"...When He [Jesus] saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd." Matt 9:36

"Do not rob the poor, because he is poor... for the Lord will take up their case and plunder those who plunder them." Proverbs 22:22-23

Monday, February 20, 2012

Shocker: Mac Brunson to Preach at Gilyard's Former Church, Shiloh Baptist in Jacksonville

Mac Brunson announced Sunday night at FBC Jax that he will be preaching a revival service at Shiloh Baptist Metropolitan Church this coming Wednesday.

This is quite unfortunate. It is really beyond comprehension that Brunson is going to make the same mistake that Jerry Vines did in 2006.

You see, Shiloh is the church that hired Darrell Gilyard back in 1993 despite his known sexual predation in churches in Texas and Oklahoma. According to the Times Union, Shiloh has settled multiple lawsuits with victims of Gilyard on several occasions yet still allowed him to remain as pastor. One such lawsuit against Gilyard and Shiloh alleged Gilyard convinced a widow in 2004 to have sex with him during a counseling session to hasten her healing after her husband's death. The suit also alleged that the church was negligent in the hiring, supervising, and retaining of Gilyard as the pastor.

I know what some of Brunson's defenders will say: this is a new day, a new pastor at Shiloh, and we should not try to hang the sins of Gilyard on the new pastor and the church.

Let's be real. Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church had a corrupt system - and could possibly still have a corrupt system - that allowed them to hire a known sexual deviant without warning the people of the church or taking adequate measures to protect women in the church from Gilyard. This church, as far as I know, has never publicly apologized to our city for allowing Gilyard free reign to abuse women when they should have never hired a man with his history of sexual abuse allegations in the first place. As far as I know Shiloh has never demonstrated to the city of Jacksonville that they have instituted changes to increase pastoral accountability and oversight that would prevent a recurrence.

So what does it say to Christian women in general in Jacksonville, and Gilyard's victims in particular, that Brunson - who does represent FBC Jax whether he wants to admit it or not - is going to preach at a church with such a terrible track record of protecting women and children from a predator?

I'll tell you what else stinks about Brunson showing up there...it was his church's own employee, deacon, and discipline committee member, Robert Hinson, who used his investigatory power as a JSO detective to pull a subpoena on Tiffany Croft's blog in 2008. Tiffany Croft is a former FBC Jax member who started a blog back in 2008 to help expose Gilyard and actually aided the state attorney's office in building the case against Gilyard that sent him to jail for 3 years - and what did Tiffany get for her bravery? She had her personal information subpoenaed by Mac's own employee and churchman. The detective under oath said that he issued the subpoena on Tiffany's blog by accident when he was investigating my blog. I don't believe that one bit. What seasoned sheriff's detective issues subpoenas to the state attorney for signature by mistake on a website that CLEARLY was no threat, whose author was not anonymous in any way, and who simply was critical of a high-profile baptist pastor? If it had become known that the JSO was investigating Tiffany's blog, that could have actually hampered the state attorney's investigation by scaring people away from reporting what they knew about Gilyard.

Has Brunson done his due diligence on this? Has he confirmed that Shiloh has cleaned house of leaders who were aware of the Gilyard history in Texas but still turned a blind eye? Are there still men in positions of leadership at Shiloh that had knowledge of Gilyard's sexual predation and thus bear some responsibility in the abuse that occurred at the hands of their pastor? I have reason to believe there still is at least one man in a position of leadership at Shiloh that knew of Gilyard's past but did not warn the congregation.

FBC Jax has already had one pastor go to Shiloh to preach and regret it. Jerry Vines preached at Shiloh in 2006 when Gilyard was still pastor, shortly after Vines' retirement. Vines knew all about Gilyard's sexual perversions in Texas, and Vines even knew that Gilyard tried to seduce one of the young women at FBC Jax during a high school revival tour in the late 1980s. Yet Vines agreed to forgive Gilyard for his "out of state troubles" and later expressed regret that he went to Shiloh to preach in 2006.

So why is Mac going to Shiloh? Does he not have better judgement than this? Aren't there better choices of churches in this city that he could visit? Don't the FBC Jax trustees and deacons see a problem with this? Maybe not, after all FBC Jax hired Ergun Caner last summer to lead their summer youth camps.

So just a quick note to Jerry Vines: Mac Brunson loves to drop your name and tell his church how often you send him loving and encouraging text messages.

Therefore, Jerry, you might want to fire off the following text message to Mac, lickity-split:

"Mac, don't preach at Shiloh. Been there, done that. Not a good idea right now. Love ya bro. Jerry."

