November 19, 2007

Why Mike Deletes Me

Random order -

1) The defense mechanisms of most posters will not allow themselves to deal with the severity of one of their own sodomizing his own son. It just couldn't happen.

2.) They cannot see the Socratic irony in the 17 years of Adrian Rogers' ignorance of Paul Williams' sin. Reasonable people see it.

3.) Mike's refusal to respond to Dr. James White's refutations of Adrian Rogers' Arminianism in his Romans 8 and 9 sermons.

4.) Mike's refusal to respond to Charles Stanley's statement concerning eternal security and explain AR's response to it.

5.) Mike's refusal to respond to the charge that the conservative resurgance was actually AR's push for evangelism and mega-ministries against moderate opposing views.

6.) Mike's lack of defense of my saying that AR was an inconsistent Arminian. He never produced the anology to end all anologies against Calvinism and Arminianism.

7.) Mike's experience at stage productions and media editing aquainted him with AR's Achilles' heel, style over substance and form over function. AR's knowledgeable peers knew it and kept a pragmatic silence better suit for the SBC.

8.) Mike knows that an opponent can be silenced by focusing on style rather than substance.

9.) Mike like AR is a purist and confuses purism with Christ-likeness. Thru Biblicism Mike forces others to conform to his piety at the cost of Christ-likeness.

Nice language often obscures the truth while coaser foreign or or altered styles claries and reveals. The Bible often uses foreign and altered languages to communicate or hide the truth.
The truths you hear are the truths God wants you to hear.

This does not condone filthy or jestful talking, neither does it hinder the plain and obvious truth. American english lacks this understanding.

This is why a sodomizer is offically called by Bellevue investigators "moral failure". When you ask a urbanite for a description of a sodomizer, you won't get an answer because he probally doesn't know what it is. When you explain as best as you can he replies with offensive language that shocks you but better communicates the explanation.

This is the reason Christians can't communicate outside the church building. When he communicates plainly he sins against his purism.

Deliversance from purism is harder than deliverance from actual sin. The purist rarely converts. Hew remains stiffnecked and unmovable. He will lack substance while mastering style and pure language thru strict self-discipline.

This is why christ could cast out the demons out of the Gaderene but could do few works of deliverance in Judea. He could work in Sammaria and Galilee but the closer he was to Jerusalem the harder it was! Eventually Judean princes at Jerusalem through wickedness captured and crucified him.

November 7, 2007

The Mess That Adrian Rogers Left AT Bellevue IV

I posted this at Mike Bratton's Report:

Mike, There are godless and silly man made traditions to be refused. I Tim 4:7-10

The Bible is absolutely faithful and cannot be scrutinized, though men have tried but without success.Our acceptation, hermeneutics, is not faithful, and so is always open to scrutiny. Even under the Holy Spirit's inspiration those who prophecy are especially open to scrutiny. When the preacher exegetes the Word from the pulpit he is particularly in need of ruthless scrutiny by the hearers.

When Adrian Rogers led the SBC in a Conservative Resurgence it was a futile attempt to shore up the infallible Word of God. IMO It was a red herring for SBC emergent evangelism that has not produced large movements of new converts but mega-Churches for Church hoppers to migrate to without any significant growth to Christianity in America. This has resulted in small struggling Churches competing with "successful" big Churches.

This in the long run is a money-making scheme for a hierarchal few and a big boost for Christian marketing firms. It has produced an even bigger growth of Para-Church organization that drain the small Churches of revenue.

We have posted a sign to the Holy Spirit "We don't need you" I fault much of this mess in America to Adrian Rogers, though he is not alone in it.

This is not an attack of his character but his theology. Yet our theology does affect our behavior and if anything can be said of AR's behavior is that he had to know that his personality was in the way of whatever the Holy Spirit wanted to do in individual hearts in ways he had no control over.

