Thanks for the additional explanation. I can see there were several places I misconstrued your meaning and intent. I apologize for that. As I considered it, I realized my misinterpretation of your user name as a pseudonym had a lot to do with my perception. That created an association in my mind with Usenet/mailing list trolls or as slashdot calls them, anonymous cowards. And I see that once I made that association, I tended toward a negative rather than a gracious spin in my interpretation of your tone.

Of course, I’m the last person who has to be convinced there are multiple sides to every story. I’m always aware our understanding is filtered through our perception. Communication is tough stuff. There’s what I intend to communicate. That is translated into the words I actually use. The reader or listener then filters those through their perception and presuppositions and arrives at their understanding. Sometimes the parties end with similar understandings. Other times, it is wildly different. Everything we believe we understand is inevitably colored and shaped by our culture, experience, and situation. Everything.

With that said, though I misunderstood the tenor of some of your comments, I see nothing that changes my basic understanding of the circumstances. Nor do I see any reason to alter much in the way I expressed them other than to clarify I was describing the manner in which the attitudes and actions are perceived. I have no information on intent or motive.

I don’t know Randy. I do know Tom and that certainly influences the way I view the situation. However, I’ve also carefully read not just the general media reports, but those published by the Baptist media as well as anonymous comments on the Harbour blog that appear to be from one or more people on the SBTC side who were at the meeting. And weighing all of that, my impression stays the same.

I need to repeat what I said. I’m not trying to ascribe evil intent to anyone. I would need a lot more evidence specifically about intent before I did that, even to myself. I fully believe that those who feel only a single, narrowly-defined approach to ministry to this community is acceptable hold no malice. (I’m actually not all that fond of the term ministry or at least the way it’s generally used today. It’s a way of making a group the other most of the time. And that seems to almost always lead to negative or at least other than best actions.) And I’m sure they don’t see how arrogant, condescending, and unloving it can often appear. Is it sometimes the appropriate approach? Almost certainly! Always? Almost certainly not.

And other things bother me. The fact that the reports from the SBTC side of the issue keep shifting in their details while the reports of Randy and at least one other from the Harbour who was in the room remain reasonably consistent concerns me.

Many of my friends also are not Baptist. Perhaps that helps me retain a sense of what these things look like. In some ways, I believe we have become far too insular and disconnected from the culture in which we are embedded. In other ways (e.g. consumerism) I believe that culture has subverted us.

But again, many thanks for clarifying your comments and intent. It was much appreciated.

1.: “So I guess the only acceptable way to reach out to this group is to whack them across the face with the Bible, tell them how wrong they are, and by the way, Jesus loves you?”
This is just not my experience with the SBTC. I have been in many SBTC churches and conventions and have met people from every walk of life. Never have they had that sort of reaction.

2.“Randy has the heart for ministry that these men have lost to their ensconced politcal legalism. These men have elevated one sin above another and therefore have placed themselves above God in judging.”
Do you know the motivations of these men? Have you included the SJBA, the South Texas Baptist Association, The sponsoring church all of which have or are in the process of removing fellowship with Faith Harbour? I do not believe this to be political stance.

FYI: “The Executive Committee rallied at the Golden Corral, along with a couple of SBTC staffers to ‘prepare’ for the confrontation.” It was not the Executive Committee that met at Golden Corral, it was the pettitionary and redentials committee. Also, when men from all over the state come in, should they not meet somewhere so that they will arrive at the same time. Maybe they just needed to get directions to the church. Why must there be a hidden agenda why not give people the benefit of the doubt, until proven otherwise.

3.”We argued most of the night over the fact that I was not starting a new church. They quoted from my blog site some things that Wendy had written, but none of these comments stated that we were starting a new church.” quoted by Randy.
I think the disagreement was in regards to although Randy and Wendy claim this not to be a church it meets and functions as a church even by the definition of its name. It uses the same word that Christ uses in “And on this rock I will build my eclesia or church” Although Eklektos is not a church by their admission, it is a MINISTRY that appears to endorse homosexual behavior.

4. “From where I sit, the SBTC never acted on the matter…they only reacted. They reacted to the fact that one of their own would reach out to the gay community with the hopes of ‘going and making disciples’.”
This is just not the case I know of several churches within the SBTC that have successful ministries to the gay community. One of which was brought up at the meeting for clarification purposes.

5.“At the end of the day, what does this really mean other than the SBTC won’t accept his church’s money anymore?”
Faith Harbour has received money from the SBTC. In the beginning $1800 a month and later $900 a month. You can see this by Randy’s admission on his website on the blog 2 sides to every story. I asked Randy about this specifically. That is what happens to mission churches, which is why even after they were constituted as a church they became a mission of another Baptist Church.

