As someone who's not a member of CRPC (though I am a South Floridian and a Presbyterian) let me say that I'm praying for your pastor, elders and membership. I was inspired by the news of the merger, but I thought at the time that this wasn't going to be easy. It would have been truly unusual if something like what is happening now did not happen. The world is watching too. May the peace of Christ reign in your midst tomorrow night.  

Matt, I'm not a member of CRPC, but have been closely associated with it for nearly 30 years. I consider CR my spiritual home. I warned Tullian back when he was considering this move that CR would be extremely opposed to changes of any kind, and, initially, to move at a snails pace regarding any change. After all, look at Kennedy. Though I loved him, I thought he was sort of living in a time warp - the order of worship hadn't changed in 48 years, KJV, etc... Coral Ridge needed to update itself for the world to take her seriously! I knew Tullian would be strong willed - look at his rebellious past. I think the least he could have done was take things SLOWLY as I suggested. He obviously didn't and he's in hot water because of it. He brought this on himself. I'm pulling for him...but I think he needs to apologize for turning things upside down so quickly - and put a stop to anymore changes for the immediate future. Also, re: EE - who says that's the only method of evangelism? There are good points on both sides. I'm sort of leaning toward Jennifer's ...but I am pulling for Tullian - if he'll finally now take my original advice!

So you're only pulling for Pastor Tullian if he does things your way?  What about him wanting to change things to reach a lost and dying community - with whom the church remains disconnected from. 

OK, let me explain:

I said EE should not be the ONLY method of evangelism at CR or anywhere. Some think that because CR is its birthplace, it should be the sole method. Baloney. Tullian has the right to bring people to Christ however he sees fit - and however he feels will work with this generation.

He was within his rights to replace the hymnals (Coral Ridge needed a legitimate Presbyterian hymnal anyway).

He was within his rights to replace the pew bibles with a newer translation (that needed to be done as well) 

He was within his rights to modify the order of worship (after 50 years of the same thing - it was sort of refreshing.)

He was within his rights to make personnel changes.

He was within his rights to preach for an hour if he wanted to.

Plus several other changes....he did have the right....

BUT HE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WITHIN 2 MONTHS OF TAKING OVER!!!

All of those items should have been undertaken gradually - over a much longer period of time - so people had a chance to catch their breaths. Especially at a church like CR whose founder never changed anything...ever! 

That is the major problem as I see it.      

No he didnt have to do everything right away.  But maybe he saw a dying church and a dying world and thought change was imperative.  Sometimes it takes an outsider to see things for what they really are.  A fresh perspective, if you will. 

Well, I'm sure you're right about that - but he still should've used some restraint , self discipline and a little common sense. BTW - aren't you at the meeting? Wish I could be there.      

 "But maybe he saw a dying church and a dying world and thought change was imperative.  Sometimes it takes an outsider to see things for what they really are. "  -  M

You took the words right out of my mouth; I agree 100%.  

I also agree 100% with Tim's assessment of the status quo that has existed at CRPC since its founding 50 years ago.  Nothing in the church ever did change and, if you think about that for a minute, it's remarkable that somebody didn't try to change things before now.  I suspect that most/all of the 8,000 or so members that were lost over  the years simply got tired of the "time warp" that Tim describes and are now attending other churches in South Florida.  I know for a fact that is the case for me and my family.

Back in the day, Coral Ridge was one of the first nationally recognized mega-churches and it was considered the hub of a great deal of the evangelical community.  Today, I'm not even certain that it is considered by most people to be even relevant in South Florida.  The loss of approximately 80% of its membership is a testimony to that.  

I suspect M is spot on in her observation of what Pastor Tullian saw when he took over the reigns; a dying church and a dying world.  

The members are now going to choose, yet again, the future of their church.  Will they vote for the same old status quo that served CRPC so poorly in recent years or will they have the courage to allow the love of Christ to truly be shared to a dying world in ways that will impact our society.  

Obviously, the futures of both the church and the surrounding society are at stake.

Wow, I had no idea that CR was dying.  Always looks pretty full to me as an outsider.  Generation X is so spiritual, they really should reinvent the church to make it relevant.  How has the gospel survived for two centuries without our improvements???

People need to step back and take a deep breath.

I appreciate your wisdom and discernment Tim.  You have LOTS.  The change generation seems to think that mature Christians are the enemy instead of our real enemy.

 
"Wow, I had no idea that CR was dying.  Always looks pretty full to me as an outsider"  -  Mac

I can assure you that from the perspective of an insider of many years that the present condition of the church is a shadow of its former self.  Most people would say that the loss of so many people and the concomitant energy and productivity they brought to the table would represent a dying church even if it stayed in business.  

 How has the gospel survived for two centuries without our improvements???  -  Mac

The gospel has survived because it is God's holy word.  The Gospel has survived because it NEVER changes for anything.  The gospel must NEVER ever be watered down or changed.  Ever!

However, the gospel has also survived because the methods used to share it with a wicked and dying world have constantly changed.  The Bible has been translated out of the Hebrew and Greek and Aramaic and Latin into countless other languages of the people who have gladly embraced it.  Remember, the first people to translate the gospel into other languages were burned at the stake for their efforts.  Still they kept translating it into words that the common people, the hoi polloi if you will, could readily understand.  

Obviously, we've come a long way from those days.  Instead of burning people at the stake for bringing the words of the gospel into the language of the common person, we now complain that they're violating our traditions and telling them they need to find someplace else to go.   

