If you don't have a catchphrase, let me suggest one
"Live for nothing, or die for something. Your call."
As a Christian, such a statement has a very specific connotation to me, but it's certainly a conversation-starter at the very least. You might have to Google the source (other than the Biblical overtones, obviously), and when you find it, you'll know one movie you might want to go see in January.
--Mike
538 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 538 Newer› Newest»Matthew 12:34 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. 36 I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.
"The wise ones fashioned speech with their thought, sifting it as grain is sifted through a sieve."
"In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves."
Ecc 12: 11 The words of the wise are like goads, and like nails firmly fixed are the collected sayings; they are given by one Shepherd. 12 My son, beware of anything beyond these. Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh. 13 The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.
"Pay no attention to the faults of others, things done or left undone by others. Consider only what by oneself is done or left undone."
"We can rebuild him. We have the technology. We can make him better than he was. Better... stronger... faster"
"When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave."
"But I took them away from all that, and now they work for me. My name is Charlie."
"Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry."
I am a bold, Spirit-filled and Evangelistic Calvinist.
Isn't the above statement somewhat oxymoronic?
That applies to most of you-know-who's statements, but with the 'oxy' taken off.
You should know, Arnie.
John Mark said...
"Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry."
2:44 PM, December 06, 2007
Sometimes you just have to ask yourself if you feel lucky. Do you feel lucky? Well do ya, PUNK!!!!!!! :)
Uh, oh, Lynn ... now you've gone and done it! Since the context of your last quote is when Dirty Harry was about to shoot the "punk" he was talking to, you are now likely to be accused of issuing death threats.
Heres a quote that fits better:
And I dedicate this to Charles:
"Your questions have become more redundant and annoying than the last three “Highlander” movies."
Charles: "...excuse me but defaming a sodomite is tantamont to defaming that which is righteous and true."
Actually, Charles, here's an interesting fact: (FACT, Cakes): In Christ the sodomite is no longer a sodomite. He is the righteousness of Christ.
Isn't this where faith gets real? Do you really believe God can forgive our sins? Do you really believe we can repent? Do you really believe we can make restitution? Or do you believe that once a sin is committed there is no forgiveness?
To be clear: I'm not a touchy feely preacher. But I do believe God forvives sin and doesn't label us according to our sin. I've done some pretty bad stuff in life. You have, too. What have we to rely on, Charles? Nothing but the grace of God.
Fact: If we rely only on our goodness to save us, we are eternally lost. Without hope.
Fact: If we repent and turn from sin God will save us.
I don't want to get in an argument with you, Charles, about how Salvation takes place. I want to be clear: It is not our good works that saves us. We are ALL condemned before God. Our only hope is repenting and turning to God for grace.
That doesn't make what we do "right." It's not an easy way out. And to be sure, God does demand we repent, not just say "sorry." Does God accept the repentance of the worst of us? Does he offer grace to the murderer? Saul's, the Peter's, the Thomas', the David's. He does.
I said...
Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.
Cakes said...
You should know, Arnie.
Boy does that make me mad!!
So Angry!!!!!!!!
ARRRRRRGGGHHHHH!!!!! ARMINIUS WILL SMASH!!!!!!!
This reminds me of David, the Arminian, trying to redefine total depravity!
YAAARRRRGHHH! DAVID KILL GOLIATH, NOT THE INCREDIBLE ARMINIUS! MUST SMASH DAVID!!!!!!
jm,
"With great power comes great responsibility."
BAAAAHHHHH!!
HULK NO CARE WHAT SQUISHY INSECT SAY!!!!!!
SMASSSSSHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I guess there really is no reasoning with some people...
"Spider pig, spider pig
Does whatever a spider pig does
Can he swing from a web?
No he can't, he's a pig..."
DOH!!!!
Charles: “No, God does not always forgive.”
Wait, let that settle in.
Is that scary, or what? Suppose that was true. What if God was like us and just decided sometimes he wouldn’t forgive! What if he was fickle? What if his nature was not consistent, but ever changing. We would never know which sins he would or would not forgive.
However, this idea that God does not forgive when we ask for forgiveness, it really goes in the big book of: Stuff Charles made up.
That’s another book. Know what it says?
“I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me.” Jer. 33:8
It’s interesting how we want God to forgive ALL our sins, but don’t believe he always forgives in the case of others.
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and WILL forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” 1 John 1:9
Not only will he forgive, he’ll purify us.
I really like this comment:
“Will God forgive a sinner who is a sodomite? I belive so. However...”
Charles, there is no however after that. Will God forgive? Yes.
You often accuse me of being a linberal. If liberals believe God forgives repentant man... I'm a liberal.
WatchingHISstory said...
astonded
"Why would a Calvinist need to resort to evangelism? Would not evangelism to a Calvinist be tantamount to usurping God's soverignty in choosing only those He wishes todole His salvation out to?"
Adrian Rogers could not have said it better in his mocking Reformed believers. With his strawman arguments he would insert a chuckle and a ha, ha, ha but you said it well. You listened closely, didn't you? (from his Romans 8 and 9 speeches. you can get them from Bellevue's library)
Charles
Wow. My first post on this blog and the first response is compliment. If Bro. Adrian could not have said it better, that puts me in good company.
WHS,
G. doesn't indict AR because there is nothing to suggest that he should be. If you have any evidence to the contrary, outside of the inference that he should have seered it, then shoot.
Otherwise, G. cuts to the chase.
Watching,
"Many liberals believe that God forgives sin. Ezekial believes C. S. Lewis is a liberal and we both know that Lewis is strong on forgiveness of sin through Christ's sacrifice."
Show me where I said I believed Lewis was a liberal..
Watching, we just see more and more of what I do believe about you in your recent posts.
Provacative statements without any biblical background or basis. Just running around throwing out stuff to elicite argument and controversy. Not any attempt to teach any sound doctrine. You apparently lay claim to "exhortation" but have that seriously confused with creating confusion and strife among the "brothers".
So far the spirits that you seem to possess or that seem to possess you are the Jezebel spirit (controlling) the lying spirit and the deceiving spirit. Come on out where we can see you for what you are. Legion.
Luke 11:23 Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 24 When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none it says, I will return to my house from which I came. 25 And when it comes, it finds the house swept and put in order. 26 Then it goes and brings seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there. And the last state of that person is worse than the first. 27 As he said these things, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed! 28 But he said, Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!
Come on out where we can see you for what you are. Legion.
OUCH! And I thought Sol was tough sometimes!!
Mike, I asked NewBBC to post thison their blog and I wanted to also post this on your blog as well. Hope you do not mind.
There needs to be a big clarification on this issue.
There needs to be a correction on the Messiah issue that was posted by Churchmouse around 8:18 am Dec 7th.
Please post this info for me.
My father did ask if some musicians could be used for the Messiah. The Minister of Instrumental said that the musicians are being used for the Tree and the Majesty. He said it it would be hard to spare them while doing both of these performances. There was nothing hidden or underlying
animosity towards my father. My father understood.
My father did ask the Minister of Music if some books could be spared. The Minister of Music said it would be hard to spare this material at the time of the Messiah because the church choir is also using these books for the Majesty service and need them for practice, etc...
There was nothing hidden or underlying animosity towards my father. My father understood.
These two men are singing and helping my father out in the Messiah. They are giving there time and voices to help out with the Messiah.
Again, there was no underlying motive from these two men towards my father and he understood why they could not spare some of the
musicians and books. I just want to make sure the truth is told about this issue that was brought up on the blog. It was no big deal and my father did not think anything about it. He is just happy to come back and help out with the Messiah and happy to have them sing in the Messiah.
I ask that you please post this for me so the facts about this matter can be read.
Thank you,
Joshua David Whitmire
It's important for the facts to be shared by reliable sources not only so that there will be no misunderstanding, but also so that the people who are so eager to distort the truth to stir up anger will not have any believability in the future.
In that spirit, the instigator's post should be preserved:
Churchmouse said...
NASS, you got to tell a story (to make a point) about churchmouse and the owls the other day. Now, I have a story for you... OK, you revelers, listen up…
A CHRISTMAS STORY
Once upon a time there was a big church called Beautiful. People came from far and wide to hear the Bible taught by the Truthful Minister of the Word. They also came to lift their voices in songs to the Lord under the leadership of the Faithful Minister of Music.
God in his infinite wisdom knew that it was time to bring the Truthful Minister home to His bosom. This made the people of the Beautiful Church very sad. Soon, a New Minister was appointed. He made the decision to replace Faithful Minister of Music with Young Minister of Music. This made the people of the Beautiful Church doubly sad, because they loved the Faithful Minister.
Two years later, Faithful Minister was invited back to the city to lead the Christmas celebration of the birthday of the Messiah. Faithful Minister called his former Minister of Instrumental Music at Beautiful Church to ask for some musicians to help lift up praises to the Messiah – our Redeemer.
The Minister of Instrumental music refused, saying that his musicians were all too busy. He said that the relationship between the Brothers in Christ was not good and they would not participate…in the celebration...of the birth of Jesus Christ.
Then Faithful Minister called upon the Young Minister to see if they might borrow some music books for a couple of hours...to help the singers lift up praises to the Messiah. Young Minister declined, saying that he would be using the books. Faithful Minister promised to return the books in plenty of time. Young Minister said, “No.”
Will Faithful Minister find musicians to help him lift praises to the Messiah? Will he find music for his singers? Will God bless this tribute to His Son?
To be continued...
8:18 AM, December 07, 2007
Let's see...
Posts that have clearly never been deleted on TBR said to be deleted. Gulf Coast relief trips that the church paid for stated to have been paid for by the participants. And now this.
These are the people attacking Bellevue? I'll tell you: if they WEREN'T saying bad things about me I'd be worried!
Charles,
Does Hebrews 10:25-27, that you cited about PW, apply to you? Aren't you continuing to sin by breaking the stated rules?
"It's important for the facts to be shared by reliable sources not only so that there will be no misunderstanding, but also so that the people who are so eager to distort the truth to stir up anger will not have any believability in the future."
One word comes up when I think of you preaching on credibility: Watchman
And I can't help of think of one of your beloved NBBCOFers deliberately and maliciously fabricating slanderous lies with the hope of creating ill will toward JP and CT.
Maybe she'll teach you a few of her tricks at the bowling party. You really don't lie very much, you know.
I'm giving NASS the benefit of the doubt, but the information from Joshua Whitmire has not been posted on NBBCOF yet.
I'm giving her the benefit of plenty of doubt.
In light of the post's existence here, she'll no doubt approve it.
"I'm giving NASS the benefit of the doubt, but the information from Joshua Whitmire has not been posted on NBBCOF yet."
I am not giving the benefit of the doubt on anything over there. This also brings to mind stories of Gianes having a residence in New York City and a supposed fight between bloggers, all reported but never verified or any retractions given.
It is just another of of bashing BBC and trying to find anything to gossip about and build into a bigger thing than it was.
Memphis
I think the whole thing is shameful actually. I just was hoping that NASS was away from the computer and that is why the information isn't on there yet.
It finally made it's way up. It looks like it was emailed instead of posted, a wise choice since it left a paper trail.
Nass's response was basically 'well, there's just no way to know what really happened, so let's assume it's true'.
When faced with an obvious fabrication with no purpose than to cause trouble, her primary concern is:
New BBC Open Forum said...
I wonder if Jamie will wear a tie this year?
Sorry nass, but even though JP doesn't dress nicely enough for you, that's no license to slander him.
Kind of funny that you are proving my conviction that you exist as a blog only because of the "other" blog. You live for them and because of them. You prove it everyday, post by post.
They don't say it, but I will.
You live and die with whatever is said on the "other" blog. Some of you are constantly running over there looking for a scab to pick.
And Mike has the gall to whine about the occasional 'sniper'. He has much bigger problems right here in his own little world because he doesn't even control his own blog, letting WHS spew his cesspool filth to be viewed by the world, possibly to children. If he doesn't have the time to control that kind of crap, he needs to hand it over to one of you who seem to have all the time in the world to monitor the sad and sickening situation that is transpiring here.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Well gee Memphis,
How would you know what they retract or not, since you said you don't go over there? You love it, because you can divert what someone says and damn the bunch for it, but you only offer sad sack, Clintonian excuses for the real criticism--that Gaines has destroyed his credibility as any kind of trustworthy pastor, by his own irresponsible actions.
You guys have to broad brush and villify others, because you are too timid to actually address how the BBCIR is in contradiction to the poplar view here that he was on top of the matter, just made wrong choices. Or that you cannot take the tenuous stand of saying what a horrible mistake it was (which most of you defensively assert), yet infer that suffering exposure on the internet is "accountability," although you lightweights won't come out and say that either, since that is preposterous and indefencable.
Keep trying to stack up enough egregious blog entries on NBBCOF to equal one incurious pastor letting a pedophile off the hook for 6 months.
I think I've caught some of the NBBCOF making left turns, not using a turn signal and J-walking. Don't forget to write those down.
Your desperation is very entertaining.
John Mark said...
Wow, it got quiet in here...
10:39 PM, December 01, 2007
Since we're in agreement on that, the question that needs to be addressed is why do they care what NBBCOF says anymore?
Or, to be more specific, why are they so obsessed with the blog? Is it going to be this way for the rest of their lives?
Kind of sad, if it is. Life's pretty short when it's all said and done.
I'm getting pretty bored with your 'get out of jail free' card, cakes.
Is anything permissible for someone who claims offense about PW do whatever they want to without consequence?
You know, I'm feeling a little offended about PW myself.