6. “And does the insistence of the SBTC that any Christian ministry to that community define itself as a rescue ministry strike anyone else as simultaneously clueless, insulting, condescending, and demeaning? Where are our rescue ministries for obscenely obese preachers? How about our rescue ministries for the proud leaders within our system? Or maybe the rescue ministry for all of us in America consumed with love of stuff rather than Jesus? (I seem to recall him having a thing or two to say about that.)

I am the one who made the remark rescue ministry because I could not think of a better word and was not at all trying to be insensitive. I hope my church is a rescue mission. I want to be rescued from my sin. I see Jesus as my anchor, my hope, my salvation, my life-preservor (ms) My apology to any I offended I do not think it was interpreted the way I meant it. We do have rescue ministries for obese people that is what ministries like First Place and other weight lose programs are. We also have groups that meet to help alcoholics, sex addicts, etc…

“The problem is that this ministry does not look to reconcile the sinner to Christ and then disciple the new believer to change to become like Christ.”
Where did you get this little gem of information? Do not ALL ministries look to reconcile the sinner to Christ and then look to Him for transformation? Do you go on mission trips with your church and require sinners to give up Bud Light and late-night HBO movies before they can pray the prayer? Would we ask Marty or Scott M to reconcile with former spouses before they can have their names written in the Lamb’s Book of Life?”

When I said reconciled to Christ, I am talking about Accepting Jesus to be my Savior and Lord in that order. No one needs to do anything to come to Jesus except confess and accept. Confess sin and Accept Jesus sacrifice!!! However, we must not leave off the next step in discipleship. We must choose to go out to the world and not continue to live in our sin. This is what Paul is telling the CHRISTIAN in Romans “Should we continue in sin that grace may abound. God forbid!”

“Do not ALL ministries look to reconcile the sinner to Christ and then look to Him for transformation?”

However, if a ministry does not believe a lifestyle choice to be a sin why would they seek to find transformation. This is the problem with this ministry. If it does not see a behavior as a sin it will not lead the sinner to find that transformation.

Next, I have lost count…
“Instead, what the SBTC really appears to require is that its member churches publicly denounce homosexuals as sinners and only reach out and accept (or — God forbid! — love) them with the precondition that they change immediately, making absolutely certain they know that they are sinners and their behavior is unacceptable. Further, don’t support, work alongisde, or even associate with people who might not believe exactly the same thing.” The SBTC asked Randy to define this ministry differently or have nothing to do with it. He chose not to. It had nothing to do with when a person denounces their sin. Let’s say a heterosexual couple living together want to move their membership to your church. Do you allow them to move their membership no question asked, or do you counsel them to quit living in sin and get married prior to moving their membership. Now if you notice I am talking about people who profess to be Christians. Different set of circumstances. A unmarried person who is living with another person comes forward and asked to accept Jesus Christ as savior. You don’t wait for them to move out or get married you lead them to Christ immediately. As christians we do have different standards for other Christians than for non Christians. We are to expect more from the Christian.

When I said this was the first time this has been done I mean to a whole church but I may be wrong that was just how it was reported.

I am sorry you have misunderstood the opinions I have expressed. I just want you guys to understand that your blogs can hurt or offend people from the outside who read things about people they respect. Just like you didn’t like to read things about Randy.

You seem fond of quoting, “Go and sin no more.” from John 8.

You *do* realize that Jesus’ words immediately prior to that are “Neither do I condemn you.”…right?

Sorry, the morning Starbucks hadn’t quite reached my fingertips at the time.

Hmmmm. I do draw my Christian brother and sister circle pretty wide and do so wholeheartedly with the humble confession that any of them could be more right than I am. And I also don’t have the need or drive to have the certainty that others seem to desire that their beliefs are right. I’m OK with having aspects of God be a mystery or more than I can stuff in my limited brain.

However, within the bounds of my concern that the rampant sectarian splintering of the Church since the Reformation appears to be in direct conflict with the words of both Jesus and Paul, I don’t really have too much of a problem with any particular group defining what they consider their boundaries.

However, in Randy’s case it appears that either the rules have shifted in midstream or that while the words say one thing, the intent is different. And that feels somewhat dishonest to me. Both he and his church conform to the catechism of the SBTC. From everything I can tell, they have repeatedly affirmed that they confess that homosexuality is a sin, just like a gazillion other areas of our lives. However, from the information I’ve seen provided by various anonymous posters on the several involved blogs and (I think) confirmed by Randy, that is insufficient. Instead, what the SBTC really appears to require is that its member churches publicly denounce homosexuals as sinners and only reach out and accept (or — God forbid! — love) them with the precondition that they change immediately, making absolutely certain they know that they are sinners and their behavior is unacceptable. Further, don’t support, work alongisde, or even associate with people who might not believe exactly the same thing.

