestions, you don’t reply. But…wait a second. Somebody just sent you a juicy piece of gossip (a lie)…so what do you do? You reply and you post your headline within minutes before verifying anything. That’s unbelievable. Why do you do that? Oh wait, we already covered that…you’re attention starved.
Moving on… How do you think others would feel if they knew you were trying to make money off of the whole ordeal surrounding Bellevue right now? Do you think most people would agree or disagree that you should do that? Why don’t you make an announcement on your website linking to your other website in the making…you know, the one where you’re helping with the publishing of a book on how to avoid what’s going on? You better hurry up on that project….and for anyone else reading this, don’t forgot to pre-order your copy on how to avoid the purpose driven church from Mr. Haywood + friends for only $21 per book. If you order two books, you can save $2 and pay only $39!!! I can smell it now…cha-ching in your pocket, Jim….cha-ching….
There is so much else I could address but I’ll end with your latest incident regarding the camcorder and you’re told you’re not allowed to record the service. What makes you more special than FOX13 or News Channel 3? They aren’t allowed to record the service, so why should Jim Haywood? My point exactly, you shouldn’t. Anyways, you post on your site the account of your morning worship service. First of all, somebody decided to sit next to you…*gasp* say, it isn’t so! Do you own a whole section in the Bellevue sanctuary that only you’re allowed to sit in? You’re the victim, aren’t you, Jim? You poor thing.
You need to quit the website….but should you decide to keep it up, here is some advice for you. 1) Take spelling lessons….you have too many grammatically errors on your site. 2) Don’t take verses out of context….that only makes you look foolish. 3) Grow up.
Ace said, There was nothing but love in my first post, so I expect nothing less from anyone else in reply to my message.
Reply: Here lies the problem. It all depends on what the definition of love is. Do we really understand the meaning of love any longer? Where is the love for the sheep from the pastor or the Communications Director?
Lindon: The scripture to which I referred is found at www.savingbellevue.com and is the first and newest item, I've pasted it below for convenience's sake. My comment is that the word "freely" is WAY out of context when comparing recording an announcement to the word "freely" in the verses.
2Cr 11:7 Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? Rev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
I'm sorry, but I couldn't help laugh about the 200 video camera comment. It is true, I know for sure when there is a children's program that we parents are lined up at the front taking video and pictures. Not getting into legalities, but it would be next to impossible to monitor an entire congregation and make sure no one is video taping. Especially now that cameras and cell phones can take video. Just the image of everyone holding up their device at a designated time seems funny but not impossible. Just a thought!!
Can anyone tell me why David Brown would wish me to email him? Mr Brown, if you're still lurking, you may answer as well. I'm anonymous because I don't wish to embarass any of my friends or family only a few degrees of separation from BBC, nor to invite the ire of the mob. Dig?
I don't wish to submit to the rubic of being anti-Gaines, yet I am anti-pedophile. So what gives? If I wanted to be witnessed to, I get plenty of offers here.
... It should be noted that Jim is no expert in the field of law, so I'll clear this up for everyone here and him as well.
Reply: Evidently several have been misled as to the identity of "ace". It is now apparant that it is Corey B. Trotz, the heavy hitter. He can get you a settlement before you even get hurt.
Folks, If ACE is really an employee of BBC, this has serious consequences. Is he speaking for leadership here? He is on here during work hours. He is paid by tithe dollars. So is he speaking for all members here?
Every word he writes has implications. Even writing under psuedonym has consequences because he represents the Body of Christ.
If he is in leadership, then his position is one of a minister biblically. (This is one area megas are really at fault) And he will be held to the standards of a minister that are in the Word.
Ace, IF you are an employee, I beg you to reconsider commenting here.
Hmmmm, I wonder if ACE is Bruce Brooke, since he has so much legaleze...
No, I'm not Bruce. I thought I was Janie (or Wendy?) - did you change your mind?
Naw, I was just poking at cha-LOL, you change your demeanor a lot, so as to be discreet I suppose. But I still think you are a "she" in disquise - precious:). You say that you have a lot of inside knowledge that you do not wish to share with us, so you let us go on questioning and then when we find hard evidence, you shoot it down, so I thought you just MAY BE a lawyer - they sometimes play tricks on folks.
Folks, If ACE is really an employee of BBC, this has serious consequences. Is he speaking for leadership here? He is on here during work hours. He is paid by tithe dollars. So is he speaking for all members here?
If, if, if.... I am speaking for no-one except for myself.
lindon, Great points you make about Ace. I don't think we are going to hear anymore from him. He may come back as another name but Ace as we know him is probably going to be history. I think Ace (JB) has crossed over the line.
Mrs. C - I would think any mega-church pastor with a brain would have someone from his staff monitoring this site since it clearly shows how NOT to deal with members who have questions. Even though some here are "kooks", or would complain about every little thing they don't like in the church, it is very foolish to try and lump everyone who has a sincere question or concern into that group and totally stonewall them, try to intimidate them, and try to get them to leave the church. As it has been said here many times...accountability and transparency would make a blog like this useless and unnecessary.
ATTENTION MEGA-CHURCH PASTORS, STAFF AND DEACONS WHO ARE SO QUICK TO "DEFEND THEIR PASTOR": We love you! We want you to do well and may your work glorify the Lord. However, we are not stupid sheep to be fleeced. Just tell us what is going on. If we don't like it, we will let you know, and then if we can't live with things, we will leave. The only reason we would ever need to blog is when you try to use intimidation and arrogance to silence us if we ask any questions. Really, try simply explaining why you do things and what you are doing, and you take away any reason for someone to blog.
This is so heart breaking. You know if our church proclaimed Christ and Him crucified to the lost world as much as we gossip and slander each other we could really spread the gospel. The bible says out of the heart the mouth speaks. If all the lost world knew of us was what we say, would they know and see Christ?
Personally, and this is just my opinion, I would like to see the blog administrator here disallow ALL argumentative posting here from "the other side". Yes, I know that sounds terrible, but so does all of this fighting.
When we don't have ace, 4545, memphis, and others on here, we enjoy the fellowship of other believers even better than being AT BBC--at least the way it is now. I have personally loved the biblical discussions, the scripture quotes, the good links to various other sites for sermons and info, the encouragement to each other to read through the Bible, the enlightenment from others out-of-state on similar matters, the beautiful letters from Sister Pam and others. It is all good, in my humble opinion.
These agitated rantings, back and forth tit for tat, accusatory tones, name calling ("liar and a deceiver"), certainly ARE NOT of the Lord but are purely the work of the devil--and I hate the devil.
Now, that's my suggestion. I doubt that it will be accepted, but, I, for one, am sick of the attacks, arguing, guessing, stirring up of strife, etc.. It's like a soap opera or a war when the "other side" tries to come on here and degrade this blog's status. If you want to carry on with the intruders, give 'em your email and do it in private. I don't like the "National Enquirer", and I don't like being a part of anything that even remotely reminds me of it. I know that praying fervently is hard work, but that really is what we need to be doing. We need to be writing letters, too, to the church staff and pastor asking for a business meeting.
These are just my old lady suggestions. You may think I'm a party pooper and maybe I am. After all, this is pretty draining; but what do the rest of you on here think about it?
Have you been gossiping and slandering? If so,I hope you will stop.
We, on the other hand, are holding our leaders accountable here.
We are gathering to exchange information in a place where we cannot be silenced.
We are documenting and verifying information that is being held in secret by some who are running their own agenda and not that of Christ.
Be assured, it will not stop here.
Our church needs to be purified. If we don't deal with the public sin of our leaders,we have nothing to offer a lost and dying world, nowdo we? We becomethe hypocrites so many think we are.
Aaron, Right now BBC is in damage control mode trying to save a over paid pastor that thinks more of himself than the gospel of Christ. They have no witness. They have 'churchianity'. Harsh? Truth is not always pretty.
And believe me when I say this, I know they will try to ruin even me. I have seen it before. The power and influence of these mega's is scary beyond belief.
But men can only kill the body. I should fear God who can kill the soul.
The problem at BBC? They do not fear an all powerful soveriegn God.
For those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property.
Ace,
How many times has there been a children's musical in the service, and there were many parents crowded around down front with video cameras and there was no issue with that? The only rule has always been "no flash photography" as that is disruptive. Even if it’s true (debatable) this is just an intimidation tool against a church member by Steve Gaines hiding behind Jim Barnwell and using the security guards to project the threat of force against a church member who is not disturbing the service, or putting anyone in danger.
One could argue that Jim Haywood is within his legal rights on a number of different fronts. First of all, he's a "member" or part "owner" of the "private property" that is Bellevue Baptist Church in a legal sense. It’s clear that Harry Smith & Co think it’s their personal “campus”, but it in the legal sense, it belongs to the members in total. That it actually belongs to God is just rhetoric that is used to control the congregation. This leadership has demonstrated that they don’t believe that. Copywriting the service and using the threat of force or legal action to keep video cameras out!!!! God’s church? You answer that question for yourself.
Second, There is some debate over whether or not a church service in progress is a copywrited work.. The same exceptions that allow the singers to sing copywrited works from the stage apply to anyone else in the congregation.
Third, for sake of argument, let's assume a copyright exists. Copyright law ONLY protects the copyright owner from commercial use of his work. The churches only legal recourse is to sue Haywood (and they would lose unless he is profiting from it, and under other sections of the law, would be responsible for his legal fees). They cannot stop him from recording legally, just as they could not stop a news organization from recording the service. If they try to remove him, he has legal recourse against the church. (I believe he already has a course of action against the church for what happened Sunday week ago...at least grounds to seek an injunction). And if it's a forceful removal, possible criminal charges for assault and battery come into play. If he shows that Jim Barnwell and Steve Gaines ordered and approved the physical removal, they would be subject to criminal and civil actions.
Fourth, all the above completely ignores the spiritual & scriptural issues here, and if the church chooses to use the legal system as a weapon against it's members, they should 1) tread carefully, as the law is not on their side, since they don’t even follow the few bylaws we do have, and 2) When members use it in return, should never throw the scripture about Christians and the court system in their face, as they would then be hypocrites.
The fact that this is even being debated should prove to the world that this church leadership does not love it's "flock", but is only interested in furthering it's own agenda, and will not stop at any tool to intimidate the congregation into submission. (Presumably motivated by power and greed).
This highlights the problem that the lack of good bylaws bring to this. THERE ARE NO RULES!!! It’s true that BBC is a private organization in the legal sense, but there is no method for the governance of that organization! We have no “policy and procedure”. Thus, whomever happens to be in power, can make up the rules as they go along, and as long as no one stands up and challenges them, that’s just the way it is. This is very tenuous legally. The church knows this, and thus works hard to intimidate the congregation into silence, and stamp out any opposition, even using God and the Bible as a weapon to beat down people. (They will answer for this one day, either in this life or the next). The Worlds’ way to describe this is “He who has the guns (power) makes the rules”. This is rule by force and not rule by law. (The very definition of a dictatorship). We are not a congregationally run church. We are a church run by a small group of people, and membership in that group requires 1) a large personal net worth or 2) Buddies of people with large net worth’s and income. Spiritual condition is only secondary if it’s considered at all. Godliness is determined by the size of your bank account. That it just also so happens all this is a hallmark of PDC’s is a coincidence. This is normal human nature. Hitler did the same thing in Germany in the 1930’s, and he had never heard of Rick Warren I’m sure.
This is ridiculous that it even has to be discussed. Shame on the church leadership for putting it's membership in a position of having to use the legal system to protect their rights as members of a “private” organization.
People of God, People of Bellevue, this sort of behavior should show you who your leaders are. The time for talk is over. It’s time to fish or cut bait.
Truth is very hard for many to accept. The church should strive to be clean, open, pure, honest, full of life, joy, peace, friendly, truthful, exciting, fun, etc.
When leaders are running around covering their deeds up, nothing above exists. What good reason does a church have to hide information from the congregation? When this is occurring, I can assure you the church is not functioning like a healthy church should.
I long for the day Bellevue can be open, honest, and truthful with not only the membership, but more importantly to the world.
Ace, I had a realtor tell me one time, over and over "You trust me don't you?"
if you have to tell me that I trust you, or if you have to tell me you were demonstrating love, you probably weren't.
And if he was going to record the Gospel, maybe he should have gone through the proper channels to get the approval
This is ridiculous. First, the proper channels are in Heaven for permission to record the gospel, Second, there aren't clear proper channels, because WE HAVE NO BYLAWS (that are followed anyway).
If he were to appear on earth today, Jesus Christ would not be welcomed at Bellevue Baptist Church, as he was a poor homeless man while on earth, who was always at odds with the religious authorities. Can you just imagine Harry Smith, Steve Tucker and Steve Gaines in a closed door meeting on how to deal with this "troublemaker" in the church?
They speak of proper channels as if they believe the church is THEIRS! Therefore they can do whatever they wish and we are to swallow and follow. No questions asked. If we don't like it we can leave and they will eventually recruit some new less discerning souls to take our place.
They need to drop that authority argument. Biblically speaking, it doesn't hold up.
Where did Barnwell go to seminary? When and where was he ordained?
Ace: "Barnwell has been placed in authority over Haywood. Does the Bible not tell us to submit to authority?"
YOU ARE ON VERY DANGEROUS GROUND WITH THAT COMMENT. I hope I have your attention. What you said above is right out of the mouth of a Pharisee. We are NEVER to submit to ungodly leaders or false teachers. Wolves in sheeps clothing. Your statement proves it. Please do not twist scripture to fit your premises.
Ace, Thanks for illustrating my point about the church leadership using the Bible to beat down the church members into submission.
To address your point (a curtesy you often fail to show people) My statement stands that this rule was made up on the fly to intemidate and protect people's power. Not further the gospel. There was nothing disruptive about what Haywood was doing. Secondly, Jim Haywood doesn't work in Barnwell's "ministry area", and thus he is not under his authority, and I've already stated that Barnwell's and the church's legal authority is questionable in this case. I repeat. If Jim Barnwell is going to use the civil law as a weapon against a church member, he has no right to complain with the favor is returned.
Ace said Why would Haywood not have to follow the rules? What makes him more special than you or I?
Jim Barnwell has to submit to the Civil government, yet he seeks to take away a right that civil government gives it's citizens. What makes him more special than anyone else?
As far as the rules, the rules are made up as we go along to fit agendas. Jesus disobeyed unjust "rules" in his day, and Haywood can do the same under the authority given to him by God when he was saved, and the government of the United States when he was granted citizenship at birth.
Chill out, lindon. There is no need to yell. Just because you disagree with me, it does not make me wrong, though.
We never submit to ungodly teachers, but what has Barnwell done that's ungodly in these times? Absolutely nothing. If you know something everyone else doesn't know, then please post away.
Personally, and this is just my opinion, I would like to see the blog administrator here disallow ALL argumentative posting here from "the other side". Yes, I know that sounds terrible, but so does all of this fighting.
Piglet says:
I've been thinking on your statement..