Therefore, cakes, I say you're a complete jackass. I could make a monkey out of you, but why should I take all the credit?
I don't really consider you a vulture, though. I consider you something a vulture would eat.
And OC, I don't know what makes you so stupid, but it really works!
But remember, I'm mad at SG so there are no consequences!
What is sad gentlemen, regardless of one's take on all the issues, is that someone would take the time to denigrate two men without having all the information (see eprov's comment calling these men "jerks") and basing it on some allegorical "story".
You calling me a Jackass--you?
Keep'em coming, Einstein--I never get tired of you being Mike's sycophant--sort of his own personal Igor, only not as smart.
Normally I'd be offended, but as long as you stay mad at SG I have to let it go.
But boy, if you ever AREN'T mad...
Cakes,
Someday they will move on and talk about very important issues, such as if Celine and Willie H. are dating and are birthing a Muslim love child. Couldn't be worse than what WHS has displayed here.
Just sayin'.
oc.
As pleasant as it's been, life calls.
Keep posting, and I promise I'll ignore you later, guys.
Peace out.
Cakes you are right, I did go over and read Churchmouses post after reading the post from Whitmire.
And I still stand beside my post of why I do not bother with the NBBCOF blog anymore.
Also it seems to be that their should be accountibility all around. Do you not think that things being reported in these forums should be right and if not that people should retract their posts and say I was wrong? SHould they not be accountable for that?
I think all agree that the situation with PW was handled wrong, but I also agree with what David posted awhile ago, "It seems when some speak of the need for accountability, they really mean punishment. They want to punish the pastor. Accountability is taking steps to make sure it doesn’t happen again."
Now, I am not totally sure you read my post since you went off on the the investigations and other things I did not mention in my post, but if you need someone to go off on and make me target for you to get things off your checst, then go ahead brother.
Memphis
Oh, and just so you know, I am leaving for awhile to do some Christmas shopping...
Do not want anyone to worry about little ole timid me!
Merry Christmas,
Memphis
mphis said:
"...Accountability is taking steps to make sure it doesn’t happen again."
WEBSTERS says:
Ac·count·a·bil·i·ty
n.
The state of being accountable; liability to be called on to render an account; the obligation to bear the consequences for failure to perform as expected; accountableness.
To a Christian, part of accountability is REPENTANCE, which leads to FORGIVENESS. Neither have been forthcoming from Dr Gaines. IF he had REPENTED instead of lying and covering his sin (Proverbs 28:13), he would have been FORGIVEN and this blog and others would have never been born....
John Mark said...
Wow, it got quiet in here...
10:39 PM, December 01, 2007
"This is a revealing statement about what was transpiring before Steve Gaines came to Bellevue."
Is that a fact?
Charles,
Does Hebrews 10:25-27, that you cited about PW, apply to you? Aren't you continuing to sin by breaking the stated rules?
Oh, please OC!
As if I've ever been bashful about posting! How bout this?
ALF said...
To a Christian, part of accountability is REPENTANCE, which leads to FORGIVENESS. Neither have been forthcoming from Dr Gaines. IF he had REPENTED instead of lying and covering his sin (Proverbs 28:13), he would have been FORGIVEN and this blog and others would have never been born....
4:26 PM, December 07, 2007
Repentance under fear of reprisal is just coercion. It's not a requirement for Christian forgiveness, either. If you lost a loved one in a car wreck, but the other driver was killed, according to your statement forgiveness is not possible.
Gaines has repented for the blunders he made, and apologized. Whether he was sincere or not is not for you to decide for anyone other than ALF. You're choosing to ignore Jesus' instruction to forgive your offender 70x7 times because you don't see any personal benefit.
What you want is to see Dr. Gaines crawl at your feet so you can feel like a bigger man. Well, that ain't gonna happen. Face it ALF, you're a nobody just like me. You have no persuasion over anyone but yourself.
Now go eat a cat or something.
WHS Said:
John Mark
I like you!! ...and I know the feeling is mutual. ;)
Charles
oc says:
JM, Dude. You need to head for the hills. (notice the wink in his...uh...flirtation.) Good luck to both of you.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Oh really? Do any other Scriptures not apply to Charles?!
Ya'll registering at Target?
Aren't you sinning by posting when asked not to? And doing it over and over and over again.
Here’s how a days blogs look:
Mike – Tells Charles to stop posting
Charles – saying stuff
Charles – posting scriptures
Charles – recounting sex acts
Someone else
Charles – Still talking
Charles – Still talking
Charles – Still talking
Cakes – mystified at Charles.
Charles – Back to Calvin
Mike – telling Charles to stop posting
Charles – saying that God does NOT FORGIVE PERPETUAL SIN...
... leading to the question: Then, why do you keep posting?
cm said...
The Minister of Instrumental music refused, saying that his musicians were all too busy. He said that the relationship between the Brothers in Christ was not good and they would not participate…in the celebration...of the birth of Jesus Christ.
joshua whitmire said...
I just want to make sure the truth is told about this issue that was brought up on the blog. It was no big deal and my father did not think anything about it. He is just happy to come back and help out with the Messiah and happy to have them sing in the Messiah.
Churchmouse said...
I don't see any conflict between the story I posted and the account given by Josh Whitmire. This is the same event given from two points of view. Each has unique details not given in the other.
It is what it is.
5:04 PM, December 07, 2007
Watching,
Let's expand a little on the Jezebel spirit that seems to have you in its grips.
One of her tactics is to control everything she touches. When she can't control, she becomes confrontational, aggressive, intimidating and willing to say anything. Along those lines, how many folks have you challenged, intimidated recently? What was the stunt in the front of BBC? How many others have you done this to? Have you visited anyone else to personally confront them? What about the story where you confronted your current pastor? What was the purpose? To intimidate? Provoke? Be cute?
Another aspect of her character is rebellion. How many times have you been asked to clean up your act or move on? You can't post on the other blog and have been asked repeatedly to not post here. Right? So we see more control. You are going to do what you want to do regardless of others wishes. So through your rebellion and refusal to clean up your act, communication has been limited there and here as well. Are you just going to keep pushing your way and forcing your way on folks till they have to moderate over here as well?
Then lets get to this obsession with Dr. Rogers. Its really not his theology that you have an issue with is it? How many times did you confront him on his interpretation or his theology? How many times did you run him down at the front of the church or try to intimidate him? None? One? Or did you lack the guts to do it in person? I have to tell you, Israel's chariots got to him before you did....Praise God!
Are you going to keep going here until the only sign left of you is your skull, feet and the palm of your hands or are you going to repent and ask for forgiveness and the cleansing you so desperately need?
Watching,
Your daily guidance then we are to believe includes, obscene, graphic imagery, lies, deception and rebellion?
Can you point us to that scripture?
JM,
Yeah, Dude.
Seems he has takin' a likin' to ya.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Bless your pea pickin' heart.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Watching,
"Charles,
Does Hebrews 10:25-27, that you cited about PW, apply to you? Aren't you continuing to sin by breaking the stated rules?
6:34 PM, December 07, 2007
WatchingHISstory said...
david
no
6:41 PM, December 07, 2007"
So I guess this is where you get authority to use the language and practice the lying and deception that you do?
Whatever happened to being Christlike? How do you justify daily instructions from the Shepherd as you claim being distinctly un-Christlike? Don't you think his instructions would be more in line with the instructions we see in the written WORD? Or do you just make up your own rules as you go along?
"I get my daily guidance from Our Shepherd! I obey Him rather than man.
Charles"
So do I Charles, So do I. But the guidance that I am getting tells me to stop sinning, stop lying, stop deceiving. Why is you message so different from mine? Do you have any written guidance that supports you? I have written, inspired, innerant words that guide me. In fact I don't hear whispers, don't see visions...
That must be that unclean spirit you seem to be sporting around. Hey, that would explain all the filth flowing from you as well...
Luke 11:23 Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 24 When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none it says, I will return to my house from which I came. 25 And when it comes, it finds the house swept and put in order. 26 Then it goes and brings seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there. And the last state of that person is worse than the first. 27 As he said these things, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed! 28 But he said, Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!
What are you listening to Charles? Is it that spirit whispering in your ear or the WORD of God written in english for the rest of us?
Watching,
You keep claiming persecution for your belief. Yet I don't see anyone persecuting you for acting like Christ. I don't see anyone persecuting you for bringing a message based on the WORD.
All I see is a man in chains, torn and tattered clothing and out of control. Where is your robe of rightesousness? It is insulitng to all that is Holy and Pure to even think you suffer in the name of Christ when everything you do is so distinctly un-Christlike. Just look at yourself....Are the wounds you suffer caused by unbelievers? Are the wounds you suffer because you are claiming to be the Savior? Are the wounds you suffer because you claim to be God himself?
No....the wounds you suffer are inflicted by men. Many if not all believers. Christians. That are so offended by your un-Christlike behavior that they are doing everything they can to turn you around. Get you to repent and be saved.
Your not suffering because you preach a message of salvation and forgiveness of sins or even a message of repentance but because you use vulgar language, lie and deceive and claim that these characteristics are characteristics of the very man that sacrificed himslf on a cross to save you and me from certain, eternal death.
Watching,
When you start suffering pain and stripes for being and acting Christlike you may be able to claim suffering in the name of Christ.
As long as you are suffering pain and stripes for foul language, lies and deception you should consider the cause being the rod of correction and the stripes of men. He is giving you ample opportunity to turn around and ask for cleansing and restoration to the body.
"Gaines has repented for the blunders he made, and apologized."
After the pie hit the fan--who doesn't apologize when they're the deer in the headlights?
Look, no body has to spell out accountability for you--any thinking person knows what it is. Eventualities--online forums, clandestine potlucks, public scrutiny of leaders stemming from a lack of transparency and what is easily percieved as bullying a few thousand people right out in the street--are just as much owned by Bellevue, because it provided no quarter for stakeholders who can rightly question the integrity of the ministers (cause like I said, a deer in the headlights confession is not compelling) and fitness as Pastor, no? You folks over here seem to think as if something as jarring can occur to a congregation and that everyone will just sweep well-founded doubts and questions under a rug, for the sake of some kind of dumbed-down unity.
If you think he should still be pastor--no matter how egregious his failure--because God put him there, then defend that. What you are arguing most of the time over here is that the core of the outspoken people who place no confidence in Gaines anymore, do so in vengence or "victim mentality," that way you don't ever have to address the points and rather seek to discredit the source.
As a bonus to the loyal, dissenters actually prove that Gaines' leadership should not be questioned regarding accountability and reconciliation, ever. I've never read a single comment about the one outspoken Bellevue critic that does it the right way. Because to you, there is no right way. You either digest a complex issue like the pedophile scandal just like we do, or you wimper away to some other church quietly and leave us alone.
"You're choosing to ignore Jesus' instruction to forgive your offender 70x7 times because you don't see any personal benefit."
As are you.
Watching,
"ou said: "Why is you message so different from mine?"
Because you vainly worship God, teaching for doctrines the commandments and traditions of men.
you said: "Don't you think his instructions would be more in line with the instructions WE SEE in the written WORD?"
" Your daily guidance then WE are to believe..."
Who are the "WE" in these sentences? Seems the traditions of men guide you. You don't hear any voices or see visions. You are not hearing the Holy Spirit so you rely on the interpretations of the WORD by man. Who are the men who guide you? Are they innerant? Are they perfect?
you said: " What are you listening to Charles? Is it that spirit whispering in your ear or the WORD of God written in english for the rest of us?"
The Jews said to Christ: "Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hath a devil?"
Ezekial, you have to be careful when you accuse someone of having a devil.
Charles"
Charles, Everyone here knows very well that the one thing that I don't teach is the doctrines of man or the commandments of man. I have been well know to confront many of them. Remember tithing, the vine, works arguments? Have you seen me make adamant defenses of armenian theology or calvanist theology? No....the doctrines of man. If there is anyone here guilty of that it is you.
As to who guides me, which men? None other than the written WORD and the Holy Spirit. (Heb 8:10) Just where have all the books you have been reading gotten you? Do you even really know what you believe? So far all we have seen is a bunch of attacks on what others believe and nothing supporting any of your beliefs other than a bunch of lies and deception.
As to the threat, telling me to be careful, I am not in the least intimidated jezebel. I am confident that the spirit within me has authority over the spirit within you. You can't do anything that He doesn't allow to happen and He can protect me from anything you have....I aint runnin....
Enough of the persecution stuff. You sound like a lot of other folk around here claiming persection for the sake of Christ and blaming all adversity on satan....it would do you well to search adversary in the WORD and find out how many times God raised them up and why. Repent of your evil deeds and seek repentance at the foot of the cross....
Charles (to Ez): “You don't hear any voices or see visions.”
Uhhh, that might be a good thing.
There are other ways the Shepherd speaks than “hearing voices” or seeing “visions.”
5 ways I learned God speaks:
1. Through the Bible. Nothing he says will contradict the Scriptures.
2. Through the Holy Spirit.
3. Through Godly teaching.
4. Through the Church. Other believers will confirm the truth of God’s revelation.
5. Through circumstances.
So while God can speak through voices, dreams and so on – don’t assume that is the only way he speaks. In fact, he speaks most naturally through Scripture.
If your visions and voices do not line up with Scripture, then they’re not from God.
The reason it seems you are not filled with the Holy Spirit is because you demonstrate rage, foulness language, and a strange need to repeat in pornographic language the molestation of a child. The exact opposite of the fruit of the Spirit. If you want to claim to be filled with the Spirit, then exhibit the fruit of the Spirit.