Trustees of FBC Jax, please nip this in the bud. Your pastor has no business going to Shiloh Baptist Church.

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Church Discipline of the Critic - You Get it if You Stay, You Get if You Leave

" 'I just want to continue to worship there,' said Dr. Nan Hawkes, who may be asked to leave Second Presbyterian Church....Hawkes said she realizes it would be easier to leave Second Presbyterian but doesn't believe she should have to. "It's not Sandy Willson's [the pastor] church. It's not my church," she said. 'It's God's church.' " From article "Unchurched" in the 2/16/11 Commercial Appeal
-----------------------------------------
On the front page of the Commercial Appeal (Memphis) newspaper Thursday was the story of a long-time church member, Dr. Nan Hawkes, who is being barred from her mega church and subjected to the church's disciplinary process and possibly excommunicated from the church for "slander, bickering, and gossip", and for "offenses of immorality and contempt for the established order of the church".

What was her "crime"? She said disparaging remarks about her pastor and one of his family members. And apparently the church doesn't tolerate people being friends of the pastor's critics either as Dr. Hawkes' friend at the church has also been barred from serving in the choir after she sent a letter stating her support for Dr. Hawkes.

As I included in the quote above from the newspaper article, Dr. Hawkes realizes she could have just left her church, but she decided to stay. She is a believer in Christ and feels compelled to worship at this church despite her differences with the pastor.

And of course Dr. Hawkes could have avoided all of this and just left the church if she had disagreements with the pastor, right?

Not so fast, my friend, as Lee Corso likes to say.

Even the act of leaving a church is now seen by some reformed pastors as being in sin - or worse, not even a believer - requiring corrective church discipline and excommunication. Let me explain.

Mark Devers' is a reformed Southern Baptist and pastor of Capital Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. He has spoken before at the FBC Jax Pastor's Conference, back in 2009 or 2010. Devers started an association of churches called "9Marks" churches (formerly known as "the Center for Church Reform") and there is a website that provides resources to pastors who wish to incorporate the "9 Marks" of a healthy church.

One of the "marks" of a biblical church - Mark Number 7 - is biblical "church discipline". Bobby Jamieson, is the assistant editor of the 9 Marks website and seminary student at SBTS, and he posted an article recently stating that the act of a cranky church member simply leaving a church is an act of open sin requiring churches to exercise discipline and excommunication.

Jamieson writes in his article "Pastors, Don't Let Your People Resign into Thin Air":
"....a cranky troublemaker who’s been giving the church headaches for years has finally had enough and decides to throw in the towel and resign. In a huff, this person says he’s just giving up on church—at least for now.

It would be tempting to simply stand aside and allow this troubler to cease troubling your church. The last thing you want is to invite more trouble by detaining him at the back door.

But should the church simply allow this individual to resign into thin air?"
The arrogance in this is astounding. A pastor and his 501(c)3 organization consider the question of whether they can "allow" someone to resign? It gets better:
"I think the biblical answer is a resounding “No.” Here’s why: When your church made that person a member, you were declaring to the world that this person belongs to the kingdom of Jesus (Mt. 16:18-19). By regarding this person as a member, your church affirmed that he is indeed a “brother” in Christ (1 Cor. 5:11-13)."
So your church "membership" isn't just that you decided to link with a fellowship of believers because the Holy Spirit led you as a Christian. No, it is much deeper than that apparently. Apparently the church has the responsibility to "affirm" that you are a "brother", and thus they can't just let you "resign". I guess when you join a Calvinist congregation like Mark Devers' church, you are checking in to the "Hotel Calvinista": you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

But it gets even better, much better:
"So what’s the problem? Hebrews 10:24-25 commands us not to forsake assembling together. Therefore, any professing Christian who quits going to church is living in habitual, unrepentant sin. And the way a church addresses unrepentant sin is not by merrily sending that person on his way, but by removing their affirmation of “member” and “brother” (Matt. 18:15-17; 1 Cor. 5:1-13). When the player quits showing up on game day, the team has to take back his jersey."
These churches are hell bent on making the gospel "bad news"! Don't tithe, and you're cursed. Quit going to church because you've been hurt or spiritually abused, you are in "habitual, unrepentant sin". Darn, I just can't measure up to the pastors' standards after I accepted Christ. I'm not tithing, and I'm not an active member of a church - who will deliver me from my torment? Is it any wonder why people are fleeing these churches?