I agree with you somewhat - especially those who pop up repeatedly to argue - mainly because I find it hard to be good :(
But I do have compassion on those who come here for the first time, angry at us because of what they are being TOLD by people they SHOULD be able to TRUST.(caps for emphasis, not yelling at you :) )
I kinda like to converse with them because they are just in the dark and need a little illumniation. I'd hate to cut them off because we've had some come around.
I also hate to do to them what was done to Mark - silence them because of the message.
Contionuous attacks are another thing and I think NASS has stepped in on several occasions...
My statement stands that this rule was made up on the fly to intemidate and protect people's power.
Wrong. Go call the news channels/media and the people who have reported from Bellevue in the past few years. This rule has always been there. Go talk to the station photographers....You need to check your facts.
There was nothing disruptive about what Haywood was doing.
Haywood was recording to tear down the church. He wants to record private church matters for the whole world to see...you just don't do that. If there's a private issue in your family, maybe concerning a son...you don't broadcast it to the entire world...you resolve it as a family. I think it's the same way in the church, if that makes sense... It's for family only, not the entire world to see
Jesus disobeyed unjust "rules" in his day, and Haywood can do the same...
Please do not tell me you're comparing Jesus to Jim Haywood....please say I misunderstood you....
I am not a member of BBC but I have been reading this ever since it started. The reason I started reading this is because I am a former member of GFBC. I have since moved and am a member of a much smaller SBC. The problem I see in all of this is that none of know Dr. Gaines personally. And yes I referred to him as Dr. Gaines b/c he has earned it. Just as Dr. Rogers had as well. Most if not all of the comments that are being made are speculation. Believe me Dr. Gaines is in my opinion a Godly man. I know that following his teachings at GFBC that I am a better man and better Christian. It tears me up that this situation is occuring. This forum will eventually dissolve. I pray that the issues dissolve as well. I think though that many of you love your church more than you love the Lord. Get behind this man that God sent you. That you voted for. Support him in prayer as he is making very tough decisions, that none of us would want to have to make. Sure he doesnt "run" church the way previous ministers have. But he isn't previous ministers. Have faith. Support him and his family and stop trying to drag things out into the light that God may not intend to be drug out. Believe me you are doing nothing for the kingdom by hosting a mud slinging forum. Why would anyone want to attend your church. Let things go. Forgive!
He sought to intimidate a church member who was doing NOTHING WRONG.
Actually, there was some wrongdoing on Haywood's part. He's not perfect. Quit worshipping him, I mean...come on, now (that comment is not directly at you, but to the people who think he's so great).
I am done addressing you because you keep going in circles around this issue.
You know what I always loved and admired about Dr. Rogers? He always stood for the truth, but he did it in love. He was probably the greatest example of a Christian I had ever seen. Strong, but humble. Something you rarely see today, even in our own church. He was the epitome of ………….well, for the sake of a better word, balance.
What I see as the greatest problem with so many on either side of the issue is balance. One side is screaming truth triumphs unity. The other side is screaming I support my pastor and my church. I agree—Fight for truth! But, don’t do it at the cost of your neighbor and your church!
So many have said so much on this blog! If we are honest, there has been misinformation on both sides. But, does that give us the right to attack each other?!?!
I cannot help but go back to God’s word, and what God keeps telling me over and over in Galatians 5:13-15, “You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.”
In our fight for truth, in our fight for unity, are we going to destroy each other? I have already seen it beginning. The blame cannot be laid at one “sides” feet! That is what our enemy would want us to think. We MUST remember this battle is not against flesh and blood, no matter how difficult it may seem.
Haywood was recording to tear down the church. He wants to record private church matters for the whole world to see...you just don't do that.
His motives don't matter. The law is the law. Besides, Steve Gains, Harry Smith & Co refuse to allow this to be dealt with privately. THEY are forcing this into the public domain.
Jim Haywood, if you are reading this, consider getting an injunction from a judge based on what has happened to you already where you can prove to Barnwell the next time he tries to intimidate you that you are within your legal rights.
Ace, More lies. The rule has never been there until Sunday a week ago. Or at least it was never enforced until Sunday a week ago. By what authority can such a rule be made anyway? You can't tell me BECAUSE WE HAVE NO BYLAWS!
Ace, The more you and your friends try to surpress this instead of having an open business meeting so it CAN be discussed privately, the more it will grow and grow until one day, it will be too big for you to handle. THAT you can take to the bank and cash.
The only person who's being worshiped around here is Steve Gaines by the people who mindlessly follow him as he drives us off a cliff. I'm defending Jim Haywood. The Scripture tells us that God uses the small things of this world to confound the great.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it as i "keep going in circles around this issue" with you.
Don't ever confuse them with facts and logic, they run home to mommy. Ace cries like a girl. She trods out that tired argument about Jim Haywood being under Barnwell's authority, yet she cannot back it up with the Bible. They love to mention authority. They also like forgiveness.
They never mention sin and consequences. They don't like light and truth because their actions cannot stand up to examination.
Take a look at what you're saying. You're unbelieveable. His motives don't matter? Ha!
Jim Haywood, if you are reading this, consider getting an injunction from a judge based on what has happened to you already where you can prove to Barnwell the next time he tries to intimidate you that you are within your legal rights.
Read the third post in this thread. He cannot get anything from a judge that says he's allowed to record.... but go ahead and try, Jim, it'll just be a huge waste of your time.
More lies. The rule has never been there until Sunday a week ago. Or at least it was never enforced until Sunday a week ago.
Contridicting statements...which one is right? Was the rule made a week ago or not? I'll answer that: no. You are the one lying. And until you do your research, you will continue to act all "stuck up." For your own good, go do your research and quit telling yourself these lies.
FinanceGuy said... If he were to appear on earth today, Jesus Christ would not be welcomed at Bellevue Baptist Church, as he was a poor homeless man while on earth, who was always at odds with the religious authorities. Can you just imagine Harry Smith, Steve Tucker and Steve Gaines in a closed door meeting on how to deal with this "troublemaker" in the church?
4:45 PM, January 16, 2007
WOW!!! What a thought. I never dreamed that one day I would think that the leadership would not welcome Jesus into our Church. This should make the leadership stop and think about what they are doing.
Ace He wants to record private church matters for the whole world to see...you just don't do that. If there's a private issue in your family, maybe concerning a son...you don't broadcast it to the entire world...you resolve it as a family. I think it's the same way in the church, if that makes sense... It's for family only, not the entire world to see
I agree with you on this point, but if the head of the family is abusing the children, (or at the least the children feel abused), and he refuses the children the opportunity for a hearing, and uses his authority as a justification for further unjust treatment, the children have the right to exercise other avenues such as the tv news, blogs, internet, legal system, etc as the situation demands.
This family has been denied the opportuntity to keep this private. They are told to "swallow and follow", "If you don't like it, leave".
Don't give me that trash about a family should keep it private. That is SO hypocritical and self serving coming from this leadership.
Adrian "earned" the right to be called "Doctor?" From what accredited institution did he receive an earned doctorate? What was his dissertation topic? Who sat on his graduate committee? He was graduated from Stetson University and New Orleans Seminary, but did not begin to call himself "Doctor" until the honorary degrees started rolling in years later.
Ace, I'll say this, if it was a "rule", it was never communicated or enforced until Sunday a week ago.
And as far as his motives don't matter, I was refering to why, or why not he was recording, he still can record.
To be consistent, Jim Barnwell should put this in the bulliten next Sunday. "The rule is it's okay to record in the service if we agree with your motives (such as recording your children singing). If we don't,(such as trying to hold us accountable for what we say in the service) then it's not okay". This is the "real" rule.
I refuse to support a pastor who not only turns a blind eye to sin as in the case of Paul Williams, but breaks laws. People would be more willing to support Gaines if he would just be up front with the congregation and listen to people who have issues. This wouldn't have gotten to this point if Gaines would have just sat down and talked to Mark Sharpe. A lot of it has to deal with his attitude towards the congregation.
I find the Christian (you know I'm not one, I'll assume) refugees from BBC, taking an action of their own accord--being stripped and shamed of a legitimate recourse within the church body--quite refreshing. At least they're not just a bunch of do-gooders and hand-claspers.
I know evangelicals, grew up in the Southern Baptist church, even studied for a short time to be a minister, but since leaving, I haven't looked back.
I don't really relate to them anymore, as they are everywhere, and it's like I'm on a different page altogether. The first attribute that I could not muster anymore and had to discard was the so-called offense of the gospels, its exclusivity. It all unraveled from there.
I find most American evengelicals to be a little arrogant and over-confident and religion is just extra cache in their upwardly-mobile lives. All the while, intolerant, zenophobic and acting persecuted and endangered by all the things they fear, notwithstanding the fact that there's a mega-church on every corner.
Do any of the sycophants think that the Sharp fellow, Beth, any of the BBC people, on here or elsewhere, who stand for accountability and presume a stake in the its future, are better off for speaking out?
These are real people disrupting their real lives for their church because they believe it is right. They value the light of truth over unity at any cost. They care more for the people more than the syndicate. They are fearless. It's nice to know a christian(besides my dear mom, of course) that's not a blowhard.
Now, that's your witness, sir. Straight from Midtown (no pun intended).
I'll say this, if it was a "rule", it was never communicated or enforced until Sunday a week ago.
So are you saying in all actuality, you have no idea if this rule existed prior to last Sunday? If so, please post that for the other readers of this blog to see.
They deserve to know the truth that you were wrong about this one.
I'm not a lawyer either (are you?), but I think Bellevue would have a hard time pressing any copyright infringement issues for these reasons:
1) While BBC may be "private property" (more on that in a moment), all services are free and open to the public, with no ticketing or admission requirements. None whatsoever, unless apparently one of the security burlies doesn't like the look of you.
2) The content of the material presented is (or should be!) taken from the Bible, which is public domain.
3) No signs, warnings, or notices to my knowledge have been posted at the primary building entrances noting that audio and/or video recording is prohibited. Absent any explicit exclusion, that would seem to mean it's OK to record.
Back to the private property issue, I prefer to view it as God's property and the property of His church universal (the word "universal" here to mean global and eternal; not any "unitarian" or "everyone's accepted regardless of their views" kind of thing).
But even if you see it as private property, who or what makes up the private entity which owns these high-dollar assets? You can't have private property without an owner. Is it not the members of the church, those whose tithes and offerings and other sacrifices have been used to build it? And would Jim Haywood — as much as you or I or any other member — not be entitled to all the benefits thereof?
Before this,I always thought the deacons were like the house of represenatives,and gave us a voice in church government. They are nominated by the church body and are part of us. They rotate on and off so it's not the same guys running things all the time....is that the way it SHOULD be but isn't?
Ace, I'm not admitting anything, I'm simply pointing out your hypocrisy. IF the rule existed, it was never communicated to the church body, which in light of everything else is very suspicious that it was made up, and they it's "claimed" that it's always been the rule. THAT is untrue, as evidenced by my previous statement of FACT that during children's music, many parents have been crowded around he front and in the balcony with video cameras down, and no one stopped them. Of course, those days are over now. "Sorry, your kids performance is copyrighted. You can't record your own child singing. His/her's service to God is a copyrighted work of Belleuve Baptist Church. Yes, I know you are a member, but you aren't worth a million $'s, so different rules apply to you.
This is more evidence that the "business method of running a church" has swung so far to the other side, that we no longer know what a church is. We are just a business organization that happens to be a church.
4) Numerous people over the years — visitors, friends, guest preachers and artists — have been allowed to record still pictures, audio and video. This would further strengthen the argument that apparently it's OK unless the person doing the recording is in disagreement with the administration of the church. The church would have a hard time telling someone "no" and legally enforcing it when they can easily be shown to have permitted it on many other occasions before.
Oh, I see...your pride is getting in the way. It's, okay, I understand. And I'm pretty sure others here understand, as well.
Folks - I'm heading off for a while, so I'm not guaranteeing replies. If you want a definite reply, send an email to acefrombbc@gmail.com otherwise I may not get back to you.
At what cost should we strive to have unity? Is there a point where truth should compromise for the sake of unity?
I sincerely appreciate the thought process that brought you to realize that the issue is divided between truth and trust.
I would like to point out that there is a false unity a satanic imitation.
Acts 19:28-29 28 And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians. 29 And the whole city was filled with confusion: and having caught Gai'us and Aristar'chus, men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel, they rushed with one accord into the theater.
Notice the "one accord" in this scripture it is the false unity, the satanic imitation that I am speaking of. We can only be assured of Godly Unity when it is bonded in Love by Godly Truths.
My opinion is that the concealment of truth has led to a lack of trust. Does that make trust the problem? Hardly. Our trust is in God. God is unchanging the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So is it truth that is the problem? No, truth is unchanging. Since truth cannot change, it cannot be the problem either.
The concealment of truth is a symptom of the much greater problem. Just as trust has been lost because of it is a symptom of a greater illness.
Where does the problem therefore lie? What is the basis for concealment of truth? Why does our church operate in such secrecy? The answer in my opinion is not nearly so difficult as it has been made to be. The primary answer is money. The root of all evil. Money and the power that comes with it.
Transparency removes the veil of darkness. Transparency by nature forces accountability. Accountability by nature forces integrity. When a church operates in transperity, with the accountability of all, and the integrity required by Scripture, then there will be true unity.
ch The church would have a hard time telling someone "no" and legally enforcing it when they can easily be shown to have permitted it on many other occasions before.
Ch, this is very true. Judges look to these sort of facts in legal disputes. What has been the past practice?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You are such a funny fellow. How about admitting you are wrong about defending the churches use of the legal system against it's members?
"that said: There appears to be a general negative reaction to elder led church's. "
David, you are right. Elder led churches are biblical. The problem is that elders are not chosen based on their regenerated hearts, how much time they spend on their knees, or holiness. They are chosen according to worldly gravitas.
By the time elders have made a decision in a mega, it is 3 months before the congregation knows about it. Folks, there are NO business meetings with elder led churches. There may be in the beginning but those will fade away.
With elder led, members only have access according to their personal relationships with elders. In many churches they are not elected. They are put forth by another elder and the elders vote. It really turns into an exclusive club which is why Mega pastors are all going that direction.
My experience with mega elder boards is that most have an appalling lack of biblical literacy.
If the elders are chosen by God they would look very different. Yes, I can hear the moans now.
I posted this in the previous thread... I realize I am not a frequent poster but I am seeking truth and would like to ask again since no one noticed earlier... I am very concerned about this.. I want to think this is impossible www.JesusDotCalm said...
Greetings, I have not posted many times. As I have stated before I have been concerned with the lack of TRUTH at BBC for well over a year now. First, I would like to say thank you once again to David Brown and I am sooo glad to see a post from you. Unless I have just missed you I haven't seen a post from you in a long time and have missed hearing you. Second, I have read on a post from a few days ago that PW was on the BBC campus during the time SG stated he would not be allowed on campus. Third, I have heard PW has even been in his office at BBC during this time as well. I hope and pray the authorities have been notified of this!!!
Has anyone else heard of this happening? Thank you for this place to share as a remnant of brothers and sisters in Christ. It is a blessing to know we have a place to further His Kingdom and protect His sheep. Even so Come LORD JESUS.