So you can be angry at me for saying this, or you can take it as loving correction. I got a dose of loving correction from an associate pastor tonight. The Lord slammed me. My choice: To take it and learn from it, or be angry. I choose to take it and learn from it.
I believe the Lord can do greater things through you, Charles. Let him.
Watching,
No, I am not implying anything. I have stated it clearly. Jezebel, Lying and Deception. I see now that we can add Deviant spirit to the list. Why don't you go ahead and show us just how graphic and deviant you can get. We are looking for seven or more right?
My outrage at the whole incident has been duly recorded. To say that it hasn't is more deception and lies. But then what should we expect from you other than more of the same?
Reprobate mind.....does that mean anything to you Charles? I am beginning to think that something about talking dirty and being sexually explicit does something for you. Could this be why. Has He already turned you over to a rperobate mind?
2 Thes 2:1 Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Heads up Charles....this looks as if it is written just for you and me. I am not going to be deceived and you are under a strong delusion, taking great pleasure in unrighteousness.
Let's recap. Jezebel, Lying, Deception, Deviant.
And now a spirit of Delusion. That makes 5 so far.
cakes,
What does accountability look like? After the pie hit the fan... ? Spell it out for us slower thinkers.
And Cakes,
Seriously, do you think that if put in the same situation again, Dr. Gaines would respond the same way?
David said:
Seriously, do you think that if put in the same situation again, Dr. Gaines would respond the same way?
9:28 PM, December 07, 2007
Huh? What does that mean? I know I'm not Cakes, but
I really am eagerly awaiting your explanation for this lame question.
David, lots of convicted murderers and rapists wouldn't do it the same again either. They would figure out a way not to get caught next time.
So what does your question really mean?
OC,
It seems there is no option to learn from the past.
Would you have reinstated Peter?
Or called Paul?
Guess what: Gaines didn’t murder anyone. He didn’t report something he should have reported. Would he next time? I think so. Do you? It’s not about cover up. It was about a pastor thinking he had information that was confidential. He now knows otherwise. Unless you were born perfect (and as for me, I was born in sin) you spend a lot of life learning.
Fraid we'll have to bid each other adieu at this point, cakes. As the Bible says, 2 people can't travel together unless they agree on the direction they're going. I could add to that they need to actually travel, instead of just talking about it.
Steve Gaines once preached that the opponents of the church often met in secrecy. This was a not-so-subtle jab at IDC and the Sharp/Manning clique. These were the people Gaines was lashing out at, not the forum. If anything, he'd be glad for them to all go bowling just so they'd shut up for a few hours. Eager to be the victims, though, the forumites claim that jab as being directed at them. Combine that mentality with the determination to see things that aren't really there and the malicious intent we've seen just this week, and what have you got? A lynch mob, that's what.
As I said before, it's not our place to judge the authenticity of another's apology. Christians have no choice but to forgive. And demanding consequences is not our right. As you've so astutely observed, many have left Bellevue and that's a consequence of what happened. However, no one can justly demand that a single person leave. It's God's place to judge, not man's. And although that judgement is often delayed, forgiveness can't be. If that opens Christians up to exploitation, then that's just the way it is.
If the disgruntled members had no forum to air their grievances, it's because Bellevue has never had that kind of forum. If the offended members had pressed for one to be created, and kept the pressure on, something might have been accomplished. Instead, they fought a battle on about 5,000,000 fronts, led by inane insinuations by people like James Sundquist, Nena Jones, Lin, and the others who deceived the rabble into rallying behind a nonsensical cause. Going to Mark Daugherty and demanding that he stop churches in America from reading the Purpose Driven Life really was a stupid thing to do, a waste of everyone's time. If the many members who were spending time blogging about the PDC had spent that time instead talking with their friends at church instead of about them, and kept the pressure on that one issue (a forum to be heard) it might have happened.
What you are arguing most of the time over here is that the core of the outspoken people who place no confidence in Gaines anymore, do so in vengence or "victim mentality," that way you don't ever have to address the points and rather seek to discredit the source.
Actually, people don't argue that here. Not at all. The credible, gracious members who were able to verbalize their concerns were so eclipsed by the trash-talking, lying, malicious bloggers that they were rendered powerless. Now they are gone, and the rabble is all that's left. Blogging against churches is an emerging trend, and the anti-BBC blog taught everyone a lesson: enable comment moderation.
As a bonus to the loyal, dissenters actually prove that Gaines' leadership should not be questioned regarding accountability and reconciliation, ever. I've never read a single comment about the one outspoken Bellevue critic that does it the right way. Because to you, there is no right way. You either digest a complex issue like the pedophile scandal just like we do, or you wimper away to some other church quietly and leave us alone.
Boy, and I said you don't lie earlier. There is a right way, and a wrong way. You, cakes, take a complex issue like Christian behavior and basically equate it with that vulgar 'swallow and follow' cliche that's been written about ten thousand times on your blog. Your bloggers chose a way that included anger, gossip, secrecy, lies, fits of rage, and other things that are out-of-bounds to real Christians. Frankly, if they had gotten what they wanted that behavior would have been reinforced. Would the God of the church want that? Do parents usually reward their children for throwing temper tantrums?
Is it being true to one's faith to go against the very scriptures you're claiming. If those fools who taped the meeting with SG had spent more time demonstrating the love of Christ to him instead of mouthing the words so that they'd sound good on the tape, I'm convinced things could have been different. Now we'll never know.
I don't hold any ill will against the NBBCOF, cakes. As I've said, I really don't care who pastors that church. What I do care is that I see the handful bloggers left on the same road I took. If you sit around being angry long enough, you become an angry person. I really wish they could all take a step back and see what they're doing.
I wish you could too, cakes. I've read how Buddhism has changed since it came to America. It's becoming more and more materialistic, just like Christianity. The focus is steadily moving away from karma to enlightenment in this life. That's a close parallel to what's happening in the Christian church, with the spectacular emphasis on Sunday morning numbers instead of eternal things.
So I wonder, which direction is everyone going? It'll be interesting to see how it all turns out.
I'm not going to spend any more time worrying about the forum. If they want to invest their life in what they're into, that's their choice. I've wasted enough of mine.
David,
Please, get a grip. Gaines was no rookie fresh out of seminary, now was he? And it takes no genius to figure out what to do in the situation he found himself in. Most people in America would have known to report. If he didn't know to do that, he probably couldn't graduate from Special Ed.
Come on. You say you are a pastor. What would you have done?
Watching,
"You are not hearing the Holy Spirit so you rely on the interpretations of the WORD by man. Who are the men who guide you? Are they innerant? Are they perfect?"
Have you ever heard..."God in three persons"?
God the father, the son and the Holy Spirit.
Now let's look at Heb 8:For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
11
And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
and each one his brother, saying, Know the Lord,
for they shall all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
and I will remember their sins no more.
Now we have at least 2 of the three here. The son...aka the WORD (See John 1) and the Holy Spirit. Now the way I interpret the above is that the teachers are the WORD and the Holy Spirit....
You can't convince me otherwise so don't try.
Then we have 2 Peter 1. I wanted to highlite some things in bold but I could not figure out what DIDN'T apply to our current discussion. I suggest you read it and consider all of it.
But finally.....Here is what I think of your vision and your claim to be a prophet....
And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
The spirit you claim delivered your "vision" is totally inconsistant with the writings and the words He inspired in the whole entire complete WORD of God.
Do you see a problem here?
Lets recap. Jezebel, Lying, Deceiving, Deviant, Delusional and the latest....The spirit of ERROR.
That makes 6. And still counting....
oc said...
Kind of funny that you are proving my conviction that you exist as a blog only because of the "other" blog. You live for them and because of them. You prove it everyday, post by post.
They don't say it, but I will.
You live and die with whatever is said on the "other" blog. Some of you are constantly running over there looking for a scab to pick.
And Mike has the gall to whine about the occasional 'sniper'. He has much bigger problems right here in his own little world because he doesn't even control his own blog, letting WHS spew his cesspool filth to be viewed by the world, possibly to children. If he doesn't have the time to control that kind of crap, he needs to hand it over to one of you who seem to have all the time in the world to monitor the sad and sickening situation that is transpiring here.
You're quite right. Consequently, I have enlisted help.
Of course, it's my fault that the unrepentant pornographer Charles Page chooses, against my wishes, to spam this blog with filth--yet not the fault of others that endorse, encourage, and even publish everything from gossip to death threats. Things that children might read, you know.
I write about what interests me--my latest article recommends a motion picture, in case you haven't actually read it.
But asking people to stop publishing everything from pornography to gossip to death threats is a bad thing... why, exactly?
Your conviction is baseless. Please abandon it.
--Mike
Mike says:
But asking people to stop publishing everything from pornography to gossip to death threats is a bad thing... why, exactly?
oc says:
Not a bad thing at all. That's why I requested it.
joshuadavidwhitmire said...
Mike, I asked NewBBC to post thison their blog and I wanted to also post this on your blog as well. Hope you do not mind.
There needs to be a big clarification on this issue.
By all means, Josh. You're welcome to post here any time the notion strikes you, of course.
There needs to be a correction on the Messiah issue that was posted by Churchmouse around 8:18 am Dec 7th.
Please post this info for me.
My father did ask if some musicians could be used for the Messiah. The Minister of Instrumental said that the musicians are being used for the Tree and the Majesty. He said it it would be hard to spare them while doing both of these performances. There was nothing hidden or underlying
animosity towards my father. My father understood.
People have finite time resources. And having been in such time crunches more than once (such as, oh, a couple of days ago), sometimes you have to make a choice.
Wonder why someone would want to make more out of what happened than what actually happened?
My father did ask the Minister of Music if some books could be spared. The Minister of Music said it would be hard to spare this material at the time of the Messiah because the church choir is also using these books for the Majesty service and need them for practice, etc...
There was nothing hidden or underlying animosity towards my father. My father understood.
Your father is a Godly man.
These two men are singing and helping my father out in the Messiah. They are giving there time and voices to help out with the Messiah.
Again, there was no underlying motive from these two men towards my father and he understood why they could not spare some of the
musicians and books. I just want to make sure the truth is told about this issue that was brought up on the blog. It was no big deal and my father did not think anything about it. He is just happy to come back and help out with the Messiah and happy to have them sing in the Messiah.
Wish I was up there to sing with them.
I ask that you please post this for me so the facts about this matter can be read.
Thank you,
Joshua David Whitmire
They're here in perpetuity, Josh. Thank you for providing them, and I hope that those who sought to lie about the events and their motives repent of that behavior.
--Mike
oc said...
Mike says:
But asking people to stop publishing everything from pornography to gossip to death threats is a bad thing... why, exactly?
oc says:
Not a bad thing at all. That's why I requested it.
OC, this is not a lawyerly or an argumentative question, but rather a question I ask because I don't know the answer and would like to get the information from you: Do you make a similar request of your Forum friends--particularly when the unsavory posts aren't coming from a rogue element (as is the case here), but from members in good standing?
--Mike
OC, this is not a lawyerly or an argumentative question, but rather a question I ask because I don't know the answer and would like to get the information from you: Do you make a similar request of your Forum friends--particularly when the unsavory posts aren't coming from a rogue element (as is the case here), but from members in good standing?
--Mike
10:56 PM, December 07, 2007
oc says:
Whether or not I do so, does it matter since you require so much better behavior over here?
Gee,Wally. what matters what happens over there? You keep trying to convince yourself your
neighborhood is better than theirs.
But no, you have the same MO as always. Let's not clean up the sewage spewing from my own crapper. Let's blame the neighbors. Maybe the neighborhood won't notice that we stink.
Actually OC you have it backwards- Mike doesn't command us to behave, we just do it of our own accord ;)
Except for the rogue element of course!
Oh, yes. I see how well that works. And YOU are the spokesman for it?
Well then, Watchinghisstory for president.
Let her rip Charles. It's open season over here I guess.
So, shall we talk about....oh....well...uh....let's say....er....Calvinism. Shall we?
And so, ladies and gentlemen, in this corner, hailing from who knows where, weighing who knows what, with a record that is... well...questionable at best...it's Chucky Duh Calvinist.
In the other corner,... is whoever will listen and put up with insane rantings.
Ding, ding, ding, and away we go...
And Mikey, I'm tired of hearing about your "death threat" thing. I would love to see that, so I can see just how scary it is. As much as you talk about it, I'm sure you are very frightened. Let's see it.
And I see you got up early to delete chucky. Good job Mike.
He needed deleting.
Mike says:
But asking people to stop publishing everything from pornography to gossip to death threats is a bad thing... why, exactly?
oc says:
Not a bad thing at all. That's why I requested it.
then...
oc says:
Whether or not I do so, does it matter since you require so much better behavior over here?
Gosh OC,
It seems your ethics are determined by the requirements of the blog owner. Inappropriate posting would be wrong here, there or anywhere. But not for you, right?
If my read is correct then that would explain a lot about most your posts.
Sad...
Yeah Estes. Once again, you miss the point, by at least a block or two. Please tell me you do that on purpose.
The point was not missed your double standard is evident.
1 - You request Mike to remove a post which is offensive because his requirements would require such removal.
2 - You refuse to request such on the other site you post on because the requirements are less strict.
It is your position that the requirements of a blog are the basis of what will have you request the removal of an offensive post.
This is from your words, not mine.
Of course, such ethics would lead one to ignore their hypocrisy and claim the point being made is different.
Whether or not you are wanting to make a different point, your words, not anyone else's, made the hypocritical point for you. Thus your lack of ethics is shown.
