Let's wait
The recent get-together at Huey's was very rewarding, and actually productive. Putting names with faces was one thing, but the maturity expressed (that perhaps one can criticize aspects of a church's direction without verbal assaults) was refreshing.
However, for those who have made a hobby of attacking Bellevue Baptist Church, that opinion does not appear to be infectious. A few moments ago, I visited the primary home of anti-Bellevue rhetoric, and saw that it's been ratcheted up--with not even a peep of admonition (so far) from the regulars.
But let's be patient.
Surely the notion that a church is "dead" because you don't like it will be countered by someone; surely the notion that a pastor you don't like is led by a demonic spirit will be rebuked at some point. Perhaps the Huey's lunch made me overly optimistic about the future of this dispute. The next day or two will tell the tale.
Occasionally, a Bellevue contrarian will realize that (gasp!) people outside the church body might be reading what is written. One day, they may realize that ignoring the Biblical model for conflict resolution can give people the notion that it's all right not to take anything else the Bible says too seriously. They might even realize that when their behavior is indistinguishable from worldly behavior, something is wrong. One day, they may understand that calls for others to be responsible ring hollow when one's own responsibility, or the collective responsibility of one's group, is suspect at best.
The clock is ticking, but let's be patient.
--Mike
577 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 577 of 577Junkster said...
Welcome back you your blog, Mike! :)
Much obliged!
Mike Bratton said...
2) David, Brady wasn't casting aspersions--he was correctly quoting the Bible.
I have to disagree. Brady was actually questioning David's "authority on anything" (Brady's words) on the basis of David being a Buddhist.
Quoting thusly and like so:
"The Paul Williams issue is both theological and common-sense. Since neither one of us was in the meetings with him and Dr. Gaines we will have to trust his judgment on this issue.
"I was not attacking your character at all. I was simply making a Biblical statement and that is that an unregenerate man (you) cannot understand the things of the Spirit of God."
Is this whole shebang a spiritual issue, fundamentally, or isn't it?
If you haven't noticed, there are those among the supporters of SG who have made the same statements about posters at NBBCOF.
Please name "those among," so's I can have the same chat with them I have with the Forum nucleus.
Well, there's that.
"Oh, no one will answer a direct question!"
Well, all right.
"Oh, someone has actually answered a direct question in a way I don't agree with!"
Ring-tailed if you do, ring-tailed if you don't... ;)
If that is your honest opinion, and I believe it is, and you are by no means open to reconsider it, as I believe you are, then what basis is there for further discussion on the matter?
I'd like to see some actual discussion for a change. Then, we can worry about whether or not there's a basis for it. So far, there's been a bunch of whacking Steve Gaines about the head and shoulders, and not so much in the way of deliberation.
But there is still the fact that people have come to that conclusion, which can only mean you do not believe their conclusion is reasonable. Must be good to have the be-all and end-all corner on the capacity to reason, eh?
As I said, discussion has to start before it can end. Framing a direct response to a direct question as that I have "the be-all and end-all corner on the capacity to reason" short-circuits discussion, don't you think?
therefore you believe that yours is the only reasonable conclusion! My, how you flatter yourself!
No, that flattering sound you heard is the sound made when someone's response jumps to a condemning conclusion, as yours did.
First off, you state as fact things not publicly known to be the case. Where in the PCIR, or any other public source, is any of that stated? Do you know this because SG says so? Or because PW or his son say so?
It's a radical approach, and I know that most folks don't go in for it, but I know these facts because I ask people who would be in a position to know. In person. Face-to-face, when possible. Without wearing a wire, even...
Hmmm...if only there were some forum for the church to have reasonable public discussions of public matters ... oh, wait, wouldn't that be called a business meeting?
It would. Covered on March 30th. The summation of your friends' reactions?
Church is a "filibuster."
Most in the Bellevue membership are idiots.
The business meeting was the equivalent of the Holocaust.
Neither the pastor nor anyone in Bellevue leadership can possibly be a Christian, because the pastor and church leadership all serve Satan.
If the church doesn't do as the contrarians wish, Pastor Gaines should die.
And if you think I'm hyperbolizing, by all means read the entire article--including the referenced Forum quotes--at your leisure.
And secondly, how could SG's thinking it was "settled" in the past absolve him of his legal and ethical responsibilities in the present? If that's the best you've got for answering "No" to David's question, perhaps your reasoning powers aren't as superior as you seem to think they are.
Again, a personal disparagement in place of discussion. However, to respond to the kernel of moderation in that remark, there was an outside investigation that found no violations of the law, wasn't there? But even in hindsight, Pastor Gaines believes he should've acted more unilaterally.
Oh, what a crock of stuff! SG could not do the right thing by the victim and toward the congregation as a whole because there were the needs of the perpetrator to consider! That is patently absurd. If a man commits murder and then tells his pastor, say, 17 years later, does the pastor sit on the information because he thinks the murdered man's family has forgiven him and because the murder is a member of the congregation who needs ministering to, as well? Hardly.
To stretch your analogy well past its low breaking point, Pastor Gaines would've had to have thought the murdered man had reconciled with his murderer.
Might want to head back to the drawing board on that one.
A pastor committed to integrity, obedience to Scripture, and to the laws of the land would seek to minister to all concerned in the proper ways, including persuading the perpetrator to immediately resign (or else be terminated), seek legal counsel, and turn himself in, and then the pastor would be there to provide moral and spiritual support to the murderer (assuming he was repentant and wanted it) throughout his trial and imprisonment.
Then why isn't Mr. Williams under arrest?
(And if anyone's interested in disagreeing with that statement, tell me first why any church, anywhere, has a prison ministry.)
Prison ministries don’t exist primarily to serve the needs of church members who get thrown into jail, but to take the gospel to those there who do not already know Christ. Once those folks have become believers, the prison ministry of church seeks to disciple them as it would any other member, regardless of where they were domiciled. This has nothing to do with anything we've been talking about.
Ah. So if you're a Christian who's convicted of a crime, a church prison ministry is to refuse to minister to you?
Where, precisely, do you get that notion from? And do you realize that your response represents exactly the "shoot the wounded" worldview?
I like a great deal of what you write, Junk, but you might want to consider the ramifications of much of what you put in your post.
--Mike
Church is a "filibuster."
Most in the Bellevue membership are idiots.
The business meeting was the equivalent of the Holocaust.
Neither the pastor nor anyone in Bellevue leadership can possibly be a Christian, because the pastor and church leadership all serve Satan.
If the church doesn't do as the contrarians wish, Pastor Gaines should die.
Wow, what a perfect summary! I (and many others) happen to disagree, but what do we know?
Keep count'n those beans, and blithly ignore their counterparts here, even on this thread.
It's mighty cute.
One glaring distinction I can see in the "Pastor Gaines/Principal Gaines" question is that the Principal Gaines would be directly entrusted with the safety of minors whereas Pastor Gaines's responsibility is a bit more broad.
Although we all have responsibilities and obligations to each other within the law and just as fellow human beings- the individual responsibilities of each job are different. I think a social worker's obligations are different from a sanitation worker's.
A CEO stealing money might not get the same punishment as an hourly worker stealing from the cash register.
SG was still wrong, but it is not because a principal would have been wrong in the same situation.
Mike,
I am too tired tonight to take the time to dissect your dissection of my post and attempt to redirect back to the main ideas after all the deflections. But I'll try to respond later.
Peace, out!
Keep count'n those beans, and blithly ignore their counterparts here, even on this thread.
It's mighty cute.
Well, that's certainly a very well thought out, insightful response. It's given me a lot to think about, that's for sure.
However, despite such a pithy answer, I'm still not convinced that SG should be fired.
Maybe you can try again?
So it is an argument of situational ethics now.
The pastor's obligations are broader, thus he limits them to the pedophile alone--good argument. A ceo, a sanitation worker an a pastor all have the same obligation to public safety when they have knowledge of childhood sexual abuse.
Whoa, you are going super-surreal.
Situational Ethics- I wondered when it would it would come into play...
It actually makes your principal argument less valid. Because if all people who know of sexual abuse and don't report it immediately should lose their jobs, then all those bloggers who knew before the story "broke" should have resigned or been terminated. I guess the victim's wife and mother should no longer be allowed to work either and should promptly be hauled off to jail.
No one is screaming for consequences for these people, because we have a much easier time understanding why they did it (or didn't do it as the case may be). But when you boil it down, they are just as culpable.
Your arguement reminds of my schoolchildren--when I catch one of them striking another, the refrain is always "he hit me first."
Is your rationale of Gaines failure situational ethics or not?
"But when you boil it down, they are just as culpable."
bepatient,
Who or whom is just as culpable? That is one to which you always make reference--but you never say who that is.
I do not know of these people--so boil it down for us, won't you? Then tell us why poor decision by one absolves another?
Well, it's been another telling week on the Bratton Report:
-We learned that Mike doesn't think that Gaines letting the pedophile off the hook for 6 months is a good enough reason to doubt his leadership. Thus, despite the facts, Mike is right and everyone who holds a differing opinion is wrong. (Isn't this something you criticize?)
-Also, some folks at Bellevue and on the Bratton Report believe that Dr. Rogers would have taken the same tact as Gaines, letting the pedophile walk for 6 months.
-We learned that sanitation workers and CEOs have different obligations from bepatient.
-We learned from Brady that a person who is not a christian cannot be an authority on anything; of course, this must be true, since Brady, a christian, is seemingly an authority on everything.
-Aramis worked a lot on his comedy routine.
You guys should go on tour.
Good job, soldiers.
Mike said...
What to write about next? If I do write about what's going on at Bellevue, some folks will grumble about my pathological need to write about what's going on at Bellevue. If I write about something else that's caught my attention, some folks will grumble that I'm just hiding my pathological need to write about what's going on at Bellevue.
I've got a suggestion (although it's about Bellevue).
I just noticed this 'over there':
Housewife said...
billie said...
Every anti Gaines person who we have encountered through writings or personal contact can be characterized by slanderous speech and obvious obsession with rumors and gossip.
(hw) Be specific. What rumors and gossip? From what I've seen, you've never been able to actually give any examples of this. If I'm wrong, this is the time to give examples.
Why don't we help Billie out and reminisce about our favorite outrageous and unfounded rumors and/or gossip about Steve Gaines?
My favorite was back when petition mania was sweeping the blog. Someone did an internet search and found a book about buying real estate in Manhattan by an author named Steven Gaines. Next thing you know, the rumors are flying that Bellevue's SG was keeping an apartment on Park Avenue, and that's why he needed to make 5 gazillion dollars a year.
That was weird, all right.
John Mark Said...
My favorite was back when petition mania was sweeping the blog. Someone did an internet search and found a book about buying real estate in Manhattan by an author named Steven Gaines. Next thing you know, the rumors are flying that Bellevue's SG was keeping an apartment on Park Avenue, and that's why he needed to make 5 gazillion dollars a year.
That was weird, all right.
JTB: I never saw that. Can you verify that by showing the post? That just isn't a rumor you are trying to start, are you?
Egads! My bluff has been called...
Proverbs 12:22 said...
I read comments on the petition site that said something about Steve Gaines having an apartment in New York. What in the world is that all about? I must have missed something.
9:08 PM, March 26, 2007
sheeplessatbbc said...
Proverbs 12:22 said...
I read comments on the petition site that said something about Steve Gaines having an apartment in New York. What in the world is that all about? I must have missed something.
9:08 PM, March 26, 2007
What is that about, anybody know?
10:17 PM, March 26, 2007
Proverbs 12:22 said...
Sheepless,
What would he maintain a New York apartment for?
Does anyone know if that is even true?
10:21 PM, March 26, 2007
Lily said...
New York is deal central. If you're working to promote money making deals - even in the realm of a ministry - New York offers a variety of opportunities. Rent would be a tax deductible expense as you pursue those opportunities.
10:27 PM, March 26, 2007
MOM4 said...
The address on the petition before it was deleted was in Queens - that does not seem like an area for deal making - my husband's uncle lives in Manhatten so I will try to contact him to see what all that area is known for. Does he make many trips to New York? When was this? Recently?
10:31 PM, March 26, 2007
Brooklyn Bob said...
Post 1
Brooklyn Bob said...
4545 said...
Wow, yet another rumor.
4545, If it were not true you would be correct. Sorry, this is more than a rumor. This time you don't know what you are talking about. Your search committee really should have done their homework.
Please ask your preacher to tell you the truth and then report back to the blog tomorrow.
11:34 PM, March 26, 2007
Post 2
Brooklyn Bob said...
Sheepless,
I think the answers to this should come from the pastor. Some things should never be disclosed online. I never considered putting anything about his Brooklyn apartment on the internet. Others started that earlier today. When 4545 called it a rumor, I decided he needed to be corrected. I am not going to let him bully those people who are simply trying to find some answers. They love their church and want the truth.
As for Steve, it looks like he waited too late to do the right thing. He could have quietly left the ministry and kept his reputation intact. I may wonder forever why he didn't do that. Now, I fear all will be out in the open.
12:22 AM, March 27, 2007
We never heard back from 4545. If Truth Rules is right about an announcement, I suspect 4545 or one of his buddies took my suggestion about talking to the preacher.
Know thine enemy, know thyself.
3:10 AM, March 30, 2007
(BTW, the 'Truth Rules' announcement was an April Fool joke.)
Jessica said...
One glaring distinction I can see in the "Pastor Gaines/Principal Gaines" question is that the Principal Gaines would be directly entrusted with the safety of minors whereas Pastor Gaines's responsibility is a bit more broad.
Although we all have responsibilities and obligations to each other within the law and just as fellow human beings- the individual responsibilities of each job are different. I think a social worker's obligations are different from a sanitation worker's.
A CEO stealing money might not get the same punishment as an hourly worker stealing from the cash register.
SG was still wrong, but it is not because a principal would have been wrong in the same situation.
JTB: Jessica, I am just not sure you couldn't be more wrong. For one, it doesn't matter who it is, protecting children is EVERYONES direct responsibility. Principal or Pastor, the responsibility is the same. A principal is directly responsible of children/minors by job description.
A Pastor is directly responsible for children/minors (and adults) by calling. He is a shepherd that is called by God to protect the sheep...little ones especially.
There isn't a grey area. No right or wrong. There is only right...to protect the children. If a man/woman commits sin against a child (and God naturally), no matter how long ago, it is the Pastor's /leaderships responsibility to remove that threat from the children. Anything less is morally, spiritually, legally, ethically, scriptually wrong.
Anyone who knowingly keeps a pedefile in a position that has the potential to harm children is guilty as well.
Suppose that Steve did let PW off the hook because Steve thought it was"under grace", does that relieve Steve's responibility before God to protect the little sheep?
I would submit to you that Steve Gaines or any pastor, has even a greater responsibility to protect the children before God than a principal has. We created the role of a principal. God created the position of Pastor/Shepherd.
While a pastor does have a lot more responibilities than perhaps a principal, NONE is greater than protecting the sheep which was mandated by God.
Boy, I just LOVE reading the old posts. Mom4 outsmarted SG and realized he actually kept TWO apartments in NY. Any you've sure gotta respect Brooklyn Bob for not divulging super secret confidential information...
MOM4 said...
The address on the petition before it was deleted was in Queens - that does not seem like an area for deal making - my husband's uncle lives in Manhatten so I will try to contact him to see what all that area is known for. Does he make many trips to New York? When was this? Recently?