10:49 AM, January 16, 2007
Thank you David Brown for all you do...I keep you in my prayers... May God give us all wisdom and strength.
Regarding your comment to Lindon, I am sure he did not know where I worked. He made a legitimate point and you took a swipe at him and had to drag me into it. Nevertheless, I will gladly stop posting if you will.
I have to point out your posts probably outnumber mine 100 to 1. I am not here to stir up trouble. I have been here to set the record straight when I see the church, and its leaders, telling lies and beating up on our church members. That is wrong and you know it. I post here when guys like you and 4545 are going crazy. You are here to interupt, not dialog. You are never a positive force. You are a nag. A whiner. You debate like a little schoolgirl. When you are backed into a corner you yell, scratch, and scream. You cannot have a reasoned, rational debate. You never bring forward a Bible-based argument. You and the men you defend are using man's logic and tactics in a spiritual battle. YOU WON'T WIN!
I agree. It seems rediculous to believe that God would only call the richest men in the churches to be elders. Are finances the primary prerequiste of God in these matters?
David S,
I was busily typing my post at about the same moment that you posted yours. The final Scripture passage on yours brings out the final point that I was making. The problem is greed and power.
I have spoke with a number of deacons, some that have rotated off, some that were due to rotate on and others that have left the church.
The common theme among the vast majority of these men was the potential business power that existed among the most influential of these deacons. There is a strong tendenancy to go along with these men because it could be beneficial or rewarding in the future to do so.
If you pull out any old tapes or recordings from Dr. Rogers, they have a copyright symbol on them. I think it is not an attempt to copyright "the gospel". Just as if I wrote a book based on and quoting Scripture I could copyright the book.
Without honesty and integrity, no church governing structure can work. I agree with your overall point on elders. Some falsely believe an elder system would be bad. I would prefer an honest elder system than a corrupt congregational system.
The Sunday morning sermons are posted on the internet for everyone to see. There is no need to get another video if your intent is simply to get the proper quotes. And he admitted that is not what he was doing.
My proof is that Jim Haywood said it in black and white. Not me. I have never said he was a terrible guy, I don't agree with all the choices he has made, but I am not going to label him. I am simply stating that I think because of the current climate of our church, anyone taping the service, when there is a perfectly legitimate copy of it available free of charge is going to come under scrutiny.
Here is the chain of events. Jim Haywood comes under scrutiny for wanting to record the service. I have stated that I think in the current climate ANYONE doing this for no apparent reason would come under scrutiny. But I did not comment on anyone's actions. Only after Jim provided the proof himself did I feel free to weigh in.
bepatient. From Jim's statement: "I wanted to record the congregation's reaction to his church address in case he did this."
Then Jim Barnwell owes Jim Haywood an apolgy, since he wasn't recording the "copyrighted" service, but the congo's reaction, which is not copyrighted.
Some lawyer out there explain to me how it's possible for a church to copyright the congregation standing and clapping? Oh wait. You can copyright carefully scripted performances, and the church can argue that the standing ovations are scripted performances, so perhaps they can copyright them afterall. Bepaitent, you sly dog. You almost had me there for a moment, but I forgot that the standing o's are "intellectual property" that can be copyrighted because they are planned and part of the "performance".
David S, The committee system works fine as long as the committees truely represent the congregation, and are not just facades put up and filled with "the inner circle" year after year after year in order to insulate the church leadership from any real accountability and scrutiny. This is what has happened at Bellevue. Harry Smith proved this in the Communication Committee meetings when he kept saying "I don't know" when asked any question about how the church is operated. You mean the one person who has served on all the vital committees for past 100 years or so has "no idea" what's going on in the church business? He is either a liar or an incompetent person who proves that the Committee system is broken at Bellevue.
Moses upon leaving the people that he had led into the promised land.
Deuteronomy 32:27-29 27 For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? 28 Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. 29 For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.
FinanceGuy said... bepatient Great point. Jim Barnwell, you need to draw up a "media covenant" with the congregation that everyone has to sign before they can enter the worship center, that gives permission to show their smiling face on the local broadcast. This "covenant" should say things like "as a Christian, I have a duty to show the world I am in church and worshiping by having a smiling face that you broadcast to the world. I also agree to hold the church harmless for any claim arising from my face being on TV."
David S, Elder rule would never work at Bellevue with the current fraternity in place. They would only see it as more opportunity to solidify power. They would never implement it in a Biblical Manner. The qualifications of being an elder that would be published, and the qualifications that would be reality would be two completely different things.
People really need to ask questions about the amount of business many of these men do with the church. "follow the money" they always say, and it's true here. Take any of the loud "Gaines supporters" in the inner circle, and there is better than a 60% chance they either do significant business with the church, they are close friends with someone who is, or they have a friend or family member recieving significant financial "support" from the church. I think anyone who fits in that catagory should be barred from any vote that may take place as having conflict of interest. It's required of ethical Legal officers and political leaders, why not "Gods Choosen Men?"
Jim Haywood is not the church nor is he representing the church in this. I would freely give my image to be used by the church I am a member of. I do not give Jim Haywood permission to use my image in any capacity.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)cor·rup·tion – noun
1. the act of corrupting or state of being corrupt. 2. moral perversion; depravity. 3. perversion of integrity. 4. corrupt or dishonest proceedings. 5. bribery. 6. debasement or alteration, as of language or a text. 7. a debased form of a word. 8. putrefactive decay; rottenness. 9. any corrupting influence or agency.
If I pose a couple of questions, might anyone answer? After hidden 17 years, what precipitated Williams' confession to Gaines; and, once learned in confidence, why the disclosure 6 months later?
Second, you misunderstand the New Testament teaching on what the church is. Jim Haywood is as much the "church" as you or I am. You just prove my point that at lot of the rhetoric about "we are one in the bond of love" and "The church is the body, not the building", etc etc is just that. Rhetoric. Romans 1, "Professing a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."
Tim, who exactly are you directing this at? Because if you are going to use that time of word it only seems fair to be willing to admit who you are aiming it at.
I will be back later if you wish to continue this conversation.
trollcates, I'm sure that something else happened more recent than 17 years ago that forced the family to take this to SG in June, and things have not been dealt with properly even since then. Be patient. The truth will come out. There is too much light on this, even though the self proclaimined personnel committee will attempt to cover it up, or at least work hard not to find anything of significance to tell us about. As Dr. Rogers used to say, they won't be able to find any evidence of wrong doing "for the same reason a theif can't find a policeman!"
Piglet, did you get my point about deacons being servants, not elders? David:
Sorry, I've been offline. I do get what you were saying, but I was led to believe that the deacons didn't just serve at Bellevue, they voted on things.
I know better now. I just want to know how we should have a voice.
It never mattered to me before, but now it's criticalin light of our circumstances....
Bepatient said... I mean the church as an entity. You are missing my point.
You mean the church as a legal and carnal entity? There you go again, opening the door to legal activity, if you are going to state it's a carnal institution subject to man's laws.
You attitude is not one of a brother in Christ showing love to another. You want to beat down Jim Haywood for working for the Truth in the Lords house, just because it's an "inconvenient truth". I hope Al Gore doesn't sue me for copyright infringement for using that phrase! Shame on you.
Ace, You've been trumped. Are you speaking on behalf of Bellevue Baptist Church as the Communications Director when you blog as Ace? When the Communications Committee booklet was published and sent out to all members, it was laced with inaccuracies with your name attached to it. If you want them detailed, it can and will be done once again. At the same time, I'd like for you to detail your accusations about Jim Haywood and the information he has put out. Earlier, you said Jim had a picture of Nazi's on his sight along with your accusation of Mr. Haywood trying to sell books. You are wrong on both accounts. Your book theory has already been dismissed today and your accusation of Nazi’s is wrong. If you remember, Steve Gaines in anger, called one of Bellevue's finest members Hezbollah. The picture Mr. Haywood put on the web for about 1 or 2 hours was a group of Hezbollah fighters with their arms raised in salute. They were Middle Eastern Hezbollah fighters, not Nazis and it was a joke referencing Steve Gaines calling one of his sheep Hezbollah. As the Communications Director in charge of reporting accurate information, please do not blog if you are not going to be accurate. Please tell Steve Gaines if he is not reading this tonight that everyone on this blog will go away when he is truthful about everything and Bellevue becomes transparent in all things.
trucker, Ace and Bepatient think they, along with their Millionaire elite friends own it. Boy are they going to be in for a surprise one day....either in this life or the next.
Please excuse me for asking such a dumb question, if BBC is private property. Who owns it?
I don't know who exactly owns it but it is private property. Go research it and you will see I am right. Maybe you could report back and tell us who exactly owns it....
Are you speaking on behalf of Bellevue Baptist Church as the Communications Director when you blog as Ace?
For the one-millionth time, no. I am not speaking on behalf of Bellevue Baptist Church. And I am not Jim Barnwell, for the one millionth time, as well.
The picture Mr. Haywood put on the web for about 1 or 2 hours was a group of Hezbollah fighters with their arms raised in salute. They were Middle Eastern Hezbollah fighters, not Nazis and it was a joke referencing Steve Gaines calling one of his sheep Hezbollah.
If you have some personal agenda against me, please take it up with me privately in an email. You are making yourself look foolish by constantly attacking me for absolutely no reason at all.
"Go research it and you will see I am right. Maybe you could report back and tell us who exactly owns it."
Yeah, go reaearch to help ace build his straw man.
Regarding jokes, they are not always meant to be funny ha-ha, but rather ironic--for instance, showing a picture of a bunch of cold-blooded killers whom signify themselves as Hezbollah, as a way of driving home the association intended by the remark and the careless-ness of labeling fellow Christians in such a deplorable manner.
Are Ace, Bepatient and 4545 all the company men they got to keep the static pumping here, because I think reinforcements are in order.
This is no more sporting than shooting fish in a barrel.
Ace's number one answer to every question.Go research it-- Maybe you could report back
I'm sorry, but I don't like to answer questions which I don't know the answers to. If I did that, it would be one of two things... 1) gossiping, or 2) lying - two things you are quite fond of.
ace, You stated as a fact that Bellevue is private property.How do you know this? Maybe you don't really know and are spreading gossip.So answer the question .Who owns Bellevue?
Please forgive me for another silly question, when someone says something in front of say 5 to 6 thousand people, how do you clasify that as private? Another silly question, how can you say it should be kept in the family, do we not have visitors present?
In reguards to who owns BBC, I have the impression that you have all the answers or that you are in the inter circle, so it should not be hard for you to find out.
Please forgive me for another silly question, when someone says something in front of say 5 to 6 thousand people, how do you classify that as private? Another silly question, how can you say it should be kept in the family, do we not have visitors present?
In reguards to who owns BBC, I have the impression that you have all the answers or that you are in the inter circle, so it should not be hard for you to find out.
No, I never could remember what the difference between a flush, full house, royal flush, straight flush, and etc. are.
Please forgive me for another silly question, when someone says something in front of say 5 to 6 thousand people, how do you clasify that as private?
It's within the church family, therefore it's private. Whether there are 2 people in your family or 20, it's still your family.
Another silly question, how can you say it should be kept in the family, do we not have visitors present?
You're right, this is silly, and I don't see a need of discussing it because it has no importance.
In reguards to who owns BBC, I have the impression that you have all the answers or that you are in the inter circle, so it should not be hard for you to find out.
I already stated what I know. People here need to quit being lazy and get up and do work for themselves instead of relying on others to do their work for them.
We really don't have time for gossip or inaccurate information so we try to verify as much as we possibly can.
What? Thanks for the laugh. ;)
An open business meeting instead of an informational meeting would be helpful, don't you think?
If you people would be civil during the meeting and behave, then I am for this. However, if you act all immature on this blog, what is going to stop you from acting all babyish at the meeting too? I think there would be chaos at a meeting such as this, allowing EVERYONE to talk that ones to....but if the people who go can behave themselves, then I'm all for it.
Ace You make up statements without the facts. HMMM sounds like you don't practice what you preach. Next time back up your statements with facts and you won't look so silly.
People here need to quit being lazy and get up and do work for themselves instead of relying on others to do their work for them.
Piglet says:
Many are doing the work and posting their findings here. The lazy thing is to dismiss everything as lies and gossip without any explaination to back it up.
You make up statements without the facts. HMMM sounds like you don't practice what you preach. Next time back up your statements with facts and you won't look so silly.
What have I made up? Absolutely nothing. You need to quit complaining and face the facts. And I'm not the one who is looking silly...that would be you for continually bringing this up when I have stated at least 3 or 4 times I don't know the answer to something and you are demanding I answer you. That's really sad.
People here need to quit being lazy and get up and do work for themselves instead of relying on others to do their work for them.
Ace , Why don't you research the facts to back up your statements? Like "Bellevue is private property." Sounds like you should heed your own words.,or do you suscribe to "do as I say not as I do". No wonder you so blindly support Jim B. Harry Smith et al.
We really don't have time for gossip or inaccurate information so we try to verify as much as we possibly can.
Ace said:
What? Thanks for the laugh. ;)
Piglet says:
I would like to know why you think this is funny. I don't.
I have only dealt with facts from the beginning. The only lies I have heard thus far were from my SS teacher who assured us this was all a conspiracy started by the people who didn't like the music. I trusted him.
That is NOT funny, my friend.
We are not here to complain. We are here to get to the root of all this and take some action.
Ace you sound so much like the CC when you avoid answering questions.Are any of the CC members you father? Well ,unlike you I have to work tomorrow and will be gone for several days.I'm sure that when I check in a few days from now you will still be making the same insiped remarks and unfounded statements. Good night ace,you did well tonight Jim Barnwell will be proud of you and will give you a "ataboy" tomorrow
Ace This blog is full of gossip and inaccurate information...
If only that were true, this wouldn't exist. It's full of facts and true statements, among the editorial opinion that the First Amendment to the Constitition of the United States gives us the right to have. It's the Sandballats and Tobiahs such as yourself that try to cast doubt on what people can see with their own eyes.
Here's my prediction on how the PW matter will be resolved: 1. David Coombs will read a statement saying that the internal investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of PW since his confessed "moral failure" from 17 years ago. 2. The statement will also indicate that PW has resigned to spend more time with his family and that BBC has accepted his resignation. 3. Coombs will praise SG for his wonderful way of handling this difficult situation and the congregation will give SG a standing ovation. 4. SG will lecture the congregation on the importance of praying for PW and his family, extending love and forgiveness to PW, and on how terrible it was for people to pass judgment on PW and on SG for his handling of this situation. 5. The congregation will give SG another standing O. 6. No explanation or defense will be given for not dealing with this situation sooner. 7. SG will conclude by having the congregation join hands and sing "Sweet, Sweet Spirit." 8. SG-supporters will say, "See there, I knew he would handle it appropriately. What was all the fuss about?" 9. SG-opponents will say, "See there, I knew he would dodge another bullet. He'll be here forever" 10. Bloggers on both sides of the issue will debate whether SG should stay or go, until they get distracted with the issue of whether Jacob's increase in striped and speckled livestock was the result of his own ingenuity, God's blessing of Jacob, or just random chance.
