Clip #1: This clip is of a local actor Andrew Cardy doing a monologue playing Jacob explaining his wrestling with God.
Clip #2: Ginger Soud introduces Rep. Adam Hasner - he gives an update on several Florida-Israel government and business initiatives.
From several camera angles you'll see how woefully small the attendance was. It looks like attendance was in the hundreds. Definitely not an event supported by the FBC Jax congregation in any significant manner.
For newcomers to this blog who don't know what these clips are about:
On November 8, 2007, First Baptist Church Jacksonville hosted an event called "A Time to Stand with Israel". This was billed as a night to honor and show support for the nation of Israel. This writer and other FBC Jax members were quite disappointed that this event was hosted at the church (see previous posts here, here, here and here). While the event in and of itself may be very worthwhile, this blog brought to light several problems with hosting it at FBC Jax. Firstly, it had no evangelistic component, secondly the funds raised were to go to a hospital in Israel at which abortions are performed (to be fair all Israeli hospitals conduct abortions as some abortions are funded by the Israeli government), and thirdly the pastor provided no leadership in explaining to the congregation why this was a worthwhile event for us to sponsor. (other than explaining Jesus was a Jew and we received our Bible from the Jews).
Something never explained to the congregation was that this service was broadcast on http://www.daystar.com/ and apparently DVD's of the entire event be purchased at the daystar website.
If more clips of the event become available on YouTube, I'll post them here at the blog.
13 comments:
You bloggers who are tearing our pastor to pieces: get a tape of the Wednesday sermon because its a message you need to hear about people like you who have judgemental and critical spirits. He preached a wonderful sermon that exposed your hypocrisy, your disobedience, your neglect of the grace of God. I continue to pray for you.
anon - I was taught to apply the sermon to my own life, not sit in judgment of others and think the sermon applied to someone else. Perhaps you are the one with a critical spirit? And are you suggesting God's man would deliver a whole sermon to address some harmless bloggers? Surely, everything the pastor does has trying to reach Jesus as its goal, he would never use a sermon or service to attack, criticize and slander some members who enjoy blogging would he?
judgmental \judgmental\ adj.
1. depending on judgment; as, a judgmental error.
[WordNet 1.5]
2. Inclined to make moral judgements about the behavior of
people; -- contrasted with an inclination not to judge the
moral qualities of others.
Anon 9:03 - I heard the sermon, and I'm not sure what you are talking about. I am not at all a judgemental or critical person so I didn't think he was necessarily preaching to me; but then all of us have some aspect of us in this area that can stand correction. But he is absolutely correct - a person who is constantly criticizing people, and passing judgement on people, a serial fault-finder and complainer... these people can do great harm. Are you saying that he preached that sermon to those who dare speak up about valid concerns in our church that he refuses to address? I really don't think he is doing that.
Another mention of church discipline if I recall correctly. I guess the discipline committee has replaced the "goon squad jumping over an itty bitty fence."
I can't wait to see how he screws up the use of that committee. Talk about being divisive in a church. The discipline committee ought to give you bloggers plenty to blog about once it starts being active.
Yes, Mac did mention church discipline...and he mentioned specifically Matthew 18:17 that a man who refuses to listen to two brothers should be brought before the church.
After he quoted Jesus that a man who refuses to listen to two brothers should be brought before the church, he had a long pregnant pause, tapped the pulpit a few times with one of those "there, what do you think of that." kind of looks. It was if he was implying that church discipline is coming, and some of us recalcitrants better get ready.
But isn't it interesting that he loves to talk about church discipline to his congregation (has mentioned it at least 4 times in the past month or so), but yet still, to this day, HAS NOT TOLD HIS CONGREGATION THAT HE CREATED A CHURCH DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE IN THE BYLAWS in the business meeting of November 28. I consider that a terrible oversight at best and at worse a lack of integrity...to get that put into the bylaws and not tell his own congregation beforehand or afterward. He has had ample opportunity to exlain this committee, who will be on it, how the members will be selected, how it will operate, and maybe most importantly why he felt the need to create it NOW, at THIS POINT IN TIME, when we've never had one before. Its awfully suspicious that he creates a discipline committee in our bylaws with no explanation, at the very time when he is facing stiff opposition to some of his initiatives.
Mac is following the play book "How to Transition an Established Church, Chuck McAlister" Read carefully part 5 about changing Structure, bylaws and business meetings. Read their play book. SAB
FBCJW - to sum up your dialogue with the texaspastor in the previous thread: His view is we SHOULDN'T be concerned about anything mac has done. But if we are, we should leave our church. Your view (and other anon bloggers) is that we don't know if we SHOULD be concerned or not, but the fact is, WE ARE VERY CONCERNED and can't understand why the response has not been a mature, reasoned response to the concerns raised with accompanying openness and transparency into all that he is leading us into. He seems to prefer to work through hand picked committees that he can control. Oh well. Let's see how it goes taking that approach.
Just my two cents... :)
Okay, I have a concern with the disciplinary committee that is to be formed. I read that in other denominations, if a member has an issue with someone in Church Leadership, you have to go to the disciplinary committee for resolution.
My situation a couple of years ago was that I discovered one of my son’s Awana leaders, not a Church employee, had been arrested for soliciting prostitution. Now when I brought it to the attention of the Church I was told that I could not tell anyone, not even the other parents that had children involved with this man. I was told that the Church would handle it and I was not to ever speak of it. It took several weeks before this man "resigned", I felt it was wrong to continue to let him be a Mentor to young impressionable boys while the Church conducted their investigation.
Does this mean that if we have more serious issues with Church Leadership that we will be effectively silenced about them and that whatever the Church decides will be that. Sounds like a great way to cover up misdoings in the Church – whether it’s from sexual misconduct to financial irresponsibility.
Concerned church member: are you relating events that occured at FBC Jax? Its not clear in your post if this occured here or at another church.
The problem with the discipline committee is we just don't know what its purpose or function is, because our pastor won't explain it to us. How sad.
It happened here, at FBC Jax. I know we can't jump to conclusions every time we hear gossip, but this was printed in the Justice Coalition's newspaper with this man's picture and all.
I think he should have been removed while they were investigating. I just worry that this new committee might have even more power to cover things like this up or push them under the rug and then tell the members that were effected, if you don't like our decision...leave.
I agree with concerned church member that the church should have asked this person to take a break from being involved in the AWANA program while they conducted an investigation. I would have been very upset to have been a parent that found out about that situation after the fact.
We can at least take comfort in knowing that now the church requires background checks on the workers so they know ahead of time if someone has "issues". But that doesn't really address the issue that happened to you.
All blog discussions have been moved up to the top post.
Post a Comment