Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Deacon Board Member Denies Request

The Bellevue Deacon Board Member I’ve been corresponding with has denied my request (see below) for his permission to post his emails containing answers to my questions. His denial was based on the fact that he is extremely opposed to “what you’re [I’m] doing” and the “discord you [I] am sowing amongst the brethren.” He also conveyed to me another “warning” that I’m not involved in a game.


I will continue to post commentary with necessary quotes from our conversations, but refrain from posting his correspondence in whole, this because the leadership's ideas on church governance must be made public knowledge and I wish to respect his wishes as much as possible while continuing to provide needful information to the Bellevue family.

Again I would ask why these men do not want their ideas known on church governance? Why should we not know what these men who lead us think?

As a final note, this Deacon Board Member suggested that I take the time I’m spending to blog these things and instead go win souls for Jesus.

To this I responded saying,

From: Joshua H. Manning
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 7:31 AM
To: ******
Subject: RE: Permission

Dear Mr *****,

I understand your position and regret that I won’t be able contextualize your quotes. As to the winning people to Christ comment, you know that’s as hollow as saying, “Instead of reading your Bible you should go win the lost.” Like reading the Word, Scripture commands us both to exercise church discipline and win the lost. As Pastor used to say, when you take part of the truth and make it all of the truth it becomes an untruth. I’m not accusing you of lying in any way, just using a bad argument.

Sincerely,

Josh

My original request for permission to publish this Deacon Board Member’s answers to my questions:

From: Joshua H. Manning
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 11:33 PM
To: *******
Subject: Permission

Dear Mr ******,

I would like to ask your permission to post the other two email correspondences we had, dated 8/30 and 8/31. I am preparing statements concerning those correspondences and would like to post your emails with them to, again, prevent me from taking anything you said out of context.

Sincerely,

Josh

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not sure which topic this should be in, so I'll just pick the top thread.

I would like to get back to the problem this blog is all about. I fully agree, as others have alluded to, that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg regarding goings on at Bellevue. If there is actionable evidence about erroneous, unspiritual, mean, deceitful, or other “fill in your own adjective” events, or maybe even much worse, to support all, some, or many of the dreadful things we have heard, is there a plan to bring these concerns to a conclusion?

Regarding blogging, it is a “privilege” of the information age – it certainly facilitates our First Amendment rights. And there probably are some kooks who blog. But anyone who took Logic 101 knows that if some bloggers are kooks that doesn’t make all bloggers kooks. Josh, I think you know that the few incidents that have been revealed or suggested in this blog just scratch the surface of what is apparently going on. Let’s find a Godly solution and “save Bellevue” so it can be a spiritual oasis for the lost and saved alike. (By the way, we need a shepherd as a leader for that.) It may take “two to tango,” but it also takes two to make peace. But are there any indications that the other side wants peace? There seem to be suggestions in Rick Warren’s “strategy” that the one side would be happy if all the dissenters (kooks) just went away. I guess they would like that, and wind up with control of a $100-plus million dollar facility, debt free.

One comment about the “cowards” who are anonymous... I’m sure many of us would like to be dealing with this problem more publicly, but I’m not sure enough specifics are known yet. And many folks, who will probably ultimately reject anonymity, still have places of service which they might well sacrifice if they revealed their “affiliation” at this point. Let’s wait and see before we judge temporary anonymity.

One more thought about the blog. Judging from recent comments, we seem to be digressing a bit. Let’s try to remember why we’re even doing this, and move toward discussing a solution for BBC. To that end we need facts that illustrate the true nature of the problem, and reasoned, Biblical strategies for a solution, and then, presumably, appropriate action.

Custos said...

Dear Confused,

Tomorrow will be the day that a copy of the bylaws should be made available under Tennessee Code SS48-66-101, 102, and 103.

I'll update you all as soon as I know.

Best,
Josh

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.