Does anyone else want to lay out a prediction of how this will play out?
I am a fairly regular reader of this blog and I'm simply shocked by the attitudes that I find exhibited here.
I would describe a minority of posts as full of grace and compassion, while many posts are quite insulting.
Why don't ALL of you who wish to blog do so only after applying I Corinthians 10:31: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God".
If a comment that we wish to make to another brother or sister does not glorify God, then don't hit "SEND". You can disagree with another blogger and make your point without being rude or insulting.
I searched my heart and feel that this post does honor the Lord, that's why I'm hitting "SEND".
Ace, Your right, that was faulty logic. I was just trying to copy the "numbers and giving are up, so God must be in what's going on" logic of Chuck Taylor and Harry Smith. By the way, what does it mean when numbers are down? God has left the building?
wontclapforsteve 10. Bloggers on both sides of the issue will debate whether SG should stay or go, until they get distracted with the issue of whether Jacob's increase in striped and speckled livestock was the result of his own ingenuity, God's blessing of Jacob, or just random chance.
Now i've had a "must wipe sweet tea off the computer monitor" moment ala Karen.
piglet, Sorry, but I think you went overboard here. The Grand Canyon is huge, and I doubt that Steve Gaines has enough dirt under his rug to fill it all by himself. You must have been talking about the leadership in general?? That would make the term you used more appropriate to me. But, on the other hand, we only know a small bit of the story. If the present strife that has been revealed is only the tip, I would almost promise you the "rest of the story" would be more than we could bear.
I did most definitely love the roach comparison though!
LOL
Ace, go to bed now and let the folks carry on a decent conversation without the division and stress. They need to fellowship somewhere now that their church has been hijacked.
I don't apologize--ace, bepatient and 4545, amongst others, are antagonists here and some behaviors warrant a lil' wrathfulness (not anger or hatred). Piety's great at church, but you should be careful about placing equivalences on attackers and those defending themselves on this, after all, last outpost.
Here's something that has puzzled me for several months now - why is it that there has been no successful attempt to organize the people who are concerned about SG's leadership? To be sure, there were a few informational meetings, but no real leader emerged to say, "okay folks, let's organize ourselves and rectify this situation!"
It reminds me of the incident where the crowd wanted to throw Jesus off the cliff and He escaped by simply walking away in their midst, because His time had not yet come.
I have come to the conclusion that whatever happens to SG, it will happen on God's timetable, not ours, and no one other than God will be able to take any credit for what happens.
Please refrain from using the anonymous identity as it becomes confusing distinguishing one anonymous commenter from another. Either register with Blogger (you can do this anonymously) and log in or select a unique screen name.
To All - consider that while all of this blogging goes on, and we all make points and argue with his trolls, SG and his lovely wife, DG, live in opulence and luxury, buy the finest clothes, eat at the finest restaurants, and live in the finest homes while driving luxury vehicles, all on that tithed money to BBC. And if that doesn't bother you enough, SG will soon be preaching at an Identity Conference and then later at a Pastor's Conference, where he will be an honored speaker and paid handsomely for both. I expect he will receive more standing ovations at each one. He also will prepare for those sermons while being paid by BBC. So continue on blogging and arguing BBC sheep. Those doing the fleecing can wait as long as it takes for this to all die down.
ReplyDelete***In the meantime, you can do two things that will make a difference: 1)stop giving any money to BBC and (2) email Tim Ellsworth and Mac Brunson and let them know in a polite manner that you believe it is poor judgment on their parts to have SG speaking at such conferences while he is under investigation. Even if they don't reply to anonymous emails, your point will have been made. These mega-church pastors all cover for each other, and your email voice WILL be heard. The web sites for Union University and FBC Jacksonville have the contact information. Don't just blog...DO SOMETHING!
Derick Calcote - I just finished reading your posts from earlier on the other thread. You seem to have a lot of credibility and facts given you disclose your name and position and invite others to email you. I say all that to say this: If you know of information on here that is blatantly false, either intentionally or unintentionally, you will do many of us that "are not on either side" a great service. Keep posting brother...many are listening.
ReplyDeleteMany people recently asked about Jim Haywood and if he really was legally allowed to record in the BBC services.
ReplyDeleteI want to clear up something surrounding that issue. He posted his story at http://www.savingbellevue.com/camcorderincident.htm
Then he posted copyright exceptions at http://www.savingbellevue.com/copyrightslaw.htm
For those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property. And because of that, recording restrictions CAN indeed be placed on the premises and there is absolutely no legal backing saying that they are forced to allow someone to record.
Then that's when Mr. Haywood's "copyright exception" page comes into play. It should be noted that Jim is no expert in the field of law, so I'll clear this up for everyone here and him as well. The page he put up only describes what can be done with a work ALREADY CREATED to which one does not own the copyright, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not somebody can create a work and where.
I hope this clears up the issue that was raised up on the blog. I have already notified Jim Haywood about this, but all I received was a response saying, "And you are a coward Mr. No Name" - oh well, I tried. Hopefully people here will find interest to that info!
My dear Ace, Are you really an employee of BBC?
ReplyDeleteDo you not see how 'worldly' your comment is? How can the Words of the Sword of Truth be copyrighted?
Legal standing? What is this? Legal standing with Pagan courts?
"For those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property. And because of that, recording restrictions CAN indeed be placed on the premises and there is absolutely no legal backing saying that they are forced to allow someone to record."
I weep for these words. Don't we want every word uttered in the pulpit exclaimed to the world?
Thanks for clearing that up Ace.
ReplyDeleteI was really worried about Jim taping the things the pastor says from the pulpit. It is good to know we can go into secret session and keep the world from knowing what is going on. Sure light has come into the world and all, but we need to keep our options open to get the pastor’s words out of the light into the darkness every now and then.
Lindon,
ReplyDeleteI am simply answering questions that people asked on the forums recently.
Jim Haywood was not going to be recording the Gospel...you and I both know that (he even stated he wanted to record the standing ovation on his site). And if he was going to record the Gospel, maybe he should have gone through the proper channels to get the approval. He isn't more special than the news channels or anyone else.
If you don't like what I have to say, I am not asking for you to reply. I am providing that information for other people on this blog. I kindfully ask that you respect my posts and don't address them if you can't do that in a civil way. Thank you.
Bin Wonderin,
ReplyDeleteI was really worried about Jim taping the things the pastor says from the pulpit. It is good to know we can go into secret session and keep the world from knowing what is going on.
You know, I really don't understand why people here have to turn everything into an argument. There was nothing but love in my first post, so I expect nothing less from anyone else in reply to my message. If you can't be respectful, please don't address me in your posts at all. Thank you.
I used to poke fun at a program called Searching the Scriptures and call it Twisting the Scriptures. The scripture quotes used to defend videoing an announcement is definitely twisting the scriptures; and this is from someone who is very disappointed in the way the "other side" is handling things. Of the ten per cent legtimate issues presented in this forum, the scriptures quoted certainly are not among it!
ReplyDeleteAce: "I kindfully ask that you respect my posts and don't address them if you can't do that in a civil way. Thank you."
ReplyDeleteI am very sorry for not being more civil.
3rdside, I am confused. I don't see any scripture quoted on this thread so far? What are you referring to?
ReplyDeleteThanks
Ace,
ReplyDeleteAre you Jim Barnwell, the one who has misspoken on numerous occasions on behalf of Bellevue as a paid employee? IF you are a paid employee at Bellevue, I don't believe you should be speaking on behalf of the church and blogging behind a name. If you are not on staff speaking on behalf of the church, then I think it's fine.
The Communications Committee booklet that was mailed out had numerous things that are not the truth. I know current staff and former staff that have said the book is loaded with half-truths.
The booklet was full of deception just like your last post about Jim Haywood. I would like for Jim Haywood to publish all of the emails under the name "Ace" you have mailed him for the world to see.
What is the Church policy for members taking pictures or video inside the sanctuary? I've taken video many times in the sanctuary and nobody has ever told me to put my camera away.
What's being said or done inside the building from the pulpit that the world doesn't need to see? It's an interesting day when a church member can't take a picture inside their own church.
A member is just that. They are a member of the organization called Bellevue Baptist Church. What would happen if 200 people with video cameras showed up Sunday and started filming like I've seen done before at a children’s performance or the SCT or the Passion Play? I think we need to have new members sign a document prohibiting them from taking video/pictures inside the church.
lindon,
ReplyDeleteThis is ACE's idea of being CIVIL. NUFF SAID!!
ace said...
An open letter from Ace to Jim Haywood
Without a doubt, most people here visit savingbellevue.com often. I know that site is not affiliated with this one, but site visitors here also go there on a regular basis. Because of that, many people here often praise Jim Haywood for his website and for "revealing the truth." People act like Jim is so great and all-knowing but I've learned about about Jim over the past few months and he is far from that. Instead, I have learned that he is a deceiver and liar. Below is an open letter to Mr. Haywood to show others exactly where his motives currently are. If anyone has comments on the letter, please feel free to send them to acefrombbc@gmail.com - Thank you.
An Open Letter To Jim Haywood:
Dear Jim,
I can't help but keep thinking about your website. Often I wonder what your purpose behind the site is. You claim in your website's mission statement your desire for the site is to "honor Jesus Christ." You also claim that it exists to "provide members of Bellevue Baptist Church of Memphis, Tennessee with a greater degree of visibility of the government of our church." After reading those two statements, I chuckled to myself because your site has not done either of those items, but quite the opposite. I have compiled a list of points to address with you from the past several months just to show you where your true intentions are or at least how they are coming across to many people.
The first point I'd like to address is the "popularity" of your website. You sure are enjoying it, aren't you? Fact: Who called Action News 5 to tell them about the site and issues surrounding Bellevue Baptist Church? Why...it was none other than you. Fact: Who contacted the Commercial Appeal and other media outlets? Why...it was none other than you. You have your little website, so why did you need to feel the need to contact the media? Oh wait, it's because you want the attention. That's exactly your problem. You are starved for attention. Not many people knew your name prior to the controversy you started. But now, you seem to be a household name for Bellevue members. Honesty - do you enjoy that attention? Of course you do, it's only natural...and that's where the bigger problem is. You can't "let go" of the attention. You feel like you are celebrity and everyone admires you....I can assure you, Jim, that is not the case. So, suggestion number one from me to you....lose the ego. It's not about you, Jim.
More proof that you are enjoying the attention: Recently after the news media reported some more information, your site got a lot of hits. So what do you do the next day? Post in big red letters the main page: "Over 10,000 hits Thursday." That showed to me, among many others, that your desire is to not show others the truth, but this is a publicity and attention thing for you. Think about it, Jim...that's pathetic. Just like your site counter. Why don't you post a little message on your website saying about 200,000 of those hits were from the same person because your counter wasn't tracking unique visitors when it first started off (and it still doesn't) and somebody exposed that on your site. Oh wait - that would make yourself look bad...and we wouldn't want that, would we?
Now, let’s shift the focus to the lies that have come from your website. I love it how you have all your 50 point font, color red headlines for your lies. You keep it up to destroy the church, yet once it’s proven wrong you remove it and act like you’re all about the truth. Do you not verify your information before you post it? Or just because you get something “juicy” it has to be posted immediately? You really don’t make much sense, Jim. What about the credit card charges that you claimed Gaines used for personal stuff? You were proven wrong, buddy. Have you ever apologized to anyone for the people you hurt by posting this rumor? What about the time when you posted someone’s name and then a statement saying, “He has chosen not to return our phone calls.” Maybe that person didn’t return your phone calls, because you never made any calls in the first place? Your website is deceiving, and YOU are a deceiver, Jim. I have you figured out, though, and soon others will realize that you are a liar. Oh, and what about that time when you posted that highly offensive picture of the Nazi salute and compared that to Gaines and the people of BBC??? How many people know of that?
Another point to talk about – how do you choose which of your emails you respond to? Because I have it from a number of people that when people criticize your site, you don’t reply. When people send you a question about yourself or site, you don’t reply. When people give you site suggestions, you don’t reply. But…wait a second. Somebody just sent you a juicy piece of gossip (a lie)…so what do you do? You reply and you post your headline within minutes before verifying anything. That’s unbelievable. Why do you do that? Oh wait, we already covered that…you’re attention starved.
Moving on… How do you think others would feel if they knew you were trying to make money off of the whole ordeal surrounding Bellevue right now? Do you think most people would agree or disagree that you should do that? Why don’t you make an announcement on your website linking to your other website in the making…you know, the one where you’re helping with the publishing of a book on how to avoid what’s going on? You better hurry up on that project….and for anyone else reading this, don’t forgot to pre-order your copy on how to avoid the purpose driven church from Mr. Haywood + friends for only $21 per book. If you order two books, you can save $2 and pay only $39!!! I can smell it now…cha-ching in your pocket, Jim….cha-ching….
There is so much else I could address but I’ll end with your latest incident regarding the camcorder and you’re told you’re not allowed to record the service. What makes you more special than FOX13 or News Channel 3? They aren’t allowed to record the service, so why should Jim Haywood? My point exactly, you shouldn’t. Anyways, you post on your site the account of your morning worship service. First of all, somebody decided to sit next to you…*gasp* say, it isn’t so! Do you own a whole section in the Bellevue sanctuary that only you’re allowed to sit in? You’re the victim, aren’t you, Jim? You poor thing.
You need to quit the website….but should you decide to keep it up, here is some advice for you. 1) Take spelling lessons….you have too many grammatically errors on your site. 2) Don’t take verses out of context….that only makes you look foolish. 3) Grow up.
That’s all,
Ace
8:02 PM, January 15, 2007
Ace said,
ReplyDeleteThere was nothing but love in my first post, so I expect nothing less from anyone else in reply to my message.
Reply: Here lies the problem. It all depends on what the definition of love is. Do we really understand the meaning of love any longer? Where is the love for the sheep from the pastor or the Communications Director?
Trump,
ReplyDeleteDo we really understand the meaning of love any longer? Where is the love for the sheep from the pastor or the Communications Director?
A simple yes or no answer will do. Do you think Steve Gaines' loves his church? Or getting a little more personally, do you think he loves you?
Lindon: The scripture to which I referred is found at www.savingbellevue.com and is the first and newest item, I've pasted it below for convenience's sake. My comment is that the word "freely" is WAY out of context when comparing recording an announcement to the word "freely" in the verses.
ReplyDelete2Cr 11:7 Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely?
Rev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Rev 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Do you think Steve Gaines' loves his church?
ReplyDeleteDo pastors that love their church allow pedophiles to remain on staff and "cooperate" with criminal investigations by hiding behind a wall of lawyers?
No, he does not love his church. He is destroying it. If he really loved the church he would leave.
I'm sorry, but I couldn't help laugh about the 200 video camera comment. It is true, I know for sure when there is a children's program that we parents are lined up at the front taking video and pictures. Not getting into legalities, but it would be next to impossible to monitor an entire congregation and make sure no one is video taping. Especially now that cameras and cell phones can take video. Just the image of everyone holding up their device at a designated time seems funny but not impossible. Just a thought!!
