Women preachers?

[vernecarty]

By the way, I am a little sad to hear some of the things they are saying about Billy Graham's comments on the recently released tapes of Nixon conversations. Particularly his apparent denial of things now proven to be the case.

I would suggest that you should not be so hasty to judge.  Politicians at that level are master manipulators.  Conversing with them is a lot like speaking with the devil himself.

It's possibile that moments after he had spoken, he had corrected his wording, thus accounting for his lapse of memory of the first form of his words.

Another possibility is that he was somehow tricked into using the wrong word in such a way that he himself thought that he was using one word, and a different word came out without his realizing it.  People who are masters of psychological manipulation know how to do such tricks.

I don't think I am. I would not have said a word had I not actually read the transcript. It is hard to explain away what was said. I don't know how many people were aware that they were being recorded.
When the books are finally opened, sex and money will undoubtedly be found to have been the achilles heel of many a man of God. Many mighty have been slain...
Verne

p.s it is a painful lesson for many of us to learn that just because a man loves Christ and serves Him does not mean He is without imperfection. I think there is a great difference between studied and unrepentant wickedness, and easily besetting sin, to which all of us are subject. I noticed that Graham has already apologised for the remarks he made.

[outdeep]

By the way, I am a little sad to hear some of the things they are saying about Billy Graham's comments on the recently released tapes of Nixon conversations. Particularly his apparent denial of things now proven to be the case.
The man has served long and well so I certainly do not begrudge him his salary but I think his critics have been given an opening on the matter of the minstry's lavish support of his kids.

I know this is off the topic, but just my two cents since I work for Graham's organization and their kids went to the same high school as my son:
I would say that the Grahams live very well off, comperable to any CEO of a large organization, but I'm not sure I would use the word lavish.   Good colleges are not a problem for his kids, one is at West Point, one has a decent job at BGEA, another went to seminary and is preaching at youth rallies (saw his picture in Decision magazine so I assume he is being groomed a bit for the spotlight) - so they will all get a nice step up, if you will.

Last October another programmer and I drove down to Charlotte in the SP company car - one that used to belong to Franklin.  It was very, very nice, well equipped, and probably burned more gas than if we drove our private cars.  In short, a very nice SUV.  On the other hand, it wasn't lavish - we are not talking limos or air-conditioned doghouses, or crystal churches, or huge gala parties that I am aware of.

On the other hand, the kids have to work.  Though they have special access to the President's office (read "Daddy") and tend to rise through the ranks quicker, they still pretty much have to do a job starting in the maintenance (read "mow the lawn" and "assemble office furnature") department.   While some of the Graham kids are very nice and likable and others are snobby, they are all well trained to be respectful and polite.  Wish I could say that about my kids.

[vernecarty]

By the way, I am a little sad to hear some of the things they are saying about Billy Graham's comments on the recently released tapes of Nixon conversations. Particularly his apparent denial of things now proven to be the case.
The man has served long and well so I certainly do not begrudge him his salary but I think his critics have been given an opening on the matter of the minstry's lavish support of his kids.

I know this is off the topic, but just my two cents since I work for Graham's organization and their kids went to the same high school as my son:
I would say that the Grahams live very well off, comperable to any CEO of a large organization, but I'm not sure I would use the word lavish.   Good colleges are not a problem for his kids, one is at West Point, one has a decent job at BGEA, another went to seminary and is preaching at youth rallies (saw his picture in Decision magazine so I assume he is being groomed a bit for the spotlight) - so they will all get a nice step up, if you will.

Last October another programmer and I drove down to Charlotte in the SP company car - one that used to belong to Franklin.  It was very, very nice, well equipped, and probably burned more gas than if we drove our private cars.  In short, a very nice SUV.  On the other hand, it wasn't lavish - we are not talking limos or air-conditioned doghouses, or crystal churches, or huge gala parties that I am aware of.

On the other hand, the kids have to work.  Though they have special access to the President's office (read "Daddy") and tend to rise through the ranks quicker, they still pretty much have to do a job starting in the maintenance (read "mow the lawn" and "assemble office furnature") department.   While some of the Graham kids are very nice and likable and others are snobby, they are all well trained to be respectful and polite.  Wish I could say that about my kids.