I can understand why you would want to avoid the fact your ethics are lacking here, but there is room for making amends. I'll watch the other blog and see if you begin to request removal of offensive postings. I don't expect it but I am up for a surprise if you so choose to give us one.
Jon Estes said:
1 - You request Mike to remove a post which is offensive because his requirements would require such removal.
2 - You refuse to request such on the other site you post on because the requirements are less strict.
oc says:
1- Why should I even HAVE to ask?
And when they start posting porn or wacked out demented visions delivered through a dog 'over there', you bet I will say something.
2- Oh boy, that is amusing. The requirements on the "other" blog are less strict? If that's the case, tell us all why you can't post over there. And don't give us the usual party line.
WHS and others have shown everyone how strict it is here.
Is there just not enough for you to do on the other blog OC?
Bored?
You wanted to get rid of WHS over there yet you come here to talk about him?
Mike deletes his posts, it is not like he leaves them there forever for the world to see. I am sorry that he doesn't always do it quickly enough for you.
OC,
The why of my being banned is common knowledge to those who were posting when I was. No party line given here but simple fact that I disagreed and confronted their ludicrous rants without caving to their "our way or the highway" mantra...
Back to the subject. As far as their requirements being more +Please accept my apology for using the term "less" when I should have used the term "more" --- my fault in terminology -- this ought to clear up the confusion caused in making my point) strict, I was taking that from your words... Remember when you said...
oc says: Whether or not I do so, does it matter since you require so much better behavior over here?
Bottom line, either you stand against wrong consistently or not. Your words shao, or not.
Jon,
"Bottom line, either you stand against wrong consistently or not. Your words shao, or not."
I think the point is that this place is so obseesed with keeping tabs on NBBCOF sins that most of its contributors engage is the very name-calling, judgement of character, petty squabbles and hyperbole that is criticized. There is the danger to become the very thing we villify, when we react too impetuously from an elevated presumption of moral supremacy.
Mike makes a half-baked argument (and instead of getting offended, just finish the argument you presented undone) saying that the cesspool that is the BR is not convicted en mass like NBBCOF, because he writes on other subjects and is not single issue.
That is the most pathetic excuse to hold a double standand as I ever heard. The nexus of this entire population is NBBCOF or Bellevue, its loyal and its detractors, and no matter what Mike submits, its threads are a running tab on all the dirt from the blog no one visits.
Now, Mike has to resort to the very deletions that this blog whines about, when it is you getting deleted. I don't think jumping on the latest outrage like a fly on you-know-what is very courageous of you, or showing your identity for all the status quo to see. I think facing the moneyed, lawyered and landed, when you don't have jack but your integrity and convictions, against overwhelming odds is heroic.
No one wins in the Bellevue debacle--it is a shell of itself, because it really just dealt with the fracture created by poor leadership by ridding itself of its most injured stakeholders. The world sees the commercials and fairs and mission trips and all this other stuff as just about restoring an image.
The colluding of consequences and eventualities, stemmming from leadership's lack of transparency and craven arrogance, with accountability is pathetic. So too is colluding stakeholders' insistence on accountability with an unbiblical attitude of unforgiveness.
Christian fundementalists have for generations railed against deviant or irresponsible behaviors, that should one sink or prosper, it is their personal responsibility. Yet time and again, in a religious institution, the culprit uses the imprimatur of God's indulgence to shirk the same. I don't agree with their faith or politics, but I deeply respect the truthseekers because they live what they preach, at a great personal cost.
Because "bottom line, either you stand against wrong consistently or not. Your words shao, or not."
So, now do you want to call me a donkey's behind or witness to me.
Tehe
“So, now do you want to call me a donkey's behind or witness to me.”
There is a real difference between those who are lost and need witnessing to, and those who reject the faith and choose to openly oppose it.
You already told us you have a mother who believes. You have rejected her faith, her savior, and make light of those who might witness to you.
You use to your advantage your status as one who does not share our faith. You act as if it actually gives you objectivity. The truth is, those empty of the Holy Spirit live in darkness.
While it is certainly true that soul winning should be done with compassion, there are some who must be warned to fear God and the coming Day.
The truth has been shared with you, and you have rejected it. (Matthew 7:6) My hope is that you will reconsider.
David said,
"While it is certainly true that soul winning should be done with compassion, there are some who must be warned to fear God and the coming Day.
The truth has been shared with you, and you have rejected it. (Matthew 7:6) My hope is that you will reconsider.
2:15 PM, December 08, 2007"
David, I'm a Christian, but at the same time, if someone came up to me whacking me over the head with a bible, I'd ignore it. I hate bible thumpers.
David,
I stand with Christians like my mom, like Lynn and many others in my criticisms of Bellevue and it's suits. I make a distinction between Christians who live their faith, and those that treat grace as an excuse to perpetuate suffering on others. But if you need to collude that as denigrating Christianity, then do as thy wilt, Christian. Colluding matters and killing the canary is the MO around here.
I don't reject your faith, I've already got a path. I don't say you reject my path--you simply follow another. You seem to be of the mind that I cannot make a reasonal judgement about this issue because I am not a Christian. People who oppose the endangerment of children the world over, of many faiths and nationalities disagree with you.
Hyperbole, even condescended with religious sanctimony, is still hyperbole, and below the example of Jesus. I never read a passage where he stooped that low.
Read Cakes comments, Lynn. Interesting the world is so comfortable with your brand of Christianity.
But that is modern Christianity, isn't it Lynn. I want to be saved, but don't talk about what I'm saved from. I want to believe, but I want to choose which parts I believe. If anyone spaks of judgment, I'll claim their just "bible thumpers." After all, as Cakes says, we’re all just on different paths. Why be so judgmental? right...
“But if you do warn the wicked man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but you will have saved yourself.” Ezek. 33:9
At what point do you actually warn someone?
Lynn: “I hate bible thumpers.”
"'Do not hate your brother in your heart.” Lev. 19:17
You "hate" Bible thumpers. Why don't you compare what you "hate" with what the Scriptures say God hates.
1. Those who cling to worthless idols Psalm 31:6
2. The deeds of faithless men. Psalm 101:3
3. Every wrong path. Psalm 119:104 (read Psalm 119, this guy is a true Bible thumper)
4. Double minded men. Psalm 119:113
5. Falsehood. 119:163 ... “but I LOVE your law”
6. Pride and arrogance. Prov. 8:13
7. Robbery and iniquity. Isa. 61:8
8. Empty religious feasts. Amos 5:21
9. Divorce. Mal. 2:16
10. A man covering himself with violence. Mal. 2:16
And by the way, Ahab hated Elijah because he didn’t tickle the kings ears.
David,
Now you are colluding what Lynn says with a whole bunch of assertions she didn't say--I don't think the fact that she rejects your pushy and judgmental attitude means she dilutes her beliefs one iota. I think she may have been concerned that I might confuse your character with an authentic representative of Christ.
But Lynn, I know the difference. David has no idea who has approached me or of what subject we've spoken, it's just another way to kill the canary. And now, you have no credibility because I said that I associate with you, a Christian. So we're damed if we do and likewise if we don't--tehe.
David seems to infer that I didn't really support the notion that I have no animosity towards Christians (that non- is not the equivalent of anti-); rather, just that some Christians, like you, are not worth their salt--look at the company you keep, Lynn.
Well, that's just classic. Are you a Pat Robertson fan, David?
Hey Cakes,
I'm a guy :)
Cakes,
My point was that there is a difference between those who don't know what the faith is and need witnessesing; and those who do know, reject it and need warning.
Cakes,
You seem to think that we don't need to share a world view in order to speak about what's true.
However, your own stated view is that we're all just on different "Paths." I have my path, you have yours... no one should condemn anyone.
In such a thought system, is there such a thing as absolute truth?
Sorry Lynn.
David, "reject" implies that percieved something I need and cast it aside. I do not recognize anything in your words that I need, only sanctimony, so there's little to reject but the words alone.
David,
"So much blood has been shed by the Church because of an omission from the Gospel: "Ye shall be indifferent as to what your neighbor's religion is." Not merely tolerant of it, but indifferent to it. Divinity is claimed for many religions; but no religion is great enough or divine enough to add that new law to its code."
- Mark Twain, a Biography
"We despise all reverences and all the objects of reverence which are outside the pale of our own list of sacred things. And yet, with strange inconsistency, we are shocked when other people despise and defile the things which are holy to us."
- Following the Equator
I stand with Christians like my mom, like Lynn and many others in my criticisms of Bellevue and it's suits. I make a distinction between Christians who live their faith, and those that treat grace as an excuse to perpetuate suffering on others.
Isn't that a telling statement? Bellevue and it's suits? Why would someone condemn a whole church and everyone in it like that? I'm not surprised, since cakes posted on his blog last year how much he despised churches like Bellevue and Lindonwood. It's only natural that he'd latch onto the first thing to come down the pike to run it down.
I hope that at some point in his life cakes is able to let go of his stereotyping. It's clear that he pictures a congregation of 8000 men who look just like David Coombs who chased the noble bloggers away.
If you tell yourself something long enough, you'll eventually believe it.
Keep telling yourself, cakes.
I think facing the moneyed, lawyered and landed, when you don't have jack but your integrity and convictions, against overwhelming odds is heroic.
And I think that line of thought is fantasy as outrageous as Harry Potter.
So finacially strapped Mark Sharpe, when SG came to his humongous house in his gated community, is a hero in your eyes? And do you plan on slapping Josh Manning on the back when he gets back from Harvard? Why don't you go buy a car from the McClerkins' to give the poor folks a hand? I didn't realize you were from opposite-world, cakes.
No wonder you don't like me! I'm broke.
"Facing" implies standing up for something, not hiding behind screen names and bawling like newborn babies. They've stood for NOTHING, and you know that good and well. They've done nothing but dilute the efforts of the people who were qualified to effect change, which is probably what you wanted. If not for their shark-like frenzy, Gaines would never have hired Coombs. Do you think Daugherty could have handled the scandal as well as Coombs did? They wouldn't have known where to start. Thanks, NBBCOF.
Why don't you find a cause worthy of your time? You're living in a fantasy world, cakes, some kind of virtual Sherwood Forrest where you're Robin Hood striking at the evil Sheriff of Bellevue by coming here to steal our 'word currencty' and give to the 'poor'. I agree that they're rather poor over there, but not in a good way. Blessed are the poor in spirit, not attitude and behavior.
News flash: the people here are not the rich and famous of Bellevue. They're just normal people, most of whom are rasiing families. Most are young, too. Your coming here to attack Bellevue is logical as the bloggers' griping about the Purpose Driven Life to solve the problems at Bellevue. Wrong target.
Standing up for convictions against overwhelming odds might be brave, but when your stand contradicts the very convictions you claim to hold then you're standing for nothing.
If you're standing for nothing, why stand at all? You're fighting a lost cause, cakes. Why anyone would waste time and energy so that a bunch of malcontents can feel good about whining on the internet escapes me.
"Live for nothing, or die for something." If you've chosen this as the noblest cause you can think of worth dying for, well, that's just sad.
Calm down, Cakes. No one is trying to kill you.
Tolerance is the buzz word, isn’t it? If we all just believe what we believe and don’t expect anyone else to believe it – we should ask: Do I really believe it?
"So much blood has been shed by the Church because of an omission from the Gospel: "Ye shall be indifferent as to what your neighbor's religion is."
So God on earth wasn't smart enough to think to say that... but Mr. Twain nailed, eh.
"I think facing the moneyed, lawyered and landed, when you don't have jack but your integrity and convictions, against overwhelming odds is heroic."
Yeah, I gotta concur with JM on this one- if that is the story you have been sold I have about half a dozen cliches to sell you- magic beans and whatnot.
They talk about how the church membership that is "left" can't afford to sustain itself, yet also talk about how the rich and powerful run things.
Cakes, I will tell you what- take some time to get to know those of us that remain at BBC as well as you know the "truthseekers" and lets see if your convictions about us hold true.
I will admit I am probably wrong about plenty of things, and I have my own "filters" that probably skew things from time to time, but you are only getting one side of the picture. There really isn't a David or Goliath in this battle no matter how much you want there to be.
ATTENTION ALL AWAY TEAMS!!!
I've just received a code 5 ultraviolet message from the commander authorizing the commencement of the mission to disrupt enemy operations.
All teams are to proceed to the bowling alley at this time and intercept the group code named 'bloggers'. As per the briefing, the plan is to prevent them from enjoying themselves and having any fun, consistent with the way we apparently treat them every day.
Step one is to position a team in the lane adjacent to each blogger team. Use their balls, spill their drinks as you have opportunity, and make sure that when you bowl that you start your approach simultaneously with the adjacent blogger.
For step 2, a pack of Marlboros has been issued to one member of each team. Use them freely. Make sure every blogger has a definite air about them when they leave.
Finally, a computer specialist has been assigned to each away team. They will position themselves at the scoring keyboards. We want to make sure to keep their scores as low as possible, in the double digits if we can. As a last resort, should the scores get too high, spill the special slurpee onto the console to short the scoreboard out.
We've arranged for Cosmic Bowling to start early, so you may consider the mission complete when the fogmachines, laser lights, and loud music kick in. We know how the bloggers respond to these things.
Good luck, people.
I think it also bears a mention that the criticisms of SG were already being flung by the "truthseekers" long before the PW issue ever became known. Once it was disclosed, things took on a life of their own and it (SG's handling of PW, etc.) has become the rally cry, the champion cause. I wonder, Cakes, would you have any cause to be on either blog had that issue never become known? Would you still be debating paths versus rejection of truth with any of us? Would you have any kind of dog in this race at all? I would imagine no.