And so if you quit attending and are in "unrepentant sin", your church must "remove their affirmation" of you as a "brother". Do you understand what this is saying? That as a Christian we are "affirmed" by the church, and if we leave on terms not suitable to the pastor ad his holy men they take back that "affirmation" as a "brother". That is code for saying you are not a Christian any longer and the holy men of your church play a role in making that determination.

So Jamieson and 9Marks gives their solution to these pesky reprobates, the "troublers" who simply walk out the door:
"A quick way to get a handle on this is to consider church discipline. If someone tries to resign mid-process in order to “escape discipline,” should the church just let them go? Of course not. That would defeat the whole point of church discipline. Instead, the church must retain the right to refuse someone’s resignation and send them out another way—through excommunication."
A "quick way"? To "get a handle on this"? Do what? A church retains the right to refuse someone's resignation? How is that even possible?

Keep in mind that the man writing those words is a seminary student at Al Mohler's Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. They are speaking of "excommunication" of church members. I never thought I would hear that word in the Southern Baptist Convention, but that is the direction of the reformed pastors apparently.

For more analysis of Jamieson's article, read the Wartburg Watch's excellent commentary here. They raise the point that Jamieson's advice to pastors in rejecting a member's resignation for the purpose of continuing church discipline has already been deemed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court as potentially tortious in the case of Guinn v. Church of Christ of Collinsville. So for Jamieson to offer this advice to pastors with no mention of the legal ramifications that might arise in particular applications shows how out of touch with reality these power-hungry preacher-men can be.

Christians, we have to wise up. While our pastors do their best to get us to fear the government, preaching that Uncle Sam is going to take away their rights to proclaim the gospel - we need to realize that a bigger threat to Christianity is from WITHIN the church and it is not the bloggers. It is narcissistic, power-hungry pastors and their underlings who view themselves and their churches as the bestowers of God's grace and your good standing with God. They want to tell us we must give a minimum portion of our money to their church to receive God's blessings, and they are beginning to tell us that we must stay with the church to be "affirmed" as a believer. This unbiblical nonsense is nothing less than spiritual abuse and is a much larger threat to the body of Christ than a particular president or his political party.

And here is a little anecdote for Jamieson and his boys to consider:

I look back at the discipline process exercised against me and my family after they found my identity as the author of the FBC Jax Watchdog blog in 2008. When they trespassed me and my wife for "church misconduct" in December 2008, we were forced to find a new church home. We immediately began visiting a new church and when FBC Jax heard that we sought to join that fellowship, the FBC Jax church discipline process cranked back up in February 2009. The pastor preached about "Kingdom Killjoys", and what churchmen are to do with complainers and criticizers is "shut 'em down". A week later the church administrator went to the deacons to tell them what a bad person I was for owning the blog, and he told the deacons I had been investigated by the state attorney (when actually it was their own discipline committee member who did the investigation!) for possible crimes.

A week later the deacons ratified and brought the infamous "deacon's resolution" to the congregation for a vote on a Wednesday night in February 2009. My wife and I watched at home as they streamed this resolution live on the Internet. I'll never forget my wife bursting into tears as she watched on the Internet the honorable A.C. Soud slowly reading that resolution like some sort of criminal indictment, and watching as our former friends stood and ratified it. They even proudly displayed their "Deacons Resolution 2009-1" on their church website using a corner hyperlink banner. Their resolution condemned my actions in particular, and condemned "unjust criticism" in general, and stated I left the church only after I was told they were taking my disciplinary case to the deacons. That was a flat-out lie uttered by the good judge A.C. Soud in his attempt to paint me as a coward. Soud and his band of holy men at FBC Jax conveniently left off the resolution that they had trespassed both me and my wife three months earlier, and THAT is why we left our church of 20 years.

But there is a strange irony in the actions of FBC Jax seeking to exercise their church discipline on a church member and his family who already left the church. It is amazing how God works. It was the church's pursuit of me through their disciplinary process in February 2009 - after we had already left FBC Jax - that led me to discover the subpoenas pulled by a Jacksonville Sheriff's Office detective who was himself an FBC Jax deacon and discipline committee member.

In their arrogant attempts to punish and humiliate me, they ended up disclosing the secret of what the JSO detective/discipline committee member had done to find my identity.

Soon after that the church was embarrassed on the front page of the newspaper for "teaming up" with the sheriff's office in outing a blogger and subpoenaing two other critical church blogs when it was discovered that the investigating officer was a church member and employee of the church. And to top it all off, when the pastor was interviewed by our paper's religion writer for the story, he made false, slanderous statements about my mental health that were published in the paper and he then ratified them in front of the congregation the following Sunday. He claimed that what he did he did out of duty to the "resurrected Jesus Christ" in protecting the flock.