"The change generation seems to think that mature Christians are the enemy instead of our real enemy."

Not really sure if you are referring to me, Tchividjian, or both.  I truly respect Christians who are "mature" both physically and spiritually.  Most of the wisest Christians I know are all 30 + years older than me.  I know exactly who the enemy is - he comes to steal, kill and destroy. 

I am not advocating "improvements" on God's Word.  As John stated, "The gospel must NEVER be watered down or changed."  However, when as a church we are not as effective as we once were (ie, declining roughly 80%, not sure on exact numbers) we must ask ourselves what we should be doing differently.  Do we care more for our comfort (we must change s-l-o-w-l-y)  than seeking the lost?  Did the Shepherd ask the sheep if they minded He go out and look for the one that was lost?  Yes, I would argue the church needs to be relevent.

(Do we care more for our comfort (we must change s-l-o-w-l-y)  than seeking the lost? )

No, seeking the lost is the first priority. But if Tullian would have paid at least some attention to other people's "comfort"  (I even told him once to just wear the stupid robe, for heaven's sake!) and brought them on board first by earning their trust over time S-L-O-W-L-Y........all of this mess could have been avoided. Now, the business of soul-winning is on the back burner while everyone is sorting out Tullian's motives. I still say he helped bring this on himself.

M

I am referring to neither you or Pastor Tullian.  I am referring to the many new believers that come into churches all over America and think that everyone has the same life experience and conversion experience that they did.  Sometimes new believers, in their zeal and enthusiam, view mature church members as "the enemy".  They have never considered that these older members have perhaps already tried the ideas they are proposing.  Music can be a prime example.  I have watched dedicated Christians/church members be vilified simply because they disapproved of some of the new music.  They are used to songs with more meaning than some of the choruses that simply repeat almost menaingless words over and over.  Why are these people suddenly the enemy?

You are absolutely right that the gospel must never change, but as the scripture says "the gospel is an offense to the non-believer".  If our methods unwittingly "water down" the changing power of the gospel, we may need to re-think it.

I am not here to pick arguments with anyone.  I hope this conflict can be resolved and that EVERYONE at CR can feel a part of God's work.

Respectfull yours,

Mac

"I am not here to pick arguments with anyone.  I hope this conflict can be resolved and that EVERYONE at CR can feel a part of God's work."

I am not either.  Debate can be healthy and dialogue is a good thing.  We all have something to learn - iron sharpens iron.  Thats one of the reasons I follow this blog. 

"Sometimes new believers, in their zeal and enthusiam, view mature church members as "the enemy". "

And sometimes mature church members view new believers as the enemy because of their zeal and enthusiasm.  We would all do well to remember the joy of our salvation.

"If our methods unwittingly "water down" the changing power of the gospel, we may need to re-think it."

Not going to argue that one.  I agree.  However, I fail to see how any of  the listed "offenses" of Tullian are methods that water down the changing power of the gospel. 

Tim said:

"But if Tullian would have paid at least some attention to other people's "comfort"  (I even told him once to just wear the stupid robe, for heaven's sake!) and brought them on board first by earning their trust over time S-L-O-W-L-Y........all of this mess could have been avoided."

I'm really not too sure of that.  IF the church does vote out Tchvidjian then I am quite certain it will have a difficult time finding another minister.  Not too many pastors would be keen on coming to a church that ran off their last pastor after only four months.

I'm really not too sure of that.

Matt - I really do believe alot of this could have been avoided if Tullian would have acted more maturely and was more sympathetic to traditions. Jennifer is right about that.  He could have changed things OVER TIME after earning the trust of the "traditionalists" - gradually then instituting his own traditions! Another thing that teed people off was changing the Lord's Prayer . I don't have a problem with it - but did he really need to do that - what with all the other changes? Of course not.

You are correct, though, about other potential ministers being wary about coming here. Absolutely - you can count on it. 

BTW, that was me, Tim, who wrote the last post 

To M, John, Tim, and others,

I hope and pray that reconciliation will be God's work among God's people.  Trust on both sides takes time.  I pray that Christian love and understanding of where the other side may be coming from prevails in God's church.

Tim,

You have made this situation much more clear to me as to what is really going on at CR.  I hope things can work out.  After Dr. Adrian Rodgers died, some of the changes at Bellevue caused alot of grief and led to many longtime church members leaving.  I hope that doesn't happen to CR.

I hope that Dr. Wilson and Samuel are able to stay.  Samuel is an inspiration to me as a church organist.  He has the heart of a servant.  That's rare in church music.

Thanks again for your insight and what people are upset about.

Mac,

Someone claimed either on this blog or the other one that Tullian eventually wants just blended worship and that his music director, Brandon will get the job leading it. The organ will not be used, a huge screen placed in front of the pipes,etc.. etc...and consequently John and Samuel will be left in the dust.

I really don't think that's what Tullian is up to.

I think he's smart enough to realize that just as there are different tastes in evangelism methods, there are different tastes in music, all burning the same flame and all with the same goal - to glorify God.

He'd be a fool to alienate such a large sector of the congregation. 

I hope you are right Tim, but my personal experience is that "blended worship" will evolve quickly into contemporary worship.  That's the way it happened in my church.  Contemporary worship appeals to the "me" generation.  I don't mean anything accusatory to anyone here with that comment.   I just mean that many of the worship songs tend to focus on the worshipper's feelings toward God.  That's not all bad, but it isn't a basis for real worship.  My personal tastes are neither classical or contemporary (maybe somewhere in between).  But I keep my mouth shut because church is not about me.  However, some of the contemporary crowd may get everything they want and they are still not satisfied.