But don't be fooled -- the folks who have been posting on NBBCOF were against SG long before this time last year. In fact, they had been at it for quite a while. The PW issue just tied a bigger pork chop around his neck.
And speaking of the truth of the gospel ...
One of the givens when moving along the conversational faith journey with another is at least a tacit agreement that the Bible is authoritative. If you cannot accept even the basic premise that the Bible is true, but instead debate its claims, then you have not even a toe on the road.
There are also other basics when it comes to Christian discourse that are non-negotiables, one of those being the concept of forgiveness, as taught and exampled by Christ Himself. If you do not "get" forgiveness, but always insist on retribution without possibility of propitiation, then you have totally missed the point of our collective and individual need of a Savior. If it were possible for SG or any of us to redeem the wrongs we have committed in this life, then there is no point to Christianity.
I would be interested in something, Cakes, and I don't know if anyone has ever directly asked you this question. What, exactly, do you think should be "done to" SG? What, exactly, does the oft-mentioned "accountability" look like to you? Is that something that is derived from the law, from your path as a Buddhist, your personal experiences as an educator or as a victim, or just from your own stream of consciousness? And would your personal idea of appropriate consequences satisfy everyone?
I'm not being flip, Cakes. I really would like to know.
mjm,
You said it so well. Gracias. I don't think I've ever made that point effectively.
I've been watching 'The Grinch' on TV, and I have to admit he reminds me a little of me.
While I have the chance, let me tell everyone how much I've enjoyed blogging with you. I guess people aren't aware of it, but the handicapped are treated badly. All we want is to be treated like everyone else, because we are like everyone else. When people treat us differently, it's a painful reminder of what we've lost.
If I act like a jerk, I expect to be treated like a jerk. But everyone just sort of tolerates it from a cripple.
It's been different here, though. I have to say I've really felt like an equal, including being cussed out when I deserved to be.
My apologies to the people I've honked off over the months, and I hope you haven't taken it too personally.
I hope everyone has a blessed holiday season, and many more.
John Mark
John Mark-
I think you should change your name to John Locke.
I hope you have a lovely holiday too.
Dearest John Mark -- you are so loved here. Merry Christmas, my brother. :)
"No man is a failure who has friends."
-Clarence
-It's a Wonderful Life, 1946
For you, John
"Cheer up dudes!! It's Christmas!"
-the Grinch
:-)))
I can think of no one that I'd want more to call me a donkey's rear.
Happy holidays
MJM,
It's not for me to decide what accountability should be for those ministers that knew and did nothing--so far its the ministers and deacons and a few thousand members who didn't, and raised difficult questions, that are gone.
I don't really call that accountability; I call that convenient for Gaines.
It's not in anyones perview to say what should be done, prior to an investigation of all parties implicated, open discourse within the church, and transparency. That's not going happen, so I won't be pulled into making conjectures. There is precedent for creating a means of acknowledging all parties affected, not just protecting careers and saving face.
Mostly, I cannot see accountablity, except that being paid by folks percieved as expendable. These are not backsliding Buddhists, but longstanding members, respected ministers, families, sunday school teachers, nursery workers, etc--you know, folks that supposedly follow the same Christ as you.
Yeah, I caught that about the scrutiny that Gaines had drawn before the pedophile scandal. That goes back to what I said about discrediting the source so you don't have to challenge the points--typical of you.
Do you think because they did find fault with the Pastor, that means that Gaines should not see accountability?
That's really stupid logic--weigh the matter of Gaines' failure against a responsible action, and its appropriate consequences, not that those consequence be mitigated or defunct because of what some third party is doing.
That's just desperate and pathetic.
Seems to me Gaines proved to be deserving of all the scrutiny beyond anyone's expectations. You call that an argument.
"That's really stupid logic..."
But I'm sure "under the blood."
What I offered, Cakes, was not with the intention of rehashing the same old tired squabbles that have gotten us nowhere. I was offering a different slant, perhaps even an opportunity to move the discussion forward. But you didn't answer my question, just sidestepped it, and that's fine.
Yet I got labeled as using stupid logic simply because I delivered to you a basic FACT, which you have been requesting from us for a while. It is a FACT that the folks who were whining the loudest were whining about anything and everything until they got the big juicy story of PW to sink their teeth into. And now it's always on the front float in the parade. Perhaps if, prior to the PW bombshell being dropped, less energy had been spent grumbling about shoes, pseudo-sublets, and SG not preaching on Wednesdays, then their wrath over PW might have been truly heard as a different kind of whining and someone might have paid attention. But not only did they whine before PW, they're still whining about anything and everything, including things said in sermons, press coverage, DG's hair, and whether JP wears a tie.
The one true "issue" they had, and it's been lost in the swell of their collective perpetual criticism.
Sooo ... no logic to denigrate here. I wasn't using it to excuse PW, or SG, or anything. I was simply pointing out a fact, one that I didn't think anyone could possibly dispute. You don't have to waste your synapses telling me how desperate and pathetic I am -- I'm just giving you fair and balanced ... you decide.
keith solomon said...
For step 2, a pack of Marlboros has been issued to one member of each team. Use them freely. Make sure every blogger has a definite air about them when they leave.
Lynn's Response:
You do know that there is no smoking in the bowling alley now don't you? :)
MJM,
Those aren't my issues, never have been. A few thousand people don't feel welcome or spiritually substantiated at Bellevue anymore, and it has nothing to do with Jamie's hair or the music. But you know that.
To rehash an issue, you would have hashed it in the first place, and your screen name says it all--as long as you can introduce doubt about someones (well, every critic's) motives, then you never have to really penetrate their arguments. Everyone knows (even that silly Spradlin) the seriousness of this failure; I'm sure you know there have been real confrontations and people hurt by this.
That is why something as serious as a Pastor's failure to protect his flock, as opposed to protecting his own hide, raises questions the leadership didn't want to answer...or investigate.
(Like you address, the heat was already on--can you fathom that he was possessed of a lil' self-preservation, or do you only judge the motivations of some people, MJM?) I'm not saying it's anything but a hypothesis, but its as compelling as what you presume in the characters of whole tracts of individuals.
I haven't sidestepped anything. I answered your question with simple wisdom and common sense. Why would I conjecture on an action that the entire Bellevue machinery has sidestepped? If I had answered in the affirmative some manifestation of accountability, then I fall in your trap there as well.
If you haven't noticed, I wasn't born yesterday. Also, getting religion doesn't automatically make you smarter or more articulate than the backsliding Buddhist.
What is healthy in a situation like this is for there to be an independent investigation, some manner of assessing needs and consequences to every stakeholder, in an open forum. Yeah, its ugly and messy in the short term, but you don't have to pull the rug out on a few thousand folks.
So, since no one can have a pure heart with regard to seeking accountability for the Pastor, is it your reasoning then that those folks that impurely are out to get him negate the need for accountability for the very well-established failure; or even the question for that matter? Because that's what your serpentine logic infers.
Read all of this, because I'm not good with words tonight. I hope the heart of what I am wanting to say comes through.
It is strange for those who beat the drum of accountability -- when asked -- can't seem to say what they think that would have looked like. So they are anxious to throw the stones, but not so clear on what the right solution should be.
About "protecting his flock" speak. Look, I know you don't believe this, but when someone cnfides something to their pastor that is usually seen as protected information. Laws that change that are pretty new. The sin was 12 years past and done in a home. A pastors interest is in confession/redemption as well as the protection of his flock.
What did he learn? He learned that even if told to a pastor, it has to be reported.
Because it's so politically correct to scream "protect children" as a chant, I think many of you will miss what I am sayng. To be clear: A pastor is interested in redemption. We hear about crimes all the time. We see the worst of humanity. The absolute worst. We want to see people healed. Gaines interest was not in protecting himself -- it was in seeing a man set free from a sin. He was not presently engaged in that sin.
Now here's the interesting thing the church has gotten from the world: The belief that once someone has committed a sin, that's WHO they are. However, the Bible doesn't seem to teach that. The Scriptures teach that while we were ONCE sinners, we are no longer. We are (what's that word...) SAVED! Saved from sin. In other words: We are no longer condemned to keep on the path of sin. Those addicted to porn can be set free. Those who use drugs can't let go. The homosexual can be made new. And even the worst -- the child molester -- can be healed.
Should a pastor report? yes. But understand a pastors main interest: Seeing the sinner healed.
David, beautifully stated -- thanks so much.
Cakes, you keep calling for an open forum to deliberate these issues. You keep talking about SG not protecting the flock.
It's been demonstrated in more than one way that BBC's internal processes were utilized (and new ones put in place, as well) to deal with this entire process. To retry it again in an open meeting is almost like a habeas corpus type of deal. It's been dealt with already, and in some of our minds, ad nauseam. Not everything that happens in a church falls under the umbrella of the membership's "right to know." Even in an atmosphere of Kum-Ba-Yah, there are things such as privacy and sensitivity that are still important to us.
John Mark explained yesterday that the information entrusted to SG by PW was something he thought was a spiritual confidence, a confession of the soul, as it were. Yes, it was "under the blood," because that's how we operate in the Christian world. I don't expect you to truly embrace or understand that if your eyes have been blinded to God's truth for whatever reason.
Yes, SG found out after the fact that he should have reported it. I believe we ALL know that now. If someone were to misstep now in this arena -- any of us -- I would imagine we'd collectively draw and quarter them, for the sin of ignorance at this point, if for nothing else. We have all benefitted from this -- and in an extrapalatory sense, perhaps so have a lot of children. Children for whom protection by reporting these actions will come in just the nick of time.
But law is a funny thing, Cakes. We can't just trounce someone because of something that "might have happened." Did you know that doctors in the operating room can actually throw knives at each other across the patient's surgery-ready body -- certainly exposing the patient to the risk of grave injury -- yet if no knives are dropped, no harm has been done? No negligence, no malpractice. No case.
No, I'm not equating SG's actions last year to throwing sharp missiles over an unsuspecting, anesthetized patient. What I'm saying is that there needs to be real harm shown in order to cry for punitive consequences. I do not in any way minimize the emotional damage that has been done to so many former church members, some of whom have left, others who have not -- but if we elevate their pain to the level of being true "fallout" from the SG/PW issue, then we must equally consider the damage to SG's reputation, trust issues, etc. as being true "consequnces" for what happened.
I hope you see the correlation.
If one child -- only one -- had been shown to have been molested by PW during that interval between June and December 2006, I would feel very differently about the entire issue. That this did not happen speaks clearly to the issue of SG's decision to keep the confidence -- but for the law that he should have done otherwise. Had this been 10 years or so ago, before that law of reporting was changed, things would be so different and there would not be such an outcry.
In a feeble attempt to tie this back to topic, let me say that yes, living a life where the stupid and evil things I do end up "under the blood" is a sweet deal for a Christian. It doesn't mean that I escape the consequences of my sin in this life (consequences that are often made much, much worse because of others, including Christians), but I don't have to carry quite the burden around, and that's a very freeing thing. Is that something I'm willing to die for? You betcha.
As an American, I am also willing to die for your "right" to seek another path, as you call it. Even if it leads straight into hell. I know that is counter to your own belief, but you have a right to be wherever you want to be in your own belief system and so do others. Just know that when you come to a Christian blog to discuss issues that pertain to a church body, personal and corporate sin and forgiveness of same, and truth -- we may be speaking quite a different language than you speak. All things are not equal just because you have found your road to enlightenment. Sadly, as Christians we believe you will find someday that that road leads to a very, very dark place. That is our truth, and yes, most of us are willing to die for it. In fact, we already have if we truly belong to Christ.
P.S. About my screen name, Cakes -- do you really have a question about where I stand on any of these issues? Does anyone? I think I've made it absolute crystal from the very beginning. But maybejustmaybe I'm wrong about that ...
Mike said:
"But asking people to stop publishing everything from pornography to gossip to death threats is a bad thing... why, exactly?"
Mike, when you reference these 'death threats', are you referring to the mythological Dr. Loney death threat of several months back?
If so, then concerning the issue of setting up strawmen that is kicked around from time to time-- "physician, heal thyself"
If not, then my apologeticals to you. An no, it's not a bad thing to ask or request that people stop publishing porn, gossip, and death threats. And since most on both blogs profess to be christians, you shouldn't have to.
William T. Loney, MD
PS...just think, if that sheriff would have left Rambo alone, we wouldn't have a movie to see in January...thank you, o rotund, corrupt, northwestern pacific hicktown sheriff for harassing Rambo, thus indirectly causing him to amass a tremendous body count in Rambos 1-3, with more mayhem to come in January.
David, MJM,
I've already covered all these issues. Gaines was in no way in a position to make a determination about whether the pedophile was still active or not--that's why the law says to report the crime to DCS. I find it interesting that David would appeal to the protection and confidence of the pedophile minister, but not consider for a moment the children's and survivor's (being "counselled") safety. Let's hope protecting children stays politically correct. (I love it when people must resort to that cannard.)
And Bellevue's investigation (into the employment of the pedophile alone) is not consistent with the concerned Pastor everyone believes in, despite the real evidence. I guess I would need to be a Christian to have that kind of blind faith. No thanks.
You guys now want to call the BBCIR the be all, end all exhaustive report that it never claimed to be--it regarded the pedophile's continued employment. The only reason it had to report on Gaines at all was because of the nexus between them. Leadership has been very careful to protect their own. And ordaining the head investigator to Rev. CEO (with either a yes or yes vote from the congregation), on its heels, has all the appearence that the abridged investigation was anything but independent. But I guess I would have to be a Christian to have blind faith that it was. No thanks, then.