10:31 PM, March 26, 2007
MOM4 said...
IF he is keeping another apartment in NY, that could account on his need for such a mammoth salary??
10:33 PM, March 26, 2007
MOM4 said...
If he is just going on business, why would he need an apartment? The rent there is in the thousands per month for a tiny apt. - we have closets bigger here than a thousand dollar a month apt there?
Looks to me like a business trip would only necessitate a hotel stay?
10:37 PM, March 26, 2007
sheeplessatbbc said...
Brooklyn Bob,
Are you really from Brooklyn, NY?
12:09 AM, March 27, 2007
Brooklyn Bob said...
Sheepless,
I think the answers to this should come from the pastor. Some things should never be disclosed online.
My Favorite Rumor
by Memphis (AKA the gansta wannabe cheerleader)
My favorite internet rumor was that 2 BBC members actually got into a fistfight over all of this stuff at an area restaurant. It was the rage at the time, yet no one (even to this day) knows who was involved or where it happened, maybe I should say it has yet to be verified that it happened or that people were involved.
You would fill a book with all the rumors that are spread on those anti-bellevue sites. Of course they totally ignore the Biblical teaching about spreading rumors and lies.
Imagine how rich Dr. Gaines would be if he only made half of what they think he makes or how many houses he would have if he had half as many as they think he does.
It will be a sad day indeed when they stand before the Judgment Seat and have to give an account for the things they have said about our pastor.
JTB,
If you will just go ahead and read what I wrote again- I said plainly that SG was WRONG. 100% black and white wrong. He made a stupid decision and my opinion is that it was a sense of fear that made him handle it the way he did.
My point is that we do not hold people to the same standards. Just because a principal would have been fired isn't the reason SG should have been fired.
You can debate with me that he is too weak or fearful or inept to be our pastor, but it seems dumb to me to say 'oh well a principal would have lost his job so SG should too'.
A principal would lose his job for getting a sex change but a worker at Starbucks wouldn't. We do have a different standard for different positions.
I don't know how to make it any plainer but you guys can just keep twisting it around however you will.
Hey, look, I've joined the cakes society of twisting words around!
jessica said...
If you will just go ahead and read what I wrote...I...was WRONG. 100% black and white wrong.... My point is that...SG should have been fired.
...he is too weak or fearful or inept to be our pastor...
Jessica said....
I don't know how to make it any plainer but you guys can just keep twisting it around however you will.
JTB: I didn't mean to twist your words. I was responding to what you wrote. If what you wrote isn't clear, maybe you should paid better attention in english comp class. Just kidding.
I am not apart of "you guys". I am just me. No conspiracy theory. No plot to twist your words.
Sorry if I misunderstood what you were saying.
There are different standards for different folks. It is just the pastor is to be held to a higher standard because of his call before God to minister to/care for & protect God's sheep.
John Mark said...
Hey, look, I've joined the cakes society of twisting words around!
I guess that would be better than your club of twisted minds and distorted views that you are president of. I mean that in the kindest possible way. To each his own.
I knew it!
jtb...
I ... mean to twist your words. I ... plot to twist your words.
John Mark said...
jtb, I ... mean to twist your words. I ... plot to twist your words.
jtb: I know John Mark, you can't help it. We will have your meds adjusted.
JM,
some people just have no sense of humor huh?
and I will take care of this one for you...
Jessica said...
"some people just have no sense..."
Thanks, folks.
I know what my next article needs to be about. Now, if I can only find the time to write it... :)
--Mike
it's a conspiracy to make people qualify their assertions, instead respecting them because someone's an actor, someone is blond or someone is loyal to Gaines. When I engage in forums, I often get the "you think you're smarter than everyone" and defend their right to "disagree."
Everybody has a right to hold an opinion, and everyone may express it on a forum; however there is no mandate to respect all opinions equally, since not everyone expresses a cogent argument on matters of consequence.
If you say that no one should have any problem--after the way the pedophile scandal was botched and hushed--trusting Gaines as pastor, then this is a good thing for the alienated to know. It expresses a thought that NBBC-types--finding it foolish to again place trust in such a man, in proportion the gravity and scope of the damage--are wrong, period; and won't even entertain the notion that it is perfectly reasonable for someone to have a differing conclusion.
This is very useful information. If words are a form of currency, and its exchange value is in direct proportion to mutual good faith and honest reason--then a conversation about this issue with Mike is bankrupt, unless one is open to be scolded on how wrong they are. How can fair play and measured exchange be built upon such a objectionable pretext?
At least with this in the open, one may decide the merit or lack thereof in seeking common ground with the loyal.
And yes, I can see how folks might look at the events in question, find them egregious too, yet place guarded optimism that Gaines has learned his lesson. I don't agree with it, but the fact that I'm here means I haven't writtten you off.
jessica said...
... I will take care of ... you...
More threats!!!
While y'all are counting beans--what do you make of this posted on NBBCOF:
"Brady said...
Its good to know you are a man. And all this time I thought you were a woman.
Now maybe you should grow some balls and take this filthy site off the internet.
12:02 PM, September 04, 2007 "
Said this here a day prior:
"Brady said...
I have a hard time understanding how people can write such hate-filled posts on the anti-Bellevue sites and then delude themselves into thinking they are so spiritual and discerning. I guess the saying is true, "they can't see the forest for the trees." Imagine what Bellevue would be like if these people spent as much time praying for Dr. Gaines and in making our church better as they do in writing their garbage.
Another thought. "Cakes" is a Buddhist (and that's his right) but the Bible clearly teaches that an unregenerate man cannot even begin to understand the things of the Spirit of God so why do people accept him as an authority on anything.
Just having a hard time understanding all of this junk.
10:09 AM, September 03, 2007"
Ha--I know, that one doesn't count.
If words are a form of currency, and its exchange value is in direct proportion to mutual good faith and honest reason--then a conversation about this issue with Mike is bankrupt, unless one is open to be scolded on how wrong they are. How can fair play and measured exchange be built upon such a objectionable pretext?
Salting the ground, David. Poor form. Please cut it out. Talk about ideas, not personalities.
"Its good to know you are a man. And all this time I thought you were a woman. Now maybe you should grow some b***s and take this filthy site off the internet."
Locker-room drawl, Brady. Please apologize to "Nass" and clean up your verbiage. Talk about ideas, not personalities.
--Mike
Ha--I know, that one doesn't count.
Oh, it does. What a crude remark. Based on that statement, I hereby condemned the blog which allowed it to originally be published.
I'm sure glad no one posts off color comments like that here, other than cakes that is.
Mike,
I'm one of the only regulars who does talk about ideas, so you cut it out. What, I cannot pick some cherries over at NBBCOF?
This thread begs a further explanation of your "movement" argument, because its beginning to resemble the very thing you condemn over at NBBCOF. How does talk of Benoit and Elvis give you an indulgence and the other forum is indicted wholesale?
This folks that visit here often attack personalities, mine, junk's, Dr. Roger's, Sotl's, Gmom's, Bill Looney's, etc.--why get your back up now?
And Mike, the statement you quoted of mine is substantive, and further, true. Why have a conversation when you've already made you mind up that no one could come to the reasonable conclusion that Gaines is a pastor unfit to follow?
Why have a conversation when you've already made you mind up that no one could come to the reasonable conclusion that Gaines is a pastor unfit to follow?
That's rich. Talk about your one-way street...
Oh,
And no rebuke for the hypocracy, in light of the swill he dumped here about the hateful speech on NBBCOF--I'm not surprised.
Pointing out the sin of hypocracy is an idea, Mike.
Pointing out the double-standard counts as an idea. And who's going to? Jessica? The court jester over here?
No.
Sorry Aramis,
Sometimes I have typos--if you ever wrote more than a quip, you'd do likewise.
Thanks for pointing it out, oh follower and emulator of Jesus.
Oh,
And no rebuke for the hypocracy, in light of the swill he dumped here about the hateful speech on NBBCOF--I'm not surprised.
Is this in reference to Brady's street corner language? Funny, it looks like he got reprimanded to me even though he didn't post it here.
Thanks for pointing it out, oh follower and emulator of Jesus.
And thank you for once again displaying your ignorance of the people who post here. Perhaps if you took a little time to read the things people say perhaps you'd learn a few things about them. I don't claim to be a Christian, so why would you call me a follower and emulator of Jesus? Not lumping everyone together now, are we? Oh surely not. That would make you one of us hypocrates. errr, hypocrites.
cates...
Say, was that by any chance where your original name 'trollcates' came from?
All,
I contacted the anti-NBBCOF headquarters and asked them to advise all units to use kinder, gentler language in the future. You should receive your instructions forthwith.
I've also asked for a formal review of agent Billie's posts. Anti-NBBCOF HQ is still trying to gather intelligence from over there, and her misguided efforts seem to have eradicated all traces of it.
Gosh Cakes, I sure am glad you have never insulted anyone over here. Just because you are more subtle doesn't mean you don't do it.
What would we do without you to tell us how inept we are?!?
I don't see how mocking our Christian walk is 'focusing on the issues and not personalities'.
There is no scenario where you are going to change your opinion- you are just as obstinate as the rest of us. So, in all honesty, what possible outcome do you see coming from all this? What is it you are hoping to gain with comments like "the court jester"?
Answer: An accurate representation of the substance and sobriety of his particular brand of "rhetoric."
Or, what the bard said, "sound and fury, signifying nothing."
If I am mistaken, point out a cogent argument Armie has posted, not merely a declaration.
Oh, this thread has accomplished much in establishing a crux of the differences, as Mike's assertion that the failure by Gaines is not a reasonable justification for doubting his authority as pastor.
I don't assume everyone follows the notion, yet I take in consideration that none of the regulars take issue with the stance.
Do you believe it unreasonable, Jessica, that one might look at the factual points of the pastor's actions regarding the pedophile and come to the conclusion that he's no leader deserving of trust?
At least my little comment got you guys all stirred up. Too bad you don't get that worked up with someone says Dr. Gaines is a false teacher or even of the devil.
The bottom line is that NASS needs to go meet personally with Dr. Gaines and get their differences resolved and then he needs to take down his digusting site.
cakes...
Pointing out the sin of hypocracy is an idea, Mike.
"Hypocrate." (misspelling courtesy of cakes)
Just answer one simple little (very telling) question. Is that where your original name came from? And the name of your charming blog? You know, the one where you write things like "Bellevue and many other churches, including Leawood, where I attended growing up, gave up their integrity and compassion when they packed up shop and chased their upwardly-mobile flocks to the burbs. It seems to justify the racial and economic segregation that continues to destroy this city. People still live in that neighborhood where I went to Sunday School, only they are poor and have dark skin."
"Mofocrates." Nice name. Very interesting that you seem to owe your very identity to the rebuttal of those mf'n 'crates'. I think it's a reasonable supposition that you aren't interested in solving anything at all, only arguing with us 'crates'.
I think I love John Mark's writings.
This is a copy and paste from today's hopefully posting on the, "BBC Open Forum" anti Gaines blog site. The Lord impressed upon my heart to bring it here today. He tells us in Ecc. 11:1 "Cast your Bread on the surface of the Waters for you will find it after many days"
This is a promise that all of us who take a stand for the ways of the Lord can claim. Mike continue to cast the Bread of Truth on the power of the Waters (Holy Spirit)!!
Many of the anti Gaines people love to quote John MacArthur!!
Andrew said...
John MacArthur part 2
"You see, the false teachers wanted to make Christianity more popular, less demanding, less distinct, less narrow, less offensive, less different, less exclusive so they'd get more people in on it, so they could get more money, which is always what false teachers want...."
Billie writes:
Note: John M. narrows it down to believing like him or you are out!
11:20 PM, September
Billie writes:
BBC Open Forum asked me to explain what I was talking about in a previous post regarding, "painting pictures" I selected the above post but I could have chosen every post (on their blog) which claims Dr. Rogers as their hero or those that claim Dr. Gaines is a false prophet (teacher). Please read the following very closely:
IDC, BBC open forum, and savingbellevue have joined forces to prove that Dr. Steve Gaines is a hypocrite and is NOT a man sent by God to Bellevue Baptist Church.
The, "picture that their statements have painted to thousands of people"
normally begins with how much they loved Dr. Adrain Rogers and how they trusted his word, his theology and his teaching capabilities. If they had stopped there, his legacy would not have been questioned BUT!!!!They organized and opened the doors to expose the world to doubt his discernment, wisdom and ability to hear from God by attacking the man that he loved and considered to be most capable to carry on the work that he had spent over 30 years doing.
For those who have followed the situation, you can see that they feel they are much wiser, much more discerning, and are God's gift to our society than Dr. Rogers, Dr. Gray Allison (founder of Mid America theological seminary, Dr. Johnny Hunt and countless other great men of the faith. Great men who fully support Dr. Gaines. What is really sad is for whatever reason the Roger's family, has supported the picture that is now painted of Dr. Rogers.
They would have you to believe that Dr. Gaines has brought shame to the legacy of Dr. Rogers but the truth is their poor choices and discernment have done the damage.
They would have us to believe that not only was Dr. Rogers a fool for recommending Dr. Gaines, who he knew personally for a great number of years and loved to listen to him preach, but he was also a fool for having placed PW, a child molester, on staff.
I want to speak to all of the people who now have doubts about our former pastor Dr. Adrian Rogers, who can not speak for himself. Dr. Rogers was a great man of faith and he was very wise; sound in judgement. He was deeply loved and respected. He was a man in close contact with the Lord.
I and countless other people refuse to allow this, distorted picture painted by the mixed up minds of a small number of people,
destroy the legacy and theology of living by faith; trusting God with the leadership of our Church which Dr. Rogers left with us.
I believe Dr. Rogers was, not perfect, but exellent in godly wisdom. I believe PW was and is a Christian who fell into sin and attempted to cover it up. I believe our Pastor is one of the finest, most godly men in our country who made some mistakes while under the demands of thousands of people who were telling him when where and how he was suppose to run Bellevue.
We watched Dr. Rogers glow with the glory of the Lord as he passed his ministry on to his choice servant Dr. Steve Gaines. Dr. Gaines continues to quote Dr. Rogers, love, support, and protect the legacy that Dr. Rogers left behind. We have a wonderful pastor who loves Jesus with a heart like Dr. Rogers (bold in faith). We can not seperate Dr. Rogers from Dr. Gaines and this web site proves that fact because they are constantly comparing the two men. If one goes down so does the other.
Please do not let the picture that the anti Gaines organization paint in their postings hang on the walls of your heart. Realize that they, like so many of us in the past, have been deceived by satan. These people did not intentionally set out to hurt Dr. Rogers they really thought they were doing God a favor by stopping Bellevue from going through changes and getting Gaines out of the pulpit was their best way to accomplish it.
Many godly ministers, laymen and prayer warriors from Bellevue and other churches all across this country are praying for these people and asking God to open their eyes to the error of their ways.
Think about the picture that has been drawn in your mind!!!
I have been blessed time and time again by the encouraging words from members of our church who tell me how thankful they are for my willingness to take a stand against those who are doing so much to destroy what we KNOW, without a shadow of doubt, is the work of our great and awesome God through our pastor Steve Gaines. I have made many new friends for whom I am grateful. I am not proud to be on this site and at times my flesh gets in the way of what the Spirit would have me to say. Our battle is with our own flesh when it comes to standing up for the Lord. I do not deny my weaknesses, I confess them as sin and ask for your forgiveness.