Oddly, the Presbyterians are at the point where Baptists were 20 years ago (experimenting with contemporary worship).  Baptists are into it.  We were 20 years behind the Willow Creek movement.  Recently, Dr. Alfred Mohler from one of the Baptist seminaries wrote an article about Willow Creek's members were feeling that they had not matured in their faith like they should.  I guess it will take Baptists a while to catch on that big numbers don't always equal God's movement in a church.

Prayers and blessings to all of you.

Tim said:  "Another thing that teed people off was changing the Lord's Prayer . I don't have a problem with it - but did he really need to do that - what with all the other changes? Of course not."

Okay, the only change made to the Lord's prayer is that now it is recited from the ESV instead of the KJV. It's ironic that people are bitterly clinging to a translation of the Bible that was originally written in 1611 as the language of the people. We live in a culture of people who speak modern English so maybe reading a translation of the Bible that was most recently updated in 150 years ago isn't the best way to go. But the fact that the ESV is more readable by a modern audience is only the icing on the cake. It is also a far superior and much more accurate translation to begin with. Not to mention that the ESV's general editor was J. I. Packer who Dr. Kennedy once described as a “master theologian."

Great. Fine by me - but it still really annoyed alot of people.  I'll say it again: Just too much, too soon.  

Mac said: "I hope you are right Tim, but my personal experience is that "blended worship" will evolve quickly into contemporary worship.  That's the way it happened in my church."

This is a major misrepresentation of what is really going on.  In reality, no one is talking about changing the traditional worship service into a blended one.  They changed the names of both the services - The Traditional Service is now called the "Classical Service" and the Contemporary Service is now called the "Blended Service."  No one is changing the traditional service around to be more contemporary so as of this time it is foul speculation to even suggest this is what is happening  until Tchividjian himself says otherwise. 

I agree - I don't think that is Tullian's plan at all.  But some people disagree with me on that. 

Any word on the Town Meeting?

Tim, as Dylan in the last post remarked, "CRPC and its ministries are not meant to be a historical unchanging establishment for people to look at, though it seems that several people want to make this perhaps the case." 

To clear up some confusion I think:

I am not "M".

I always sign my comments by my full name.

The meeting went great. Lots of substance, little fireworks. Unfortunately most who protested in the letter were not there.  Will update tomorrow, too tired to do so now.

Listen to Tim,  you guys. He is saying what I tried to say. Too much too soon, and I will add to that there was not much sensitivity from him or the team he has surrounded himself with to the people who expressed concern about it. I call it arrogance and insensitivity....like "just find another church if you don't like this one".  Last night Tulian said about the robe issue that "its just not comfortable to me". Well...couldn't he "suffer" thru an hour of wearing a robe for the sake of the people who care about it? I thought that was pretty telling of his mind set. There's more to being a good preacher than preaching.

Betsy,

If you went last night and that's honestly what you came away with, then I have no idea what to say to you or how to say it.

Right, Betsy - He could've handled all of this in a much more mature and pastoral way.  e.g. : OK, ditch the robe, but leave the order of worship alone; or, wear the robe and replace the bibles, etc. AND let people know what you are doing and why!

It was a genuine lack of respect,  I think. And not a very pastoral way of  handling things.

He has a definite independent and strong-willed spirit. I can imagine Gigi telling him to wear thus and so when he was a kid...and he refusing (because he's not comfortable in it) and throwing a tantrum or something.  

In other words, he could have said:

"OK, the only changes I'd like to make for now are: I'd rather not wear the robe; and I'd like to update the order of worship (but not mess with the Lord's Prayer)" and explain why...

"Maybe in the fall I'd like to take a look at replacing the KJV with the ESV because I think the ESV.........." (Then let them stew on that for a few months)

"After the 1st of the year, I'd like to look at streamlining the personnel situation to help save money and change to a new hymnal" and explain why.....

Wouldn't that sort of approach have made more sense?

Matt,

With all respect to what I thought were two very thoughtful blog posts by yourself, this comments section seems to be plummeting into the malicious and the absurd.

Dan, they definitely have a way of doing that.  Again, thanks for the encouraging words though. 

Dan and Matt - Gonna have to disagree with you:

There's nothing malicious or absurd in stating that Tullian could have handled things differently. He could have been more pastoral, more sensitive, and more respectful of an institution well-known for its rigidity and inflexibility.

There's a teachable moment here for all of us.

Don't dismiss it so quickly.  

Tim, for the record, I do not think there was anything malicious or absurd you wrote. 