ReplyDeleteI will try and answer your questions as direct as possible but with as much love as possible.
ReplyDeleteI truly don't beleive Steve Gaines has a pastor's heart to love the sheep the way we need to be loved.
Some examples:
If I loved my sheep, I'd not hide anything from them including my salary. I wouldn't have to take my orders from men who have been running the church.
If I loved my sheep, I'd not call them names or go to their homes in a show of force to intimidate.
If I loved my sheep, I would spend time with them and not other sheep in other pastures.
If I loved my sheep, I would not fleece them by leading a "tour".
If I loved my sheep, I would always tell the truth to them.
If I loved my sheep, I would protect them from a pedophile.
If I didn't love my sheep or I thought my sheep were scattering because of me, I'd step down and let another shephard take over.
Can anyone tell me why David Brown would wish me to email him? Mr Brown, if you're still lurking, you may answer as well. I'm anonymous because I don't wish to embarass any of my friends or family only a few degrees of separation from BBC, nor to invite the ire of the mob. Dig?
ReplyDeleteI don't wish to submit to the rubic of being anti-Gaines, yet I am anti-pedophile. So what gives? If I wanted to be witnessed to, I get plenty of offers here.
trollcates,
ReplyDeleteDavid Brown is an abused child advocate and is the SNAP coordinator for West Tennessee and Memphis. http://www.snapnetwork.org/
Is it ironic or hypocritical that we demand total openess, honesty and tranparency as sheep hiding behind usernames.
ReplyDeleteHmmmm, I wonder if ACE is Bruce Brooke, since he has so much legaleze...
ReplyDeleteace said...
ReplyDelete... It should be noted that Jim is no expert in the field of law, so I'll clear this up for everyone here and him as well.
Reply:
Evidently several have been misled as to the identity of "ace". It is now apparant that it is Corey B. Trotz, the heavy hitter. He can get you a settlement before you even get hurt.
Mrs. C,
ReplyDeleteHmmmm, I wonder if ACE is Bruce Brooke, since he has so much legaleze...
No, I'm not Bruce. I thought I was Janie (or Wendy?) - did you change your mind?
Tim,
ReplyDeleteCorey B. Trotz is the way to go...call 683-7000....
Corey B.!!!!!!!! LOL ROFL
ReplyDeleteFolks, If ACE is really an employee of BBC, this has serious consequences. Is he speaking for leadership here? He is on here during work hours. He is paid by tithe dollars. So is he speaking for all members here?
ReplyDeleteEvery word he writes has implications. Even writing under psuedonym has consequences because he represents the Body of Christ.
If he is in leadership, then his position is one of a minister biblically. (This is one area megas are really at fault) And he will be held to the standards of a minister that are in the Word.
Ace, IF you are an employee, I beg you to reconsider commenting here.
Your leadership should insist upon it.
Way to go Tim!
ReplyDeleteAce,
ReplyDeleteAre you Jim Barnwell or not?
Mexico,
Are you a legal citizen?
ace said...
ReplyDeleteMrs. C,
Hmmmm, I wonder if ACE is Bruce Brooke, since he has so much legaleze...
No, I'm not Bruce. I thought I was Janie (or Wendy?) - did you change your mind?
Naw, I was just poking at cha-LOL, you change your demeanor a lot, so as to be discreet I suppose. But I still think you are a "she" in disquise - precious:).
You say that you have a lot of inside knowledge that you do not wish to share with us, so you let us go on questioning and then when we find hard evidence, you shoot it down, so I thought you just MAY BE a lawyer - they sometimes play tricks on folks.
Hey ACE, you know that this blog is monitored don't ya?
ReplyDeleteTrump,
ReplyDeleteAre you a bigot?
Lindon,
ReplyDeleteFolks, If ACE is really an employee of BBC, this has serious consequences. Is he speaking for leadership here? He is on here during work hours. He is paid by tithe dollars. So is he speaking for all members here?
If, if, if.... I am speaking for no-one except for myself.
Trump,
ReplyDeleteAce,
Are you Jim Barnwell or not?
No.
Mexico,
Are you a legal citizen?
Quick! Someone call border patrol.
lindon,
ReplyDeleteGreat points you make about Ace.
I don't think we are going to hear anymore from him.
He may come back as another name but Ace as we know him is probably going to be history.
I think Ace (JB) has crossed over the line.
Mrs. C,
ReplyDeleteYou say that you have a lot of inside knowledge that you do not wish to share with us,
I never claimed that. I think you're mixing me up with someone else?
By the way, I think Jim Barnwell has a lot of better things to do with his time than to post here...
ReplyDeleteI'm just sayin'...
Mrs. C,
ReplyDeleteHey ACE, you know that this blog is monitored don't ya
By whom? What do you mean by that statement? Thanks!
Jim Barnwell,
ReplyDeleteHave you ever been Ace or ace before?
Trump,
ReplyDeleteHe may come back as another name but Ace as we know him is probably going to be history.
I will always post as Ace, no worries.
I think Ace (JB) has crossed over the line.
Thanks for your opinion...and again, I am not JB...
Mrs. C - I would think any mega-church pastor with a brain would have someone from his staff monitoring this site since it clearly shows how NOT to deal with members who have questions. Even though some here are "kooks", or would complain about every little thing they don't like in the church, it is very foolish to try and lump everyone who has a sincere question or concern into that group and totally stonewall them, try to intimidate them, and try to get them to leave the church. As it has been said here many times...accountability and transparency would make a blog like this useless and unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteATTENTION MEGA-CHURCH PASTORS, STAFF AND DEACONS WHO ARE SO QUICK TO "DEFEND THEIR PASTOR": We love you! We want you to do well and may your work glorify the Lord. However, we are not stupid sheep to be fleeced. Just tell us what is going on. If we don't like it, we will let you know, and then if we can't live with things, we will leave. The only reason we would ever need to blog is when you try to use intimidation and arrogance to silence us if we ask any questions. Really, try simply explaining why you do things and what you are doing, and you take away any reason for someone to blog.
Ace, Are you currently an employee of Bellevue Baptist Church?
ReplyDeleteThis is so heart breaking. You know if our church proclaimed Christ and Him crucified to the lost world as much as we gossip and slander each other we could really spread the gospel. The bible says out of the heart the mouth speaks. If all the lost world knew of us was what we say, would they know and see Christ?
ReplyDelete-Aaron
Very true, Aaron....very true...
ReplyDeleteAaron,
ReplyDeleteWhat of truth?
Personally, and this is just my opinion, I would like to see the blog administrator here disallow ALL argumentative posting here from "the other side". Yes, I know that sounds terrible, but so does all of this fighting.
ReplyDeleteWhen we don't have ace, 4545, memphis, and others on here, we enjoy the fellowship of other believers even better than being AT BBC--at least the way it is now. I have personally loved the biblical discussions, the scripture quotes, the good links to various other sites for sermons and info, the encouragement to each other to read through the Bible, the enlightenment from others out-of-state on similar matters, the beautiful letters from Sister Pam and others. It is all good, in my humble opinion.
These agitated rantings, back and forth tit for tat, accusatory tones, name calling ("liar and a deceiver"), certainly ARE NOT of the Lord but are purely the work of the devil--and I hate the devil.
Now, that's my suggestion. I doubt that it will be accepted, but, I, for one, am sick of the attacks, arguing, guessing, stirring up of strife, etc.. It's like a soap opera or a war when the "other side" tries to come on here and degrade this blog's status. If you want to carry on with the intruders, give 'em your email and do it in private. I don't like the "National Enquirer", and I don't like being a part of anything that even remotely reminds me of it. I know that praying fervently is hard work, but that really is what we need to be doing. We need to be writing letters, too, to the church staff and pastor asking for a business meeting.
These are just my old lady suggestions. You may think I'm a party pooper and maybe I am. After all, this is pretty draining; but what do the rest of you on here think about it?
Dee
amk47
ReplyDeleteHave you been gossiping and slandering? If so,I hope you will stop.
We, on the other hand, are holding our leaders accountable here.
We are gathering to exchange information in a place where we cannot be silenced.
We are documenting and verifying information that is being held in secret by some who are running their own agenda and not that of Christ.
Be assured, it will not stop here.
Our church needs to be purified. If we don't deal with the public sin of our leaders,we have nothing to offer a lost and dying world, nowdo we? We becomethe hypocrites so many think we are.
Aaron, Right now BBC is in damage control mode trying to save a over paid pastor that thinks more of himself than the gospel of Christ. They have no witness. They have 'churchianity'. Harsh? Truth is not always pretty.
ReplyDeleteAnd believe me when I say this, I know they will try to ruin even me. I have seen it before. The power and influence of these mega's is scary beyond belief.
But men can only kill the body. I should fear God who can kill the soul.
The problem at BBC? They do not fear an all powerful soveriegn God.
For those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property.
ReplyDeleteAce,
How many times has there been a children's musical in the service, and there were many parents crowded around down front with video cameras and there was no issue with that? The only rule has always been "no flash photography" as that is disruptive. Even if it’s true (debatable) this is just an intimidation tool against a church member by Steve Gaines hiding behind Jim Barnwell and using the security guards to project the threat of force against a church member who is not disturbing the service, or putting anyone in danger.
One could argue that Jim Haywood is within his legal rights on a number of different fronts. First of all, he's a "member" or part "owner" of the "private property" that is Bellevue Baptist Church in a legal sense. It’s clear that Harry Smith & Co think it’s their personal “campus”, but it in the legal sense, it belongs to the members in total. That it actually belongs to God is just rhetoric that is used to control the congregation. This leadership has demonstrated that they don’t believe that. Copywriting the service and using the threat of force or legal action to keep video cameras out!!!! God’s church? You answer that question for yourself.
Second, There is some debate over whether or not a church service in progress is a copywrited work.. The same exceptions that allow the singers to sing copywrited works from the stage apply to anyone else in the congregation.
Third, for sake of argument, let's assume a copyright exists. Copyright law ONLY protects the copyright owner from commercial use of his work. The churches only legal recourse is to sue Haywood (and they would lose unless he is profiting from it, and under other sections of the law, would be responsible for his legal fees). They cannot stop him from recording legally, just as they could not stop a news organization from recording the service. If they try to remove him, he has legal recourse against the church. (I believe he already has a course of action against the church for what happened Sunday week ago...at least grounds to seek an injunction). And if it's a forceful removal, possible criminal charges for assault and battery come into play. If he shows that Jim Barnwell and Steve Gaines ordered and approved the physical removal, they would be subject to criminal and civil actions.
Fourth, all the above completely ignores the spiritual & scriptural issues here, and if the church chooses to use the legal system as a weapon against it's members, they should 1) tread carefully, as the law is not on their side, since they don’t even follow the few bylaws we do have, and 2) When members use it in return, should never throw the scripture about Christians and the court system in their face, as they would then be hypocrites.
The fact that this is even being debated should prove to the world that this church leadership does not love it's "flock", but is only interested in furthering it's own agenda, and will not stop at any tool to intimidate the congregation into submission. (Presumably motivated by power and greed).
This highlights the problem that the lack of good bylaws bring to this. THERE ARE NO RULES!!! It’s true that BBC is a private organization in the legal sense, but there is no method for the governance of that organization! We have no “policy and procedure”. Thus, whomever happens to be in power, can make up the rules as they go along, and as long as no one stands up and challenges them, that’s just the way it is. This is very tenuous legally. The church knows this, and thus works hard to intimidate the congregation into silence, and stamp out any opposition, even using God and the Bible as a weapon to beat down people. (They will answer for this one day, either in this life or the next). The Worlds’ way to describe this is “He who has the guns (power) makes the rules”. This is rule by force and not rule by law. (The very definition of a dictatorship). We are not a congregationally run church. We are a church run by a small group of people, and membership in that group requires 1) a large personal net worth or 2) Buddies of people with large net worth’s and income. Spiritual condition is only secondary if it’s considered at all. Godliness is determined by the size of your bank account. That it just also so happens all this is a hallmark of PDC’s is a coincidence. This is normal human nature. Hitler did the same thing in Germany in the 1930’s, and he had never heard of Rick Warren I’m sure.
This is ridiculous that it even has to be discussed. Shame on the church leadership for putting it's membership in a position of having to use the legal system to protect their rights as members of a “private” organization.
People of God, People of Bellevue, this sort of behavior should show you who your leaders are. The time for talk is over. It’s time to fish or cut bait.
Mo-Scratch said...
ReplyDeleteReally, try simply explaining why you do things and what you are doing, and you take away any reason for someone to blog.
Reply:
That would just take too much common sense for which our leadership seem to be lacking at the moment.
Truth is very hard for many to accept. The church should strive to be clean, open, pure, honest, full of life, joy, peace, friendly, truthful, exciting, fun, etc.
ReplyDeleteWhen leaders are running around covering their deeds up, nothing above exists. What good reason does a church have to hide information from the congregation?
When this is occurring, I can assure you the church is not functioning like a healthy church should.
I long for the day Bellevue can be open, honest, and truthful with not only the membership, but more importantly to the world.
finance guy
ReplyDeleteYou have mail
Ace,
ReplyDeleteI had a realtor tell me one time, over and over "You trust me don't you?"
if you have to tell me that I trust you, or if you have to tell me you were demonstrating love, you probably weren't.
And if he was going to record the Gospel, maybe he should have gone through the proper channels to get the approval
This is ridiculous. First, the proper channels are in Heaven for permission to record the gospel, Second, there aren't clear proper channels, because WE HAVE NO BYLAWS (that are followed anyway).
Ace,
ReplyDeleteWhat is your relationship with Jim Barnwell?
FinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteBarnwell has been placed in authority over Haywood. Does the Bible not tell us to submit to authority?
Why would Haywood not have to follow the rules? What makes him more special than you or I?
If he were to appear on earth today, Jesus Christ would not be welcomed at Bellevue Baptist Church, as he was a poor homeless man while on earth, who was always at odds with the religious authorities. Can you just imagine Harry Smith, Steve Tucker and Steve Gaines in a closed door meeting on how to deal with this "troublemaker" in the church?
ReplyDeleteFinanceguy,
ReplyDeleteThey speak of proper channels as if they believe the church is THEIRS! Therefore they can do whatever they wish and we are to swallow and follow. No questions asked. If we don't like it we can leave and they will eventually recruit some new less discerning souls to take our place.
They need to drop that authority argument. Biblically speaking, it doesn't hold up.
Where did Barnwell go to seminary? When and where was he ordained?
I Love my church,
ReplyDeleteBarnwell is not a minister...
Ace: "Barnwell has been placed in authority over Haywood. Does the Bible not tell us to submit to authority?"
ReplyDeleteYOU ARE ON VERY DANGEROUS GROUND WITH THAT COMMENT. I hope I have your attention. What you said above is right out of the mouth of a Pharisee. We are NEVER to submit to ungodly leaders or false teachers. Wolves in sheeps clothing. Your statement proves it. Please do not twist scripture to fit your premises.
Ace,
ReplyDeleteThanks for illustrating my point about the church leadership using the Bible to beat down the church members into submission.