The best thing that caring people can do for us is to pray for those who have allowed a ugly picture to be painted in their minds, NOT to be discouraged from the faith that we have been taught and continue to teach and actively embrace at Bellevue Baptist Church.
Billie
John Mark always makes me smile :)
Brady said...
At least my little comment got you guys all stirred up. Too bad you don't get that worked up with someone says Dr. Gaines is a false teacher or even of the devil.
That's the wonderful thing about having a blog, Brady. My comments on the various attacks levied against Pastor Gaines are easily searchable, so you can see just how concerned I am about them--and have been since soon after the inception of "Saving" Bellevue, IDC, and the Forum.
The bottom line is that NASS needs to go meet personally with Dr. Gaines and get their differences resolved and then he needs to take down his digusting site.
On those points, we agree precisely. The Forum should've shuttered a long time ago, sometime after it became obvious that death threats, judgements on who is and isn't really saved, and the use of the various labels--"demon," "cult," and the like--became the coin of the realm. And I think some face-to-face conversation is always a good thing, but it would take away some of that luxurious anonymity, so I don't know if NASS would be up for it.
Cakes said...
Oh,
And no rebuke for the hypocracy, in light of the swill he dumped here about the hateful speech on NBBCOF--I'm not surprised.
You were a little quick on the draw, there, David.
Pointing out the sin of hypocracy is an idea, Mike.
A couple of things:
1) At what point do you not think it's ironic that you, of all people, refer to something as a "sin"?
2) Do you understand that it's possible to, in the course of a discussion, say something along the lines of "You know, those two statements of yours are dissonant," rather than "You are such a hypocrite"?
Pointing out the double-standard counts as an idea. And who's going to? Jessica? The court jester over here?
3) And do you understand that call someone a "court jester" isn't exactly focusing on the ideas? Your remark, combined with your previous comments in the thread, was an awfully dissonant one, David.
--Mike
I do not normally post but I could not pass up this time.
I have been thinking for a long time there is something wrong with the picture that the other blog site paints about the situation of Bellevue. I have read several of the postings from, "Billie" and something in my heart would tell me that he or she is right on target even though at times they have been a little hard to figure out. The posting today is a WOW! This person hits the nail on the head.
I wish that this post from Billie today would be sent to every paper and church in our state.
Thank you Billie for clearing up my mind, I have finally got what I what I was missing.
Mrs. Billie, I appreciate your posting here; if my failing memory serves, this is the first time you've left a comment here.
Since I don't see an available e-mail address for you, I will have to speak to you here about something that's been on my mind awhile.
As you know, many (if not most) of the Forum participants either make posts (or indulge them) that refer to Pastor Gaines as "head demon," a cult leader, a type of the anti-Christ, someone who's never been saved... the list goes on and on.
When you refer to Forum participants as "tools of Satan," as one example, you must understand that you're doing precisely the same thing that damages any legitimate points (and they've had a handful) the Forum participants might try to raise. The people we might disagree with on an issue, regardless of how vigorous the disagreement is, are people for whom Christ died--and in many (if not most) instances, are brothers and sisters in Christ.
Even if it's crystal clear in your mind that members of the Forum/IDC/SB nucleus "feel they are much wiser, much more discerning, and are God's gift to our society," it accomplishes nothing to make such statements, except to make commonality and reconciliation that much more difficult to achieve.
I seem to be writing this a lot lately, but it's something we all should keep in our minds: Please talk about ideas, not personalities. As has been previously noted, your ideas are spot-on.
--Mike
Mike said...
Do you understand that it's possible to, in the course of a discussion, say something along the lines of "You know, those two statements of yours are dissonant," rather than "You are such a hypocrite"?
NO WAY!!!
Let me try it:
You know, cakes, those two (palms getting sweaty) statements of yours (hands shaking) are SUCH HYPOCRASY!!!!! I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU'RE SO BLIND!!!! WHERE'S THE DUCT TAPE?!?
This may take a while.
And on a hunch, folks, I paid a visit to the Forum, curious as to how Mrs. Billie's comment would be received. Among the responses were these two:
sickofthelies said...
Ms. Billie,
Put the bong down.
10:59 AM, September 05, 2007
New BBC Open Forum said...
...or at least stop inhaling.
11:05 AM, September 05, 2007
Comments?
--Mike
John Mark said...
Mike said...
Do you understand that it's possible to, in the course of a discussion, say something along the lines of "You know, those two statements of yours are dissonant," rather than "You are such a hypocrite"?
NO WAY!!!
Let me try it:
You know, cakes, those two (palms getting sweaty) statements of yours (hands shaking) are SUCH HYPOCRASY!!!!! I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU'RE SO BLIND!!!! WHERE'S THE DUCT TAPE?!?
This may take a while.
Put...
the duct tape...
down...
--Mike
Isn't there something in a book somewhere about treating older women with respect? Even if they are so bold to say something we don't agree with?
Well, I doubt SOTL is younger than I am. S, please put the acrimony away. Or at least stop exhaling it.
"I think some face-to-face conversation is always a good thing, but it would take away some of that luxurious anonymity, so I don't know if NASS would be up for it."
I know.....we can just ask them to invite us to their next bowling party...kinda like you offered them a lunch meeting! I know I would really like to meet a few of the regulars over there....
Think it will happen??????
Memphis,
When pigs fly.
Ms. Billie,
I have to agree with Mike on this one- I do understand what you are trying to say, I agree that the most frustrating thing personally for me is when people act like we are lesser than them (in faith, connection to God, or discernment). But we have to step up and take the high ground on that and not behave that way.
I disagree with their tactics and I think the fact that the other blog still exists- it is far past time that they moved on to a more private form of communication- is a travesty. If fellowship is truly their interest there is no reason it can't exist in a private blog or emails or even with events.
Sheesh.
I think a certain youth pastor must have run over SOTL's dog or something.
memphis said...
I know I would really like to meet a few of the regulars over there....
And even more threats!!! Wasn't the carnage at the restaurant enough to satisfy you? You and your fellow long-time upstanding members just never get enough do you ?!?
Oh, the humanity!
Mike Bratton said...
I seem to be writing this a lot lately, but it's something we all should keep in our minds: Please talk about ideas, not personalities.
Mike,
I still haven’t had a chance to respond at length to your last comment to me, but I have thought about it, and wanted to apologize for the tenor of some of my response toward you. I was very frustrated to think you would dismiss the conclusions of others regarding SG's fitness to remain as pastor of BBC as unreasonable. That came across as arrogance to me, but I have to acknowledge that may not have been your intent--and even if it was, arrogance on someone else's part is no excuse for rudeness in my responses. So I'm sorry for responding in that way toward you, and I hope you will forgive me.
My only real further response to the substance of the matter is that it does seem reasonable to me that some would look at how SG handled the PW situation and conclude that SG should have stepped down as pastor. I don't know that I'd say that would be a permanent "disqualifying" factor in terms of ministry (as I have been studying and thinking on the meaning and context of "above reproach" in 1 Timothy and have not yet come to a firm conclusion on some of the proper applications). But I do think it is not unreasonable to conclude he was not the appropriate man to be ministering as pastor of BBC.
I wish the pastry would hurry up and respond! I was looking forward to it all afternoon!!
Till then, I read about an up-and-coming anti-Gaines blog and stopped by for a visit today. I think that our friend 'nathantheprophet' (you know, like the guy who presumed to speak from God but King David spared) is quite typical of the 'anti' crowd.
His question was about praying for miracles. I posted on the blog, but Nate didn't respond to me. I suppose that he's afraid to anger the NBBCOF by harboring a B-Blogger, which is strange since his profile says
"I have a favorite quote "A Prophet is never loved in his own country".
Of course, a prophet can't risk losing popularity on the NBBCOF. Jeremiah would understand, I'm sure. Nass wasn't around back in his day (or was she?).
Anyhow, my post included this remark:
What kind of miracles did SG ask for Sunday night? Conventional? Interventional? Contraventional?
If all he asked was for people to stand as a way of confessing that their problems were beyond their ability to solve and then ask God to intervene, then obviously there's nothing wrong with that.
To which Nate avoided answering but editted the original post to include:
EDITED TO ADD:
Something someone said made me think of another question.
When is something a miracle, and when is it simply an answer to prayer?
To which I have to respond, when is an answer to prayer NOT a miracle?!? Oi!
Boy, what arrogance. What presumptious pride. To think that each and every second God gives NTP the very breath in his lungs, and yet he takes it for granted as if it's his right. Nate, you deserve nothing, and yet God has granted you everything. You really need a reality check. Anything you have is by His grace.
Do you pray for God to give you what you deserve? I sure hope not! Because if you do, and He answers, you can look forward to h e double hockey sticks!
junkster
neither does it seem to be unreasonable that AR was not good at choosing capable ministers at BBC. (PW and SG)
WatchingHISstory said...
junkster
neither does it seem to be unreasonable that AR was not good at choosing capable ministers at BBC. (PW and SG)
I really like grilled cheese sandwiches.
jtb said...
We will have your meds adjusted.
Sigh.
More empty promises. Oh, if only I weren't such a naive and trusting soul...
Junkster said...
Mike Bratton said...
I seem to be writing this a lot lately, but it's something we all should keep in our minds: Please talk about ideas, not personalities.
Mike,
I still haven’t had a chance to respond at length to your last comment to me, but I have thought about it, and wanted to apologize for the tenor of some of my response toward you. I was very frustrated to think you would dismiss the conclusions of others regarding SG's fitness to remain as pastor of BBC as unreasonable. That came across as arrogance to me, but I have to acknowledge that may not have been your intent--and even if it was, arrogance on someone else's part is no excuse for rudeness in my responses. So I'm sorry for responding in that way toward you, and I hope you will forgive me.
Absolutely. Let us speak of it no more, my brother.
A direct question was posed, and I answered it directly, in response to a complaint that direct questions around here generally don't get the desired type of response.
My only real further response to the substance of the matter is that it does seem reasonable to me that some would look at how SG handled the PW situation and conclude that SG should have stepped down as pastor.
And that is how reasoned, sober discussions are born. :)
I don't know that I'd say that would be a permanent "disqualifying" factor in terms of ministry (as I have been studying and thinking on the meaning and context of "above reproach" in 1 Timothy and have not yet come to a firm conclusion on some of the proper applications). But I do think it is not unreasonable to conclude he was not the appropriate man to be ministering as pastor of BBC.
And I have yet to begrudge anyone a reasoned, dispassionate opinion, have I? :)
--Mike
P.S.: Two emoticons in one message! Yes, we had a great choir practice tonight.
Junky Monkey said:
But I do think it is not unreasonable to conclude he was not the appropriate man to be ministering as pastor of BBC.
I actually do agree with you there- I do not think it is unreasonable at all for people to conclude that. But unfortunately for those who came to that conclusion the ultimate decision was not in their hands, and lack of power is what drives so many to lash out in the way that they have.
But the fact remains that the majority of BBCers (be they dumb, lost, uncaring, blind, or drinkers of the SG flavored Kool Aid) wanted him to stay.
And quite frankly, if us wanting him to stay makes us as bad as "they" seem to think we are, I don't understand why they would fight so hard to stay. Because if that is truly how they feel, the fellows members should be driving them away regardless of who is in the pulpit. SG leaving will not and would not have solved the division that has come into the congregation.
I do think we are on the same page with this- I have never felt they were out of line for thinking this was not something they were willing to accept, just that they don't have the right to force or manipulate others into believing the same way.
Where do you draw the line at warning other against "danger" and becoming bitter and frustrated at your lack of power?
"A response from cakes:
bepatient,
I'm much smarter that you, and a man besides. It scores points for me on the NBBCOF and makes me feel like a real man for once in my life to put people down over here, so you're just plain stupid. STUPID!!! Plus, I know a lot of big words, and I'm not scared to use them.
Also, I'm a victim so if you disagree with me you're heartless and cruel.
Now that I've put you in your place, I'll be expecting a full apology.
Yours truly,
cakes"
"Based upon the findings of the BBCPCIR alone, might an individual alienated by the handling of the pedophile scandal and aftermath, come to a reasonable conclusion that Gaines is not fit to be Pastor?"
"The answer is: No. Pastor Gaines was operating on a time line that was designed to minimize further injury to any member of the Williams family. His understanding was that the matter was settled within the family--and when he found out it wasn't, he acted."
Did he? He was outed, was he not and it was folks at the NBBCOF that contacted DCS, yes? I'm not certain, the question is not rhetorical--Gaines acted how, by contacting the DCS? What did he do?
Everybody and their brother who support the pastor, swear right and left that he made a huge mistake; yet an attitude prevails amongst the loyal that no one has a basis to question his leadership. That is cognitive dissonance, sir.
Is there some logic at play, or are we talking about untouchable status, akin to the Divine Right of Kings? God put him up there and who am I to question it? Sounds ironically Catholic.
that no one has a basis to question his leadership
I am pretty sure I voiced my opinion on this earlier, but like I said- they absolutely have the right to question his leadership. They don't have the right to whine that they have no "voice" while they sat still for the last 25 years and let the church become the way it has, and they don't have the right to expect me to agree with them.
Its amazing how many people question everything Dr. Gaines does yet they never have the courage to simply call his office and make an appointment to visit with him in person. But then, its a lot easier to be brave when you are anonymous and on a blog.
There is a great discussion going on over in Wade Burleson's blog (http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/ about whether women should be silent in the church.
Provides great food for thought in the arena of blogs. But then, most of the anti-Bellevue sites would have to close down if the women were to remain silent.
Dear Brady: I am not anonymous and I did call Dr. Gaines to request a meeting BEFORE any of this got public. I spoke at length with Linda Glance and she was aware I was not some nut calling for just anything. The victim had also requested a meeting but he too was denied. What happened? I never heard from him. Instead I heard from David Coombs who at the time was not offically an employee of Bellevue. David called me on his cell phone. When I asked David why this wasn't reported, he replied he was not sure there was anything to report. I could not believe it. I know of others that have requested meetings with Dr. Gaines and they too were steered to David Coombs. So don't tell me that some people don't have the courage to ask to meet him. I he would just ONCE.
Yes, I am critical of his actions in this situation. And I do expect more from any senior pastor that is aware of this type of abuse. The way he acted is typical of how the bishops of the Catholic Church have dealt with this horrible crime. Do I think those bishops are unfit to lead? Certainly I do. I feel the same about ANY senior pastor, not just Dr. Gaines. Our children are too valuable to take a chance and believe the word of a pedophile.
I wish I could share with you the emails I have received from other victims of clergy abuse, especially Baptist victims that were crushed. I was too. For over 24 years Bellevue was my home church. When I first became aware I was devastated and did not want to belive it. I know first hand what Cakes and other victims felt and still wonder about this.
I moved my membership many months before this because I sensed the Lord leading me. I have NO dog in any of the other arugments about Dr. Gaines, but jsut this one and it is one molehill I do not want to dare go up again.
I trust and pray you understand where I am coming from. If I had one prayer it is that some day BOTH sides of this Dr. Gaines issue would unite again as we once were. There are some emotional, but very good Christians on both sides. We do worship the same Jesus and many sat side by side each other at Bellevue for years. This division does hurt our witness.
