New BBC Open Forum (nass' copyrighted picture-excellent) This forum (her's) was created to provide a place where those who are seriously concerned about the issues facing Bellevue Baptist Church can come to comment and exchange ideas in a respectful, Christian spirit. The purpose of this blog is not to confront sins affecting us individually but sins that affect us congregationally.She commented to John Harraman at 11:08 AM, January 19, 2008
"I don't know if you have children or grandchildren, but if you do, did it not bother you even a little that your pastor allowed a confessed pedophile and documented sexual predator to freely roam the halls of Bellevue Baptist Church for over six months after he knew about him? If you don't, do you not care about anyone else's children?"
She said: It's about the lack of integrity in our church leadership."
I don't want to stoop to the level of NBBCOF's impugning of Steve Gaines and his wife Donna however her statement leads me to comment on Dr Rogers lack of leadership during the years Paul Williams sodomized his own young son for 12-18 months. It was the zenith for Bellevue and the new Appling Structure. The national involvement in SBC convention leadership. Chairing the committee to present the 2000 BF&M.
Why he even drafted a family oriented program dealing with of all things "deadbeat dads"!
NASS, the problems were not with Paul Williams' conduct during the six months after Steve Gaines knew about him. He had to have been on his best behavior.
Any molestation that took place by him was under Dr Rogers' watch. GMMOMY herself states that she was not able to go to Rogers, even though she was able to confide in others. They knew themselves that Dr Rogers didn't need to know about this. He was just too busy.
Like praying, if you are too busy to pastor your church you are too busy. He was not so big that he could do both without sacrificing one at the expense of the other. Chris Williams paid a high price for Adrian's success!
NASS, it is about integrity of Church leadership. Who else beside Chris Williams paid a high price? It is not about Steve Gaines but Adrian Rogers. The cause is theological in nature.
Posts
15 comments:
You say "NASS, it is about integrity of Church leadership", pointing back to Adrian Rogers. Yet the front page of your blog says "The intent of this blog is not to impugn the character or integrity of Dr Rogers".
So which is it? Are your true colors showing through? Admit it, this is really all just about your personal dislike for Rogers, the rest is just blowing "spiritual" smoke, isn't it?
No I am not angry with Dr Rogers, God is. I'm just his messenger and I know how angry God is.
I did feel that there was a line I was stepping over in my post. Is there a correlation between one's theology and character? Can there be a connection to Dr Rogers' bad theology that would effect his priorities and cause him to be so busy in one area and neglect another? You tell me.
I didn't say you were angry with Dr. Rogers. I said you dislike him and that personal dislike looks like a motive for what you are saying.
Yes, there can be a connection between a person's theology and their character/integrety, but if that's what you believe is the case with Rogers you should remove the statement on the front page of your blog.
I'm not angry nor do I dislike Dr Rogers. I said God is angry with Dr Rogers.
Don't feel bad for misunderstanding me. A lot of folk misunderstand me.
Sorry the statement stays!
Obstinance is not a spiritual gift!
Pray for me to have your spiritual gift of discernment.
Thanks
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You had a vision from God that He is angry with Adrian Rogers and now it is your personal mission to tell the world about it. I take it, then, that Dr. Rogers is in hell. It saddens me greatly to hear that.
He is in hades now, awaiting the resurrection.
So in spite of his testimony and preaching about Jesus, he was not saved?
all2jesus
Preachers and teachers with good testimonies and are elected are saved through the blood of Christ.
Did you think that AR would get to heaven through his good testimony and preaching? I don't think so!!
Our testimony is that which declares our faith in word and deed (Heb. 11:5). By faith we obtain a good testimony (Heb. 11:1-2; 11:39-40). It bears witness to saints and sinners alike (2 Thess. 1:7-10).
Dr. Rogers testimony was that his faith and trust were in the saving blood and accomplished work of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 John 5:11-12). He preached salvation in no other. He often said he wouldn't trust the best 15 minutes he had ever lived to get him to heaven, so his faith was not in works. Why do you say he was not one of the elect?
I've never said he went to hell, the place of eternal punishment, nor did I say he wasn't elected.
The elect go thru the firey test of I Cor 3:12-15
Your statement strongly implies that in spite of Dr. Rogers testimony of faith in Jesus Christ, he somehow missed the mark and was therefore not elect.
So you believe on the basis of 1 Cor. 3:12-15 that all saved people go to Hades to be punished for their sins (wood, hay and stubble), where they stay until resurrection day?
all2jesus
unfortunately I have no control what you imply from what I say. This is an endless circle.
In the moment we die we are fully conscious of our deeds. I Cor 3: 9-23 apply to the elect. The elect are built on Christ, their foundation. Clearly this is not a punishment just for sins but their works which have been built on the foundation.
Some people will be rewarded for their works by degrees and others will loose their rewards likewise by degrees. Some people will loose everything, their temple will be destroyed.
If Paul williams is of the elect of God he will experience this awful firey indignation. There is no forgiveness for his sins. Heb 10:26-31 Adrian Rogers by close proximity to PW has contributed to this indignation and will share in the firey test. This is the source of the anger that God has for him.
We all will go through this same test "every man's work shall be made manifest..."
all2jesus
again I have no control over what you deduct from what I say and it is already clear that you are subjective in your reasoning. Don't let your admiration for Dr Rogers cloud your thinking.
neither should you let your animosity toward me cloud your thinking. I have no control over your implications.
Post a Comment