So, if in that 6-7th month period of Gaines' incuriosity (according to the BBCIR, not your pipe dreams)it was shown that further abuse occured, then you would seek accountability for that failure. But sans that, no harm, no fowl. And I thought you Christian coonservatives didn't believe in situational ethics or moral relativism. I guess if I was a Christian, I could have the blind faith in getting an indulgence like that and believe it too. No thanks.
How about 10 years from now, if some victim comes forth and says he or she paid a price for Gaines' incuriosity--will you seek accountability then? No, I imagine you'll condemn them for not saying anything at the time, no matter how young or injured they were. Was the pedophile still minister of prayer during those months of Gainse' incuriosity/ concern(sic)? I guess y'all haven't heard about what occured in that office--more blind faith?
You apologists for Gaines have to embroider a cloth that Bill Clinton would be ashamed to rely, but at the same time you don't want to seem light on the Pastor's failure. If you seek no accountability, then you cannot then claim that it was egregious. These are only "uncharted waters" to $600,000 a year ministers who are incurious anyway, and don't know how to google.
Look, be happy, you won--got rid of a few thousand folks and you have your dumbed-down unity. Congratulations.
"So, since no one can have a pure heart with regard to seeking accountability for the Pastor, is it your reasoning then that those folks that impurely are out to get him negate the need for accountability for the very well-established failure; or even the question for that matter? Because that's what your serpentine logic infers."
Answer this MJM. Also, is it in your estimation that accountability exists for the Pastor? Please extrapolate.
Dear David and MJM: The laws on reporting child abuse have NOT changed RECENTLY with regards to reporting requirements in Tennessee. They were changed recently with regards to the penalities for not reporting.
As far as that collective relief for there being no other known victims, time will tell if that is true or not. I don't need to go into how stupid that thinking is.
But I do have a question that does not seem be answered. Why was an admitted pedophile believed in the first place when he says there are no other vcitms? That type of thinking is also very dangerous.
Trust me I understand full well about wanting to forgive the sinner and his sinning. But NOT for one second am I going to be so politically correct to make the mistake of trusting the pedophile ever with children! Just look at the extreme efforts the viciim took with his father to protect his own children. I could care less what his job responsibilites are.
I get tired of all this talk defending and trashing Dr. Gaines. He flat screwed up, bottom line. No excuses please. But what are we doing for those vicitms that have not been able to reach out for help yet. What about them? Do any of you think that anything has been done to help them? NO we are so busy waging our wars to defend out position over Gaines, we forget them. Folks they are still out there. And the numbers are growing. I know, I hear from them all the time.
Please be more concerned about seeing there is an environment that when a vicitm is ready to reach out, real help is there for them. That is the way all people of faith should react. In love and compassion.
David Brown
SNAP coordinator for Memphis & West Tennessee
Thanks David,
And by not seeking accountability for these ministers' failure, Bellevue sends the message that what victims suffer is no big deal.
Some witness.
Look, if you believe in the redemption of Christ's blood to change behavior, that is fine by me. But that is a poor excuse for not seeking the accountability that is common and just in a civil society. You cannot make a theological argument to defend the actions of Bellevue.
I don't think God had much to do with buying out contracts, loyalty oaths, sham business meetings and the villifying of dissenters.
David,
You say,
"Read all of this, because I'm not good with words tonight. I hope the heart of what I am wanting to say comes through."
Then...
"Should a pastor report? yes. But understand a pastors main interest: Seeing the sinner healed."
I am willing to give you some room on the second statement based on your first. However, after you get rested up or you are in a better position to communicate, I would apreciate it if you could clear this up a little.
As I understand it, the church is built on Peter (Matt 16:18) and Christ's instruction to the first "pastor" was "feed my sheep" which He repeated 3 times. "John 21:17".
EZ 34: 28 They shall no more be a prey to the nations, nor shall the beasts of the land devour them. They shall dwell securely, and none shall make them afraid.
This lays out a pretty good description of what a shepherd is to do. Protect and feed. We don't find "healing sinners" anywhere in this scripture.
The primary function of a pastor is feeding the sheep on the WORD and protecting them from wild beasts......It would go a long way to freeing pastors TO minister if they limited responsibility to these areas and allow the Holy Spirit to do the work He is supposed to do. I seems like it would take a lot of pressure off you guys.
In this case one of those beasts was left roaming the pasture for 6 months after the shepherd knew he was there. And in those six months he continued to prey on the flock as evidenced by the official reports and eye witness accounts. All while the shepherd, failed to find out who the beast had contact with, what his job was or who he was counseling. There really is no excuse for that regardless how we try to find one.
No matter how hard we try, we just can't justify the attempt at "healing the sinner" in this case at the risk of him devouring other sheep. It is pretty clear that he did. Otherwise we wouldn't have all these folks wounded and bleeding all over. Some may have died...others are seeking treatment at other churches and some just continue to hurt in the pasture they grew up in.
Many still ask what could have been done that wasn't? What kind of consequence or punishment or whatever we want to call it would have been acceptable to most? What course of action would have saved the most sheep?
All I can offer is what I would have liked to have seen. And no, it wasn't to have Gaines gone. It would have gone a long way for me if he would have just sat down in front of the congregation on a Sunday night and just simply said..
"I messed up and I ask you for forgiveness. I want to take a little time the next 3 months and study the WORD, pray and seek God's guidance. In that time I want to get to know you (the flock) better. I have certainly made a poor start here and I want to step back, refocus on what I have been ordained and called to do. I am going to instruct the information committee to answer all questions, and if you can't get answers send me an email or call me. Come by to see me if you you have any concerns or just want to meet me. You are important to me. In the next 3 months, the pulpit will be filled with people you know and trust. When that time has passed I intend to come back before you and ask to continue to shepherd you and grow this church. Let's all spend the time we have now to heal and bring this church back together. If you know anyone that has left, tell them we love them and want them to give us another chance."
No coverups, no Nicolatian spirit, no "my way or the highway" bull rambling through the woods scattering sheep. Is it too late fo that...prolly. But at the time it wasn't and he would have ended up with the suport of most. Including many of those that left.
But pride got in the way.......and so he sat down in front of the church one Sunday night and made excuses and put into place all sorts of schemes and manipulations to consolidate his power and hold onto his seat...The aftermath is evident and the scattering just keeps on happening.
In short, had he humbled himself and taken a little time to restore the damage his pride and failure to follow scriptural guidelines had casued, WE would be past this now and BBC would have been a lot stronger.
And before anyone says it, I don't mean grovel in front of the congregation or anything other than humble, sincere, truthful repentance. And 3 months to let it bear fruit. Just sit down for a bit. Regroup. Get to know the folks rather than running over them.
Just my opinion. Maybe....just....Maybe....
Well said, EZ.
When you boil it down, we don't have to defend the need for accountability for rank failure, or a perfectly rational need for openness and transparency, full disclosure--that serves every stakeholder's need to ask questions, aire grievences and reconcile integrity and trust issues--rightly shaken by this royal screw up.
Bellevue took the corporate route, and after all, it is a business first and foremost. I'm not a bit suprised; but I am at how ruthlessly you lie in wait over at NBBCOF just to collect dirt. They have a real issue with their church and being a refuge; on the other hand, they're the BR's single obsession. Who's the desperate ones?
Ez,
The church is not built on Peter.
Is this articulate enough for you: Pastors primary interest when talking face to face with someone is redemptive. How can I help this person confess sin and change.
Pastors do have a legal responsibility that should have been honored. I was simply wanting you to see where a pastor might get that confused. If someone comes to their pastor and confesses sin, it is not usually our first thought to go to the police. And by the way, I actually have been in the situation of calling the police on issues I know about. Anyone here who is doing a lot of grandstanding every actually had to make that call?
It’s too bad everything is so black and white with some of you. I’m not saying Dr. Gaines was right. I am asking you to see how a pastor might make that error.
Again, there is a lot of bolstering about “accountability” from Mr. Cakes, without any explanation of what exactly that looks like. Are you talking about punishment, or the putting in place of set guidelines for how similar situations would be dealt with?
I think accountability looks a lot more like what Mr. Brown outlined. I agree wholeheartedly with his statements.
“Please be more concerned about seeing there is an environment that when a vicitm is ready to reach out, real help is there for them. That is the way all people of faith should react. In love and compassion.”
That is: Accountability is changing how we do business so the kids are protected. Not doing a lot of looking for who we can punish, vilify or smear. Sorry if it seems I’m defending Dr. Gaines. I am stating that I understand how a pastor could (as Mr. Brown said): “Screw up.” Yes, he did flat screw up. And guess what, I understand how it could happen. With all this knowledge of what was done wrong, the question is: How can we better protect our children? And to us church leaders: How do we protect our children in the church?
Here's what's dangerous:
Some of you are so busy condemning Dr. Gaines that you don't see that we are capable of making the same mistake: Not protecting the children.
So don't condemn me if I use the situation to look at myself, my church and ask the tough question: Could this have happened here? (Oh no! It could have!) So what do I need to change?
Gaines and PW and the rest answer to God. For me, my part, means I examine myself and learn from it.
But feel free to keep grandstanding, gang. Fun, isn't it. Get to make neato points and look cool.
I challenge you to ask the tough question: Is there anywhere or any situation I'm involved with regarding children where those children are not safe? What will I do about it?
Case in point: I recently reconnected with a young lady I used to teach in the youth group at another church, about 6-8 years ago. She has grown into a lovely adult, for which I am very thankful. Yet in the relating of catch-up stories with each other, it comes out that she was seriously abused by her parents during the entire time I was her youth group leader, SS teacher, and mentor.
I am grieved by this on so many levels, but probably most intensely because of the fact that she didn't feel she had enough trust in me to tell me then. I have extended my sorrow to her now and have expressed my heartfelt regret over what she endured at the hands of her parents, and I have told her that I like to think I would have done something to help her had I known what was going on in her home.
I think I would ... but would I? Would you?
I agree with you, David (and David Brown) -- no matter what has taken place in the past, our focus needs to be totally placed on protecting the children we know, love, and have in our care today.
David: The answer to your question is a hard one to answer. I think you have to look at how others have dealt with it in the past.
The Catholic Church certainly has blotched it. Victims of Catholic clergy certainly are not comfortable in approaching the employer of their offenders for help.
And without rehashing the Bellevue situation, look at the message that was sent. They chose to believe the words of the pedophile instead of reaching out to the victim. That unfortunately spoke volumes too.
As for that environment I keep talking about, why is it that victims continually contact SNAP coordinators, local children advocates? I don't for one second believe it is me. Maybe that they have heard our stories and know our compassion and understanding.
We must continually use what resources that are available for us to protect our children. That is how we effect change. I am going to be working with the governor's wife after the first of the year on a project where my story is told as well as testimony from pedophiles. It is her and my joint prayer that some light is shone on this horrible crime. Ms. Conte knows I do not support the party of her husband yet we can forget our differences for the sake of our children.
Being silent, making excuses for not dealing with it head on is not the answer. 1 in 3 girls and 1 in 5 boys will be sexually abused in America before they turn 18. We all must be diligent and on guard.
What I would like to have seen Dr. Gaines or any other pastor in the situation he was in do? Tell the pedophile, he loves him, prays for him and will get him help but inform him that his crime must be reported. Then reach out to his victim(s) and lift them up and also aid them with what resources you can muster. Genuinely reach out. Look there are great groups of professionals out there that are more than ready to help. I am blessed to be able to work with one of the sweetest ladies in Shelby County, Anna Whalley of the Crime Victims Center. And for what is worth, Anna is Jewish. She is my right hand. I could not do what I do without her. It takes ALL of us working together. ALL PEOPLE. ALL RACES. ALL FAITHS.
Trust me if a pastor deals with it like I have detailed above, I would hail them a hero, that goes for Dr. Gaines, Dr. Rogers and even David Squires. It does take a lot of courage to do it that way but gosh what a message it sends to victims and even your members. One of compassion but also one of integrity. I challenge the next pastor that finds their self in that situation to do that way. But be forewarned if you do. Your life will change. And your crown will have a few more jewels.
David thanks for your honest question. I appreciate it.
David Brown
SNAP coordinator of Memphis & West Tennessee
davidbrown@bigriver.net
901/569-4500
Gang let me say this. Contrary to one frequent poster, you cannot discern a pedophile. No one can. Oh how I wish I could have.
See if I could have, I would have spared by sister and my niece. But I did not know my brother was one. In fact not until 2 years after he passed away and my niece told me right in the middle of the Bellevue situation did I find I had pedophile in my own family. And I mean for years.
See I don't have the answers either. That is why it takes all of us working together. One thing I learned from the 60's there is strength in numbers.
So please be on alert.
David Brown
Brother John Mark (Armie, the Hulk): I have read your posts and golly you are changing. I have someone that could use what you have been through. The Shelby County Crime Victim's Center (Anna Whalley's group) needs mentors like you that have taken something horrible and have come out on the other side.
It is not remaining a vicitm but losing the roots of bitterness and working with others that are going through what you have. You help them grown thru their hurt. It does take a lot out of you but if anyone can do it, it is you.
So would you and anyone else that is interested in this type of program contact me? We could use you brother.
David Brown
MJM, David,
So you "agree" with Mr. Brown, although he called your prior assertions "stupid" and "dangerous?" Now you want to claim his perspective as if it justifies your sweep-it-under-the rug-and-move-on mentality.