Mike you mentioned being slimmer, good luck. I am getting fatter. We am in Bath, Maine and ate lobster tonight and later stopped by a place that is called the Beale Street BQ. It was great. I think Elvis must be alive and living in Maine.
God bless all and remember HIM first, please?
David Brown
SNAP Director for Memphis and West Tennessee
901/569-4500
Well, I hate to do this.
I have this persistent nagging feeling that I overstepped some boundaries. Since I've been divorced for 23 years, it must be my conscience nagging me.
I shouldn't have said a few of the things I've said over the last few weeks. Don't get me wrong. Cakes, I'm not apologizing and asking for your forgiveness because I don't want it. You came into this fray with a grudge against Bellevue, and your bias will keep you from ever being objective. You continue to slam good people just because they won't argue according to your rules. You're just like those 'crates' who claim offense but in reality just don't like SG's preaching. In essence you're a disestablishmentarist. Your goal is for Bellevue to fail, not heal.
But, since your sense of humor seems to be a little lacking, I see that some of what I've said could be hurtful. I read your first blog entry, and I know what it's like to lose a family. I know exactly what it's like to have 'friends' offer their sympathy but give your their pity instead.
I don't dislike you personally, cakes, I'd just like for Mike and the others to be able to read the Bratton report and feel cheered up instead of beaten down. Quit demanding that they play ball according to your rules. You should check your motives for what you write. I'll check mine.
And as apologies go, that's as good as it's going to get.
And while I'm at it, Mike, thanks for your indulgence.
jmd
I wish to give a report on the deceptive ways that the BBC Open Forum blog site creates lies on people who confront their false statements. This is what actually happened to me tonight as I was conversing with the owner of the site.
I commented on a subject of Pastor Steve being cruel to Jim W. our former minister of music. I said, that I did not believe that Brother Steve intentionally hurt J W, but my personal opinion, I thought that J W tried to hurt Brother Steve because of the way that he left BBC. Note: my personal opinion.
In another posting, Housewife, stated that Brother Steve had treated Dr. Rogers badly in front of witnesses and that Dr. Rogers had made a comment that he felt he had been duped by Gaines.
I wrote a letter of confrontation to housewife telling her to put up or shut up! produce the witnesses.
BBC owner took my email of confrontation and edited it to read as though I had made up a lie on Jim Whitmire and that I said that Jim Whitmire had treated Brother Steve badly and that I had witnesses to prove it!! Which is a LIE! I never said there were any witnesses to anything only my opinion and that others had expressed their disappointment in JW for the way he conducted himself even though everyone including Brother Steve says that he did not receive the recognition that he deserved.
I am reporting this to you as well as others. I know that most of you know the evil deeds of the master minds against Brother Steve, but I am telling you to BE AWARE they will stop at nothing, they will stop short of nothing to get revenge when they are caught in a trap having to face truth!
BBC Open Forum will block anyone from confronting one of his followers. He protects the guilty to prove the innocent are wrong!!!!
Billie
Billie, Why do you think NASS is a he? Also, I tried to post the following twice yesterday, but apparently I didnt make the cut since she didn't allow it to be posted. I hope Mike will indulge me.
Here goes:
"This is off topic, but that seems to be allowed. My question is, in light of last night's announcement by Fred Thompson, What is yall's opinion of a Thompson / Huckabee ticket, or maybe even a Huckabee / Thompson ticket. Thanks in advance for your input."
I dont know why this question was censored, but anyway, I really do want to know what everyone thinks.
Supposedly NASS is a man who lives in his parent's basement in Minnesota--but then, who knows what is true on that site. I do know he alters comments to make them say what he wants. Aren't you glad Mike is a man of integrity!
David, perhaps one of the reasons Dr. Gaines did not grant you a meeting is because you write so frequently on the anti-bellevue blog and also because you are no longer a member. I would try again though--maybe you can get through this time. My comments were not directed at you--they were specifically directed at those on the anti-bellevue site that say such ungodly things about our pastor and then don't even have the courage to post their names or emails.
If you note, the posts on the anti-bellevue site have shrunk to nearly nothing and most of them are by the same misguided women.
Mike, thanks for all you do!
brady said...
Supposedly NASS is a man who lives in his parent's basement in Minnesota--but then, who knows what is true on that site. I do know he alters comments to make them say what he wants.
Actually, NASS is woman who still goes to Bellevue (one of the few over there who does). Although she allows far too many disgraceful statements to be posted for my taste, she has some redeeming qualities. Although she does occasionally quote the statements of others out of context when responding to them (don't we all), she doesn't alter the original posts (the blog admin doesn't have that ability, and I don't think she would even if she could).
The NBBCOF is definitely a mess, but it could be much worse.
Solomon,
Thanks for the information. During the last few days someone said she was a man who lived in his parent's basement. Now that we know that she's a woman who still goes to BBC then she needs to do two things:
1. Post her real name.
2. Call Dr. Gaines' office and arrange a personal meeting as soon as possible.
Until she is willing to do that she will never have the respect of people who attend BBC.
Personally, I think we need to put a "hedge of thorns" around those who post such ungodly things about our pastor. The hedge works and since this is spiritual warfare, we need to use our spiritual weapons.
I wish they would take that site down and make it a members only site. I think they still need to vent (aparently)but I wish they would do it where the whole world did not see them.
I have often wondered why after 2 years are they still bashing BBC. I also wondered what they are missing in life by spending all day posting???
And for the record, I have thought about Huckabee/Thompson in the White House. Whooo Pigg Sooiieeee!!! Give AR a chance to rebound from the dope from Hope!
This from the NBBCOF Blog...
"there comes a time when you have to leave it in God's hands because you've done all you can do."
I guess over a year is when that time comes huh?
Memphis
Two things:
1. If I get the chance to cast my vote for Fred Thompson it will be one of the best days EVER! I don't really care who runs with him.
2. I am leaving for vacation at 4am tomorrow, please pray for us as we are taking the baby on her first loooong car ride! I intend to forget all about you guys while I am there, but if it rains or something I might be bored enough to come back around!
brady,
I agree about NASS. SG and DC would be more than happy to meet with NASS if she identified herself and asked for a meeting. They'd be happy to let her tape it, too.
I'm not so sure about the spiritual warfare, though. James wrote that a lot of sin comes from our own selfish desires and I think that's where most of the conflict originates.
I'm trying to 'kick the habit' but I read a post from '32yrs@bbc' that is worth thinking about. 32 is one of the more level-headed bloggers, and this is a list of wrongs that he or she has seen Steve Gaines do. I'll share my comments after each one.
-SG told his congregation at Gardendale that he intended to change some "wrongs" at Bellevue when he came as our pastor. He then told us that he was going to teach us HOW to pray (with Dr. Rogers still sitting in the congregation) and worship.
This is an example of altering the original statements so that it sounds more offensive than it actually was. In the Gardendale address (which is in the library) SG said that he told the search committee that Bellevue did 'this and that' wrong in order to make them think twice about calling him. He later said that he wanted Bellevue to be a praying church, but I don't see any connection between the two statements. Dr. Rogers once said on a Sunday night that he wanted Bellevue to be an evangelistic church and to imagine what would happen if everyone there (about 1500) would share the gospel with their neighbors. No one was offended by that, and no one should be offended by the prayer statement either.
-SG said nothing gracious to Dr. Rogers after Dr. Rogers humbly washed his feet and bestowed on him the mantle of ministry.
What should he have said? What would have been an appropriate response that wouldn't have cheapened the gesture? I think a lot of people misunderstand why Pastor Rogers did what he did.
-He refused Dr. R's counsel to "slow down" in making changes.
The changes he was cautioned about were not the ones everyone might think, but it's true that SG did not heed this counsel. He wanted things done his own way, and did not take adequate time to implement the changes. A lot of people were hurt by this.
-He very seldom asked for prayer for Dr. Rogers when Dr. Rogers was so critically ill in the hospital.
The Sunday before Dr. Rogers passed, SG had a special time of prayer of Dr. Rogers before each of the morning services. I don't know how anyone could say that he didn't ask for the church to pray for him. That's just not true.
-He immediately brought about changes to our church while we were in the process of grieving Dr. Rogers' grave illness and then death...instead of being sensitive to the suffering sheep in his flock. (This after he promised the Search Committee he would make no changes for at least a year!)
This is very true. We were not given time to mourn. I never have understood how it was 'business as usual' the next week.
As far as 'promising' the search committee, I have to wonder about what was said. He might have said he wouldn't make changes for a year during the interview process, but that's a long way from a promise. He wasn't gunning for the job, so I doubt he'd have promised anything. Hopefully the committee looked at things other than his schedule for making change when they selected him.
-He used the pulpit as a "bully pulpit" to rebuke us for being unhappy with the change in music.
Well, that one's legendary. I think it's odd that his preaching about the music that time is secondary to some of his other sermons, though.
-He dismissed JW and long-time staff members in a way that was not honoring to them and their long tenures at Bellevue.
We really need to distinguish between staff resigning and being dismissed. I'm sure that working for SG is very different than working for AR, but even if he's a hard man to get along with and a staffer finds they can't work for him that's not a dismissal. Now, if he singled a person out for mistreatment that's a different story.
No, JW was not treated well, and his retirement was poorly handled. Hopefully SG has learned something from his mistake, though.
-He (thru MD) registered our church with The Willow Oak Association (PDC association) without it being congregationally known or approved. (They later withdrew when the matter became known and there was an out-cry.)
The only outcry about Willow Creek was from those already after the pastor. It was a non-event to everyone else. I don't think our church needs to be involved with this organization, but since the membership was cancelled it's not an issue. If anything, the whole episode shows that the BBC leadership does listen to the members when they sensibly present reasonable objections.
-He wanted (this has been put on the back-burner) to use the Love Offering to build a Prayer Bldg. and have people praying 24 hrs. a day...and bring people from all over the world to teach them how to pray.
I'm not clear if the objection is with the concept of a prayer building or the fact that it has been turned over to long range planning. The original building was meant to be a wedding chapel, but SG wanted it to be devoted to prayer instead. Personally, I think the money could be better used elsewhere.
-He reduced the security at Bellevue even tho' the one who is head of security advised him that was not a wise thing to do.
I haven't heard this one before. I'd assumed that security was actually increased since they are much more visible now, and the children's department now has limited access. I'd like to know more about it.
-He led three other men to trespass into MS's gated community and did not apologize until he was pressured to.
Another Bellevue legend. I suppose that in 100 years people will point to his portrait in the lobby and say "he was the fence jumper".
-He called MS at home and compared him to Hezbullah (a Muslim terrorist group).
I've thought about this one a lot, and I really think some bigotry is showing through. People hear that MS was compared to a Muslim group and hit the roof.
Hezbollah is not Al Qaida. They are listed by the US as a terrorist group, but in addition to their loose-canon armed wing they also perform many humanitarian services in Lebanon. Was the statement so offensive because Hezbollah are terrorists, that the run hospitals, or that they are Muslims?
If you'll remember the context of the statement, Israel was bombing Lebanon at the time, and the military wing was randomly firing missiles into Israel hoping to hit something and do some kind of damage. They hit nothing of any value, but did a lot of collateral damage. That's exactly what Sharpe was doing. He was firing anything and everything he could find at SG, and by doing so he cheapened the real offenses that were done.
-He apologized to the congregation for the Gardendale remarks and the "fence jumping" but never really asked for forgiveness.
I was told that SG called Sharpe and apologized, but was denied because he didn't expressly ask for forgiveness. I suppose this is a personal choice, but I don't need for someone to say the magic words 'will you forgive me' before I do. That seems VERY childish to me.
-He (on the very next night) made some jokes at Bellevue's expense to a congregation at Union City, TN.
-He apologized for that one later but excused it by saying "I tend to shoot from the hip" and then asked "How many of you out there
shoot from the hip sometimes?" No real repentance or asking for forgiveness.
I really want to believe that he learned from this idiotic blunder. I equate this with going out and saying bad things about my wife to strangers. SG fared much better with BBC than I would if I were to do that, let me tell you!
-He authorized $25,000 be given to an apostate church with a female pastor (First United Methodist).
This is what has irritated me all along. Why is this so far down the list? Isn't this a little bit more serious than not thanking Dr. Rogers for washing his feet?
-He did not immediately deal with a staff member who confessed to child abuse but let it ago until forced to do something. He
called this major blunder "a mistake because I was in unchartered waters" (he has been a pastor for 20+ years) and then let blame be distributed to two other staff members.
Is it just me, or does this seem a little obscured by the other issues on the list? Shouldn't it be first? If all the other nit-picking and carping hadn't been going on, I wonder how things might have been different when this broke?
-He (in a meeting with a committee that oversees the monies given by Bellevue to Mid-America Seminary) insisted that MS be relieved from his position as Pres. of Mid-America if he didn't personally apologize to him and D.
I've heard several renditions of this incident, but I have to reject all of them. What does a Bellevue committee on Mid-America donations have to do with Dr. Spradlin's job, exactly?
-He refused to exonerate Dr. Rogers as Joyce asked when the PW problem was announced to the church in December thereby
hurting Joyce and forcing her to call into to Mike Fleming's program to protect her husband's name.
While he couldn't say at the time that Dr. Rogers didn't know before the investigation, he should have emphasized that there was no evidence to indicate that he knew. Regardless, the PC stated that Dr. Rogers didn't know so that's the end of it.
-He allows others to stand up before the church and speak for him and take the "blows" instead of him standing up before us alone
and acknowledging his failures.
Sometimes he has, sometimes he hasn't. In my mind, he saw that nothing he could do would be enough to satisfy some people and that's why he's hesitant to be more open.
Mistakes have been made, and a lot of very dishonorable things have been done. At the same time, I've seen some changes made that are encouraging. The question that must be asked is what will happen now, and what is each of our part in it.
Those who have chosen to leave need to leave. That means ceasing all derogatory talk about Bellevue. A lot of what is being grumbled about has been forgiven and needs to be cast into the sea of forgetfulness. Let those of us who stayed worry about the future of our church. If it continues to succeed, let it be because God wants it to and not because we have a perfect pastor. And if it fails, let it be because it's God's will, not because our members became discouraged because people they once worshiped alongside were constantly grumbling and saying cruel things about them.
"there comes a time when you have to leave it in God's hands because you've done all you can do."
That could be a noble statement, but it's not. It should be rephrased "there comes a time when you have to leave it in God's hands because you've complained about all you can complain about."
Oh, if only that were true!
Well, Bellevue thriving or failing is not my interest, never has been--you cannot qualify it, unless you're just going on Mike's poor argument. Neither you nor anyone else on this blog has to believe me, but pushing the motive upon my character is tantamount to calling me a dishonest.
If the single paragraph plucked from my piece was all there is to make a judgment of my motives, then perhaps the herring wouldn't stink so bad; as a matter of record, I've stated and restated many context for having an interest in the issue, but the intimation that all of those are a rouge is again the defamation of my character. I first came here because of a defamation of my character by bugsii.
I have no axe to grind with Bellevue. I am a teacher in an inner city school and I see children who live on the very edge of existence--I learned from one child last week that his mother is a prostitute and both his father and stepfather are in jail for abusing him. He has marks all over his face neck and arms--some of them even look like cigarette burns.
Unfortunately, i don't have merely sympathy for this child and many more drug babies and emotionally wrecked children than I thought I'd ever meet, because I don't have to imagine what it's like to be someone's punching bag or sex object. But perhaps you consider this a lie too.