TIm and Betsy.....Have we forgot that Tullian is human and a sinner himself? Have you ever heard the term "you spot it. you got it." If you are claiming that someone is "arrogant and absurd" then you must have a little of that yourself. You can't spot something unless you can define it or feel it yourself. Tullian has called us to examine our own sins before we examine the sins of others. I seem to think that Miguel Del Toro was right last night in saying that Coral Ridge has had quite a bit of arrogance about "We are Coral Ridge and you are not." mentality. All these things that people are quarrelling about are NONESSENTIALS TO WORSHIP.  Adrian Rogers never wore a robe. David Jeremiah doesn't wear a robe. Joel Osteen doesn't wear a robe. His grandfather, Billy Graham never wore a robe. Schaller is the only TV guy that NEVER WORE A ROBE. I KNOW MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY GOOD PREACHERS THAT DON'T WEAR A ROBE. "A house divided against itself will fall," Abraham Lincoln said. Well folks we went a long long time without a preacher and if we're not careful we're going to end up an even longer time without one. Some of the comments made last night were irrelevant and nonessential. We need to get on with the business of the mission of this church and proclaiming the word of God in the streets. Tullian is as humble a man as I have ever seen in the pulpit. Maybe you guys can wear robes to church and sit out in the pews with them since you love them so much. You'll look as ridiculous as you sound!!!  Court rules in favor of the defendant! COURT ADJOURNED!!!

sorry correction to my last post Schuller is the only TV guy I watch that wears a robe. You guys must love to argue....

Thank you, Judge Dexter Poitier, for these comments.  I think Miguel made a very good point last night that needed to be mentioned here, so I'm glad you brought it up.  We need to focus on the esentials and let go of the nonessentials (like wearing a robe).  We have a new pastor and he needs our support and our love.

Also, he did mention from the stage in front of at least 1,000 people that he had been wrong about some things.  I saw a HUMBLE (fallible) man sincerely ask for forgiveness.  He will make mistakes; we need to be willing to forgive him... and pray for him.

If you went last night and that's honestly what you came away with, then I have no idea what to say to you or how to say it.

- Matthew Cochrane

I don't know what you mean by "came away with" but that was just a quote on one issue. That is not a synopsis of the entire evening or anything else. It was a quote about a particular issue, the robe issue. And that's what he said.  I don't know why I have to explain this. Everything gets so picked apart that nobody talks about the issue.  It's like I'm trying to say just step back and see someone else's point of view, whether you agree or not.  This is not about whether he was in his "rights" to wear or not wear a robe...its not about who else does and doesn't...its about common sense sensitivity when introducing new things to an existing situation. It could and should have been handled more sensitively.  It would have been "nice" and smart and made his life easier in the end also.  That's what I mean when I say you can be right but still be wrong.

I agree with all of you: the robe issue is not essential. But being mature, sensitive, pastoral, respectful, and PATIENT is.  That's where he lost some people. It's not about the robes - we all know that.

FYI, though, most Presbyterian pastors wear robes: Adrian Rogers was a Baptist, and Joel Osteen.....God only knows what he is. 

Tullian is a good man - and we can all learn from this experience. 

The above post was from Tim (sorry)  

You guys having beeen complaining about what you call "mundane" greivances from the letter sent out. But what is this!! Talking about a robe that was not even mentioned in the letter... I think you guys do not know what is mundane; you can't keep up with the true and strong arguements that are being presented. Can't you argue or debate about anything that is important such as what Tullain defines as the Gospel ("Simply what nonChristians need" - Tullain, from his blog and Easter morning sermon), is he really ordanied a PCA pastor, why are the lights in the church on when we are barely getting half of the cost needed in the offerings each week, where is EE going and why does Tullain refuse to participate in it, why is New City Church still opperating if this is a merger (is Tullian affraid and wants a cushion to fall on if anything happens?), other than not fitting, what were their true intentions to fire Nicholson, how about Haywood? 

Why, why, why!? I agree that things were done so quickly without congregational awareness or votes. Why can't this be called a-may I borrow the phrase-"hostile take over?" Oh! I am sorry, it offends them... How about all this offending all of us?

Nothing is being "Transparent." We only find things out a week after it has happened.

Why does it concern you? Tim and Betsy,

Did you guys attend the meeting last night first off? If you were there DID YOU NOT HEAR HIM SAY THE EE WAS NOT GOING ANYWHERE AND THAT HE LIKED IT?! DID YOU NOT HEAR HIM SAY THAT HE HAS KNOWN ABOUT DJK HIS WHOLE LIFE AND THAT HE WENT THROUGH EE TRAINING 20 YEARS AGO. HE INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF TIMES EE IS GOING TO BE PER WEEK. YOU GUYS MUST HAVE SELECT HEARING. ONCE AGAIN I THINK WE SHOULD ALL DO SQUARE DANCING IN ROBES. NOW LET'S GET ON WITH THE BUSINESS OF GLORIFYING GOD.

I AM THE CHURCH! YOU ARE THE CHURCH! WE ARE THE CHURCH TOGETHER! ALL OF GOD'S PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD!!! YES WE'RE THE CHURCH TOGETHER!!! THE CHURCH IS NOT A BUILDING! THE CHURCH IS NOT A STEEPLE! THE CHURCH IS NOT A QUARRELING PLACE!!! THE CHURCH IS THE PEOPLE!  REFRAIN...I AM THE CHURCH! YOU ARE THE CHURCH! WE ARE THE CHURCH TOGETHER! ALL OF GOD'S PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD! YES WE'RE THE CHURCH TOGETHER!

"IT TAKES MORE MUSCLES TO FROWN THAN TO SMILE!" UNKNOWN

IT'S.............. NOT.................. ABOUT................. THE................... ROBES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tim said,

"OK, the only changes I'd like to make for now are: I'd rather not wear the robe; and I'd like to update the order of worship (but not mess with the Lord's Prayer)" and explain why..."

He certainly has made himself available for those questions.  There have been several town-hall meetings where he did or couldve answered questions about this, that and the other...

Looks like he did again last night.  I pray it is over now.

Uh, Tim, after reading the assertions from "Why does it concern you," would you say "malicious and absurd" applies NOW?