Had you known and did nothing, then your analogy would apply. I think what I despise most of all in the pious of all stripes, is that notion that they can can present any weak justification, any little scrap or crumb, and as soon as it is easily flitted away with a modicum of rational thought, you just change gears and act as if you'd never uttered the nonsense--and direct the argument to my lack because I don't share your faith.
I think the Pastor was but one of many, to various levels, culpable in not just the pedophile scandal, but in the way the leadership tried to massage the partial disclosure--as if they could stage manage this crisis while they were still themselves just getting their legs in the matter. To ultimately insist that folks just play along, for the sake of unity, is repulsive to some, especially here in the South; I imagine, at Bellevue or not, if someone asks for that kind of acquiessence and deference, it must be earned, not abused as a divine right.
I agree with EZ--when the Pastor responded in defensiveness and self-preservation, he inflamed the very doubts regarding integrity and fitness that were raised by his own failures in the first place. What, did he really think everyone would just roll over?
No one is out for his head because this failure is systemic and infiltrates the church, especially this far down the road. Had they taken steps in the manner of EZs wish, then all this carnage wouldn't have occurred.
Did Ken Lay say he was sorry for bilking those folks? Which one did they do--take measures to insure that such never occurred again? Did Lay get to keep his job since he, you know, apologized? Have you ever apologized yourself out of a speeding ticket? If you pick a fight at a bar and you get beat up, the cops don't let you out of jail a moment sooner because you're the worst for wear.
Why did they even invent the word "accountability" when we already had "consequences" and "apologies?" And I'm still trying to figure out what the meaning of "is" is.
maybejustmaybe said...
Case in point: I recently reconnected with a young lady I used to teach in the youth group at another church, about 6-8 years ago. She has grown into a lovely adult, for which I am very thankful. Yet in the relating of catch-up stories with each other, it comes out that she was seriously abused by her parents during the entire time I was her youth group leader, SS teacher, and mentor.
This raises a serious question, to anyone who knows ... 'cuz I don't know ... does the law (and/or ethics or morality) require that anyone (no matter who) who receives knowledge of prior abuse of a child report the abuse to authorities, no matter when the abuse occured, and no matter if the child is now an adult? Does it matter what was the type of abuse (phycical injury, sexual, etc.)?
David,
You are right! Thanks for the correction. Accepted with the spirit that you intended!
And I appreciate your comments, and agree that it should be a huge wake up call to anyone put in this position in the future.
But honest question, what would ever have been done, how would you have ever gotten your wake up call, if there had not been a group of people willing to make a fuss about it. A big one.
If this would have been handled the way the pastor wanted to, PW would still be asking women for lurid details of their abuse and would have still been abusing people. Maybe he still is. We don't know.
I can understand and do undertand the need for ministering to the individual. But at what point does your responsibility to protect the rest of your church kick in? And when that kicks in, is your first response to ask those wounded to leave if they just can't accept the logic you present for keeping him on staff?
We are just not talking about one of the sheep in the pew or the guy off the street. We are talking about the one that serves on your staff and that reports to you. It shouldn't take much to be able to see the potential damage that he can cause you and your sheep. And let's just say it takes you a few days to sort it out. Are you then going to advocate for his continued service on your staff?
We have gone through months of excuses for Gaines behavior and failure to act. Some frankly have been pretty lame. But when we try to get past that, is the solution to just get harder, rule with an ever tightening fist and run off the folks you have offended..... or to sit down, back up and try to start it over? Try to repair the damage rather than try to outlive it? But then that would take true leadership and humility.....I am not sure how we get that.
Watching,
"You couldn't be refering to me because I know as well as you that I can't discern a pedophile."
Just more of your deception. You have been ranting for months and blaming Dr. Rogers for not discerning the beast in the midst for 17 years. You have been ranting that he should have been able to . Now you start changing your story. Just more of the spirits we have been discussing. Lying, and Deceiving.
Junkster: The law does not make any distinction as to the type of abuse. Report them. Let the legal authorities make the decision if there is continued abuse. Once again why give the pedophile an edge or benefit? Report them to DCS.
The law says once again, if you SUSPECT abuse, report it. It does not say investigate and then report. It does not say if the victim is now an adult you don't have to report. Report it.
However you may encounter some in DCS that are not that concerned if the victim is now an adult. If you ever get that reaction, call me or Anna. We will make sure the right people get the information. They will investigate.
Thanks for your question.
David Brown
John Mark,
Give David Brown some serious consideration. I have witnessed the change as well. I think you could do a lot to help folks. You have skills man.....
Thanks, David Brown, for your response. It sounds like a very high standard, but I understand that we can't take any chances.
Maybejustmaybe ... something for you to be aware of.
WHS said...
"We live in a different world now that the enemy has penetrated the assembly. It is spiritual warfare as we have never dreamed it would be."
Sorry to disappoint you sir, but the spiritual warfare that has been battling in the souls of this earth for thousands of years is not a new thing. If you have never done battle with dark spirits, then you have no clue what you are talking about and from the description of your "dreams", you have succumbed to their manipulations. The dreams you described are not of God, yet you have failed to recognize them for what they are, an attack on your spirit that entices you to mock that which is Godly, which is sin. Compare all that you have said about your dreams with God's Word and see if there is any place any where when God attacks his people with evil or vile spirits. You will not find it. If you are interested in winning your battle, you must challenge those spirits with God's Word instead of believing in a vile vision, or a dream.
The battle is most definitely raging, but as a very wise man once said, "It is getting gloriously dark....."
The Good News is that we can know the Victor and the ending!!!
David,
"Some of you are so busy condemning Dr. Gaines that you don't see that we are capable of making the same mistake: Not protecting the children.
So don't condemn me if I use the situation to look at myself, my church and ask the tough question: Could this have happened here? (Oh no! It could have!) So what do I need to change?"
Far from condemning you for it, I applaud you for taking a serious look at it and confronting it where you see the need. But just so you don't focus all your energy on protecting children, make sure you understand what happened at BBC. Some on one side have focused attention on the safety of children and others have made the defense that other than one child, there weren't really any children at risk anyway. (Don't confuse this with my argument. As long as he was in the building there was a risk to children there in my opinion.) But in all this, everyone appears to have forgotten the other victims. Apparently, from evidence produced, this guy was responsible for screening sunday school workers, many of them women, where they were asked all sorts of detail under the gise of "needing to know" by this guy.
When he confessed to Gaines, he didn't even bother to find out what he did in ministry.....other than minister of prayer. I hope you can see the problem with allowing him to continue in that position for the next six months and even then advocate keeping him on staff....You wouldn't want him in your counseling office, counseling abuse victims would you?
EZ,
Not to harm your reputation, but you are a gentleman and a scholar, sir. You could not said that with more grace and aplomb.
Even so, I think it's 'bout to git stupid up in here.
Ez,
No, I would not want that.
However, that's never going to hapen. Not even a chance it will happen. The question for me and thee is: What are we going to do to better protect the kids in our lives?
Cakes,
That is what is so tragic about this whole mess. It has been stupid from day one.
They do say hindsight is 20/20 and I guess it is. But there is a book...that details man's error for centuries and it tells us how to avoid the mistakes they made. It even tells us that there is no temptation(1 Cor 10:13) that hasn't been faced before by people just like us.
But when we won't read the book or worse yet, when we don't follow the guidance we get from the book....disaster is sure to follow.....
David,
I don't know.....I really don't. If you have young ones then you know the fear I have when we go anywhere or even when we are at home and I can't find them or when they don't come when I call. Immediately. It might have something to do with the guy on the list that lives down the street that I can't do anything about.....
Other than pray. Ask for protection for them and claim the protection and safety, the blessings from Deut 28:1-14. And remain ever vigilant.
That and....when you see someone you trust to keep your kids, violate that trust, do anything and everything to insure that it doesn't happen again.
When that trust has been broken, trying to convince me that one of the folks working with them and choosing folks to work with them, who has confessed to have committed an unthinkable act is still suitable to be anywhere near them just ain't going to happen.
The harder this is tried, the more hurdles that are leaped in attempting to do this only strengthens my resolve that the ones trying to convince...were not worthy of the trust in the the first place.
David,
And another thing :)
I have found through the years that when I say never, ever...it usually does.
I hope you prepare yourself and resolve to act immediately and decisively if anything even remotely resembling this happens to you.
You never know. You seem pretty well grounded and no telling what the Lord has in store for you. Might just find yourself in a huge church some day with a lot of staff.....read your book..Immorality among the elders is never a good thing. Sexual sin is especially grevious amongst clergy. You will know what to do. If you can learn anything from this mess do it...
Watching,
"If Gaines had gone to the authorities "immediately and decisively" everyone of you would have nailed his hide to the wall.
Bellevue would not have been able to withstand the shock.
Like Christ, the same crowd that said "praise him" said on Friday "nail him"
Gaines did the lessor of two evils.
What else could he have done?
I'm telling you over and over we have to learen from Roger's error.
We have to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit about the unknowns in our Churches."
Well, I see that this morning your bring out #7. The spirit of Confusion.
Now you throw up a bunch of smoke about needing something besides the WORD to know how to handle a pedophile. Compare Gaines and the treatment of him to that of Christ.
Tell us we can't handle the truth.....That the shock would have been too great. As if the current shock is just a small bump in the road. Right?
And then even praise him for doing the "lesser of two evils"....I am almost speechless.....but not quite. There is just nothing else he could have done? Where have you been. He even admits there was something else he could have done
Then you bring up Roger's error. What error? Didn't you just tell us yesterday that you couldn't discern a pedaphile in your midst? But you expect another man to???? If you can't it is ok but you expect your preacher to though...What kind of logic is that?
Yep, #7.
Let's recap. Jezebel, Lying, Deceiving, Deviant, Delusion, Error and now we have Confusion.
Not meaning to change the subject, but yesterday afternoon, my family and I attended the Singing Christmas Tree at BBC.
It was a great showing and we even invited some friends from work. They were totally impressed witht he tree and also really enjoyed it. They said that as of Sunday afternoon, almost 20,000 people had attended the SCT.
If you have not seen it, you have tonight, Tues. and Wed to attend.
Merry Christmas,
Memphis
EZ,
Sorry, I should have been clearer. When I said it's "never ever" going to happen... I meant: PW is never ever going to confess tome. I was being a brat.
What might happen is I could find myself in a similar situation where someone confesses a sin tome that is also a crime against a minor. That I can learn from. So I was saying: The specifics will not happen to me... they already happened to Mr. Gaines. But of course we will all face similar problems.
I think the "accountability" thing is that there needs to be agreed upon stated church policy. that is: Everyone knows up front the ground rules. The law should not have to be church policy (the law doesn't change according to our policies!), but by stating in church documents the church procedure, we all agree up front.
Ez,
"But honest question, what would ever have been done, how would you have ever gotten your wake up call, if there had not been a group of people willing to make a fuss about it. A big one."
Okay, an honest answer:
People were pitching a fit long before they knew this had happened. This became ammo. Is their concern for the victim, or is the victim being loaded in a cannon to be used?
that you and I can take good out of bad does not mean we have to honor bad behavior.
How would God have taught me without them? Dunno. I'm not God. (and I don't want the job). But I do trust he would have somehow. SNAP is doing a good job of making people aware withiout villifying people.
Waching
No Charles, I won't go for that one either. That is unless you can show me where Paul laid his hands on you.....and are part of the 12. Then we can talk about tongues and prophecy. Till then, you would be better served...by
SCRIPTURE
2 Peter 3:14 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just asour beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction,as they do the other Scriptures. 17You therefore, beloved,knowing this beforehand,take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. 18But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.
And then there is alway the dream...the sign...the wonder...
2 Thes 2:9The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
David,
"I think the "accountability" thing is that there needs to be agreed upon stated church policy. that is: Everyone knows up front the ground rules. The law should not have to be church policy (the law doesn't change according to our policies!), but by stating in church documents the church procedure, we all agree up front."
David, do you really think you could write or any group of men could write any policy that would be anywhere near as comprehensive as the WORD?
1 Cor 5 and 2 Tim 3:16
Is the danger here, adding to or taking from......when we start writing our own church policy?
David,
Okay, an honest answer:
"People were pitching a fit long before they knew this had happened. This became ammo. Is their concern for the victim, or is the victim being loaded in a cannon to be used?"
David, who handed them the gun?
I know you have read through 1 and 2 Kings. But look at...
this
Why did great King Sol have an adversary and who provided them? How often is that theme repeated on Israels's leaders throughout Kings? I don't consider it too big a leap to look at it as in God's hand the rod of correction takes many forms but mostly men and the stripes of men. When a king or in the church age, the pastor starts letting pride and arrogance corrupt him....do you think his administration will be an easy one, blessed and dwelling in peace?
Yes, the adversaries were already there and had he handled that as we discussed earlier, that could have been difused easily. But again, it would have taken repentance and humility....but by then the hand and heart had already started to harden...
that you and I can take good out of bad does not mean we have to honor bad behavior.
How would God have taught me without them? Dunno. I'm not God. (and I don't want the job). But I do trust he would have somehow. SNAP is doing a good job of making people aware withiout villifying people.
This argument has come up many times before and is tied to the legal argument as well. The astounding thing is that we as a church even have to consider the legal system or some outside advocate for abuse victims even having to exist to monitor CHURCHES....Are we not supposed to be the very essence of love? To point to either the legal system or SNAP as the end all for notification of and adherance to moral and ethical guidelines to protect our very own members points to a mind boggling failure of the very institution that should be a safe haven and beacon of light for those suffering abuse anywhere.