Perhaps I'm not completely honest when I say that Gmom is as kind and sweet a person as frequents here, and her posts are no less impetuous and emotional than those found on the Bratton Report (and they often have more substance). Padroc is one of the nicest and most sincere folks I've ever met. Sotl's been through hell, and if "court jester" gets y'alls shorts in a bind, then I'm thinking you'd have a meltdown if you'd been through her ordeal. I dare say, concernedsbcer is an angel, gracefulness in the storm; OC has a deep protective streak, and the Bologna hurled at people he cares about will get his back up. Don't tell me that that's a foreign concept around here.
I don't know you, thus do not need or seek your apology and/or attempt to look half-magnanimous. I had a sea-change the last couple of days, and I am going to follow everyone's wishes and my better judgment and leave you to your devices. Really, no good can come of a conversation if there, first, is no respect for the tropes of reason; and second, rhetoric is employed at the service of a particular pretext. (bepatient--read the blog to see if anyone else said as much before you get insulted; it'll save both of us time.)
The notion that NBBCOF is indicted by its content--without holding the legitimacy of the Bratton Report to the same rubric--defies reason. If the NBBCOF needs to shutter its doors, then you should follow suit. By design or by default, this is the anti-NBBCOF, and such is the only significant "movement" at play here, Celine Dion notwithstanding.
Whatever your issue is, I have no dog in this church politics and power trip--Bellevue could be Catholic, or Muslim, or Church of Christ, etc., but I genuinely care about people whose failed leader has demonstrated an utter lack of trust with those in his flock, that I care about the safety of children, or that I care what this pat on the hand communicates to survivors in general, and those outraged by being “counseled” by the pedophile.
I have no issue with the music, the carpet, bad hair, alcohol over dinner, etc.; rather, Gaines discredited himself (BBCPCIR) by doing nothing when faced with a pedophile in his midst. You cannot both call it a horrible failure and then turn around and call him a man of integrity—that too strains credibility as an argument.
You cannot vilify a community en mass for the behavior of some of its members, while blithely ignoring the same behavior in your own backyard. That, in fact, seems two-faced and devoid of reason. It is like saying any ole behavior is acceptable as long as you are on the correct side of an issue.
I wish you all peace and happiness.
Just for the record I made several efforts to talk with SG, through Linda Glance. She was very nice and tried to set something up assuring me I would be able to see him. Charlie helped me to speak with two other pastors at length. I eventually got a phone call from Coombs and we talked at length, however he assured me I would not be able to talk with Steve. He was not discourteous with me.
I believe that the reason that Steve is hard to get to see is his health issues. He is not able to talk with a lot of folks.
fallethnthe ditch said this last nignt on the "other" blog at 1152 PM:
"Are you one of the Calvanist who believe that God created you for the purpose to persecute and harrass another man? You have a choice; either work with the man God has chosen as our leader or not obviously you have chosen to stay and stir up as much hostility as you possibly can, which is characteristic of Lucifer."
Can someone give me a translation?
Hey watching: Read carefully, friend. Falling was quoting your good friend Billie. Ask her what she meant.
It's all about context, isn't it?
:)
ok Billie, what do you mean?
You cannot vilify a community en mass for the behavior of some of its members, while blithely ignoring the same behavior in your own backyard. That, in fact, seems two-faced and devoid of reason. It is like saying any ole behavior is acceptable as long as you are on the correct side of an issue.
When one community is selective and the other is open to all, it's much more likely that the behavior of one member is typical of all. Or if not, the lack of correction by the other members demonstrates their like-mindedness.
It is like saying any ole behavior is acceptable as long as you are on the correct side of an issue.
Yes, you have summed up perfectly the philosophy that dominates the NBBCOF.
It is like saying any ole behavior is acceptable as long as you are on the correct side of an issue.
You're saying it's a bad thing, right?
It is like saying any ole behavior is acceptable as long as you are on the correct side of an issue.
Whichever side of an issue you're on, the Bible allows a very specific kind of behavior.
It is like saying any ole behavior is acceptable as long as you are on the correct side of an issue.
So anyone who behaves in a way contrary to the way Christ taught is showing that they are not on his side, and their claims to the contrary are worthless.
Since their efforts thus far haven't succeeded in doing anything (other than promote hatred), you can expect them to get uglier and uglier. They are not anchored to anything, so their campaign against Gaines will become more outrageous as they exhaust the ammunition that is based in reality.
I see there has been some talk of NASS speaking to the pastor. I think that's a great idea. I promise you he'd grant her a meeting if she called the church and identified herself as the blog leader. She might even do some good.
Esther 5:12-14
When Esther's words were reported to Mordecai, he sent back this answer: "Do not think that because you are in the king's house you alone of all the Jews will escape. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father's family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?"
I agree with John Mark. Perhaps if enough people encourage Miss NASS or Mrs. NASS to go and meet with the pastor perhaps this issue can be resolved or at least helped.
I guarantee you that Dr. Gaines would meet with her if she would identify herself properly and let them know she hosts the blog.
Only time will tell if she will do the right thing.
I have no issue with the music, the carpet, bad hair, alcohol over dinner, etc.; rather, Gaines discredited himself (BBCPCIR) by doing nothing when faced with a pedophile in his midst.
Sorry cakes, but it seems to me that your biggest problem with BBC (and Leawood) is that they moved east. (gave up their integrity and such...)
As far as I'm concerned, any other condemnation from you is simply an add-on to strengthen your desire for retribution.
You have proven yourself totally and spectacularly unable to grasp the most basic concept imaginable, that correction is a good thing sometimes. Why can't you understand that? It's not hateful or judgemental to tell someone to stop doing something that's wrong.
Telling someone that they are wrong for saying that someone is an unsaved, ring-kissing, evil, satanic demon and God will hurl them into the abyss is not the same as saying that someone is an unsaved, ring-kissing, evil, satanic demon and God will hurl them into the abyss. Does that make sense? Yes, they are both negative statements but there's a difference even a child could see.
I for one fully support your departure, and I hope you follow through this time. Enjoy your bowling parties with the 'good' blog. I'm sure they're a good enough bunch once you get to know them, but I don't have much hope that a fellowship built around the hatred of a man will last for long. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Hey, here's a little gossip mongering and innuendo...
Has anyone else noticed that the grammar and thought processes of some of the bloggers on certain blogs (not any particular one) seem to deteriorate at night?
You know, after happy hour?
jsushst shaynn...
In my opinion, NASS will never meet with Pastor Gaines.
In my opinion, NASS will also not take responsibility for the blog either, she will say she is only moderating the blog, not running it.
In my opinion, that blog should go private with only their members they want because they "seem quite satisfied to sit back and just complain"
Again, that is just my opinion.
Memphis
AKA WGC
johnmark said:
I'm sure they're a good enough bunch once you get to know them, but I don't have much hope that a
fellowship built around the hatred of a man will last for long. Enjoy it while it lasts.
oc says:
That 'bunch', that fellowship, is built not around hatred of a man, but around the love of Jesus of Nazareth. Bet it lasts a long time.
Juat sayin'.
oc.
Are these statements Armininian?
"When we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, we are born of God."
"The new birth takes place when we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ."
"Think of grace as God's hand of love reaching down from heaven, saying, "I love you. I want to save you." It is a nail pierced hand because He has paid for our sins. Think of faith as your sin stained hand, saying "God I need you. I want you." And when you put your hand of faith in God's hand of grace, that is salvation."
Aren't these statements denials of Total Depravity and affirmations of Armininian "Partial Ability"?
Don't these statements imply that a sinner has the enablement to initiate a step toward God in salvation?
Have to agree with those that think the anti-BBC blogs are built on hatred for Dr. Gaines. All you have to do is read their posts...
WatchingHISstory said...
Are these statements Armininian?
"When we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, we are born of God."
"The new birth takes place when we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ."
"Think of grace as God's hand of love reaching down from heaven, saying, "I love you. I want to save you." It is a nail pierced hand because He has paid for our sins. Think of faith as your sin stained hand, saying "God I need you. I want you." And when you put your hand of faith in God's hand of grace, that is salvation."
Aren't these statements denials of Total Depravity and affirmations of Armininian "Partial Ability"?
Don't these statements imply that a sinner has the enablement to initiate a step toward God in salvation?
No. None of those statements presume individual initiative apart from the prompting of God the Holy Spirit. Without His prompting, in ourselves we would have no interest in the things of God.
And Charles, if you quoted Pastor Rogers from where I think you quoted Pastor Rogers, you would've found this--immediately after your last quote: "If you pay anything for a gift, it ceases to be a gift."
--Mike
WatchingHISstory said...
Are these statements Armininian?
"When we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, we are born of God."
"The new birth takes place when we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ."
"Think of grace as God's hand of love reaching down from heaven, saying, "I love you. I want to save you." It is a nail pierced hand because He has paid for our sins. Think of faith as your sin stained hand, saying "God I need you. I want you." And when you put your hand of faith in God's hand of grace, that is salvation."
Aren't these statements denials of Total Depravity and affirmations of Armininian "Partial Ability"?
Don't these statements imply that a sinner has the enablement to initiate a step toward God in salvation?
Answer to all: No.
Oh, wow, Mike and I just agreed!
:)
oc says:
That 'bunch', that fellowship, is built not around hatred of a man, but around the love of Jesus of Nazareth. Bet it lasts a long time.
OC,
Didn't you start contributing to the forum after someone started threatening physical violence against a 60 year old blogger named 'just my opinion'? Seems to me you wanted to meet up with jmo and punch him or something.
How was that the love of Christ drawing you there? Was that another instance of God using all things for good? Sounds to me more like you were looking for a scrap.
As long as you and your friends (including the pastry) continue to define right and wrong by which blog people post upon, your 'fellowship' is not built on Christ. I really hope you don't truly believe that it is.
People who love Christ talk about him, not obsess over how wicked other people are. They read the whole Bible, not just Ezekiel and Revelation. When Christians condemn the actions of others, it's because those actions do not honor Christ. It's not because their personal tastes aren't the same.
Show me one aspect of your 'fellowship' that will last for eternity. All I see is a bunch of grumblers who have fixated on Steve Gaines as the object of their anger. It's a little pathetic, really. If the words 'Steve Gaines', 'Bellevue', 'false teacher', and 'duct tape' were banned from the blog's vocabulary your 'fellowship' would not last one day.
To paraphase a preacher I heard once, if Jesus did not exist, if the Bible had never been written, and if the Holy Spirit were not in the world, it wouldn't make one bit of difference to the way that blog is acting.
How anyone could think that's the way Christians act is beyond comprehension. Read Wade Burleson's blog and compare it to the NBBCOF. Or try David Rogers' blog. That's how Christians interact. These aren't super mature highly trained pastors. They haven't been through discipleship courses to learn how to treat each other. They treat each other kindly because THAT'S WHAT CHRISTIANS DO! It's as natural as a fish swimming.
Go ahead, OC. Take a look around the other blogs and look at what the people talk about. You'll find that they are focused on spiritual things, and although they don't agree they don't talk down to each other.
You could learn much about 'fellowship' from them.
Are you going to threaten to beat me up now? Before you do, I have a suggestion. Why don't you volunteer to go talk to Dr. Gaines with NASS? I'm sure she'd feel safer with a big boy like you around.
Thank you for your advice. I'll take it under consideration.
I'm prayin' for you.
oc.
Mike, you said:
"No. None of those statements presume individual initiative apart from the prompting of God the Holy Spirit. Without His prompting, in ourselves we would have no interest in the things of God."
Just today I received in the mail an Armininian book: "Unconditional Eternal Security, Myth or Truth?" by French Arrington
Almost immediately I read on p.31 this statement: "God took the iniative in restoring his people to Himself. By his prevenient grace, grace that goes before conversion, God created the opportunity so the sinner could freely respond to the wooing of the Spirit and accept or reject salvation." This is from a Wesleyan Armininian.
Isn't this almost what you are saying?
My quotes are from tomorrow's SS lesson: Master Work, What Every Christian Ought to Know, By Adrian Rogers. I have not found your quote.
I am studying for my contribution in the discussion!
While we are discussing the Armininianism of AR (He was anti-Calvinistic) let us also consider the Armininism of the SBC.
In the 1925 BF&M it states: "Through the temptation of Satan man transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original innocence; whereby his posterity inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin, and as soon as they are capable of moral action become transgressors"
In the 1963 BF&M the additional words are added
"... and are under condemnation. Only the grace of God can bring man into His holy fellowship and enable man to fulfil the creative purpose of God."
Isn't this enablement Prevenient Grace? Grace that goes before conversion so that the sinner can freely respond to the wooing of the Holy Spirit and accept or reject salvation?
1963 BF&M adds: "Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ."
Isn't this change of heart Prevenient Grace wrought by the Holy Spirit enabling the sinner to respond in repentance toward God?
Doesn't this change Total Depravity into partial ability? And isn't this a semi-pelagian position?
Is the SBC of today the same as the one prior to 1925?
In 1925 salvation was a work Wholly of God's Grace (whole gospel) and in 1963 it was God's grace for the whole man.
WatchingHISstory said...
In the 1963 BF&M the additional words are added
"... and are under condemnation. Only the grace of God can bring man into His holy fellowship and enable man to fulfil the creative purpose of God."
Isn't this enablement Prevenient Grace? Grace that goes before conversion so that the sinner can freely respond to the wooing of the Holy Spirit and accept or reject salvation?
1963 BF&M adds: "Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ."
Isn't this change of heart Prevenient Grace wrought by the Holy Spirit enabling the sinner to respond in repentance toward God?
Doesn't this change Total Depravity into partial ability? And isn't this a semi-pelagian position?
Is the SBC of today the same as the one prior to 1925?
Answer to all: Again, no. Any more questions?
junkster
will the tigers play Arkansas tonight?
junkster
Is the SBC of today the same as the one prior to 1925?
you said no
Can you elaborate?
junkster
You yourself said: "Repentance is God's work -- just as is faith, in the sense that God must grant them to us by His grace, since we do not inherently possess the capacity to repent or believe unto salvation apart from God's gracious work in us."
This is a good statement consistent with the Bible.
But you had to mess it up by clarifying your position into an Armininian statement.
"But this does not mean that repentance is not something we ourselves do ... just as with faith, we ourselves must exercize it, put it into practice."
I tried to show my Jehovah Witness friend today about saving faith and he quoted his NWT Bible: "...everyone exercising faith in Him..." John 3:16 He said 'exercising' is a work of faith consistent with the book of James. He was arguing against my view that grace is a gift of God separate from any sort of works.
Of coarse his view of repentance is a pelagian view and your clarification makes your view semi-pelagian.
john mark:
but I don't have much hope that a fellowship built around the hatred of a man will last for long.
Arminius,
I have to admit that I'm somewhat curious to hear what your definition of 'fellowship' is. As I understand it (from your posts) you haven't been a church member for a long time and you're somewhat cross with Christians.
Granted that 'koinonia' has been greatly watered down to include everything from burgers to miniature golf, how is it that you can say what true Christian fellowship is and what it it not?
You can email me if you'd like to keep your thoughts confidential.
I'd really like to hear from you.
Larry
WatchingHISstory said...
will the tigers play Arkansas tonight?
Dunno, don't follow sports.
Is the SBC of today the same as the one prior to 1925?
you said no
Can you elaborate?