Uh, Tim, after reading the assertions from "Why does it concern you," would you say "malicious and absurd" applies NOW?

Yeah, maybe. I don't agree with "why does it concern you".

I think Tullian knows exactly what the gospel "means".  I just think that to him it means more than just the initial (and most important) step of accepting Christ.  The "Gospel" is also the lifelong journey of being a disciple - following the teachings of Jesus and letting the world see the beauty and joy of the Christian experience so that they can inquire of "the joy that is within us" and we can respond accordingly.

I think what "why does it concern you" is upset about is that there are not enough "altar call" type invitations from the pulpit.

Am I wrong on that?

In other words, the Gospel is the "whole council" of Jesus - not just "you must be born again". Does that make sense?

Tim's comments conclude with: "Am I wrong on that?"

At the risk of putting words in Tullian's mouth, let me say, Tim, that I think you're pretty much on the money. I'm not sure how often you get to hear Tullian preach, but I have heard him say several times that the gospel is not solely something that is preached to give the message of salvation to unbelievers, as important as that is, but also something that must be preached to believers (and by believers to themselves) every day in order to live out, as you said so well, the beauty and joy of the Christian experience. We drink in the gospel every day so as to live victoriously in Christ and not miserably in the world.  Anyone who is truly interested in what Tullian has to say about this subject will have no trouble finding blog entries he's written on the subject.

I hesitate to to speculate on the motives of "why does it concern you." Those comments, like the letter which prompted them, are filled with so many distortions and factual innacuracies (i.e., "church is not taking in half the cost of keeping the lights on"), that to respond to them veers perilously close to "answering a fool acccording to his folly."

 I think what "why does it concern you" is upset about is that there are not enough "altar call" type invitations from the pulpit.  -  tim

To the best of my recollection he never had any (altar calls).

No, I said altar call "type" invitations. At the end of many of Kennedy's sermons, he would give an invitation to "whosoever will" to accept Christ. You didn't have to get out of your seat and come forward or anything, but he did extend the invitation. Maybe this is where "why does it concern you" is coming from.

And, not to offend any EE'ers out there, but I think Tullian's approach to sharing the gospel (living among them, etc. etc. as defined in his book) is a method of evangelism that I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to. Why not give it a shot? As long as people are accepting Christ by seeing what the joy and beauty of the Christian life can be like, who cares what method you use?

To tell you the truth, in my neighborhood, both non-believer and believer alike cringe when they see the Mormons coming. I mean, they're nice guys and everything, but that type of door-to-door stuff - while it worked in its day and certainly may still be effective - is not the ONLY option. 

  . . . why are the lights in the church on when we are barely getting half of the cost needed in the offerings each week, where is EE going . . .   -  "Why does it concern you?"

Such insightful questions deserve solid answers.  Oh, wait, they were answered, actually, in great detail at the meeting last night called for the specific purposes of answering such questions.  Either you weren't there and didn't take advantage of the opportunity or you are purposely distorting what was said.  Let's recap.

In a paper handed out to those who attended the meeting there was this piece of information which should allay all of your heartfelt concerns:

Church Revenues:  General giving for CRPC has remained constant for last 10 years averaging 90k - 100k per week notwithstanding a significant decline in membership in previous years and the more recent decline in the economy.   Since the union of our two churches, general giving for this period has exceeded general giving for the same period last year by approximately 10%.Thee has been no decline in general giving nor is any decline anticipated in the future.

The answer to your other concern about where EE was going was also answered in full.  Pastor Tullian clearly stated it was "going" to three times per week from the current two times per week.  C'mon, now, let's at least try telling the truth here, ok?

Why Does It concern you...

Nobody answered your questions except for the lights issue, so I'll answer them.

1) nobody asked him if he was really a PCA ordained minister

2) about this lights thing, maybe you can give us more info that you have as nobody here obviously is aware of what you are saying, if it is factually based or what. Do you have info that would contradict what John wrote?

3) the EE thing...obviously that could have been the plan all along to increase it to three nights a week, or it could have just been a good defense publicly as they knew it was in the letter. Only time will tell. And, nobody asked him if he was going to personally participate.

4) the only thing I heard about New City was that half their members (175) had become crpc members and the other half  would follow soon.

5) several people mentioned firings and the only name I could hear was Haywood, and the questioner was told something about it was a legal issue and they couldn't talk publicly about it. If I heard wrong, someone can correct me...the accoustics weren't that great sometimes but that's all I heard. I don't know if Nicholson's name was mentioned.

There were mostly Tullian supporters there, probably 85 % or so. (Tullian got lots of applause and even a standing ovation over something.) Someone got up and told his story about not being able to get a meeting with Tullian no matter what method he tried. Tullian said he didn't know why...said he meets with lots of people, in fact he said maybe that's why you can't get a meeting cause I'm so busy meeting people. He said you could see his appt book to prove it.  One woman was questioning him, I couldn't hear all she said, but all of a sudden he cut her off with a "no, I don'tknow what you are talking about and YOU ARE DONE."  On another guy, an old man, they turned the mike off when he wouldn't stop insisting on talking. That was about the extent of any drama with dissenters, but there were a few more. One woman chastised him for the way he has treated or allowed Anne and Jennifer to be treated with them both being so sick this year. That's all I can remember now.

A congregational meeting is being scheduled possibly in Aug. or Sept. for the purpose of dismissing Tullian. Hold on to your hats.    