(I still have a hard time swallowing the sheer conceit in the statement that the only acceptable ministry is a rescue ministry. The implication is that we can change or rescue these “poor lost souls.” And that’s utter nonsense. Only God can truly change people. And I’ve not found that he comes to me for advice on the means or the timing.)

And yes, Marty. They appear completely unaware that those massive planks in their own eyes rob them of all credibility. As a teen parent who was twice divorced by the time I was 22 and who is currently approaching my sixteenth anniversary with my lovely wife, I’ve asked the very same pointed question you ask. The statistics I’ve seen indicate that the divorce rate is slightly higher among evangelical Christians in the US than that of the general population.

Of course, I’m familiar with and unsurprised by that particular attitude. It’s essentially the same one I experienced as a teen. I endured months of increasing isolation and condemnation of my failure and sin in the SBC church I thought had embraced me less than two years before. (I was naive enough at the time to take all those things Jesus said about family and love seriously. And no, it wasn’t everyone in that church, but certainly the preponderance.) The final straw came one morning when I was told from the pulpit to remove my sleeping infant daughter from the sanctuary because she was disturbing the sensibilities of the good people present in the congregation. And I’ve encountered far too many similar (and sometimes worse) stories among other people seriously hurt by “christians”.

I often chalk it up to God’s sense of humor (and I do think some of that was involved) that he brought me the rest of the way back to Christianity through a different SBC church and that he keeps me here. But I can also now recognize that it was through his intimate knowledge of my pain and hurt that he knew it was a necessary part of those final steps.

Apparently one of the anonymous posters from Randy’s blog also found this one. He seems to have boiled Jesus’ whole message to us down to the tag line, “Go and sin no more!” And in so doing, has completely missed the point. I’m not sure how anyone can read the gospels and leave with any other understanding than the one Paul captured so beautifully. “In Christ there is now no condemnation.” How people can turn Jesus into the finger-wagging, scolding image they appear to hold is a mystery I’ve never been able to fathom. Jesus says that when he does judge, his judgement will be true, but right now he’s not judging anyone. He’s on a tremendous search and rescue (and redemption!) mission. And of course he works to free us from our lives of sin! Sin is destroying us and everything around us. But his message is not to go fix ourselves (the phrase “whitewashed tombs” springs to mind for some reason). Instead, he tells us to come to him. He will reveal to us what needs to be changed (because we don’t even know that much until the Spirit reveals it) and give us the power we lack to change it. At the right time and in the proper order, which again is something only God knows.

The sad thing is that so many people are so utterly blind to their own hypocrisy. It doesn’t anger me. It breaks my heart. They don’t see how they demonize some sins and crush those who display them while ignoring and even embracing other areas of sin. They have eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear.

And worst of all, they have lost their scent of love. How is it again that others will know we are followers of Jesus?

Here are some thoughts:
“How can you guys say that you are Christians when you are bashing each other and other Christian groups?”

That’s like asking ‘how can you say you are a christian when you are gay?’….’or how can you be a Christian and be so fat?’…it’s really a mmot questions, huh?

” However,this sort of thing has never been done by the SBTC. This is a first! ”
Actually, it’s at least the third time. The first time I know of was regarding a man I worked with in 2003. (I’m witholding his name because I’m not sure he’d want it dragged up here and haven’t talked with him about it. I realize that may cause you to disbelieve the credulity of my claim…but, oh well. You’ll have to trust me on this one.) The issue was not homosexuality, but it was most definitely a case of the public story varying quite differently than the actual sequence of events in the (old) office on Walnut Hill in Las Colinas.

“The problem is that this ministry does not look to reconcile the sinner to Christ and then disciple the new believer to change to become like Christ.”
Where did you get this little gem of information? Do not ALL ministries look to reconcile the sinner to Christ and then look to Him for transformation? Do you go on mission trips with your church and require sinners to give up Bud Light and late-night HBO movies before they can pray the prayer? Would we ask Marty or Scott M to reconcile with former spouses before they can have their names written in the Lamb’s Book of Life?
Seriously… The Holy Spirit ALWAYS does the transformation. Even when it’s NOT on our timetable. That’s His job and He’s much better at it than you or I or the political winds of conservative evangelicalism.

“1)Publically move to define this ministry as a rescue ministry. Paul talks about this in 1 Corinthians 6 when he list a long group of sins and then says “such were some of you but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” ”
I guess I missed something somewhere. If you get a chance, could you email me a copy of Paul’s bylaws, defining his ministry as a ‘rescue ministry’? I think it’s assumed that evangelism is a ‘search and rescue’ mission. I can’t imagine an opportunity when Randy *wouldn’t* have shared his conviction about homosexuality while involved in this ministry.