Thanks for the insight Dave. I do not think that what the Grahams do is in any way dishonorable. I was simply making the point that for those involved in any kind of ministerial work, whether we like it or not, the scrutiny is harsher, the expected standards are higher. I think James Dobson has been a stellar example of a man who understands the potential problem.  He does not take a penny from the FOTF organization. I know not everyone can do this, but I personally would not go into full time ministry unless I had the means to fully support myself without use of ministry funds. Just a personal opinion.
Having served as one-time treasurer of my church, I can tell you the pitfalls are many and subtle...
Verne
p.s Franklin receives around 600,000.00 from the organization yearly, an amount substantially greater than his father...

[al Hartman]

This, too, is a bit off the topic of the thread, but may fit in with the general trend of the conversation:

Do you think that a part of identifying the servants of Christ by their fruits is possible and/or advisable by our evaluating their verbal conversation?  For example, by how much of what they say is punctuated or emphasized by their use of the personal pronouns I, me, my?  

In light of such passages as ...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks Mt.12:34; see also Lk.6:45, and ...where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Mt.6:21; Lk.12:34, does the focus upon the self-view (one's emphasizedly personal perspectives, attitudes, history and actions) indicate an egocentricity, rather than Christ-centeredness?

The question is sincere, and not intended to compare Christian commentators (on or off this board) among one another.  Is our Lord pleased with our recitations to others about what "I" think and do; do these proclamations honor and exalt Him alone, and are such expressions among the fruits by which we may recognize his true disciples?

al

[outdeep]

Thanks for the insight Dave. I do not think that what the Grahams do is in any way dishonorable. I was simply making the point that for those involved in any kind of ministerial work, whether we like it or not, the scrutiny is harsher, the expected standards are higher. I think James Dobson has been a stellar example of a man who understands the potential problem.  He does not take a penny from the FOTF organization. I know not everyone can do this, but I personally would not go into full time ministry unless I had the means to fully support myself without use of ministry funds. Just a personal opinion.
Having served as one-time treasurer of my church, I can tell you the pitfalls are many and subtle...
Verne
p.s Franklin receives around 600,000.00 from the organization yearly, an amount substantially greater than his father...

Different ministries certainly have different philosophies.  We are not a "starve for Jesus" organization (Ariel comes to mind).  Though this wasn't true when I arrived, I make pretty comperable to what a computer programmer would make in the area in the secular world with vacation, 401K, medical, etc.  Other ministries such as Campus Crusade pay bare survival levels and then require each person to raise their own salary.  Again, my personal experience here is that they take care of their employees well, but not lavishly.

Since the information is propriatary (I don't even have full access to it and if I did I really would have to keep it to myself), I can't conform or deny the $600,000 claim.  What I have heard from a source (Carolina business review) is that his salary is much lower (more $100,000 range) so the amount could include business expense reimbursements, gifts, etc.  But, then its not like Franklin and I hang out together or even chat.

Again, from personal observation (which is very limited) of seeing them around the community and at work, I have seen a ministry that doesn't skimp and does things well but isn't necessarily overdone or lavish.

I'll tell you one thing I have learned from all this, Verne.  I certainly don't want to be in the "high profile Christian celebrity club"!

[vernecarty]

I'll tell you one thing I have learned from all this, Verne.  I certainly don't want to be in the "high profile Christian celebrity club"!

I hear ya man.
The thing I really like about CMA is the way they fully support their missionaries in the field.
These folk can devote their time fully to reaching the unsaved with the gospel message.
If there is a bit of bias in my viewpoint it may be because in this country we have been blessed with such abundance.
I think the rank and file of the church itself could do a better job of spreading the gospel message and I am especially conflicted about young people in the U.S. who use the better part of the funds they raise to pay living expenses while in full time ministry. I guess each situation is different.
Verne
I am a bit surprised that the salaries of officers of an organization that accepts contributions from the general public would be considered "prvileged" information. Transparency is important.
If they are members of ECFA (evangelical council for fiscal accountability), that info would be in the public domain.