I'm confused...I am hoping someone could explain this approach touted by Tullian as to other ways to spread the gospel. There is nothing new about Christians leading a life that would attract others to Christ (by their fruits shall ye know them,etc etc) but how watching someone lead an exemplary life will give them the facts they need to know how to get to heaven escapes me. I recently heard a gentleman's testimony of how he thought he was a Christian, went to a Methodist church, etc etc and didn't know the way to salvation until EE came to his door and told him. (by the way, Tim, they don't go out and "cold call" they go to people who have signed cards during services they attended at CRPC.) John 3:16 is not evident, the facts are not evident, when I feed the hungry or live my life according to how God wants us to live. All that would do is make people say what do they have in their life that I dont...and then they are supposed to go to church and HEAR the FACTS. Kennedy NEVER finished a sermon without getting in the fact that we are all sinners and undeserving of the fact that Jesus died for our sins in our place and all we have to do is accept the free gift of eternal life and we will live forever in Paradise.. He put that exact thought in to WORDS in each and EVERY sermon he ever made. He even said that when he was on television or on Phil Donahue's show or a news show...he didn't care what the newscaster wanted from him...he got his testimony in there.  I can't imagine any preacher not doing the same...what a horrible waste of the pulpit's potential power and obligation we have to God that would be. So, my question is...does Tulian actually say the words that would tell someone how they can know with certainty that they are going to heaven? Does he say it in every sermon? That's a yes or no  question.

Here's another  confusion I have...Tulian said the other night that the reason the Apostle's Creed is not repeated every Sunday anymore is because it is a "sacramental thing". He didn't say "thing" but the point was that you only say it when there is a sacrament going on....so he said that in order to be "able" to say the  AC more often he would try to do Baptisms more often, and in order to say the Nicene Creed more often they will do more Communions. Since CR always included that as part of the worship service there is obviously a point of disagreement here. Who determines what is right and what is wrong? Does this mean his theology doesn't match the theology of CR? Shouldn't the congregation have known of these types of facts beforehand?Doesn't the congregation have any say in these matters? We used to...whether it was just out of consideration or whether it was because that's the correct "church order", we used to be kept up on these things directly from the pulpit. At least, he should have done a sermon on this giviing his reasons and the Biblical back up for it...since he was starting to preach from a pulpit in a church with dramatically different point of view on this. Whether he is right or wrong on the issue, and I believe he is wrong, he certainly used poor judgement to jump in and change something so vital to our worship experience (stating publicly exactly what we believe). Please don't defend this just tell me if there is an actual protocol that should have been followed when you change something this important. The fact that he didn't preach about this and tell the congregation his reasons from the pulpit certainly has contributed to his situation now. He still didn't explain the reason we used to do it and now we "can't" the other night...he just stated this as fact and moved on. 

A number of people have said to me, as an excuse for not witnessing (we are really very good at making excuses), “Well, I can’t talk about religion. I just witness by my life.” Now, I am all in favor of witnessing by our lives, but it doesn’t work with the Gospel. That is not how people are converted

The above is a quote from a sermon of Kennedy's that is one of the few still left on their website. I just thought it was interesting/

Here's some more of that sermon...if you guys can post songs I guess part of a sermon by Kennedy is fine to post also....you can see the entire thing on  crpc.org:

On the cover of The Presbyterian Journal, some 45 or so years ago, there was a single para­graph printed in simple typewriter print on a white background, and it said this: “You can no more catch a dose of Christianity than you can catch a dose of geometry.” The Gospel is a message that needs to be proclaimed. The apostle Paul said, “I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received…”(1 Corinthians 15:1) Christ died for our sins; He was buried and rose again from the grave the third day. No. We can’t just be Christians and live a nice life and expect that anybody is going to go to Heaven because of that.

I remember one time a friend of mine in the ministry was debating a man who believed in what he called the “theory of a voiceless Christianity.” He probably could have talked you into joining his church pretty easily — at least some of you who want a voiceless Christianity — just be nice and all will be well, and people will flock into the kingdom.

But the Christian minister debating him dis­agreed, and said, “That’s not the way it works. You can’t just live a Christian life, because the Gospel is a body of knowledge that must be taught and un­derstood.” He took out a pen and a little piece of paper and wrote some words on it. Then he said to his opponent in the debate, “To prove my point, when you fly home tonight, I want you to unfold this piece of paper when you get on the plane and give it to the stewardess. I guarantee you that it will change your life forever.”

“Really?” he said.

He got on the plane, unfolded the piece of pa­per, and gave it to the stewardess. She looked at it, and read these few and simple words: “Take me to Cuba.” His life certainly would have been changed, but I am sure he chickened out before he let the stew­ardess have that piece of paper. There is no “voice­less Christianity.” The Gospel is Good News, and it has to be told if people are going to get it.

Or suppose you are walking down your street at about ten o’clock at night. You notice smoke com­ing out of the back window of your neighbor’s house. You say to yourself, “Good grief, my neighbor’s house is on fire, and that is his daughter’s room where the smoke is coming from. I had better scream at the top of my voice saying, “Fire! Fire! Your house is on fire.”

Then you say, “If I do that, people will come out and see me, and they will think I am some kind of a fanatic, a lunatic. Why, they might call the po­lice on me. No. I’ll do this. I will go home and get down on my knees and pray and somebody will take care of it.” That is not what you would do. You would scream “Fire!” at the top of your lungs; you would go to the front door and bang on that door and cry “Fire! Fire! Fire!” until someone opened the door, and went and got the little girl out of her room.