Watching,
I won't be herded around to fulfill you fantasy. If you have something to say, say it.
I would suggest further study of the "scriptures" noted above with special care in a search for any particular sign or "vision"
Most if not all the referenced teaching was in fulfilment of or teaching of scripture...and your vision just aint scriptural...
Repent....
Ez,
I think just assuming people know “the word” got Bellevue in trouble. We can parse Greek and exegete... but on some practical things it is good to agree on how we will handle situations. That is not to discount what the Word says; it is to agree ahead of time: This is what we believe the Lord would have us to do.
I can see the point of those who wish to see SG "punished" for his terrible choice.
Sometimes God gives us blessings that we don't deserve and sometimes we don't see the punishment that a man receives-but we are Americans and we like tangible consequences. That just isn't always the way it goes.
I have been reading about Jacob and Rachel and Leah. Jacob stole the blessing from his brother (lied to his father, etc.) and yet God still blessed him over and over and over again. To outsiders, it would seem that he had everything- wives, children, prosperity, eventually even the forgiveness of his brother. But we know that his life wasn't picture perfect as it may have seemed- his punishment was such that it wasn't a tangible thing. He even got to keep the blessing he stole, whereas nowadays we would expect him to pay restitution and do everything to deny him that blessing.
Maybe SG is not getting what he "deserves", but that just isn't the way it works sometimes.
To me, it just sounds like people would rather depend on karma rather than the inexplicable will of God.
None of us deserve the blessings that we have- why is it that some who are faithful in tithe and work are rich and some poor? Why are some that are faithful in prayer blessed with many children and some none?
There has just been so much talk of "consequences" lately and accountability and punishment it got me thinking about this.
Interesting.
jacob certainly suffered Consequences for his actions. Not man inflicted; God inflicted.
In fact, he tells the King of Egypt: "My years have been few and difficult, and they do not equal the years of the pilgrimage of my fathers." Gen. 47:9
But did he become accountable before God? He did. Of course, it took God pulling a leg out of scoket and losing a son. And in the end... amazing: God made Jacob what He wanted him to be. A broken man ready to serve God at any cost.
You guys crack me up--let Heavenly Father take care of it. Then why do we have laws, a court system and juries, investigative and relief agencies, and traditions of civil conflict resolution, the tropes of rhetoric--like, common sense even, etc? Maybe because, by his own actions, he has marred his own credibility, and some stakeholders would like to see their church restored without giving the Pastor a blank check, trust-wise; and I add, based upon reasonbly-established doubt of his fitness. Without some sunshine on the subject, and these PR stunts instead, it just inflames further scrutiny.
I imagine the pastor to be a nice gentleman, who was navigating some psycological, familial or professional issue at the time; or thought this would blow over or could be resolved with minimal circulation, and thus preserve the good name of the church and not embarass a collegue. It is unwise, but not unforgivable.
Defensiveness and condescension from the pulpit are not great followups after you've screwed-up that horribly though, and presumes an unrealistic deference to authority. When you have to levy loyalty oaths, that in itself is a chink in the armour. Anyway, he didn't have to roll like that, he and other leadership could have taken a less macheveillian approach to management. But honestly, that approach gets the job done--just doesn't sound very Christ-like. (And Mike, I was a "Christian" for 20 years, so I'll draw from whatever history I darn well please, if you don't mind, sir.)
Answer this, did the leadership wait on God during the "business meeting;" can you really justify the truthseekers spurned there, or their behavior, truly? (And not Mike's poorly argued exgesis.) How about the Coombs vote?
So, the poor folks put out on the street should just let divine provinance handle accountabilty. How about taking your own advice and let the same take care of Bellevue's refugees?
It's like y'all will deny your nose to spite your face.
Cakes,
Do you actually read the posts, or do you just talk and accuse?
Mr. brown
EZ
myself
others have all discussed what accountability looks like practically. You read a post from WH and use that to define "you guys."
Can you accept that we hold the theology that ultimately God is in charge. Because we will one day give account before him, we should hold ourselves and one another accountable. What does that look like.
No David,
I don't need your religion, and I have engaged in a equally valid discussion of the issue, and all your fallen justifications littered here attest to it. So you agree with David Brown--tehe. Oh, and I'm not angry, but if you need me to be to justify your piety, then you go, boyee.
Religion annoys me less than how folks hide behind it when the integrity of their reasoning is found in question. It goes back to what I said about being on the right team is no excuse for not articulating a sound argument at the table of debate.
If you need me to be anti-Christian, so that you can feel superior to me, then do as thy wilt. It is no burden for me.
Do you ever use any other trope but the declarative? I may not be wise in the things of the world, but I wouldn't sit on my keister for 6 months knowing a pedophile was in my midst; and that makes me wiser than some folks.
Cakes: "I may not be wise in the things of the world, but I wouldn't sit on my keister for 6 months knowing a pedophile was in my midst; and that makes me wiser than some folks."
Are you actually in a position where that might happen, or are you just bolstering again? Easy to say what you would do if you were in someone elses position.
I suspect anyone could stand up and beat their chest and say: "I would never do that!" Well praise be to you.
David,
Re:
The 2:52 post
What is staggering is that apparently, the senior pastor is the one that didn't.....Least that is what the report said.....
Of course one would think that it could have been figured out in six months...but even then, Dr. Gaines still wanted to keep him....
Knowing it and obeying it is two different things....
I'm the school teacher of some 500 disadvantaged and at risk children in the inner city. We have stringent standards for reporting abuse and equally strict acountability measures.
Still not a Christian though.
May I qualify for an opinion?
No David, any thinking person knows what to do or can easily find out. Also, I am shocked you still justify a gray area. Of course I know what I'd do! Don't you?
It's simply about not taking the least-credible's word for it when abuse is discovered. There are people potentially harmed if you fail to report; there are people potentially being harmed now if you fail to report. Don't you know the common-sense of the law preceded its legislation? Are you really going to hide behind ignorance of the law?
A law degree is not required when this crime is discovered, just a conscience.
What gray area did I justify? I said he was wrong not to report. He should have reported.
That I also understand HOW he made the mistake means that I justify? Not at all.
Do you have another tactic other than accusation? Do you ever discuss, or just charge in?
"I suspect anyone could stand up and beat their chest and say: "I would never do that!" Well praise be to you."
Sir, do you not recognize some beating of your own chest in this diatribe? I'm sorry you must resort to such bromides. Go back to the sermonettes, for both our sakes.
Actually, Cakes, I wasn’t beating my chest proclaiming I would never do the same. I said I was capable of doing similar things, as is anyone else. Instead of proclaiming we would never do the same, we should ask: How can I be more careful?
My “sermonettes” are doing fine, I do not need your direction on that.
"What gray area did I justify? I said he was wrong not to report. He should have reported."
Don't make me argue against what I didn't say--you assert that I wouldn't know what I'd do in Padre's shoe's, since I'm nor in them. To that I say "phooey!" And someone would have to defend a gray area if his relative position, stature or relationship has any bearing on proper action.
"That I also understand HOW he made the mistake means that I justify? Not at all."
Don't make me argue what I didn't say. No, I'm well-aware of how often folks here "beat their chests," asserting as a Constitutional Right to say what Padre did was really, really naughty; while curiously being completely indifferent to accountability for such a humongous failure, and justifying the leadership's bumrush.
"Do you have another tactic other than accusation? Do you ever discuss, or just charge in?"
Ever heard of the pot calling the kettle black? Settle down, preacher-man.
8D
I added that "beating their chest" bit to demonstrate how such phrases are meant to paint me as a savage. But if all we have are the words--if rhetoric is all we have to represent our perspectives and articulate sound reason, then I'm hardly the cro-magnon here, weilding a blunt object.
Jessica,
The last part of your 3:36 post reminded me of some of Solomon's wisdom....
Ecc 9:11 Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to those with knowledge, but time and chance happen to them all.
Also, when you talk of Jacob and his blessings, I am not sure Leah was a blessing...in fact we see that she was hated. I would have been terribly upset when they turned the lights on to find what I had worked for 7 years had been withheld and I had been tricked. I often wondered if it was coincidence that he tricked his father when he was blind and then in turn he was tricked because he could not see.... And when you consider the treachery of Laban....14 years is a long time. I wonder if he ever felt at some time in that 14 years that he was paying for his treachery and deception with Esau and his father.....
Consequences??
Take another look at it and see if you can see the irony in Laban telling him that in this country....it is not our custom to give the younger before the firstborn...I don't see a lot of blessing for Jacob in the first years....
In fact, it looks like the blessing went to Laban for the first number of years. Only later did Jacob benefit...
EZ,
Could you fill in the blanks on that Jacob story--what're y'all talking 'bout?
Cakes: "you assert that I wouldn't know what I'd do in Padre's shoe's, since I'm nor in them. To that I say "phooey!"
That is exctly what I assert. Glad you got it; even if you did say Phooey.
You do not hold his theology. His hope that man can repent. HIs desire to reach people with the Gospel. So you can't undertand WHY he did what he did. You can't stand in his shoes because you don't hold his convictions.
I'm not throwing stones at you. I am saying that you have to understand his world view to get why he did it.
(and the title is "pastor" cakesman-- not padre.)
Again:
I disagree with his decision, I do understand the heart with which he did it. He desired to reach out to or minister to a guilt ridden man. What he failed to do was protect his congregation.
I'm reading a book right now called "When Religion Gets Sick" by Wayne E Oates. A sick side of mercy is failing to see the danger that still exists. (and failing to report).
I love you lots
You have a good night, Cakes-man.
Cakes,
Jessica had used the story of Jacob and Laban to more or less show that even though Jacob decieved his father and brother...really wasn't a very good person...that he was blessed by God anyway.
Eventually he was. He became the father of the sons that would eventually become the heads of the 12 tribes of Israel....
But short term...he had a father in law that you and I would try real hard to avoid. One that more or less repaid Jacob for the treachery and deception that he and his mother played out on his brother and father.
Short answer, Jessica says his deception didn't result in any conseqences....I guess it depends on what you call consequences but working for 7 years to get married to an ugly girl in the dark when you thought you were marrying the pretty one...and then having to work for another 7 years for the pretty one...seems to me like consequences....
There is a saying somewhere in the bible where God essentially returns the wickedness of an indiviual back on himself.....another way of saying what goes off your belly comes back on your back...or whatever you shoot up has got to come down....
Consequences...
David,
Whoa now.....as far as world view, and convictions, I thought I was pretty close to Gaines....and I still don't understand his actions....
Unless I step out of the baptist worldview and back into the worlds...worldview. Then his actions make total sense...
In that worldview I think they call it covering one's backside....and protecting one's bank account...
So in reality, it may make more sense to cakes...than it does us....
The hard part is to admit that....
Back it up EZ,
That is NOT what I am saying... what I was saying is that to an outsider it would seem like Jacob had it all- in spite of the fact that he was being denied the woman he loved, trapped by a horrible father-in-law, etc.
If some guy who didn't know him took a snapshot of his life it would seem that his life was great- two wifes, bunch of sons,prosperity.
My point was that punishment is not always tangible- we know that he had a miserable time now but to someone living back then I don't think it would have been that apparent.
Please stop putting words in my mouth. That goes for you too Cakes.
I simply wanted to have a discussion about the various expectations we have for accountability and consequences. We as a culture favor anything tangible or easy to quantify.
Why is one man more important that all his potential victims; and why can anyone credibly cite religious belief as an excuse?
That's about what the Catholic's argue.
I believe you believe it, despite all the evidence to the contrary, including the indicting words I quoted from the BBCIR. I don't know much about the Bible, but I know it doesn't say I must have blind faith in Padre (Padre is the same as Pastor or preacher--and consumes one less letter--must I pay him deference too? I mean, I answer to Donkey's behind--for Pete's sake).
Anywho, I don't think a God who would shape a deeply complex mind, would have us throw out reason, logic, rhetoric, doubt and their tangential fields, when it is convenient to uppend our most cherished or embatteled pretexts.
You may apply the above to what you belief about the Padre or religion. I've about decided that one can believe in just about anything or anyone they choose.
I think faith is a private affair and it is best experienced than discussed. But when someone seeks to insulate a poor justification, then it rightly might be ripe for challenge. Do you think the clergy abuse scandal in the Catholic church is up to God's Providence, or is it all of our responsibility to see justice served, Christian and non- alike? Do I need any special perview to come to a reasonable assessment of damage done or percieve accountability?
How about in any case, where facts are present, and judgements to be drawn from them?
Sleep well.
I wish people would just put sensible words in their own mouth, so we we wouldn't spend so much time clarifying misunderstandings.
Or people could just read things completely and not jump to conclusions about what people mean. That would eliminate a lot of misunderstandings as well...
Cakes, you said you were a Christian for 20 years...
Does that mean that at some time in your life you accepted jesus as your savior??
What happened to make you stop being a Christian, and how did you stop being a Christian??
Serious question...
I think you would do well to see that you and EZ essentially agree about the story.
Would you like to offer the notion that everyone should rely on these intangible consequences, so that's the same as accountability? Is that just for church people, or can every rounder git in on that deal? Just kidding.
I'm not sure what you are offering because it so obtusely relates to the point; that one may infer the above from what you relay is not out of line. But from now on, I'll respectfully ask for clarification.
How exactly does this story of Jacob relate to the matter of accountability? What point are you making? Do we just trust God for those intangibles and forget about it?
Just wondering.
Post a Comment