[vernecarty]

One of the things that went on in the assemblies was the systematic undermining of authority of men to lead their families, despite the chauvinistic facade. This apparently was Betty's specialty.
You had one incredible situation of a brother having his  own wife as chief steward over the entire household.
You can take people out of the assemblies but it is not always possible to take the assembly out of people.
Two erstwhile sisters on this very BB a few months back grabbed me by by the throat and practically ordered me not discuss a matter at the church where I was an elder and chairman of the governing board. One sternly informed me that she had indeed talked to everyone involved!
Talk about cojoneros!
As Malcolm X says, if somebody grabs you by the throat, you should do your best to make sure they grab no one else...
Verne

[outdeep]

I'll tell you one thing I have learned from all this, Verne.  I certainly don't want to be in the "high profile Christian celebrity club"!

I hear ya man.
The thing I really like about CMA is the way they fully support their missionaries in the field.
These folk can devote their time fully to reaching the unsaved with the gospel message.
If there is a bit of bias in my viewpoint it may be because in this country we have been blessed with such abundance.
I think the rank and file of the church itself could do a better job of spreading the gospel message and I am especially conflicted about young people in the U.S. who use the better part of the funds they raise to pay living expenses while in full time ministry. I guess each situation is different.
Verne
I am a bit surprised that the salaries of officers of an organization that accepts contributions from the general public would be considered "prvileged" information. Transparency is important.
If they are members of ECFA (evangelical council for fiscal accountability), that info would be in the public domain.

Actually, you may be probably right on that as we are a ECFA member (Dr. Graham was a part of starting this).

We just got a new payroll system and I wrote some programs to help with electronic transfer, retirement, etc.  Only a couple of people are allowed access to use the system and I wasn't one of them.  It made for interesting times to try and develop and debug a program on a system that you can't use.

(OK, in fairness we have a test environment with bogus data, but there were times it would have been useful to use the real thing).

[Oscar]

This, too, is a bit off the topic of the thread, but may fit in with the general trend of the conversation:

Do you think that a part of identifying the servants of Christ by their fruits is possible and/or advisable by our evaluating their verbal conversation?  For example, by how much of what they say is punctuated or emphasized by their use of the personal pronouns I, me, my?  

In light of such passages as ...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks Mt.12:34; see also Lk.6:45, and ...where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Mt.6:21; Lk.12:34, does the focus upon the self-view (one's emphasizedly personal perspectives, attitudes, history and actions) indicate an egocentricity, rather than Christ-centeredness?

The question is sincere, and not intended to compare Christian commentators (on or off this board) among one another.  Is our Lord pleased with our recitations to others about what "I" think and do; do these proclamations honor and exalt Him alone, and are such expressions among the fruits by which we may recognize his true disciples?

al

Al,

I think it would behoove you to ask another question:  "Does the above post reveal an unhealthy tendency to subjectivism and/or legalistic thinking?"

Our own inner thought life is the only one we have direct access to.  If we don't state our own perspectives, we can't really say anything at all.  This is true for everyone.

Even when we speak of the Bible or someone else's writings, it still must pass through our own mental process, and so becomes, "what I think".

So it seems to me that it is the intent of the individual's heart that matters, not the frequency of personal pronouns.  God is the judge of our hearts.  

Tom

[vernecarty]

I'll tell you one thing I have learned from all this, Verne.  I certainly don't want to be in the "high profile Christian celebrity club"!

I hear ya man.
The thing I really like about CMA is the way they fully support their missionaries in the field.
These folk can devote their time fully to reaching the unsaved with the gospel message.
If there is a bit of bias in my viewpoint it may be because in this country we have been blessed with such abundance.
I think the rank and file of the church itself could do a better job of spreading the gospel message and I am especially conflicted about young people in the U.S. who use the better part of the funds they raise to pay living expenses while in full time ministry. I guess each situation is different.
Verne
I am a bit surprised that the salaries of officers of an organization that accepts contributions from the general public would be considered "prvileged" information. Transparency is important.
If they are members of ECFA (evangelical council for fiscal accountability), that info would be in the public domain.