To address your point (a curtesy you often fail to show people) My statement stands that this rule was made up on the fly to intemidate and protect people's power. Not further the gospel. There was nothing disruptive about what Haywood was doing.
Secondly, Jim Haywood doesn't work in Barnwell's "ministry area", and thus he is not under his authority, and I've already stated that Barnwell's and the church's legal authority is questionable in this case.
I repeat.
If Jim Barnwell is going to use the civil law as a weapon against a church member, he has no right to complain with the favor is returned.
Ace said
ReplyDeleteWhy would Haywood not have to follow the rules? What makes him more special than you or I?
Jim Barnwell has to submit to the Civil government, yet he seeks to take away a right that civil government gives it's citizens. What makes him more special than anyone else?
As far as the rules, the rules are made up as we go along to fit agendas. Jesus disobeyed unjust "rules" in his day, and Haywood can do the same under the authority given to him by God when he was saved, and the government of the United States when he was granted citizenship at birth.
Chill out, lindon. There is no need to yell. Just because you disagree with me, it does not make me wrong, though.
ReplyDeleteWe never submit to ungodly teachers, but what has Barnwell done that's ungodly in these times? Absolutely nothing. If you know something everyone else doesn't know, then please post away.
2006hulda said
ReplyDeletePersonally, and this is just my opinion, I would like to see the blog administrator here disallow ALL argumentative posting here from "the other side". Yes, I know that sounds terrible, but so does all of this fighting.
Piglet says:
I've been thinking on your statement..
I agree with you somewhat - especially those who pop up repeatedly to argue - mainly because I find it hard to be good :(
But I do have compassion on those who come here for the first time, angry at us because of what they are being TOLD by people they SHOULD be able to TRUST.(caps for emphasis, not yelling at you :) )
I kinda like to converse with them because they are just in the dark and need a little illumniation. I'd hate to cut them off because we've had some come around.
I also hate to do to them what was done to Mark - silence them because of the message.
Contionuous attacks are another thing and I think NASS has stepped in on several occasions...
Thanks NASS.
FinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteMy statement stands that this rule was made up on the fly to intemidate and protect people's power.
Wrong. Go call the news channels/media and the people who have reported from Bellevue in the past few years. This rule has always been there. Go talk to the station photographers....You need to check your facts.
There was nothing disruptive about what Haywood was doing.
Haywood was recording to tear down the church. He wants to record private church matters for the whole world to see...you just don't do that. If there's a private issue in your family, maybe concerning a son...you don't broadcast it to the entire world...you resolve it as a family. I think it's the same way in the church, if that makes sense... It's for family only, not the entire world to see
Jesus disobeyed unjust "rules" in his day, and Haywood can do the same...
Please do not tell me you're comparing Jesus to Jim Haywood....please say I misunderstood you....
Ace
ReplyDeletebut what has Barnwell done that's ungodly in these times
He sought to intimidate a church member who was doing NOTHING WRONG.
Doesn't sound very godly to me.
Piglet,
ReplyDeleteI hope you will notice that I have not attacked anyone and I am actually remaining quite civil today. ;)
I am not a member of BBC but I have been reading this ever since it started. The reason I started reading this is because I am a former member of GFBC. I have since moved and am a member of a much smaller SBC. The problem I see in all of this is that none of know Dr. Gaines personally. And yes I referred to him as Dr. Gaines b/c he has earned it. Just as Dr. Rogers had as well. Most if not all of the comments that are being made are speculation. Believe me Dr. Gaines is in my opinion a Godly man. I know that following his teachings at GFBC that I am a better man and better Christian. It tears me up that this situation is occuring. This forum will eventually dissolve. I pray that the issues dissolve as well. I think though that many of you love your church more than you love the Lord. Get behind this man that God sent you. That you voted for. Support him in prayer as he is making very tough decisions, that none of us would want to have to make. Sure he doesnt "run" church the way previous ministers have. But he isn't previous ministers. Have faith. Support him and his family and stop trying to drag things out into the light that God may not intend to be drug out. Believe me you are doing nothing for the kingdom by hosting a mud slinging forum. Why would anyone want to attend your church. Let things go. Forgive!
ReplyDeleteFinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteHe sought to intimidate a church member who was doing NOTHING WRONG.
Actually, there was some wrongdoing on Haywood's part. He's not perfect. Quit worshipping him, I mean...come on, now (that comment is not directly at you, but to the people who think he's so great).
I am done addressing you because you keep going in circles around this issue.
You know what I always loved and admired about Dr. Rogers? He always stood for the truth, but he did it in love. He was probably the greatest example of a Christian I had ever seen. Strong, but humble. Something you rarely see today, even in our own church. He was the epitome of ………….well, for the sake of a better word, balance.
ReplyDeleteWhat I see as the greatest problem with so many on either side of the issue is balance. One side is screaming truth triumphs unity. The other side is screaming I support my pastor and my church. I agree—Fight for truth! But, don’t do it at the cost of your neighbor and your church!
So many have said so much on this blog! If we are honest, there has been misinformation on both sides. But, does that give us the right to attack each other?!?!
I cannot help but go back to God’s word, and what God keeps telling me over and over in Galatians 5:13-15, “You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.”
In our fight for truth, in our fight for unity, are we going to destroy each other? I have already seen it beginning. The blame cannot be laid at one “sides” feet! That is what our enemy would want us to think. We MUST remember this battle is not against flesh and blood, no matter how difficult it may seem.
May God have mercy on ALL of us!
Healme
Haywood was recording to tear down the church. He wants to record private church matters for the whole world to see...you just don't do that.
ReplyDeleteHis motives don't matter. The law is the law. Besides, Steve Gains, Harry Smith & Co refuse to allow this to be dealt with privately. THEY are forcing this into the public domain.
Jim Haywood, if you are reading this, consider getting an injunction from a judge based on what has happened to you already where you can prove to Barnwell the next time he tries to intimidate you that you are within your legal rights.
Ace,
More lies. The rule has never been there until Sunday a week ago. Or at least it was never enforced until Sunday a week ago. By what authority can such a rule be made anyway? You can't tell me BECAUSE WE HAVE NO BYLAWS!
Ace,
The more you and your friends try to surpress this instead of having an open business meeting so it CAN be discussed privately, the more it will grow and grow until one day, it will be too big for you to handle. THAT you can take to the bank and cash.
Ace,
ReplyDeleteQuit worshipping him,
The only person who's being worshiped around here is Steve Gaines by the people who mindlessly follow him as he drives us off a cliff. I'm defending Jim Haywood. The Scripture tells us that God uses the small things of this world to confound the great.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it as i "keep going in circles around this issue" with you.
Financeguy,
ReplyDeleteDon't ever confuse them with facts and logic, they run home to mommy. Ace cries like a girl. She trods out that tired argument about Jim Haywood being under Barnwell's authority, yet she cannot back it up with the Bible. They love to mention authority. They also like forgiveness.
They never mention sin and consequences. They don't like light and truth because their actions cannot stand up to examination.
FinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteHis motives don't matter. The law is the law.
Take a look at what you're saying. You're unbelieveable. His motives don't matter? Ha!
Jim Haywood, if you are reading this, consider getting an injunction from a judge based on what has happened to you already where you can prove to Barnwell the next time he tries to intimidate you that you are within your legal rights.
Read the third post in this thread. He cannot get anything from a judge that says he's allowed to record.... but go ahead and try, Jim, it'll just be a huge waste of your time.
More lies. The rule has never been there until Sunday a week ago. Or at least it was never enforced until Sunday a week ago.
Contridicting statements...which one is right? Was the rule made a week ago or not? I'll answer that: no. You are the one lying. And until you do your research, you will continue to act all "stuck up." For your own good, go do your research and quit telling yourself these lies.
FinanceGuy said...
ReplyDeleteIf he were to appear on earth today, Jesus Christ would not be welcomed at Bellevue Baptist Church, as he was a poor homeless man while on earth, who was always at odds with the religious authorities. Can you just imagine Harry Smith, Steve Tucker and Steve Gaines in a closed door meeting on how to deal with this "troublemaker" in the church?
4:45 PM, January 16, 2007
WOW!!! What a thought. I never dreamed that one day I would think that the leadership would not welcome Jesus into our Church. This should make the leadership stop and think about what they are doing.
SCAAAAAARRRRRYYYYY!!!!
Lindon,
ReplyDeleteI love my church works at Bellevue...why don't you tell him/her not to post here anymore?
It's because you guys are biased and only want to get rid of the opposing side on this blog. That, in itself, is quite pathetic.
Ace
ReplyDeleteHe wants to record private church matters for the whole world to see...you just don't do that. If there's a private issue in your family, maybe concerning a son...you don't broadcast it to the entire world...you resolve it as a family. I think it's the same way in the church, if that makes sense... It's for family only, not the entire world to see
I agree with you on this point, but if the head of the family is abusing the children, (or at the least the children feel abused), and he refuses the children the opportunity for a hearing, and uses his authority as a justification for further unjust treatment, the children have the right to exercise other avenues such as the tv news, blogs, internet, legal system, etc as the situation demands.
This family has been denied the opportuntity to keep this private. They are told to "swallow and follow", "If you don't like it, leave".
Don't give me that trash about a family should keep it private. That is SO hypocritical and self serving coming from this leadership.
Adrian "earned" the right to be called "Doctor?" From what accredited institution did he receive an earned doctorate? What was his dissertation topic? Who sat on his graduate committee? He was graduated from Stetson University and New Orleans Seminary, but did not begin to call himself "Doctor" until the honorary degrees started rolling in years later.
ReplyDeleteAce,
ReplyDeleteI'll say this, if it was a "rule", it was never communicated or enforced until Sunday a week ago.
And as far as his motives don't matter, I was refering to why, or why not he was recording, he still can record.
To be consistent, Jim Barnwell should put this in the bulliten next Sunday.
"The rule is it's okay to record in the service if we agree with your motives (such as recording your children singing). If we don't,(such as trying to hold us accountable for what we say in the service) then it's not okay". This is the "real" rule.
prayingforyou,
ReplyDeleteI refuse to support a pastor who not only turns a blind eye to sin as in the case of Paul Williams, but breaks laws.
People would be more willing to support Gaines if he would just be up front with the congregation and listen to people who have issues. This wouldn't have gotten to this point if Gaines would have just sat down and talked to Mark Sharpe. A lot of it has to deal with his attitude towards the congregation.
Well Aaron,
ReplyDeleteI find the Christian (you know I'm not one, I'll assume) refugees from BBC, taking an action of their own accord--being stripped and shamed of a legitimate recourse within the church body--quite refreshing. At least they're not just a bunch of do-gooders and hand-claspers.
I know evangelicals, grew up in the Southern Baptist church, even studied for a short time to be a minister, but since leaving, I haven't looked back.
I don't really relate to them anymore, as they are everywhere, and it's like I'm on a different page altogether. The first attribute that I could not muster anymore and had to discard was the so-called offense of the gospels, its exclusivity. It all unraveled from there.
I find most American evengelicals to be a little arrogant and over-confident and religion is just extra cache in their upwardly-mobile lives. All the while, intolerant, zenophobic and acting persecuted and endangered by all the things they fear, notwithstanding the fact that there's a mega-church on every corner.
Do any of the sycophants think that the Sharp fellow, Beth, any of the BBC people, on here or elsewhere, who stand for accountability and presume a stake in the its future, are better off for speaking out?
These are real people disrupting their real lives for their church because they believe it is right. They value the light of truth over unity at any cost. They care more for the people more than the syndicate. They are fearless. It's nice to know a christian(besides my dear mom, of course) that's not a blowhard.
Now, that's your witness, sir. Straight from Midtown (no pun intended).
Finance,
ReplyDeleteI'll say this, if it was a "rule", it was never communicated or enforced until Sunday a week ago.
So are you saying in all actuality, you have no idea if this rule existed prior to last Sunday? If so, please post that for the other readers of this blog to see.
They deserve to know the truth that you were wrong about this one.
Ace,
ReplyDeleteI'm not a lawyer either (are you?), but I think Bellevue would have a hard time pressing any copyright infringement issues for these reasons:
1) While BBC may be "private property" (more on that in a moment), all services are free and open to the public, with no ticketing or admission requirements. None whatsoever, unless apparently one of the security burlies doesn't like the look of you.
2) The content of the material presented is (or should be!) taken from the Bible, which is public domain.
3) No signs, warnings, or notices to my knowledge have been posted at the primary building entrances noting that audio and/or video recording is prohibited. Absent any explicit exclusion, that would seem to mean it's OK to record.
Back to the private property issue, I prefer to view it as God's property and the property of His church universal (the word "universal" here to mean global and eternal; not any "unitarian" or "everyone's accepted regardless of their views" kind of thing).
But even if you see it as private property, who or what makes up the private entity which owns these high-dollar assets? You can't have private property without an owner. Is it not the members of the church, those whose tithes and offerings and other sacrifices have been used to build it? And would Jim Haywood — as much as you or I or any other member — not be entitled to all the benefits thereof?
david s
ReplyDeleteBefore this,I always thought the deacons were like the house of represenatives,and gave us a voice in church government. They are nominated by the church body and are part of us. They rotate on and off so it's not the same guys running things all the time....is that the way it SHOULD be but isn't?
Ace,
ReplyDeleteI'm not admitting anything, I'm simply pointing out your hypocrisy. IF the rule existed, it was never communicated to the church body, which in light of everything else is very suspicious that it was made up, and they it's "claimed" that it's always been the rule. THAT is untrue, as evidenced by my previous statement of FACT that during children's music, many parents have been crowded around he front and in the balcony with video cameras down, and no one stopped them. Of course, those days are over now. "Sorry, your kids performance is copyrighted. You can't record your own child singing. His/her's service to God is a copyrighted work of Belleuve Baptist Church. Yes, I know you are a member, but you aren't worth a million $'s, so different rules apply to you.
This is more evidence that the "business method of running a church" has swung so far to the other side, that we no longer know what a church is. We are just a business organization that happens to be a church.
How sad.
Continuing my numbered list from the post above:
ReplyDelete4) Numerous people over the years — visitors, friends, guest preachers and artists — have been allowed to record still pictures, audio and video. This would further strengthen the argument that apparently it's OK unless the person doing the recording is in disagreement with the administration of the church. The church would have a hard time telling someone "no" and legally enforcing it when they can easily be shown to have permitted it on many other occasions before.
FinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteI'm not admitting anything,
Oh, I see...your pride is getting in the way. It's, okay, I understand. And I'm pretty sure others here understand, as well.
Folks - I'm heading off for a while, so I'm not guaranteeing replies. If you want a definite reply, send an email to acefrombbc@gmail.com otherwise I may not get back to you.
Have a great night, everyone...
healme,
ReplyDeleteAt what cost should we strive to have unity? Is there a point where truth should compromise for the sake of unity?
I sincerely appreciate the thought process that brought you to realize that the issue is divided between truth and trust.
I would like to point out that there is a false unity a satanic imitation.