I personally witnessed one small event 5 or 6 years ago when he silenced an exuberant woman's applause because he had to make his point in his message about how a mega-Church like Bellevue can be even bigger. Ordinarily this would be an insignificant event that could be excused so easily in AR's favor. But as Tim has said this a feeling that God has ordained me to continually harp about until someone takes me serious.

I believe with all my heart that the theological issue of Adrian Rogers' attacks of Reformed Theology is at the root of this mess. The final analysis is that anything that falls short of Reformed Theology opens the door to self-determination and closes the door to the same degree to the Holy Spirit. As a result the door as demonstrated by both sides of the Bellevue mess is nearly shut completely.

Mike let others, though your mind is made up, listen to James White's scrutiny of AR's theology.If they want to hear it bad enough it will cost them $3.00 to download but worth hearing. Dr White does not attack AR's character rather his


November 5, 2007

The mess that Adrian Rogers left at Bellevue Part III

In addition to sharing my vision with my pasor, I went to Bellevue to talk with any minister I could talk to in hopes of finally reaching SG. I encountered no animosity nor any indication from them that I had a vendetta against AR. There was no questioning me about the validity of visions only that a vision had to be supported by scripture, which we all seem to agree. The uniqueness of the vision never was brought up.

Each conversation was well over an hour. I explaind that I was comming to them first as it would be hypocritical to go public without going to them. I was fervent beyond decorum and at times too loud to a fault.Each session was closed with prayer and each one ask God to help them understand what message God had for them. Hardy handshakes and God's blessings closed the times together.

I talked with Larry Ray and Phil Newberry and the thing that stuck in my mind was the look in their face when I mentioned the part about AR sitting and watching the crumbling of Bellevue. It was not the look of anger toward me for saying it but the 'in you face' look of plain and obvious truth. They knew better than anyone how true it was!
I went to GBC and by 'coincidence' was sent to Rob Mullins as he was the 'staff of the day'.The same with him as the others. Good meeting, firm handshakes. He knew my daughter, her husband and by extension the rest of my family by name! He only ask that I meet with him again as he had to process the information due to his closeness with AR. Specifically he acknowledged my fervency and that "his spirit bore witness with my spirit" He did not have problems with revelations, except that they must be confirmed by scripture. Our visit was good!

Now here is where it gets interesting. Office staff outside Rob's office overheard me getting loud and they feared for Rob's safety. They told some of the NBBCOF clique and the "gossip" (unfounded factual information)spread like wildfire.When the Monday brawl with a Bellevue member (I assume with a dissenter) took place at a nearby restuarant I was the assumed assailant! The assumptions were made to Rob and my attempts to get back with him were stymied.He finally called me at home and instructed me to never speak about this to him again. I was shocked and confused as to his abrupt turn-around.

Several weeks later two and two made four and I e-mailed Rob asking him for an explanation about the office incident. His reply was, "I have no control with what they do or say!" (Is there anyone out there who has office personel working for you)

I attempted several times to contack SG through his secretary and she reassusred me that I would be able to but he was in and out of town and hard to reach. Persistently I tried again only to be told extremely graciously that she was working on it and would call me. This occured over a period of three or more weeks.

Finally David Coombs called me at home and informed me that there was no way that I would be able to meet with SG, He said "is there anything you can say over the phone to him" I said, "I prefer a face to face meeting." Since he insisted it will not take place (I am convinced it had nothing to do with me but with SG's failing health and that he could not handle the added stress. JMO)tell him over the phone so as quickly as possible I told David everything. In sincerity he ask me "what should we do?" I replied "that is a big question and can not be answered simply over the phone." I knew in my mind that I was not even remotely qualified to give him an answer. Suddenly I fell to my knees and said to David, "David, you and Steve Gaines must unpretensiously rely on the Holy Spirit to guide you. You cannot pretend to rely on the HOLY Spirit You have to be led by the Holy Spirit." I said that with fervency and tears running down my face knowing that it would probally be the only chance I could get. David acknowledged the wisdom of that and we said our goodbyes.