Actually, you may be probably right on that as we are a ECFA member (Dr. Graham was a part of starting this).

We just got a new payroll system and I wrote some programs to help with electronic transfer, retirement, etc.  Only a couple of people are allowed access to use the system and I wasn't one of them.  It made for interesting times to try and develop and debug a program on a system that you can't use.

(OK, in fairness we have a test environment with bogus data, but there were times it would have been useful to use the real thing).

You cannot err with transparency; in this case even at the expense of confidentiality. At our church everything is put on paper for all eyes to see.
I am surprised that you as a programmer don't get to work with the real bananas...that is ususally a given  
Verne
p.s don't tell me that they don't trust you for that is unthinkable...

This, too, is a bit off the topic of the thread, but may fit in with the general trend of the conversation:

Do you think that a part of identifying the servants of Christ by their fruits is possible and/or advisable by our evaluating their verbal conversation?  For example, by how much of what they say is punctuated or emphasized by their use of the personal pronouns I, me, my?  

In light of such passages as ...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks Mt.12:34; see also Lk.6:45, and ...where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Mt.6:21; Lk.12:34, does the focus upon the self-view (one's emphasizedly personal perspectives, attitudes, history and actions) indicate an egocentricity, rather than Christ-centeredness?

The question is sincere, and not intended to compare Christian commentators (on or off this board) among one another.  Is our Lord pleased with our recitations to others about what "I" think and do; do these proclamations honor and exalt Him alone, and are such expressions among the fruits by which we may recognize his true disciples?

al

Al,

I think it would behoove you to ask another question:  "Does the above post reveal an unhealthy tendency to subjectivism and/or legalistic thinking?"

Our own inner thought life is the only one we have direct access to.  If we don't state our own perspectives, we can't really say anything at all.  This is true for everyone.

Even when we speak of the Bible or someone else's writings, it still must pass through our own mental process, and so becomes, "what I think".

So it seems to me that it is the intent of the individual's heart that matters, not the frequency of personal pronouns.  God is the judge of our hearts.  

Tom

Whew!! Mr Moderator I am sure glad you fielded that one.
I would have been likely to spout a Yogi Berra-ism like:

"Al if you don't feel comfortable expressing an opinion nobody is stopping you."

Your response was much more moderator-like...thanks!  
Verne

[outdeep]

You cannot err with transparency; in this case even at the expense of confidentiality. At our church everything is put on paper for all eyes to see.
I am surprised that you as a programmer don't get to work with the real bananas...that is ususally a given  
Verne
p.s don't tell me that they don't trust you for that is unthinkable...

The issue with the payroll system is that I would see EVERYBODY's information including salary, medical information, who pays child support, etc.  so due to legal privacy laws, these are kept to the few individuals who need to have the information.  I am pretty confident that we (Samaritan's Purse) play by the rules as we have double accountability for all our day's entry (bank deposit and data entry must match and are done by two different groups), closed incoming mail room with security cameras, and we are audited by both internal and external auditors at least annually.  

I didn't want to imply that information was kept secret.  Its just with payroll, there are folk's privacy issues mandated by law that we must honor as well.   Yes, it would have been easier if I had the real stuff and I've been in my share of "if you want us to work on your database, you are going to have to trust us" discussions, but I was able to get things done.   There was one person in our department who was designated as being able to log into the system so she did my testing for me.

Accountability and security is not necessarily "everyone sees everything", but making sure the right people see it and enough people see it so that you have an honorable process.  And making sure that the wrong people don't see it.  The guy who cuts the grass doesn't need to know how much I make.  Though, your point is well taken that the ministry officer's salary is probably public and may even be in our year-end statement.

Twenty years ago, I told Tom Maddux what I made and I don't think he ever forgave me.

[vernecarty]

You cannot err with transparency; in this case even at the expense of confidentiality. At our church everything is put on paper for all eyes to see.
I am surprised that you as a programmer don't get to work with the real bananas...that is ususally a given  
Verne
p.s don't tell me that they don't trust you for that is unthinkable...