So go ahead, pastors. Pursue critical church members before they leave, pursue them after they leave.

But whatever you do, don't use police detectives in your congregation to pull subpoenas to investigate your critics, and please pastors - don't issue slanderous statements about the mental health of the people you are "lovingly" trying to discipline.

Monday, February 13, 2012

"Tithing on Trial" - Excellent Series at "Church Tithing & Stewardship Report" Blog

"This [the tithing doctrine] is the big daddy. This is their sacred cow. This is the beating heart of their evil empire. The crown jewel. The Death Star. The one ring to bill them all. The pot of gold. Their matrix (into which they want to plug you). Their Wizard of Oz. Their magic spell. Their special power. Their secret recipe with the eleven herbs and spices. Their Golden Goose. The very air upon which they breathe!

Question this doctrine and watch these money hungry pastors bare their fangs. This is a teaching that they will bear no compromise on. Tithing, or at least their own version of tithing, is their one true love." Mark Vrankovich of Cultwatch
------------------------------------
Readers - I am going to be writing a few articles again on tithing to bring to your attention the continued false teaching, and outright spiritually abusive comments made by pastors in the pulpit to their congregation regarding personal finances. It ranges all the way from the emergent churches, into what were once the most theologically reliable SBC mega churches.

I want to start off by first directing your attention to a blog entitled "Church Tithing & Stewardship Report" and a new series there entitled "Tithing on Trial". So far the author has posted three articles in this series with more to come - the latest one addressing the misuse of Matthew 23:23 that many preachers use today, claiming this text proves Jesus affirmed tithing as applicable to Christians.

The author of this blog goes by the name "Jared", and his profile says he lives here in Jacksonville! I don't know his identity and have never communicated with him (at least I don't think I have!), but he has an excellent website on the subject of tithing. Jared is a born again Christian, a layman, and best of all, he is not ordained - making him particularly qualified to speak on this topic - and I'm only half joking when I say that.

It is absolutely amazing to see preachers like Mac Brunson and Steve Gaines continue to use the once great pulpits of FBC Jax and Bellevue Baptist to put forth false and harmful doctrines regarding people's finances. They claim to be teaching what their predecessors' taught, but that is not true. We might expect it from the Perry Nobles and Robert Morris' of the church world, but when those same doctrines creep into the influential SBC churches, it is a sad day indeed. But as Mark Vrankovich says in the quote at the top, this tithing doctrine is the pastors' "pot of gold". Apparently they don't trust their God enough to preach the truth of the Bible with regard to finances.

So look for some upcoming articles along with accompanying videos on tithing - including a shocking sermon delivered by Charles Stanley - and in the mean time go to Jared's site and reach his first three articles:


And also, you might find this article on Frances Chan's view on tithing very interesting as well.

Thanks, Jared, and keep up the good work.

Friday, February 10, 2012

Unbelievable! Gilyard's Church is Now Asking Court to Allow Minors in the Church When Gilyard Preaches!

This is totally unbelievable. I can't believe this is happening in our city of Jacksonville, Florida.

As Jeff Brumley reported this afternoon, the church that hired Darrell Gilyard, the man convicted of sex crimes against young girls, is seeking to have our court system allow minors in the church sanctuary when Gilyard preaches.

Thank God the judge has denied the request for now - but his final decision is based on a psychological evaluation that he has not yet received. So it is possible that Gilyard will once again get access to the minds and hearts of potential victims within the walls of the church just like he did over and over again at multiple churches in Florida and Texas.

Does the court realize how these sexual predator/preachers gain the trust of their victims and their parents? Gilyard's victims over the years were women and girls that he spiritually abused FIRST through his church contact with them from the pulpit, using his pastoral authority to ultimately abuse them sexually.

Spiritual abusers take the authority given to them as gospel ministers that is to be used to help people grow closer to God, and they pervert that authority into power used to lord over people, to coerce, manipulate, and swindle them in order to punish, or to convince them to do what the spiritual abuser wants them to do under the auspices of it being "God's will".

This is how sexual deviants like Gilyard operate in churches. Gilyard needs access to the hearts and minds of young women, wives, and little girls to gain their trust and establish his "spiritual authority" over them as the "man of God". Then, it is only a matter of time until Gilyard will misuse this authority, gain the trust of the most gullible, and then ultimately use his power to get women to do the sexual favors that he desires.