Why would you do that when you pass and have passed thousands of people who are definitely going to die, and most of them without Christ and in need of the Savior, and you don’t talk to them? I thought about that for a long time, and then the an­swer came to me. You know why we would go and knock on that door and not on others? The reason is, my friend, we believe that the fire in that bedroom is real — but do you believe that your neighbors, friends, and fellow workers are going to the lake of fire forever? If you did, you would do something about it. The flames are real, but unfortunately there is coiled in the soul of many of us a serpent of unbe­lief that keeps us from responding to such people.

Do you remember Aunt Sophie? She was a converted scrubwoman. No initials after her name, except possibly S.W. for “scrubwoman.” But she was a converted scrubwoman. She loved the Lord. She didn’t have any education to speak of, but she did speak what she knew. She told people everywhere about the love of Jesus Christ. Of course some people laughed at her. They mocked her, especially one day when someone saw her standing out in front (this is years ago) of a cigar store witnessing to a cigar store Indian. In case any of you children don’t know, it’s made out of wood. But she couldn’t see him well enough to know that, so she just went on witnessing to him.

Somebody told her, “Well, you know, Sophie, someone said they saw you witnessing to a cigar store Indian this afternoon.”
And she said, “Well, perhaps I did. My eyesight is not as good as it used to be, but talking about Christ to a wooden Indian is not so bad as being a wooden Christian and never talking to anyone about Christ.” I’ll go with Sophie on that. How about you?

What did the five fingers say to the face? SLAP!!!!!

A congregational meeting is being scheduled possibly in Aug. or Sept. to precede this unbiblical meeting for the purpose of supposedly dismissing Tullian to stop the minority faction that is causing this rift. Actually Satan is causing this rift. The parties involved are going to use the Bible and the PCA Book of Church Order to quelch this rebellion. We are going to aggressively with God's help gain the needed signatures from the overwhelming majority that support this man of God, Tullian Tchividjian. If you think you've got any prayer or hope of winning this then you are sorely mistaken. We will Biblically back up our cause until the final bell tolls.

I am sitting here in front of the computer listening to the evening service, and am in tears listening to Warren Gage's comments and admonitions to the congregation.  I understand there will be a congregational meeting - let it happen, let it pass, and move on....(Tullian's not going anywhere). In 5 or 10 years, no one will even remember this whole nightmare.   

Betsy,

I'm very sympathetic to everything you're pointing out (believe me, I am); but regarding worship -  It seems to me that Tullian is trying to do two things: make CR more accesible to this generation - i.e. the new ESV bibles, modern language, etc....; and also, to make CR's worship more reformed, more typically Presbyterian if you will -monthly communion, the Nicene Creed, the Trinity Hymnal (finally, a legitimate Presbyterian hymnal).

I remember Larry Roff (from Knox, and the Tirnity Hymnal editor) telling me that CR purchased the former, generic hymnal instead of the Trinity Hymnal years ago because "they got such a good deal on them".  Shame on DJK for allowing that.

Good for Tullian to have enough sense to put a Presbyterian hymnal in a Presbyterian Church.

Regarding EE, I still say, when people see you living for Christ and ask you "Why?" , that's the best opportunity to explain the gospel to them.  I think that's what Tullian is trying to say regarding evangelism. EE is not the only method.   

 Regarding EE, I still say, when people see you living for Christ and ask you "Why?" , that's the best opportunity to explain the gospel to them.  I think that's what Tullian is trying to say regarding evangelism. EE is not the only method.  -  tim

You are quite right but I somehow think that the phrase "see you living for Christ" might be misunderstood in this context a bit.  It is not a passive, do-nothing stance as it is being portrayed here on this blog.  For instance Jesus, and by extension His disciples, spent a lot of time and effort in meeting people where they were at.  He healed the sick quickened the dead, fed those who were hungry, etc. . .  

A few weeks ago CRPC participated with another church and a large local hospital and put on a back to school health fair for a poor neighborhood in Pompano Beach.  Not only were children given back to school physicals (required) but these same children were given large numbers of brand new back packs, school supplies of all kinds and, naturally, Bibles.

Valuable contacts were made with the students' parents and families and followup will definitely occur.  This is exciting stuff and something I feel is worth all the effort.  Efforts like this are not EE in any way, shape or form but they definitely come under the definition of "see you living for Christ"  that we keep talking about and definitely have a place in ministry.  This is just one of the directions Pastor  Tullian is leading CR and those who attack him for trying other methods that aren't EE should be ashamed of themselves, especially since EE is not only not going anywhere but is being expanded.  

Tim,

I don't think its "what" Tullian is doing, its more like "when" and "how".  Plus, people  under him or acting/speaking for him have put a sour note on the whole thing also. To fire people like Nicholson for monetary reasons and then buy all new hymnals rubs people the wrong way. I was told that CR now has more employees than before the merger. I don't know if that's true but that's what I am told. Nobody expected the changes that have come up like changing the entire church mission statement, the traditional service etc etc. I question the judgement of everyone involved in all these things. This is not how I remember issues being resolved over the years.  It was considered necessary to include and inform the congregation in anything like this stuff...