Accountability and security is not necessarily "everyone sees everything", but making sure the right people see it

I agree. I should have qualified my comment to restrict it to the matter of how the Church itself spends the treasury, and not how its employees spend their wages. Obviously that is no one else's business.

Twenty years ago, I told Tom Maddux what I made and I don't think he ever forgave me.

'Dem are fighting words buddy!  
Verne

[vernecarty]

Verne,

David, quite frankly, far exceeded the evils of George Geftakys!

How do you reconcile these two sides of David's life?  He displayed both a passion for God and passions that led him into heinous crimes against God an man.

Hmmmmmmm.  

Thomas Maddux

You've got me to gnawing at this question and I am still not completely satisfied with the answers I have considered. I wondered what you thought the answer was?
Obviously those of us who are saved know that we too love the Lord Jesus Christ and want to serve Him faithfully, but that does not always prevent us from committing serious transgressions.
Romans 7 partly explains it, but not fully.
Like Brent, I am fairly confident that I would never be unfaithful to my wife...I am not so sure about ghosting somebody though....

JUST KIDDING FOLKS... JUST KIDDING!  

(as some of you no doubt are aware, I have been referred to as the "murdering Calvinist"...  )

But seriously, I think people despise George Geftakys not so much for his many weaknesses as for his stunning hypocrisy. David’s reaction to the story Nathan told is quite revealing. He was immediately righteously indignant and no doubt was quite sincere:
Some poor schmuck was going to die for doing what Nathan described and David was going to see to it.
(was David a "murdering Calvinist?  )
Sin blinds us to our own condition, even when it is presented to our very faces.
Remember the malevolence with which George greeted the news that his grand-daughter was with child out of wed-lock?. You would think from his reaction that the man had been personally sodomized by  prison thugs. He trumpeted near and far that this child would never be his grandchild. This from a man who had apparently had multiple affairs, and had polluted the innocence of young women who trusted him as their spiritual leader, to say nothing of  loving to have the wives of leading brothers rub his stinky feet.

Why were they touching this cretin??!!
That alone should have been a red flag to any dumbkopf
The man is an unholy monstrosity.
This kind of vicious, prideful and vindictive wickedness was apparently shared by his darling wife, who took it upon herself to try and drive a wedge between a couple, who are friends of mine, who decided to provide shelter for their daughter who had made some bad decisions. In the exact moment when this child was most desperately in need of the display of the divine love instilled in parents for children, even way-ward ones, her royal highness Betty Geftakys would have had these parents throw this young girl out on the streets, and in so doing countermanding the wishes of her husband. These were your mentors folk. Anybody still pining for days gone by?!
Verne

p.s. my sneaking suspicion is that the life of David is intended to teach us that, passion for God notwithstanding, look what a man after God's own heart is capable of...should be a warning to us to be careful yes?
Was Solomon any worse? His legacy of course is that he was half-hearted...

Lesson? : Just because you have a heart for God does not mean that you will never screw-up and do so royally!

Application?: Repent!....and do so quickly!!  

Result? All will be recovered...      

[al Hartman]

This, too, is a bit off the topic of the thread, but may fit in with the general trend of the conversation:

Do you think that a part of identifying the servants of Christ by their fruits is possible and/or advisable by our evaluating their verbal conversation?  For example, by how much of what they say is punctuated or emphasized by their use of the personal pronouns I, me, my?  

In light of such passages as ...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks Mt.12:34; see also Lk.6:45, and ...where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Mt.6:21; Lk.12:34, does the focus upon the self-view (one's emphasizedly personal perspectives, attitudes, history and actions) indicate an egocentricity, rather than Christ-centeredness?

The question is sincere, and not intended to compare Christian commentators (on or off this board) among one another.  Is our Lord pleased with our recitations to others about what "I" think and do; do these proclamations honor and exalt Him alone, and are such expressions among the fruits by which we may recognize his true disciples?

al

Al,

I think it would behoove you to ask another question:  "Does the above post reveal an unhealthy tendency to subjectivism and/or legalistic thinking?"