“2)Choose not to support, endorse and affirm this homosexual ministry. It does not need to be his ministry for him to support it…”
Sure. Again, the language used is simply a hot button in our current political climate. See my previous posts…

“The SBTC has shown Faith Harbor a lot of support and financial contribution over the last few years to be blasted so harshly by the very people they have helped start a ministry.”
I understand where you’re trying to go with this, but if you do your research you’ll see that Faith Harbour was started prior to his affiliation with SBTC.

Also, you make some claims in your last paragraph about people being misquoted,etc. If you’ve got better information, please share it. I’d sincerely like to know if I’ve misrepresented someone unknowingly.

Also, please log in and identify yourself here. The rest of us have put all our cards on the table with our identities. Please have the courtesy to do the same. It’s pretty easy to make anonymous comments without accountability of what your real identity is…it’s one of the blessings/curses of our digital age. Let’s have some juevos. It makes it more difficult to sling arrows that way…I, too, STILL have friends at the SBTC.

(BTW, I am the one who is a former (and not disgruntled) employee, not shaeman. And, yes, I *do* have an agenda: for the saving gospel of Christ to be taken to the world. Including the homosexual that so many seem to be trying to steer clear of. Yeah, I believe it is sin. NO question. I also believe that the Holy Spirit will address *every* sin issue in our lives according to His timetable, not ours. His first priority may not be my first priority. Or yours.

Again, if I am wrong, please show me.

No. This wasn’t even close.

Admittedly I probably draw my circle wider than most. I actually try to include all the groups that most people at least grudgingly admit are Christian. And, of course, it has to be wide enough to include me.

But I tend to stick close to the core elements captured in the central creeds of our faith as essential. Jesus is fully divine and not created or occurring after the Father. Jesus became fully human. Jesus died, was buried, and was resurrected on the third day. Through our faith in him, we are adopted as children of the Father and receive the Holy Spirit, God with us and in us.

Following our belief, as demonstrated in the blossoming of a desire to do the things Jesus tells us to do, we come to understand truth, and are set free from the bondage of sin.

Of course, any confession can be twisted and distorted, but taken straightforwardly, I’m not sure I insist on a whole lot more. If a gay person is not worthy of inclusion in the Church as is with affirmation as a child of God without precondition or condemnation, then I don’t think I’m worthy. I know myself that well, at least. Their areas of sin are certainly no worse than mine.

And does the insistence of the SBTC that any Christian ministry to that community define itself as a rescue ministry strike anyone else as simultaneously clueless, insulting, condescending, and demeaning? Where are our rescue ministries for obscenely obese preachers? How about our rescue ministries for the proud leaders within our system? Or maybe the rescue ministry for all of us in America consumed with love of stuff rather than Jesus? (I seem to recall him having a thing or two to say about that.)

On the positive side, this freakshow may actually help Wendy’s ministry. There’s nothing like self-righteous condemnation to pique the interest of those who are also condemned. But then, I’m a big believer in a God who specializes in transforming evil into good.

Yes. The list does go on and on and on. I should know. As his brother, if you’d like the lowdown on a loooong list of them, I’ll be happy to email them to you.

Just kidding.

Yeah. I’m pissed. This is all so incredibly juvenile, in my opinion….and Tom…your comments about partnering with fat people were exactly where I was about to go.

So, in a world like this with so many factions and differences on belief within the Church catholic (“universal” for those I just scared to death), do where do we draw the line between what is essential? I think I know, but this certainly wouldn’t have been it.

What change would put him in accordance to the SBTC constitution? He needs to

1)Publically move to define this ministry as a rescue ministry. Paul talks about this in 1 Corinthians 6 when he list a long group of sins and then says “such were some of you but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” Teaching people to turn from their “wicked ways” is the message of Christ. AS Christ often told the sinner, the taxcollectors, the fornicator “Go and sin no more” Basically, do not live in your sin anymore.

2)Choose not to support, endorse and affirm this homosexual ministry. It does not need to be his ministry for him to support it, which according to his own blog he does. This is in accordance to the SBTC’s Constitution.

If Randy no longer wants to be a part of the SBTC what is the big deal, don’t be. However, he nor anyone else should be blasting them for their stance on the issue. It is their right to believe what they will and set the guidelines for their convention. The SBTC has shown Faith Harbor a lot of support and financial contribution over the last few years to be blasted so harshly by the very people they have helped start a ministry. This sort of criticism and chaos goes against everything in scripture. Men are men and they will never do everything to the best of God’s ability. Be careful what you write and say of others. Knowing a person does not make everything they say true, nor does it make the other person the vilian. I know several people quoted in the Baytown Sun and they are highly upset that they were misquoted. As a matter of fact I believe Randy was given credit for a statement that was actually said by the pastor of Baker Road Baptist Church about how we should love homosexuals and reach out to them. We just cannot affirm their lifestyle. This should be the standard by which we reach out to all sinners. Love the sinner which we all are, but do not love the sin. We cannot expect the world to come to Christ, if we cannot demonstrate his love to each other.