Nothing is the same today as in 1925. But I think your point is that the current SBC is much less Calvinistic overall than it was in 1925, and also that the BFM changes since then reflect that theological shift. I would agree with that. Although more Calvinistic in 1925 than today, the SBC was already less Calvinistic in 1925 than when the denomination was formed. The move away from Calvinism started before 1925.
your clarification makes your view semi-pelagian.
You are mistaken. There is nothing about my view that is semi-Pelagian; everything you quoted from me is completely consistent with Calvinism. Either your understanding or Calvinism is faulty, or your understanding of what I said is. I suspect it it both.
The move away from Calvinism started before 1925. Agree there
So was Rogers an Armininian? He was deffinitely not a Calvinist!
Were his views Amyraldianism?
Wasn't he emergent in his theology, sabotaging the truth that the sinner is at enmity with God? Weren't his invitations 'seeker friendly' before Rick Warren made the 'purpose driven' concept popular?
Didn't he agree with the Armininians that God elects to salvation all those whom He forsees will trust in Christ?
Now that you are a declared Calvinist can you give me a blanket answer 'NO' to the above?
WatchingHISstory said...
Mike, you said:
"No. None of those statements presume individual initiative apart from the prompting of God the Holy Spirit. Without His prompting, in ourselves we would have no interest in the things of God."
Just today I received in the mail an Armininian book: "Unconditional Eternal Security, Myth or Truth?" by French Arrington
Almost immediately I read on p.31 this statement: "God took the iniative in restoring his people to Himself. By his prevenient grace, grace that goes before conversion, God created the opportunity so the sinner could freely respond to the wooing of the Spirit and accept or reject salvation." This is from a Wesleyan Armininian.
Isn't this almost what you are saying?
If an Arminian says something that's Biblical, and I say something that's Biblical, that doesn't label me as an Arminian (which I'm not, by any stretch), but it does mean that the statement is worthwhile--because it's Biblical, and for no other reason.
Some of Arminianism gets it right. Some of Calvinism gets it right. But both systems get it wrong enough of the time to suggest that investing in either one is a bad move.
My quotes are from tomorrow's SS lesson: Master Work, What Every Christian Ought to Know, By Adrian Rogers. I have not found your quote.
Ah. We're working out of the same Sunday School book.
It's in the full book. Try Googling, and you should be able to come up with a site that gives you the first few pages of every chapter--you'll see it there.
I am studying for my contribution in the discussion!
I had the blessing of being able to work on some of Pastor Rogers' sermons in that series for radio, which was both enjoyable and immensely educational.
--Mike
Mike
You said: If an Arminian says something that's Biblical, and I say something that's Biblical, that doesn't label me as an Arminian (which I'm not, by any stretch), but it does mean that the statement is worthwhile--because it's Biblical, and for no other reason
So your statement: "Without His prompting, in ourselves we would have no interest in the things of God." This is Biblical, you say.
This is prevenient grace, grace that God bestows before conversion. This Armininianism is Biblical, you say.
Does this imply that unlimited atonement and resistable grace is Biblical?
If Calvinism's view of limited atonement and irresistable grace are unbiblical, then predestination and depravity as viewed by Calvinist are also unbiblical, according to your view.
You said "by any stretch" you are not Armininian. What in your belief system makes you confident that you are not?
I'll bet it is because you don't believe in loss of salvation!
Now Calvinist believe that God will perserve in grace the ones who have been regenerated. How can that be Biblical, if grace is resistable? If you can resist grace before conversion why can't you resist it after you are converted?
Maybe I'm not qualified to say what real 'fellowship' is, but I know what it's not and that's the weak relationships of the regulars on the NBBCOF. Everything revolves around Bellevue - not in a good way, but who can say the ugliest things. If SG retired to an island somewhere, that blog would be gone within a week and the 'sheep' would be scattered.
Even those who supposedly have left constantly compare their present churches to BBC. Here's a recent comment praising another local church from someone who had 'severed ties' with Bellevue:
The pastor is not the "head" or the celebrity of the church.
When the awe and worship is not on the man teaching....amazing how much changes!!
It's sad that this church can't be appreciated without comparing it to (a perception) of Bellevue. This is the kind of bondage that will keep those people from ever having any real fellowship, with God or one another.
At best, it might last 15-20 years until SG retires. I truly hope they enjoy it while it lasts, and I'll feel sorry for them when they try to lay all their grumbling and complaining down at the feet of Jesus thinking it's a trophy.
Reminds me of the time a bird dog brought me dead coon he found in the yard.
OK, obliviously it is now very clear to me that BBC does care about accuracy and timelines, and it was very evident to me today as I sat in church.
Today, September 9, 2007, they celebrated the 2 year anniversary of Steve and Donna Gaines. Well everyone knows that they did not start till Sept 11, not Sept 9!!!! I guess this is another example of the leadership doing whatever they want without accuracy and doing their homework!
(I hope that this is read with the sarcasm intended!)
WGC!!!!
johm mark
you da man!!!
"The pastor is not the "head" or the celebrity of the church."
"When the awe and worship is not on the man teaching....amazing how much changes!!"
Seems the poster didn't appreciate Roger's leadership!
test
Evidently, I am banned at the other blog. She is refusing to allow my comments thru. I had simply posted a response to one of the other bloggers assertion. I said regarding PN "He is a good and Godly man devoted to God's calling on his life and I admire and respect him."
Following is the offensive response.
Piglet says:
"I haven't ever mentioned PN by name but now that you bring him up, I cannot tell you how ashamed I am of him.
It is widely known that PN avoids onflict. He has taken the road of least conflict - going along to get along, and participating in the persecution of others who will not condone sin.
I yanked my kids out of his youth group. WHAT IF ALL THE KIDS IN PN'S YOUTH GROUP TOOK THE EASY ROAD, THE ONE OF LESS CONFLICT - AND FOLLOWED HIS EXAMPLE? THEY'D ALL BE HAVING SEX AND GETTING STONED.
He sold out his integrity for postion, the same thing he tells his kids NOT to do every week."
8:03 PM, September 05, 2007
I simply replied something like this. I waited a few days to avoid responding out of emotion. I did not keep a copy of my exact comment, so this is a paraphrase.
CC,( initials seem to be fair game for everyone else, so I think initials are appropriate here, I am not revealing her identity) that has to be one of the most ridiculous comments I have ever seen posted. I think the idea that PN persecutes those who wont condone sin is absurd. Furthermore, I think that the idea that PN is leading our kids down a road to sex and drugs is even more absurd.
Surely you must agree that this is over the line and I hope you will pray about easing back on this comment.
I didn't realize that the were two ministers in the youth group with the intiials 'PN'.
Whoever this other 'PN' is, I hope my children won't be influenced by him.
I'd rather my girls follow the example of Phil Newberry, so that they won't engage in premarital sex or use drugs and alcohol. That's what he teaches, that's what he preaches, and that's what his life testimony demonstrates.
And as far as condoning sin, I can attest to the fact that he's been very outspoken about his disapproval of 'savingbellevue' and the blog, albeit not in such a condescending and unfair (and untrue) way as sb and the NBBCOF have been of him.
To whom it may concern, especially those faithful bloggers of BBC Open Forum who come over here to read the other side of what they refuse to allow on their garbage site.
Many have speculated on my opinion of Ms. R leaving BBC
I, personally, am very glad that Ms. R has found a new place to worship. I am happy to hear that people are in worship services.
I am rejoicing with Joyce!!!
I pray for each of you to also find a new church home where you can worship the Lord in peace.
There is no reason to continue on in your wickedness and every reason to stop. Ezekiel explains!
I would select the specific verses but some of you blasted me for not writing the entire Bible, choosing things out of context, and selecting only those verses which convey my beliefs. I don't have the time nor the space so I just encourage you to sit down and read Ezekiel along with the rest of the Word so that you can get the full meaning of God's warnings and prayerfully you will see and understand that they apply to you as well as others.
Please post your new church homes as you find them, but we will only believe it when you stop your wicked gossip and stirring up trouble as long as you talk about us and our preacher you HAVE NOT found a new place of true worship. You haven't really left! Think about it!!!
Billie
I would ask this question on the NBBCOF, but of course we all know that NASS doesn't let me post.
The latest thread is questioning the ability of pulpit committees to call a pastor. I'm not sure what the alternative is, but NASS pointed out that there were 'questions' (plural) about the pulpit committee.
After going to the (ugh) 'saving bellevue' site, it seems like the only person there was a problem with was Pat Caldwell.
Here's a list of her multiple problems:
1) Daughter, Dayna Caldwell Street was working for Steve Gaines in 2004.
2) Her father John Caldwell was on the Board of Directors at Bellevue in 2004.
3) John Caldwell was on the Board of Directors at Bellevue in 2005
4) Her mother Pat Caldwell was on The Pastor Search Committee 2004-2005.
Honestly, NASS. Do you even read the garbage you link to? Pat Caldwell is married to her father John Caldwell and is her own mother and they were both on the same pulpit committee? Sounds like an H.G. Wells novel.
The rest of the 'conflict of interest' page is the same babble about the fence climbing and how much money SG makes.
Didn't SB break it's link to the NBBCOF and replace it with a link to a lecture on gossip? Why in the world would anyone who wants a smidgen of believability want to be associated with 'savingbellevue'?
That might be an interesting topic (for a change), but as long as it's connected to the septic tank you can guess where it's headed.
billie said...
as long as you talk about us and our preacher you HAVE NOT found a new place of true worship. You haven't really left!
Ms. Billie,
It's none of our business what's said on the other blog, or anyone else's who is still a concerned member of Bellevue. The deserters show every day that they don't care about our well being, and in fact that they long for us to suffer even more. I wonder how much is enough for them?
If the pastor were to leave, would they come back to labor with us? No. If something dramatic like 9/11 were to occur, would they join together with us in sorrow? No, they wouldn't. They have forsaken us, and are totally indifferent to our situation.
Each day they show again and again how much they hate us. Instead of wishing for our well being, they tell us 'stay away from our children!' Instead of praying for healing, they call for God to curse us. They seem overjoyed that our attendance is down, and hopeful that it will go down even more. How opposite that is from our prayers that they will receive blessings wherever they go.
We're on our own, and it's time for us to separate ourselves from those who want our church to fail. It's time for us to turn our backs on them like they turned their backs on us last year.
I've prayed for them as much as anyone, but I've stopped reading their angry outbursts. I suggest that you do, too.
God is merciful and just, and I believe that someday he will provide a middle ground on which we can meet. Until then, let's leave those outside our walls to their own ways.
Keith
MOM4 said...
The pastor's search committee obviously had an agenda. Other than the apparent situation with the Caldwell family, I am not aware of other motives that would cause them to blindly seek after a man of such low esteem, as noted by the membership of at his previous churches and within certain SBC circles on numerous occassions, some here on this blog and some thru personal relationships.
I AM aware of the FACT that they were warned, repeatedly. A very prominent member of the church brought all the information to light that the search committee needed to make them aware of the caliber of the man they were seeking. This man was spurned, turned away and shut out. He resigned his positions within the church and has since moved away. His family was deeply wounded, just as many have been wounded since SG's arrival. The damage that has been wrought solely lies at the feet of the search committee and all those who covered up the facts concerning Steve Gaines. You know who you are.
Yep, lies straight out of the crapper. What could have been a worthwhile discussion of how a church body's decision is placed in the hands of a small group of men ends up in the latrine.
I AM aware of the FACT that they were warned, repeatedly. A very prominent member of the church brought all the information to light that the search committee needed to make them aware of the caliber of the man they were seeking.
Trash. Mike, by any chance was mom4 the name you were thinking of before?
John Mark said...
MOM4 said...
...
I AM aware of the FACT that they were warned, repeatedly. A very prominent member of the church brought all the information to light that the search committee needed to make them aware of the caliber of the man they were seeking.
Trash. Mike, by any chance was mom4 the name you were thinking of before?
No comment.
--Mike
solomon said...
billie said...
as long as you talk about us and our preacher you HAVE NOT found a new place of true worship. You haven't really left!
Ms. Billie,
It's none of our business what's said on the other blog, or anyone else's who is still a concerned member of Bellevue. The deserters show every day that they don't care about our well being, and in fact that they long for us to suffer even more. I wonder how much is enough for them?
Reply,
Thank you for your post and it breaks my heart to have agree with you with some of the things that you stated. It is hard for me to, "shake the dust off the bottom of my feet" I deeply care for the souls and the spiritual welfare of church members, the very thing that drives me to witness and teach. I will go the extra mile to try to help people to see and understand the Word of God. I was a slow learner in understanding the Word but when God finally got His teachings through my thick skull I became passionate about helping others to see and understand that our minds must become like a infant without any understanding (a new birth) when we receive Christ. A grown person has a mind of their own and it is hard to accept that our personal opinions and feelings about things easily deceive us from trusting God in ALL things.
I know a lot of people think that I am condesending and I try very hard to make it clear that I feel like Isaiah and Nehemiah who confessed the sins of, "Me and my people" I want so much for us all (them, our pastor, ministers, staff, teachers, workers, members, to do as the Israelites turn away from sin and turn to God for healing. I am the first to say that I have not participated in this without sin.
Solomon,
I ask for your prayers for me that if it is God's will for me to shake the dust off the bottom of my feet with all of those who have left us, who continue to publically try to, "destroy" us, that I will do His will and walk away.
Thank you,
Billie
Just a quick point of clarification, RAS and SH both have it in their head I am ACE. I know who CS is, but I doubt he knows who I am. Anyway, we are not the same person. I am banned from posting over there because I dare to disagree with them. I would like to say to SH, you are making terrible and ugly comments regarding CS, especially the last one from last night. I am embarrassed for you. I pray you will let go of this hatred that seems to be eating you up to the point of saying things that I bet you would have never said as little as two years ago. Your language is in a downward spiral. I also want to say to the many who read the other blog, please don't take this as indicative of the way all Christians act or speak. God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. Please make the effort to come to a bible believing, bible preaching church, or in some other way get around another believer and ask them to show you what I am talking about. If nothing else, you may copy and paste this link into your browser for more info. http://www.bellevue.org/templates/cusbellevue1103/details.asp?id=1360&PID=24122&Style=
If you know Mike, I am positive he would love to correspond with you. I promise this is the most important issue anyone will deal with. If this is not addressed, all other issues really don't matter. Please consider this and I have prayed for anyone reading this, that if you don't know what will happen to you after you die, you will take some time to try to understand God has told us irrefutably, the answer to that question.
jb said... (to sotl)
I am embarrassed for you. I pray you will let go of this hatred that seems to be eating you up to the point of saying things that I bet you would have never said as little as two years ago. Your language is in a downward spiral. I also want to say to the many who read the other blog, please don't take this as indicative of the way all Christians act or speak.
Bud, you said a mouthful. I wonder if the other bloggers invited ol' sotl over for tea and got to know her how much they'd appreciate her tirade.
Maybe they could chit chat about her accusation that Steve Gaines and Jamie Parker are engaged in a homosexual relationship. Or maybe they could start a few rumors about how people they don't like are child molestors.
She's out of control, no question. And as long as the rest continue to wink at her sin she'll only continue to get worse. I don't think it's so much that they agree with her, they just don't want to set her off against themselves.
Maybe someone should contact the pastor at Faith?