Acts 19:28-29
28 And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.
29 And the whole city was filled with confusion: and having caught Gai'us and Aristar'chus, men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel, they rushed with one accord into the theater.
Notice the "one accord" in this scripture it is the false unity, the satanic imitation that I am speaking of. We can only be assured of Godly Unity when it is bonded in Love by Godly Truths.
My opinion is that the concealment of truth has led to a lack of trust. Does that make trust the problem? Hardly. Our trust is in God. God is unchanging the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So is it truth that is the problem? No, truth is unchanging. Since truth cannot change, it cannot be the problem either.
The concealment of truth is a symptom of the much greater problem. Just as trust has been lost because of it is a symptom of a greater illness.
Where does the problem therefore lie? What is the basis for concealment of truth? Why does our church operate in such secrecy? The answer in my opinion is not nearly so difficult as it has been made to be. The primary answer is money. The root of all evil. Money and the power that comes with it.
Transparency removes the veil of darkness. Transparency by nature forces accountability. Accountability by nature forces integrity. When a church operates in transperity, with the accountability of all, and the integrity required by Scripture, then there will be true unity.
ch
ReplyDeleteThe church would have a hard time telling someone "no" and legally enforcing it when they can easily be shown to have permitted it on many other occasions before.
Ch,
this is very true. Judges look to these sort of facts in legal disputes. What has been the past practice?
Ace
ReplyDeleteMy pride is getting in the way?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You are such a funny fellow. How about admitting you are wrong about defending the churches use of the legal system against it's members?
"that said: There appears to be a general negative reaction to elder led church's. "
ReplyDeleteDavid, you are right. Elder led churches are biblical. The problem is that elders are not chosen based on their regenerated hearts, how much time they spend on their knees, or holiness. They are chosen according to worldly gravitas.
By the time elders have made a decision in a mega, it is 3 months before the congregation knows about it. Folks, there are NO business meetings with elder led churches. There may be in the beginning but those will fade away.
With elder led, members only have access according to their personal relationships with elders. In many churches they are not elected. They are put forth by another elder and the elders vote. It really turns into an exclusive club which is why Mega pastors are all going that direction.
My experience with mega elder boards is that most have an appalling lack of biblical literacy.
If the elders are chosen by God they would look very different. Yes, I can hear the moans now.
I posted this in the previous thread...
ReplyDeleteI realize I am not a frequent poster but I am seeking truth and would like to ask again since no one noticed earlier...
I am very concerned about this..
I want to think this is impossible
www.JesusDotCalm said...
Greetings,
I have not posted many times. As I have stated before I have been concerned with the lack of TRUTH at BBC for well over a year now.
First, I would like to say thank you once again to David Brown and I am sooo glad to see a post from you. Unless I have just missed you I haven't seen a post from you in a long time and have missed hearing you.
Second, I have read on a post from a few days ago that PW was on the BBC campus during the time SG stated he would not be allowed on campus.
Third, I have heard PW has even been in his office at BBC during this time as well.
I hope and pray the authorities have been notified of this!!!
Has anyone else heard of this happening?
Thank you for this place to share as a remnant of brothers and sisters in Christ. It is a blessing to know we have a place to further His Kingdom and protect His sheep.
Even so Come LORD JESUS.
10:49 AM, January 16, 2007
Thank you David Brown for all you do...I keep you in my prayers...
May God give us all wisdom and strength.
Ace: "I love my church works at Bellevue...why don't you tell him/her not to post here anymore?"
ReplyDeleteDon't post here anymore.
Ace, I guess that means YOU DO work at the church. thanks.
ACE,
ReplyDeleteRegarding your comment to Lindon, I am sure he did not know where I worked. He made a legitimate point and you took a swipe at him and had to drag me into it. Nevertheless, I will gladly stop posting if you will.
I have to point out your posts probably outnumber mine 100 to 1.
I am not here to stir up trouble. I have been here to set the record straight when I see the church, and its leaders, telling lies and beating up on our church members. That is wrong and you know it. I post here when guys like you and 4545 are going crazy. You are here to interupt, not dialog. You are never a positive force. You are a nag. A whiner. You debate like a little schoolgirl. When you are backed into a corner you yell, scratch, and scream. You cannot have a reasoned, rational debate. You never bring forward a Bible-based argument. You and the men you defend are using man's logic and tactics in a spiritual battle. YOU WON'T WIN!
Lindon,
ReplyDeleteI agree. It seems rediculous to believe that God would only call the richest men in the churches to be elders. Are finances the primary prerequiste of God in these matters?
David S,
I was busily typing my post at about the same moment that you posted yours. The final Scripture passage on yours brings out the final point that I was making. The problem is greed and power.
I have spoke with a number of deacons, some that have rotated off, some that were due to rotate on and others that have left the church.
The common theme among the vast majority of these men was the potential business power that existed among the most influential of these deacons. There is a strong tendenancy to go along with these men because it could be beneficial or rewarding in the future to do so.
If you pull out any old tapes or recordings from Dr. Rogers, they have a copyright symbol on them. I think it is not an attempt to copyright "the gospel". Just as if I wrote a book based on and quoting Scripture I could copyright the book.
ReplyDeleteOur services are broadcast for free online. We even give them away on iTunes.
ReplyDeletedavid s:
ReplyDelete"but mostly to protect against misuse or abuse."
Don't you think there is potential for this in the current situation considering who was trying to do the filming?
David S.,
ReplyDeleteWithout honesty and integrity, no church governing structure can work. I agree with your overall point on elders. Some falsely believe an elder system would be bad. I would prefer an honest elder system than a corrupt congregational system.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI believe it has been made clear that the intent was to get a video of the standing ovation, not proper quotes.
ReplyDeleteFrom Jim's statement:
"I wanted to record the congregation's reaction to his church address in case he did this."
Just as you assume SG will lie to you in the future, I think it is fair for security/leadership to assume Jim's interest was not to spread the gospel.
The Sunday morning sermons are posted on the internet for everyone to see. There is no need to get another video if your intent is simply to get the proper quotes. And he admitted that is not what he was doing.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletebepatient,
ReplyDeleteYeah, and aren't you one of those "where's your proof" guys?
My proof is that Jim Haywood said it in black and white. Not me. I have never said he was a terrible guy, I don't agree with all the choices he has made, but I am not going to label him. I am simply stating that I think because of the current climate of our church, anyone taping the service, when there is a perfectly legitimate copy of it available free of charge is going to come under scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteI have never ever used the term "hate filled" or "slanderer" about anyone.
ReplyDeleteI'd wager the scrutiny preceded the proscription.
ReplyDelete"I have never ever used the term "hate filled" or "slanderer" about anyone."
ReplyDeleteWhy do reply to accusations that no one has levied? Why must people here argue the obvious and become drawn up in such childish outburst?
If you really dislike labrynths...
see allofgraces' 6:32 post.
ReplyDeleteHere is the chain of events.
Jim Haywood comes under scrutiny for wanting to record the service. I have stated that I think in the current climate ANYONE doing this for no apparent reason would come under scrutiny.
But I did not comment on anyone's actions.
Only after Jim provided the proof himself did I feel free to weigh in.
bepatient.
ReplyDeleteFrom Jim's statement:
"I wanted to record the congregation's reaction to his church address in case he did this."
Then Jim Barnwell owes Jim Haywood an apolgy, since he wasn't recording the "copyrighted" service, but the congo's reaction, which is not copyrighted.
Some lawyer out there explain to me how it's possible for a church to copyright the congregation standing and clapping? Oh wait. You can copyright carefully scripted performances, and the church can argue that the standing ovations are scripted performances, so perhaps they can copyright them afterall.
Bepaitent, you sly dog. You almost had me there for a moment, but I forgot that the standing o's are "intellectual property" that can be copyrighted because they are planned and part of the "performance".
so allofgrace,
ReplyDeleteBillie Tapp sent me an e-mail about why I shouldn't be a Calvinist..
David S,
ReplyDeleteThe committee system works fine as long as the committees truely represent the congregation, and are not just facades put up and filled with "the inner circle" year after year after year in order to insulate the church leadership from any real accountability and scrutiny. This is what has happened at Bellevue. Harry Smith proved this in the Communication Committee meetings when he kept saying "I don't know" when asked any question about how the church is operated. You mean the one person who has served on all the vital committees for past 100 years or so has "no idea" what's going on in the church business? He is either a liar or an incompetent person who proves that the Committee system is broken at Bellevue.
Folks,
ReplyDeleteMoses upon leaving the people that he had led into the promised land.
Deuteronomy 32:27-29
27 For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death?
28 Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them.
29 For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.
Nothing more can be said. The Word is complete.
If he was taping the congregation, was he going to ask for my permission to show it seeing as it might be my face in the congregation?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteFinance Guy,
ReplyDeleteThat was beautiful. These company men try to pull you into their convoluted arguments.
Baptists still spank bad children, no?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteFinanceGuy said...
ReplyDeletebepatient
Great point. Jim Barnwell, you need to draw up a "media covenant" with the congregation that everyone has to sign before they can enter the worship center, that gives permission to show their smiling face on the local broadcast. This "covenant" should say things like "as a Christian, I have a duty to show the world I am in church and worshiping by having a smiling face that you broadcast to the world. I also agree to hold the church harmless for any claim arising from my face being on TV."
This is great fun. Keep them coming Bepatient.
trollcates
ReplyDeleteThat was beautiful. These company men try to pull you into their convoluted arguments.
Thank you.
Baptists still spank bad children, no?
I spank mine, and at least for now, I'm still a Baptist. Although the Baptist appear to be trying to run away from me, at least theologically.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteDavid S,
ReplyDeleteElder rule would never work at Bellevue with the current fraternity in place. They would only see it as more opportunity to solidify power. They would never implement it in a Biblical Manner. The qualifications of being an elder that would be published, and the qualifications that would be reality would be two completely different things.
People really need to ask questions about the amount of business many of these men do with the church. "follow the money" they always say, and it's true here. Take any of the loud "Gaines supporters" in the inner circle, and there is better than a 60% chance they either do significant business with the church, they are close friends with someone who is, or they have a friend or family member recieving significant financial "support" from the church. I think anyone who fits in that catagory should be barred from any vote that may take place as having conflict of interest. It's required of ethical Legal officers and political leaders, why not "Gods Choosen Men?"
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteJim Haywood is not the church nor is he representing the church in this. I would freely give my image to be used by the church I am a member of. I do not give Jim Haywood permission to use my image in any capacity.
ReplyDeleteThe vocabulary word of the day.
ReplyDeleteCORRUPTION.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)cor·rup·tion – noun
1. the act of corrupting or state of being corrupt.
2. moral perversion; depravity.
3. perversion of integrity.
4. corrupt or dishonest proceedings.
5. bribery.
6. debasement or alteration, as of language or a text.
7. a debased form of a word.
8. putrefactive decay; rottenness.
9. any corrupting influence or agency.
A very descriptive word.
If I pose a couple of questions, might anyone answer? After hidden 17 years, what precipitated Williams' confession to Gaines; and, once learned in confidence, why the disclosure 6 months later?
ReplyDeleteBepatient,
ReplyDeleteFirst, you misunderstand the point
Second, you misunderstand the New Testament teaching on what the church is. Jim Haywood is as much the "church" as you or I am. You just prove my point that at lot of the rhetoric about "we are one in the bond of love" and "The church is the body, not the building", etc etc is just that. Rhetoric. Romans 1, "Professing a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteTim, who exactly are you directing this at? Because if you are going to use that time of word it only seems fair to be willing to admit who you are aiming it at.
ReplyDeleteI will be back later if you wish to continue this conversation.
trollcates,
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that something else happened more recent than 17 years ago that forced the family to take this to SG in June, and things have not been dealt with properly even since then. Be patient. The truth will come out. There is too much light on this, even though the self proclaimined personnel committee will attempt to cover it up, or at least work hard not to find anything of significance to tell us about. As Dr. Rogers used to say, they won't be able to find any evidence of wrong doing "for the same reason a theif can't find a policeman!"
David s said:
ReplyDeletePiglet,
did you get my point about deacons being servants, not elders?
David:
Sorry, I've been offline. I do get what you were saying, but I was led to believe that the deacons didn't just serve at Bellevue, they voted on things.
I know better now. I just want to know how we should have a voice.
It never mattered to me before, but now it's criticalin light of our circumstances....
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteBePatient,
ReplyDeleteCORRUPTION
The ultimate problem within our church and church governance, Corruption.
be patient,
ReplyDeleteregarding Tim, don't jump to conclusions.
haha
I mean the church as an entity. You are missing my point.
ReplyDeleteyeah, and I hope you didn't miss my double-entendre.
ReplyDeleteBepatient said...
ReplyDeleteI mean the church as an entity. You are missing my point.
You mean the church as a legal and carnal entity? There you go again, opening the door to legal activity, if you are going to state it's a carnal institution subject to man's laws.
You attitude is not one of a brother in Christ showing love to another. You want to beat down Jim Haywood for working for the Truth in the Lords house, just because it's an "inconvenient truth". I hope Al Gore doesn't sue me for copyright infringement for using that phrase!
Shame on you.
Ace,
ReplyDeleteYou've been trumped.
Are you speaking on behalf of Bellevue Baptist Church as the Communications Director when you blog as Ace?
When the Communications Committee booklet was published and sent out to all members, it was laced with inaccuracies with your name attached to it.
If you want them detailed, it can and will be done once again. At the same time, I'd like for you to detail your accusations about Jim Haywood and the information he has put out.
Earlier, you said Jim had a picture of Nazi's on his sight along with your accusation of Mr. Haywood trying to sell books. You are wrong on both accounts.
Your book theory has already been dismissed today and your accusation of Nazi’s is wrong.
If you remember, Steve Gaines in anger, called one of Bellevue's finest members Hezbollah. The picture Mr. Haywood put on the web for about 1 or 2 hours was a group of Hezbollah fighters with their arms raised in salute. They were Middle Eastern Hezbollah fighters, not Nazis and it was a joke referencing Steve Gaines calling one of his sheep Hezbollah. As the Communications Director in charge of reporting accurate information, please do not blog if you are not going to be accurate.
Please tell Steve Gaines if he is not reading this tonight that everyone on this blog will go away when he is truthful about everything and Bellevue becomes transparent in all things.
The doctor has arrived and is preparing to operate.
ReplyDeleteI'll be making rounds later.
ace said earlier
ReplyDeleteFor those you don't know it, Bellevue Baptist Church is private property.
ACE, Just who owns Bellevue Baptist Church?
ace,
ReplyDeletePlease excuse me for asking such a dumb question, if BBC is private property. Who owns it?
Am I to assume that it is not the Lord's church?
I think I need to change my name to "confused."
The doc-tor--well, it's about time!
ReplyDeleteMay you know?
After hidden 17 years, what precipitated Williams' confession to Gaines; and, once learned in confidence, why the disclosure 6 months later?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI think the next--y'all should continue to work out that church government bidness, cause it looks like your going to need it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletetrucker,
ReplyDeleteAce and Bepatient think they, along with their Millionaire elite friends own it. Boy are they going to be in for a surprise one day....either in this life or the next.
trucker,
ReplyDeleteACE, Just who owns Bellevue Baptist Church?
concerned,
Please excuse me for asking such a dumb question, if BBC is private property. Who owns it?