We see the same pattern all over modern Christianity. We see it in the Roman Catholic Church. We saw it over at Trinity Baptist Church where Bob Gray gained the trust of parents and little boys and girls so he could do his deeds.

The problem we usually have to deal with is finding the predators, and then getting the predators' church authority to take action. At Trinity, it was covered up and the abuse went on and on.

But in this case we KNOW Gilyard is a predator. We KNOW of his repeated sexual misconduct here in Jax and in Texas and Oklahoma.

And now Gilyard and his church wants the court to sanction a new beginning of abuse of boys and girls and women in our city.

Shame on Christ Tabernacle Baptist Church and Darrell Gilyard.

Judge Kevin Blazs, please do the right thing and refuse their motion to grant Gilyard access to the hearts and minds of minors. And judge, please don't just rely on the testimony of a psychological evaluation - rely on Gilyard's track record of decades of spiritual and sexual abuse in churches to guide you in your decision.

And thank you, Jeff Brumley and the Times Union, for staying on top of this story.

Evangelicals' Resistance to Mormon President Irrational, But Not Surprising - Just a Repeat of 1960 Criswell JFK Fear-Mongering

"....the fact that Mitt Romney is a Mormon doesn’t bother me. I think when we are voting for president we need to get the person who is absolutely the most qualified. ...You want somebody who understands Washington, who understands government, who understands how to bring people together so that we can move this country forward. Mitt Romney is a very capable fellow..." Franklin Graham 12/19/11

"Do we want a candidate who is a good, moral person? Or do we want a candidate who is a born again follower of Jesus Christ?" Robert Jeffress 10/7/11
--------------------------------------
I have no problem voting for a Mormon for president. None whatsoever. I'll take a Mormon Mitt Romney any day, over a Southern Baptist Bill Clinton, Al Gore, or Jimmy Carter.

I am shocked when evangelical Christians tell me they would never, ever, vote for a Mormon for president, no matter his qualifications, and that it would be un-Christian for me to vote for Mitt Romney.

But the good news is that the vast majority of evangelicals don't find Romney's faith to be a barrier in voting for him, as reported in the Christian Post last week. Romney will probably be the Republican nominee, and I predict there are enough fear-mongering Christians who will not vote for Romney that will ensure Barrack Obama's re-election this November.

No doubt there will be evangelical preachers who will raise the issue of Romney's Mormonism during this election just as FBC Dallas' Robert Jeffress did last fall during the primaries. When it happens, Baptists would do well to look at the past foolishness of Jeffress' predecessor at FBC Dallals, W.A. Criswell, who tried to lead the charge against JFK's 1960 candidacy using similar fear-mongering over JFK's Catholic faith.

As chronicled by Joe Early, Jr. in this article, Criswell preached a sermon on July 3, 1960 entitled "Religious Freedom, the Church, State, and Senator Kennedy". In this sermon, Criswell made three ridiculous assertions about Kennedy:

1. The Influence of the Roman Catholic Church on the U.S. Government: Criswell actually tried to get his peeps to believe that a JFK presidency would result in the RCC being favored by the federal government, while other faiths would merely be tolerated.

2. RCC Held Power Over Its Members in Political and Spiritual Matters: Criswell actually said that the RCC "has full power of true jurisdiction over all the faithful and hence has the duty and the right to guide, direct, and correct them on the plane of action and ideas..." This is particularly funny today, as in 2012 who tries to exert more influence on the thinking and behavior of their members - the RCC or the Southern Baptists?

3. Kennedy Would Allow the Pope to Intervene in State Affairs: Criswell made the argument that a JFK victory would open the door for another Catholic later to grant the RCC an ambassador, and possibly RCC schools to receive state support.

Kennedy did his best to overcome the Criswell fear-mongering in his speech to the Houston Ministerial Association on September 12, 1960 with Criswell in attendance. Said Kennedy:

"I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute - where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote...and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him."

This did nothing to convince the hard-headed Criswell, who when asked about the speech said that Kennedy "was either lying or a bad Catholic", and the declared that all 40 million American Catholics should be barred from running for president. Criswell also stated that his church members at FBC Dallas supported him in this belief.

So Baptists, let's cast our vote for president based on the man's track record in governance, his integrity, and his policies - but certainly not on his faith.

And when you hear one of the pious evangelical preacher men later this year warning you about the threat of a Mormon presidency - think "W.A. Criswell"....and just laugh and shake your head.