I hate to admit it, but I've almost been enjoying some of the posts over there today. (I've made it a point to skip the golden girls.) Shoot, even nass confronted that grouchy old dude named 'amazed' when he said that God wasn't involved in selecting Gaines as pastor.
Unfortunately, just when things are almost tolerable, some idiot named "WishIhadknown said...
Just curious, how does a reasonable person recommend someone as a pastor who says he is coming to "destroy" the church? How do you stand and cheer? Isn't the job of destroying the church Satan's?
Wonder if nass will say anything about that? Or anyone else?
Ms. Billie,
I'll be honored to pray for you. I'm very cautious about using the phrase 'shaking off the dust', though, since as far as I can tell from the Bible it always carries an implication that the other person is unsaved. The regulars on the NBBCOF say a lot of untrue and deliberately hurtful things, but I'll never call their salvation into question since it's a gift from God and not anything we've earned.
It's hard to let them go, but if you think about it, God has allowed each of us to go our own way and learn from our own mistakes. We should respect them enough to give them that same freedom.
It's funny, but I've been critical of Steve Gaines' mistakes since almost the beginning (in the right way, I hope). Many of the members of my BFC would make fun of me because I posted on the NBBCOF, even though most of my posts were pleas to behave in a Christian way. I always believed that if we voiced our concerns in a respectful, rational way that God would honor the effort.
Now, most of my BFC (including the teacher) have left, and slander me for staying. How's that for irony? One day I was a villain for questioning the pastor, the next I was a villain for not totally condemning him.
It's been difficult for me, make no mistake. I'm an optimist who believes that we really and truly can and should live at peace with one another. If we can't get along with our own family, what hope do we have of getting along with the unsaved?
It was difficult, but I've finally accepted that there is nothing I can do to help. I prayed that God would use me in some way to bring resolution, but I've had to conclude that He doesn't want that at this time.
I suspect that some of those who have left will return someday, but that's not our concern. We need to focus our energy on those God has put in our sphere of influence.
Jesus felt great compassion for the sheep without a shepherd, but he didn't let them divert him from his mission. Let's follow his example.
solomon said...
Actually, NASS is woman who still goes to Bellevue (one of the few over there who does). Although she allows far too many disgraceful statements to be posted for my taste, she has some redeeming qualities.
Uh, Sol? Could you list a few? Other than being a pusher of 'spiritual pornography' (Josh Manning's eloquent description) and an enabler of gossip (Jim Haywood's less-than-eloquent description), I really don't see anything that could be called redeeming. She has the status of being the 'leader' of the blog, but she's apparently not man enough to use that position to effect any changes at Bellevue.
She'd rather enjoy her 'popularity' as 'NASS' than make a difference.
Redeeming qualities?
None.
John Mark said...
Redeeming qualities?
None.
Fortunately for us all, our redemption isn't based on our own qualities. :)
Implying that ACE is a pedophile?Is this to be considered acceptable behavior? I think he's shown himself to be lacking in maturity and tactfulness (qualities I TOTALLY admire!!!) but saying ugly things about him just because it makes a person feel good is a most un-Christian thing to do.
sotl said...
Pay particular attention to INTERESTS: one of them says,
"hanging out with middle schoolers"
New BBC Open Forum said...
SOTL,
On March 26th, CS wrote to me:
"I am wrongly being accused of being 'Bob Barker' and as a result of that, other things are being said about me. In previous posts, SOTL has referred to me as being 'attracted to jr. highers.'"
"Hanging out with"... "attracted to"... hmmm. Not much difference that I can see...
Every parent of a 6th grader needs to attend this thing and LOUDLY protest someone like this being a teacher. Then they need to take their children and run!
NASS has fully endorsed SOTL's indictment of ACE, putting her own personal grudge ahead of doing and saying the right thing.
It's entirely possible that God has allowed her to gain her current 'status' to influence others, but the only thing she seems to want to do is slander a 20 year old kid.
And BTW, if SOTL really believes what she's saying why hasn't she notified DCS? Isn't knowing about abuse and not reporting it 'harboring a pedophile?' And if she doesn't believe it, why is she saying it?
Lately I've noticed that the vast majority of those who post on the anti-BBC sites are women who come with all kinds of emotional baggage and defects. A sad commentary of their state of affairs--and most of all, sad because people sometimes believe their filth.
There's nothing wrong with having emotional baggage and defects (I hope). They're the inevitable result of living in a messed up world.
It's just a shame that the NBBCOF doesn't correct it's members when they go off the deep end like they do all the time. SOTL shut up about SG and JP being engaged in a homosexual relationship after one of the few bloggers who has a backbone called her on it. She never apologized for what she said, but at least she shut up about it.
That needs to happen much more often. It won't, but it should.
she's apparently not man enough to use that position to effect any changes at Bellevue.
Redeeming qualities?
None.
JTB: Seems you and Nass have more in common than you thought.
You, yourself are not man enough to do anything usefull.
Nass is a blog owner which only carries power over the blog. She exercised that power to ban you and Charles along with a few others. Good use of power.
And, you don't have any redeeming qualities either. Thinking..thinking...thinking...
nope, you possess no redeeming qualites. Sorry bud. None of us do.
Who of us has redeeming qualities that would allow us into heaven? That is why we need the Redeemer.
Now here's a perfect example of narrow thinking. You see the word 'redeem' and don't realize that it can be used in multiple ways.
Have you ever redeemed a coupon? Is that coupon now in heaven?
That's why so many people have trouble with SG's sermons.
As far as NASS's wise use of power, why doesn't she try to arrange a meeting with Gaines? I promise you - PROMISE - that he'd be overjoyed to meet with her to try to get that bunch to shut up.
And did mr. JTB try to get his name put on the list of members who meet with SG over dinner on Wednesdays?
Solomon,
Could you please send me an email when you see this? I'd be much appeciated. Thanks. My address is on my profile page.
John Mark,
Apparently feeling called by God to work with Middle Schoolers is weird, according to some people...
I guess it's a good thing I decide to listen to what God tells me and not others. I like to hear what He has to say about me over what others do.
John Mark said...
Now here's a perfect example of narrow thinking. You see the word 'redeem' and don't realize that it can be used in multiple ways.
Have you ever redeemed a coupon? Is that coupon now in heaven?
JTB: I trust that you are joking with that. Scriptually, there is are not multiple uses for the word. I have redeemed a coupon and that coupon has a better chance of getting to heaven than some people.
That's why so many people have trouble with SG's sermons.
As far as NASS's wise use of power, why doesn't she try to arrange a meeting with Gaines? I promise you - PROMISE - that he'd be overjoyed to meet with her to try to get that bunch to shut up.
JTB: Steve would do more than meet with her or anyone else to shut them up if he thought he could get away with it.
And did mr. JTB try to get his name put on the list of members who meet with SG over dinner on Wednesdays?
JTB: Why would I spoil my perfectly good dinner by meeting with Steve? That would also cost BBC alot of extra money on the church credit card.
I am thinking of installing a fence so Steve can hop on over and visit me.
What have YOU done to help things? Yep, just as we all know. NOTHING.
Way to go sport!
Its good to see John The Baptist over here carrying on NASS's traditions. I agree with John Mark that NASS should get herself in high gear and call Dr. Gaines' office.
I thought JTB's little comment that Dr. Gaines would "do more than meet with her" is ridiculous and shows his maturity and level of understanding. But then, howling to the high heavens over nothing is pretty commonplace on NASS's blog.
There are many of us that are praying that she will find the courage to go and meet and then get this thing behind us.
Brady said...
Its good to see John The Baptist over here carrying on NASS's traditions. I agree with John Mark that NASS should get herself in high gear and call Dr. Gaines' office.
I thought JTB's little comment that Dr. Gaines would "do more than meet with her" is ridiculous and shows his maturity and level of understanding. But then, howling to the high heavens over nothing is pretty commonplace on NASS's blog.
JTB: Brady, who cares what you think? I understand far more than you even have a clue about. You comments prove how ignorant you are of the facts.
Your blind following of King Steve & your approval of his sins shows you have no character.
Keep on kissing his ring buddy!
Well, JTB's response was about what I expected. I would rather be found to be loyal to the pastor that God sent to our church and not a part of an ungodly blog than to say and do the things that JTB says and does. Notice how they always turn on the attack mode the minute you question something or stand up for Dr. Gaines.
By the way, I was personal friends with Dr. Rogers and I wonder what he would say to JTB about the junk he writes. I have a good idea what it would be.
Frankly, I was a little disappointed with JTB's response. He just cut and pasted the 'King Steve' and 'ring kisser' stuff from the standard NBBCOF library. It's sort of like an automated vacation response.
He must have had dinner on the stove or something.
Brady said...
Well, JTB's response was about what I expected. I would rather be found to be loyal to the pastor that God sent to our church and not a part of an ungodly blog than to say and do the things that JTB says and does. Notice how they always turn on the attack mode the minute you question something or stand up for Dr. Gaines.
By the way, I was personal friends with Dr. Rogers and I wonder what he would say to JTB about the junk he writes. I have a good idea what it would be.
JTB: do you want me to use the special copy and paste feature on your posts? You have quite abit of nerve to accuse me of something when you post some very bad things.
You say it is an ungodly blog and yet you dwell there. Speaks volumes about you...nothing good. Do you not see your double standard?
You said" I would rather be found to be loyal to the pastor that God sent to our church and not a part of an ungodly blog than to say and do the things that JTB says and does"
JTB: I am sure you would. Your loyality to a man is called SIN.
Loyality to God is called being a disciple.
We are never called to be loyal to a man, only Christ.
"to say and do the things JTB says and does".....you don't know me. we have never met. How do you know what I do? Again, your ignorance is on display. You don't even read everything I write or you wouldn't have said such an ignorant thing.
Personal friend of Dr. Rogers? I doubt it. I tell you what, I will speak with the Rogers family if you like and ask if they know you. You need to be careful of who you claim you are personal friends with. It could come back to bite you.
If I were you, I wouldn't worry about what Dr. Roger's would think. I would be far more concerned what Christ thinks.
John Mark said...
Frankly, I was a little disappointed with JTB's response. He just cut and pasted the 'King Steve' and 'ring kisser' stuff from the standard NBBCOF library. It's sort of like an automated vacation response.
JTB: Sorry to disappoint you. Actually, I didn't cut and paste those phrases. I had to type each word! whew, I am tired.
NBBCOF has a library of standard phrases? Why am I always last to know??? I could have saved some time.
I guess your are getting soft. I used to get you rilled up pretty good.
rilled up
OR RILED up if you want to use the english version.
JTB,
Your post speaks for itself.
Brady said...
JTB,
Your post speaks for itself.
JTB: so does yours. It has a beginning and an end but no substance in the middle.
What are you afraid of?
JTB,
Trust me, I am afraid of absolutely nothing but I'm not going to get into a drawn out spat with you.
Its useless and non-productive as well as boring to me.
Brady said...
JTB,
Trust me, I am afraid of absolutely nothing but I'm not going to get into a drawn out spat with you.
Its useless and non-productive as well as boring to me.
JTB: Wise move. I hope you use the same stratagy when you attack others.
Example of Brady's posts on other blog
Brady said...
Even though you don't print my comments its always interesting to check at night and see what pompous asses you actually have become.
JTB: Brady, that is just one example of your filth.
Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks...
You said: I was personal friends with Dr. Rogers and I wonder what he would say to JTB about the junk he writes. I have a good idea what it would be.
JTB: I do believe that was a lie. I don't think you were personal friends with Dr. Rogers. However, I also wonder what he would think of the filth you spout out and the junk you do?
You condem yourself. Your self-rightousness rants is but filthy rags.
jtb
The best of OUR righteousness is as filthy rags. Yours, mine and Brady's
WatchingHISstory said...
jtb
The best of OUR righteousness is as filthy rags. Yours, mine and Brady's
jtb: Watching, thanks for the imput. That is what I meant but added an extra word.
I was fixing to go to supper but wanted to answer JTB before I left.
First, I would be very careful about calling someone a liar--especially when you don't know me personally. I doubt seriously if you would be that brave in person.
I can guarantee you that I was personal friends with Adrian Rogers. I had supper and lunch with him at least 10-15 times, sat next to him in numerous meetings, and shared the same hotel with him on numerous occasions. Sorry to disappoint you JTB but I am surely not a liar. I do admit all of our righteousness is like a filthy rag, but I am sure not a liar.
Second, I notice that the email you quoted was one I sent personally to NASS--therefore, I guess we can conclude that you two hang out together. Are you also a woman???
I also didn't know saying "pompous ass" was a bad word. Maybe we grew up in different cultures but it pretty well sums up what I think of Nass and her blog.
Gone to supper. I'll miss you all!
Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus - Cite This Source
Main Entry: stuffed shirt
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: bore
Synonyms: blimp, bloated aristocrat, POMPOUS ASS, pompous person, twit
Source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.3.1)
Copyright © 2007 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
Truett said...(my response to Truett's observations on the other blog))
Friends,
"Wow what a Roller Coaster Belleview has been on! I think there's more twists and turns to come.
First a disclaimer, then some observations."
Last week's SS lesson: "The Assurance of Salvation" from Masterwork, 'What every Christian Ought to Know' by Adrian Rogers revealed his Armininian position about salvation. He leap-frogs between Biblical beliefs and Armininian views.
Next week he attempts to define Eternal Security from a "Calvinist" perspective. He defines it as preservation in grace and we all know that when an Armininian tries to define ES he is attempting to define perseverance and that is suppose to make him a moderate Calvinist when actually he is an inconsistent Armininian. A regular Armininian believes that you can loose your salvation and an inconsistent Armininian just believes you can keep your salvation. It is the opposite side of the same coin.
An inconsistent Armininian is according to James a double minded man unstable in all his ways.
I want to post some observations of AR's instability
Observations:
1.) Bellevue had a pedophile entrenched for 17 years under the watchcare of AR's leadership. He was a staff member entrusted with spiritual responsibilities. It is so hard to believe that AR didn't know about this!
2.) Rather than rejoice in the glories of brothers of low degrees he gathered (or allowed to be bestowed upon himself)all the exaltation. This unholy act was manifested in a large Church with out-dated by-laws.
3.) He should have known that no man could fill his shoes as pastor.
It is hard to believe that a man of his caliber would be naive to this!
4.) He was surrounded with staff that had hidden agendas (perhaps jealously) They did not like the way things were run at Bellevue. They were not happy with the youth ministry nor the worship style, both which were important to future growth of the Church. My guess was that there was suppression of opinions by staff.
5.) There was a class envy in the congregation. Common people were second class to the Bellevue "snobs" that ruled the Church.
6.) The blogs opposed to Gaines have revealed the "dark side" of his devotees. (I have asked over and over, "did AR teach you your communication skills?")
7.) His own family in his absence is alienated from his beloved Bellevue.
8.) While his influence touched thousands, tens of thousands were alienated by his exaltation. The ostentatious display of the mega-church with it's three large crosses bears a greater curse than blessing to the mid-south.
9.) When he stood at the corner of Calvin and 39th street in West Palm Beach, Florida he drove a peg deep down settling his assurance of salvation, was it an Armininian determination? Was the river of peace that flowed from his heart an emotional self-determination?
10.) Did he think he would just die and ascend to heaven and join God in amusement at the mess left on earth with his Bellevue? Do they both sit together and join NASS and her crew in berating Steve Gaines?
brady said....