I don't know who exactly owns it but it is private property. Go research it and you will see I am right. Maybe you could report back and tell us who exactly owns it....
Trump,
ReplyDeleteAre you speaking on behalf of Bellevue Baptist Church as the Communications Director when you blog as Ace?
For the one-millionth time, no. I am not speaking on behalf of Bellevue Baptist Church. And I am not Jim Barnwell, for the one millionth time, as well.
The picture Mr. Haywood put on the web for about 1 or 2 hours was a group of Hezbollah fighters with their arms raised in salute. They were Middle Eastern Hezbollah fighters, not Nazis and it was a joke referencing Steve Gaines calling one of his sheep Hezbollah.
Alright...and how exactly is this funny????
Lindon,
ReplyDeleteAce, I guess that means YOU DO work at the church. thanks.
I never said that.
I love my church,
You are a nag. A whiner. You debate like a little schoolgirl.
Thanks for you great attitude and opinion.
FinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteIf you have some personal agenda against me, please take it up with me privately in an email. You are making yourself look foolish by constantly attacking me for absolutely no reason at all.
Thank you.
acefrombbc@gmail.com
Ace's number one answer to every question.Go research it-- Maybe you could report back
ReplyDeleteLindon,
ReplyDeleteMay I add to your list?
You are a nag. A whiner. You debate like a little schoolgirl.
You sound like an angry teenager.
"Go research it and you will see I am right. Maybe you could report back and tell us who exactly owns it."
ReplyDeleteYeah, go reaearch to help ace build his straw man.
Regarding jokes, they are not always meant to be funny ha-ha, but rather ironic--for instance, showing a picture of a bunch of cold-blooded killers whom signify themselves as Hezbollah, as a way of driving home the association intended by the remark and the careless-ness of labeling fellow Christians in such a deplorable manner.
Are Ace, Bepatient and 4545 all the company men they got to keep the static pumping here, because I think reinforcements are in order.
This is no more sporting than shooting fish in a barrel.
God is calling you to pray.
ReplyDeleteThis video is what the church should be about:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2609149243719622443
Zephaniah 3
Trucker,
ReplyDeleteAce's number one answer to every question.Go research it-- Maybe you could report back
I'm sorry, but I don't like to answer questions which I don't know the answers to. If I did that, it would be one of two things... 1) gossiping, or 2) lying - two things you are quite fond of.
Don't ask, don't tell.
ReplyDeleteace,
ReplyDeleteYou stated as a fact that Bellevue is private property.How do you know this? Maybe you don't really know and are spreading gossip.So answer the question .Who owns Bellevue?
Ace, it's after 9; don't you have homework?
ReplyDeleteace,
ReplyDeleteDo you play poker, Just curious ?
Please forgive me for another silly question, when someone says something in front of say 5 to 6 thousand people, how do you clasify that as private? Another silly question, how can you say it should be kept in the family, do we not have visitors present?
In reguards to who owns BBC, I have the impression that you have all the answers or that you are in the inter circle, so it should not be hard for you to find out.
ace,
ReplyDeleteDo you play poker, Just curious ?
Please forgive me for another silly question, when someone says something in front of say 5 to 6 thousand people, how do you classify that as private? Another silly question, how can you say it should be kept in the family, do we not have visitors present?
In reguards to who owns BBC, I have the impression that you have all the answers or that you are in the inter circle, so it should not be hard for you to find out.
Ace,
ReplyDeleteWhere where are you? Did mom catch you on the computer instead of doing your homework?
Trucker,
ReplyDeleteYou stated as a fact that Bellevue is private property.How do you know this?
It's common knowledge, that's how.
Maybe you don't really know and are spreading gossip.
Nope. That's your job
So answer the question .Who owns Bellevue?
I already answered this - I didn't know an hour ago, I don't know now. So drop it.
Trollcates,
ReplyDeleteAce, it's after 9; don't you have homework?
Huh? I have never directed any posts towards you and yet you attack me. That's real nice.
FinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteYour 4:24pm post was a great breakdown of things thank you for laying it out like that.
Concerned,
ReplyDeleteDo you play poker, Just curious ?
No, I never could remember what the difference between a flush, full house, royal flush, straight flush, and etc. are.
Please forgive me for another silly question, when someone says something in front of say 5 to 6 thousand people, how do you clasify that as private?
It's within the church family, therefore it's private. Whether there are 2 people in your family or 20, it's still your family.
Another silly question, how can you say it should be kept in the family, do we not have visitors present?
You're right, this is silly, and I don't see a need of discussing it because it has no importance.
In reguards to who owns BBC, I have the impression that you have all the answers or that you are in the inter circle, so it should not be hard for you to find out.
I already stated what I know. People here need to quit being lazy and get up and do work for themselves instead of relying on others to do their work for them.
Ace
ReplyDeleteWe really don't have time for gossip or inaccurate information so we try to verify as much as we possibly can.
An open business meeting instead of an informational meeting would be helpful, don't you think?
Trucker,
ReplyDeleteWhere where are you? Did mom catch you on the computer instead of doing your homework?
No, I actually have a life and don't sit at the computer 24/7 refresing the page for updates.
Awe, didn't mean to hurt your feelings there mate.
ReplyDeleteThere's really no way to roll your eyes on the internets, so I do so verbally.
Piglet,
ReplyDeleteWe really don't have time for gossip or inaccurate information so we try to verify as much as we possibly can.
What? Thanks for the laugh. ;)
An open business meeting instead of an informational meeting would be helpful, don't you think?
If you people would be civil during the meeting and behave, then I am for this. However, if you act all immature on this blog, what is going to stop you from acting all babyish at the meeting too? I think there would be chaos at a meeting such as this, allowing EVERYONE to talk that ones to....but if the people who go can behave themselves, then I'm all for it.
Ace
ReplyDeleteYou make up statements without the facts. HMMM sounds like you don't practice what you preach.
Next time back up your statements with facts and you won't look so silly.
Ace said:
ReplyDeletePeople here need to quit being lazy and get up and do work for themselves instead of relying on others to do their work for them.
Piglet says:
Many are doing the work and posting their findings here. The lazy thing is to dismiss everything as lies and gossip without any explaination to back it up.
There it is, "you people." Ah, did you hear love? I heard love there.
ReplyDeleteTrucker,
ReplyDeleteYou make up statements without the facts. HMMM sounds like you don't practice what you preach.
Next time back up your statements with facts and you won't look so silly.
What have I made up? Absolutely nothing. You need to quit complaining and face the facts. And I'm not the one who is looking silly...that would be you for continually bringing this up when I have stated at least 3 or 4 times I don't know the answer to something and you are demanding I answer you. That's really sad.
Ace said:
ReplyDeletePeople here need to quit being lazy and get up and do work for themselves instead of relying on others to do their work for them.
Ace ,
Why don't you research the facts to back up your statements?
Like "Bellevue is private property."
Sounds like you should heed your own words.,or do you suscribe to "do as I say not as I do".
No wonder you so blindly support Jim B. Harry Smith et al.
Trucker,
ReplyDeleteSince you are arguing with me constantly, is Bellevue Baptist Church not private property?
Piglet said,
ReplyDeleteWe really don't have time for gossip or inaccurate information so we try to verify as much as we possibly can.
Ace said:
What? Thanks for the laugh. ;)
Piglet says:
I would like to know why you think this is funny. I don't.
I have only dealt with facts from the beginning. The only lies I have heard thus far were from my SS teacher who assured us this was all a conspiracy started by the people who didn't like the music. I trusted him.
That is NOT funny, my friend.
We are not here to complain. We are here to get to the root of all this and take some action.
Then, YOU won't be laughing.
There'snothingfunny about thatand I'mirlt
And I'm not the one who is looking silly.
ReplyDeleteThe silly one is generally last to know.
Piglet,
ReplyDeleteWe really don't have time for gossip or inaccurate information
That was the part I was laughing at. This blog is full of gossip and inaccurate information...
Trollcates,
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm not the one who is looking silly.
I wasn't talking to you...I was talking to trucker.
Ace
ReplyDeleteyou sound so much like the CC when you avoid answering questions.Are any of the CC members you father?
Well ,unlike you I have to work tomorrow and will be gone for several days.I'm sure that when I check in a few days from now you will still be making the same insiped remarks and unfounded statements.
Good night ace,you did well tonight Jim Barnwell will be proud of you and will give you a "ataboy" tomorrow
Ace
ReplyDeleteThis blog is full of gossip and inaccurate information...
If only that were true, this wouldn't exist. It's full of facts and true statements, among the editorial opinion that the First Amendment to the Constitition of the United States gives us the right to have. It's the Sandballats and Tobiahs such as yourself that try to cast doubt on what people can see with their own eyes.
Here's my prediction on how the PW matter will be resolved:
ReplyDelete1. David Coombs will read a statement saying that the internal investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of PW since his confessed "moral failure" from 17 years ago.
2. The statement will also indicate that PW has resigned to spend more time with his family and that BBC has accepted his resignation.
3. Coombs will praise SG for his wonderful way of handling this difficult situation and the congregation will give SG a standing ovation.
4. SG will lecture the congregation on the importance of praying for PW and his family, extending love and forgiveness to PW, and on how terrible it was for people to pass judgment on PW and on SG for his handling of this situation.
5. The congregation will give SG another standing O.
6. No explanation or defense will be given for not dealing with this situation sooner.
7. SG will conclude by having the congregation join hands and sing "Sweet, Sweet Spirit."
8. SG-supporters will say, "See there, I knew he would handle it appropriately. What was all the fuss about?"
9. SG-opponents will say, "See there, I knew he would dodge another bullet. He'll be here forever"
10. Bloggers on both sides of the issue will debate whether SG should stay or go, until they get distracted with the issue of whether Jacob's increase in striped and speckled livestock was the result of his own ingenuity, God's blessing of Jacob, or just random chance.
Does anyone else want to lay out a prediction of how this will play out?
Goodnight, trucker. Have a safe trip....
ReplyDeleteFinanceGuy,
ReplyDeleteIf only that were true, this wouldn't exist. It's full of facts and true statements
Well, if we're following that logic, is the Koran true or is it full of inaccurate stuff? It must be true since it exists.
There goes your argument out the window. Nice try.
I am a fairly regular reader of this blog and I'm simply shocked by the attitudes that I find exhibited here.
ReplyDeleteI would describe a minority of posts as full of grace and compassion, while many posts are quite insulting.
Why don't ALL of you who wish to blog do so only after applying I Corinthians 10:31: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God".
If a comment that we wish to make to another brother or sister does not glorify God, then don't hit "SEND". You can disagree with another blogger and make your point without being rude or insulting.
I searched my heart and feel that this post does honor the Lord, that's why I'm hitting "SEND".
Ace
ReplyDeleteI know enough for myself without gleaning ANYTHING from this blog.
I have DONE the work you talk about. I have opinions based on what I KNOW.
Good grief, there's enough dirt to fill the Grand Canyon. You can't possibly hide it all.
The sad part is, whatever we know is only a small part of what we don't know...
"For every roach you see there are 100 you don't see.."
Safe travels, trucker.
ReplyDeleteLet me rephrase that:
"And I'm not the one who is looking silly."
The silly one is generally last to know.
There, better.
Ace,
ReplyDeleteYour right, that was faulty logic. I was just trying to copy the "numbers and giving are up, so God must be in what's going on" logic of Chuck Taylor and Harry Smith. By the way, what does it mean when numbers are down? God has left the building?
Ace
ReplyDeleteI guess you don't have any comment on the lies from my SS teacher,who was a deacon officer, by the way.
wontclapforsteve
ReplyDelete10. Bloggers on both sides of the issue will debate whether SG should stay or go, until they get distracted with the issue of whether Jacob's increase in striped and speckled livestock was the result of his own ingenuity, God's blessing of Jacob, or just random chance.
Now i've had a "must wipe sweet tea off the computer monitor" moment ala Karen.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAce
ReplyDeleteLet's make this easier.
Fill in the blank:
For a SS teacher to lie to their class is __________________.
Necessary
Commanded by Steve Gaines
A sin
A mistake, we all make mistakes
Piglet,
ReplyDeleteI guess you don't have any comment on the lies from my SS teacher,who was a deacon officer, by the way.
All you seem to do is want to argue with me so I decided not to respond to you anymore...is there a problem with that?
You say I am full of lies, yet you keep begging for my posts... hmm...
Ace
ReplyDeleteRidiculous statements need to be confronted.
Sorry I make you so uncomfortable. :)
Piglet,
ReplyDeleteSorry I make you so uncomfortable. :)
You don't make me uncomfortable...you just don't make much sense, that's all.
piglet,
ReplyDeleteSorry, but I think you went overboard here. The Grand Canyon is huge, and I doubt that Steve Gaines has enough dirt under his rug to fill it all by himself. You must have been talking about the leadership in general?? That would make the term you used more appropriate to me. But, on the other hand, we only know a small bit of the story. If the present strife that has been revealed is only the tip, I would almost promise you the "rest of the story" would be more than we could bear.
I did most definitely love the roach comparison though!
LOL
Ace, go to bed now and let the folks carry on a decent conversation without the division and stress. They need to fellowship somewhere now that their church has been hijacked.
Good night all!
No disrespect intended,
ReplyDeleteI don't apologize--ace, bepatient and 4545, amongst others, are antagonists here and some behaviors warrant a lil' wrathfulness (not anger or hatred). Piety's great at church, but you should be careful about placing equivalences on attackers and those defending themselves on this, after all, last outpost.
We could make this blog a much nicer place if we could refrain from feeding the trolls. I am speaking to myself as much as anyone else.
ReplyDeleteIt is actually a very peaceful place when we ignore certain people who just want to disrupt.
We need to remember that we have the Spirit in us and that we grieve the Spirit when we allow the flesh to get the best of us.
I know how hard it is to ignore someone who posts something so rediculous as to almost be funny. It would be funny if this weren't so serious.
Folks just remember this is not nearly as painful as Jesus suffered for each of us.
Let's try to show love in each post and if we can't would it not be better to delete it?
more to follow....
Here's something that has puzzled me for several months now - why is it that there has been no successful attempt to organize the people who are concerned about SG's leadership? To be sure, there were a few informational meetings, but no real leader emerged to say, "okay folks, let's organize ourselves and rectify this situation!"
ReplyDeleteIt reminds me of the incident where the crowd wanted to throw Jesus off the cliff and He escaped by simply walking away in their midst, because His time had not yet come.
I have come to the conclusion that whatever happens to SG, it will happen on God's timetable, not ours, and no one other than God will be able to take any credit for what happens.
Someone asked if members could legally stand on the grass on the "median strip" on Appling or "Adrian Rogers Pkwy" and hand out literature.
ReplyDeleteThe answer is yes.
This is because of the legal status of the street once the name of the street was changed.
At that time, so did the legal rights on the "median strip."
Soo, you may exercise your membership privilege.