Our own inner thought life is the only one we have direct access to.  If we don't state our own perspectives, we can't really say anything at all.  This is true for everyone.

Even when we speak of the Bible or someone else's writings, it still must pass through our own mental process, and so becomes, "what I think".

So it seems to me that it is the intent of the individual's heart that matters, not the frequency of personal pronouns.  God is the judge of our hearts.  

Tom

Whew!! Mr Moderator I am sure glad you fielded that one.
I would have been likely to spout a Yogi Berra-ism like:

"Al if you don't feel comfortable expressing an opinion nobody is stopping you."

Your response was much more moderator-like...thanks!  
Verne

Tom, Verne, and All,

As usual, I have failed to express my question in a manner that could not be misinterpreted and misunderstood...  It's almost enough to make me question my own infallibility!

To clear the air, let me confess that I have always had an unhealthy leaning toward subjectivity and legalism (such as are common to man), and I try to stay aware of those tendencies in all I do and say.  For that reason I am grateful for such responses as Tom's and Yogi's, er, Verne's -- Part of the workings of the body of Christ is that we help one another to be honest and humble.

Nevertheless, my question stands unaddressed.  

This BB has often hosted the statement "by their fruits you shall know them," with accompanying expansions of opinion.  Most of us probably recognize by now that adultery, fornication, thievery, deceitfulness, murder, blasphemy, etc. are recognizable fruits on the negative side of the scale.  On the other hand, Paul tells us in 1Cor.13:1-3 that a brother or sister may manifest every sort of good quality in action and yet be without love...

So, once again:  In seeking to know one by one's fruits, how are we to account for those forms of verbal conversation that appear to "talk down" toward us, that seem to emphasize the vastness of the speaker's knowledge while implying the listener's ignorance, that give the impression of exalting the speaker's holiness/righteousness by recitations that suggest they exceed those of the listener?

Of course we can always choose the low road, chastening ourselves for our "unkind" attitude toward the speaker, and assuring ourselves that the problem must lie within me.  That was how George taught us to deal with any doubts we might have about what he or his henchmen said.  They were, after all, the Lord's chosen servants and any conflict we might have with them or their manners indicated that it was our hearts (never theirs!) that were wrong.

So, assuming for the moment that my heart is not right, and that I am steeped in subjectivity and legalism, someone please tell how the rest of you consider a person's speaking manner in determining the nature of their fruits.  (After which, I will appreciate your prayer and counsel in getting my own heart right... )

Thanks & God bless,
al


P.S.-- In case anyone is wondering whether I am personally applying this question to posters on this board:  There is no situation anywhere that I can think of in which the question does not apply...

[M2]

...
So, once again:  In seeking to know one by one's fruits, how are we to account for those forms of verbal conversation that appear to "talk down" toward us, that seem to emphasize the vastness of the speaker's knowledge while implying the listener's ignorance, that give the impression of exalting the speaker's holiness/righteousness by recitations that suggest they exceed those of the listener?
...
P.S.-- In case anyone is wondering whether I am personally applying this question to posters on this board:  There is no situation anywhere that I can think of in which the question does not apply...

Are you saying that you don't like tone of some posters on this BB?

IMHO:

1.  Inquire and address the poster directly in response to the offensive post.
2.  It is difficult to really pinpoint the tone on a BB.
3.  Sift through the tone and discover what the person is saying and respond to what the person is saying.
4.  Even if someone has an offensive tone, this BB may be the opportunity for that person's growth in knowledge and attitude.
5.  Even if someone has an offensive tone, it may be just what I need to jog me out of my fog of deception.
5.  Even if someone has an offensive tone, I put up with a lot worse under the "guidance" and "testing" of the Geftakys-system, so...
6.  Read Matt 23.  If I had met the Lord Jesus only on that particular day, I probably would have said that He was not very Christ-like eh??  Here He was gossipping about the leaders, and calling them names like white-washed tombs and vipers and...  And then another day He takes out a rope and turns over the merchants' table.  2000 years later however, I see instead the fruit of His ministry.

God bless,
Marcia