First, I would be very careful about calling someone a liar--especially when you don't know me personally. I doubt seriously if you would be that brave in person.
JTB: I wouldn't bet any money on that. I would stand face to face to you or anyone else if needed.
brady said...
I can guarantee you...
JTB: coming from you, that means nothing.
brady said....
Second, I notice that the email you quoted was one I sent personally to NASS--therefore, I guess we can conclude that you two hang out together. Are you also a woman???
JTB:
A real mature deduction. You married? Is your spouse a man? Not saying that but just following your flawed logic.
brady said....
I also didn't know saying "pompous ass" was a bad word. Maybe we grew up in different cultures but it pretty well sums up what I think of Nass and her blog.
JTB: would you have called everyone at the other blog that if Dr. Rogers was there...being the good friends that you were. I doubt he would have approved you using that language. If you was as close to him as you claim, you would know that he didn't even like secondary "cussing".
What culture did you grow up in that calling someone a "pompous ass" was consider normal and acceptable???
I sure it was just a "mistake of the head and not of the heart". I wonder where I have heard that before?
I hope you had a good dinner. Were you on the list to dine with Steve and Donna tonight? I hope you remember to let Steve pay. He has BBC credit card. What's a few tithe dollars blown on a good meal, huh?
Mike, I know we don't agree with each other on most things. I appreciate you allowing an open blog for the most part for people to post things.
We all know that Watchinghisstory has some issues that are beyond human comprehension. What I don't understand is how you can allow him to constantly attack Dr. Rogers and you have done very little to stop him.
You said that you would "take a bullet for that man". Well, you can't take a physical bullet now for him but how about a spiritual one?
You let charles attack & show disrespect to Dr. Rogers legacy, allowing him to call him unstable, have hidden agenda's ect. This is also hurtful to their families.
This goes beyond the Armininian/Calvinist debate. This is a personal attack on his character.
Do you even care what people say about him?
Mike, I know we don't agree with each other on most things. I appreciate you allowing an open blog for the most part for people to post things.
JTB said: "I hope you had a good dinner. Were you on the list to dine with Steve and Donna tonight? I hope you remember to let Steve pay. He has BBC credit card. What's a few tithe dollars blown on a good meal, huh?"
Mike, "Do you even care what people say about Steve and Donna?"
brady said....
I do admit all of our righteousness is like a filthy rag, but I am sure not a liar.
Second, I notice that the email you quoted was one I sent personally to NASS--therefore, I guess we can conclude that you two hang out together. Are you also a woman???
JTB: You, not a liar?? Well, you said that "I quoted a personal email to NASS". I guess you concluded wrong.
That is another lie you told. It wasn't a personal email but a post on the blog. Don't you even remember where you spread your lies and hatred?
That is two lies you have been caught in and I didn't even have to try.
Do you want me to continue to post your hate-filled posts? There are quite a few.
You are a fraud and a lier. I would tell you that straight to your face. I have seen the evidence.
While I don't believe you and Dr. Rogers were friends for one minute, if it was true, I think Dr. Rogers could have found a better friend to hang out with than you...like maybe Judas?
jtb said:
"While I don't believe you and Dr. Rogers were friends for one minute, if it was true, I think Dr. Rogers could have found a better friend to hang out with than you...like maybe Judas?"
...or maybe Paul Williams
Watchinghisstory said.....
...or maybe Paul Williams
JTB: or maybe Charles Page. You are on the same level as Judas.
jtb
How is it that AR was so in touch with God that he didn't allow secondary cussing and yet he worked side by side with a pedophile for 17 years?
I guess PW was careful about secondary cussing! Seems that too many people were careful around AR!
Is there anything spiritually unhealthy here?
Another cross-blog exchange:
sickofthelies said...
It has been brought to my attention that they are accusing me of something about a homosexual relationship between SG and JP??????????????? WHERE in the world did THAT come from?
It came from SH's own words, and if I'm grasping at straws you should also holler at aslansown and NASS since they read the same thing I did, which was exactly what was intended. You need to take responsibility for your own words for once.
aslansown said...
SOTL said:
Now, now, Gmommy...have you forgotten that JP and SG have a SPECIAL covenenant between just the two of them? We still haven't figured out what special covenant exists between those two men.
(aslans) Just to keep things on the high road, please don't go there.
10:07 AM, August 13, 2007
New BBC Open Forum said...
aslan wrote:
"Just to keep things on the high road, please don't go there."
(NASS) Agreed. Let's not even pretend to navigate those uncharted waters.
10:24 AM, August 13, 2007
You know perfectly well what you were directly implying, and what you are currently implying about ACE. Deny it and you're lying, 'sickofthelies'.
When I hear him say he enjoys hanging out with middle schoolers I don't think anything about it other than he must be immature for his age, and I think many of his posts testify to that. Only an unhealthy mind would instantly assume that there is any kind of sexual connotation.
What you are saying is ugly, Stephanie. Even on my bad days I've never said anything like that. Yes, you're mad at ACE. Yes, it looks like he is living high on the hog while you're struggling to find a place. But God is very clear that Christians are not to return evil for evil. If you're trying to ruin ACE's life as punishment, you're doomed to fail because God is not with you. He has his own plans for ACE, and his own schedule too.
Read over this passage, and share it with your friends. Most of the scripture that's shared over their is about damnation and judgement, but there's a recurring theme of waiting on the Lord throughout the Bible.
Psalm 37:4-8
Delight yourself in the LORD
and he will give you the desires of your heart.
Commit your way to the LORD;
trust in him and he will do this:
He will make your righteousness shine like the dawn,
the justice of your cause like the noonday sun.
Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for him;
do not fret when men succeed in their ways,
when they carry out their wicked schemes.
Refrain from anger and turn from wrath;
do not fret—it leads only to evil.
sickofthelies said...
If they don't like what SG says, they should take it to him, not make up a story about it and then blame me for their own dirty, sick minds.
I liked what Mike wrote earlier, "Methinks the lady doth protest too much."
(I certainly hope no one makes any connection between the two quotes, because I don't mean anything by it!)
I just love it when the anti-BBC bunch call you liars when you disagree with them--shows the depth of their love for Jesus and His church. At least they're after others now instead of Dr. Gaines. They seem to have lost their focus--which isn't surprising considering their spiritual depth.
WatchingHISstory said...
jtb
How is it that AR was so in touch with God that he didn't allow secondary cussing and yet he worked side by side with a pedophile for 17 years?
I guess PW was careful about secondary cussing! Seems that too many people were careful around AR!
JTB: How is it that your pastor at CFB hasn't applied church discpline to you???
How is it that you can baspheme against God and you still think you are doing His work?
Brady said...
I just love it when the anti-BBC bunch call you liars when you disagree with them--shows the depth of their love for Jesus and His church. At least they're after others now instead of Dr. Gaines. They seem to have lost their focus--which isn't surprising considering their spiritual depth
JTB: I just love it when the
anti-truth crowd shows the hate and ignorace when they say one thing but when they are called on it, they just call people names. You are not called a liar because you disagree, brady. I called you a liar because I have caught you in a few lies. Liars tells lies. That is why people call them(you) a liar.
I love it when you catch the
anti-truth crowd in a lie (which are many from brady) and they question your love for the church.
Funny, when Jesus confronted the liars of His day, they said the same thing.
It seems that anti-truth brady has lost his focus. It seems that when confronted with his own lying words, he changes the topic and chooses to question peoples spiritual depth.
Looking at anti-truth brady's posts, his lack of love for Christ and His church it would lead one to believe that anti-truth bradys lack of spiritual depth would be of greater concern to him than someone elses.
Usually a small man throws around baseless accusations. JTB loves to do that. He loves to call me a liar when that simply isn't true.
I did send an email to N-ass and said people were acting like pompous asses. It was a personal email send to her only but seems that she must have posted it somewhere. I don't apologize for or deny that.
I did say I was personal friends with Adrian Rogers and I stand by that statement.
Now let's see where the other accusations can come from...
johnthebaptist said...
Mike, I know we don't agree with each other on most things. I appreciate you allowing an open blog for the most part for people to post things.
Happy to be of service. It's an unintended consequence (from my perspective) of having a blog where discussion is encouraged.
We all know that Watchinghisstory has some issues that are beyond human comprehension.
In one way or another, I would suggest that all of us do.
What I don't understand is how you can allow him to constantly attack Dr. Rogers and you have done very little to stop him.
You said that you would "take a bullet for that man".
And that's not a statement I make lightly; I can count on one hand the people (other than members of my family) I'd make that statement about--Adrian Rogers having been one, and Jim Whitmire being another.
Well, you can't take a physical bullet now for him but how about a spiritual one?
You let charles attack & show disrespect to Dr. Rogers legacy, allowing him to call him unstable, have hidden agenda's ect. This is also hurtful to their families.
Words cannot personally harm Adrian Rogers now in the slightest. And as for his family, they've no doubt heard, seen and read far worse things being said about him.
This goes beyond the Armininian/Calvinist debate. This is a personal attack on his character.
Do you even care what people say about him?
I'm guessing you already know the answer to that question: Of course I do. However, as we've been reminded more than once over the past year, the source of a remark must be considered when dealing with it.
Speaking of which, a new article is on its way.
johnthebaptist said...
Brady said...
I just love it when the anti-BBC bunch call you liars when you disagree with them--shows the depth of their love for Jesus and His church. At least they're after others now instead of Dr. Gaines. They seem to have lost their focus--which isn't surprising considering their spiritual depth
JTB: I just love it when the
anti-truth crowd shows the hate and ignorace when they say one thing but when they are called on it, they just call people names. You are not called a liar because you disagree, brady. I called you a liar because I have caught you in a few lies. Liars tells lies. That is why people call them(you) a liar.
I love it when you catch the
anti-truth crowd in a lie (which are many from brady) and they question your love for the church.
Funny, when Jesus confronted the liars of His day, they said the same thing.
It seems that anti-truth brady has lost his focus. It seems that when confronted with his own lying words, he changes the topic and chooses to question peoples spiritual depth.
Looking at anti-truth brady's posts, his lack of love for Christ and His church it would lead one to believe that anti-truth bradys lack of spiritual depth would be of greater concern to him than someone elses.
Um, John?
You just reinforced Brady's point for him.
And there's a difference between questioning someone's Christian maturity, as he did, and questioning someone's salvation, as you just did. The former behavior, while not conducive to discussion, is far more tolerable than the latter behavior, which is presumptuous and sinful.
And you might want to check your spelling of "ignorance." The irony alarms went off automatically on that one... :)
--Mike
Mike,
Good to see you up and about today. Hope you are having a good one.
Dr. Rogers and his legacy do not need defending nor protecting. It can stand on its own. Those who attack him but reap their own rewards; however, we all need to remember that he was a man just like all of us.
Dr. Gaines is another story though. He is our pastor and deserves our love, respect, and prayers. There will be harsh rewards for those who attack a man that God has placed in a position of spiritual authority. I have always respected you stands and service at BBC.
Keep up the good work!
Sorry but I meant to say "those who attack him will reap their rewards."
Just got in a hurry.
Send me an e-mail, Brady. It's nice to know we have mutual friends.
--Mike
Well Mike, thanks for responding anyway.
I guess the fact that the Rogers family has heard worse is a good reason in your world to do nothing.
I do consider the source but why leave all that junk for people to read? Very disrespectful of the Rogers family. What kind of friend does that kind of thing?
I consider myself a friend of the Rogers family and I would show more love and respect toward them than you. I guess what I have heard from your coworkers is true. Probably good you moved to Alabama anyway.
I wasn't questioning anti-truth brady's salvation. If that is what you read into that, whew boy! I can imagine how you would interpret scripture.
He says that his posts were in an email but there are on the blog for everyone to see. Mike, as a blog administrator, can you assume someones identity and post for them? Anti-truth brady's posts have date and time stamps on them.
As far as my spelling of ignorance...oops, I made a mistake. Ever made a typo Mike?
Not in your eyes I am sure.
Are you sure it was the "irony alarm" going off or was it your arrogant pride alarm going off again? Not questioning your salvation mind you.
: ) <--- the smiley make it ok to say that, according to your post.
johnthebaptist said...
Well Mike, thanks for responding anyway.
I guess the fact that the Rogers family has heard worse is a good reason in your world to do nothing.
Like authoring misrepresentations? I've communicated with Charles, just as I have with others who have written unpleasantries here--and just as I am with you.
I do consider the source but why leave all that junk for people to read? Very disrespectful of the Rogers family. What kind of friend does that kind of thing?
A friend who knows that the Rogers family, as a rule, doesn't spend time dwelling on the unsubstantiated opinions of bloggerati.
I consider myself a friend of the Rogers family and I would show more love and respect toward them than you.
Nothing like a little self-aggrandizement to make the day sail by, hmm?
I guess what I have heard from your coworkers is true. Probably good you moved to Alabama anyway.
Let's hear it--either via e-mail or, if you prefer, right out here in the open. With attributions, mind you. None of this "so-and-so said" junk.
And since it was God's will for us to move here, it was very good that we did. Do you have a problem with it?
I wasn't questioning anti-truth brady's salvation. If that is what you read into that, whew boy! I can imagine how you would interpret scripture.
Then, by all means, tell me what I should've understood "lack of love for Christ and His Church" to mean, with special emphasis on just how one can possibly be a Christian while lacking love for either the body of Christ or for Jesus Himself.
He says that his posts were in an email but there are on the blog for everyone to see. Mike, as a blog administrator, can you assume someones identity and post for them? Anti-truth brady's posts have date and time stamps on them.
Couldn't tell you. I've seen blog identities hijacked before, though. Why don't you ask Brady about the discrepancy--and ask without the pejoratives?
As far as my spelling of ignorance...oops, I made a mistake. Ever made a typo Mike?
Not in your eyes I am sure.
Are you sure it was the "irony alarm" going off or was it your arrogant pride alarm going off again? Not questioning your salvation mind you.
: ) <--- the smiley make it ok to say that, according to your post.
It's called a joke. I've been known to make them on rare occasions... Unless my "coworkers" have been telling you the deep, dark, untold story... Heh heh heh...
--Mike
P.S.: Seriously, though. Let's see all the slurs you presume to have on me from my coworkers, with attribution. To put it politely, either put up or hush.
Looks like JTB is getting paranoid again. He needs to go talk to N-ass and he will discover that the post I sent her was intended for her and her alone.
Methinks JTB is getting paranoid.
It will be great to see if JTB is man enough to put who said what about you Mike--but don't hold your breath waiting. That's not how they do things.
Perhaps we should all continue to encourage N-ass to go and meet with Dr. Gaines and then publish her real name for all to see.
But then, I'm still waiting for frogs to fly.
I think that anyone who makes the claim that they desire to further the kingdom of God should use everything at their disposal to do so.
NASS has sat herself down in a highly visible position. She should use whatever influence she has to fix what she thinks is wrong at Bellevue. Honestly, I don't understand why she won't try to arrange a meeting with Gaines. She's said that she's not afraid of him, and that she remains anonymous because of the disturbed people in bloggerland.
If she won't even try, she has no reason to complain about anything. She's just waiting around for others to do the job for her.
As far as I am concerned, anyone who rips a preacher (in emails or in a blog) and doesn't have the common decency (much less Biblical responsibility) to go and meet with him in person is a person without merit.
Post a Comment