Before you say  "shame of DJK"...know that it was noted Friday night that they got a two thirds discount off these newer hymnals. Nothing wrong with saving "our" money. What is missing in the old hymnals that is in the new ones? I really don't know.  And I am not saying King James is good for everything, but it got us to the year 2009. "easy" translations have come and gone over the years (Good News bibles, etc etc) but KJ has a beauty to the language that appeals to people. Why not both? What happened to the old bibles at CR? Just curious

And this "go find another church" that keeps getting thrown around is the wrong thing to say to old time members or anyone really. . One day all these "young" people will be "old time members" and might find themselves in the same predicament, and hopefully they will be treated with more respect , consideration and love.

I also fault whoever it was that didn't inform the congregation of all the changes that would be taking place BEFORE They voted on this merger. I think it was presented as "pretty vanilla" and no big change, yet look what happened.  I still haven't gotten answers to my posts about does Tullian present the gospel in every sermon? And why does he consider the Apostles Creed something only for  "sacraments" and we used to say it every Sunday.  How can he have become the new head minister and have different beliefs? That's what I mean about why wasn't the congregation informed more thoroughly before this merger took place. I still say we should have just hired a minister.....regardless of whether it would be Tullian or someone else. It seems like some people wanted Tullian so badly they pushed this thru. I am not sure why but in hindsight, it wasn't as "vanilla" as everyone was told.

Also, no argument about when people see you living for Christ and ask "why" etc etc...but then you have to be "literate" enough in presenting the gospel to lead them to Christ (EE trains people for that, they don't just go knocking on doors) and they have to be able to come to church and hear the gospel every Sunday. (by gospel I mean the facts on how to get to heaven). It isn't one or the other, its both.

"Tullian's theology matches up perfectly with CRPC and the fact that the session of elders unanimously approved his selection speaks volumes.  I'm not sure what you're getting at when you say "things aren't always what they seem to be, and the same with people.  This marriage of two churches may be a disaster when the honeymoon is over."  I must say I find that kind of talk divisive.  If anybody had specific objections to Tullian they were free to bring them up Sunday morning at the congregational meeting, yet all we heard from detractors were these vague and ominous warnings (one member did object because Tullian was a pastor and not a "businessman")."..................................................................................................

You seems to have the same arrogance and certainly disrespect to the "elderly" and the "Iimmature" mature population's opinions of our church's direction.!

There probably are definately some issues going on behind the scenes that neither YOU or I have any knowledge of except from "rumorsville" on both sides!!

To be honest, do you really think that Dr. Kennedy would raise his daughter to be a "rebel" in the church? I would very much think that both the Kennedys know all the ins and outs of what is going on behind so called "smokefill" backdoor room deals, wouldn' you agree?

We have personally escorted Dr. Kennedy to Broward County Court House to oppose the homosexual agenda and fighting for the Boy Scouts, etc. have you?

We have personnally contributed to establishing  "D. James Kennedy Center for Christian Statemanship" that was lead by Dr. Frank Wright who had been our teacher on EE.

You should go back and listen to Dr. Kennedy's sermon from the same  pulpit  that now Tchividjian is occupying. Yet he has been mentored to not take up these important issues. Our Forefathers said that this nation is a "Christian Nation" founded on Christian  Values. They did NOT told us to be silence, to the contrary.

He said on his blog that he did not ask for this merger, if so who did?

It is far from our immagination to think that Dr. Kennedy would ever, ever ask for a merger with another church, him  as the founder of our church!

The whole mess reminds me of how a whole nation can be blindfolded to elect an illegal alien as President of the United States by "blue sky" faked promises to gain control. As a police mand, did the usurper offend you last week ?

Interestingly enough I saw from another Tchividjian "diciple's" blog that a Kenyan Birth Certificate has been found and submitted to Distric Court of California Saturday.

I am sad of this unfortunate situation, but I also saw Friday night the very arrogance and lack of total humility, not only from the Pastor, but also from the congressional people in general (I feel from the New City people who were talking about the majority rules, etc.)  and steam rolling over the older "population" who sacrificed "sweat, blood and tears" to build CRPC from nothing to a worldwide ministry,. And it is very convenient for New City to move from a "warehouse church" into a glorious Sanctuary and its facility without having to pay rent, see earlier remark , (one member object because Tullian was a pastor, not a businessman.) Now are we supposed to think that the Senior Pastor is not think about our busineses?

My personal view is that when a Pastor refuse to wear the  vestment that Dr. Kennedy always wore at the traditional service is a direct disrepect for our beloved founding Pastor, a traditonal attitude you can expect of young runaway rebels!

Betsy,

The old bibles are being presented to folks that the EE teams are going to visit at homes.

It strikes me that none of the dissenters give there names? If you feel you are on God's mission to rectify a mistake He made....Be Proud...Stand Tall...You're correcting God's mistake, right? God really did not want things to change, did He?  It's up to you folks to fix this honest mistake made by our King and God. What was God thinking?

Robert Audet

Tulian said the other night that the reason the Apostle's Creed is not repeated every Sunday anymore is because it is a "sacramental thing". He didn't say "thing" but the point was that you only say it when there is a sacrament going on....so he said that in order to be "able" to say the  AC more often he would try to do Baptisms more often, and in order to say the Nicene Creed more often they will do more Communions. Since CR always included that as part of the worship service there is obviously a point of disagreement here.   -  Betsy 

I believe what Pastor Tullian said is that the recital of the Apostles Creed was traditionally done at baptismal services and, in this context, he was going to have baptisms more often instead of waiting a specified period of time to do them.   He also said he was going to recite the Apostles Creed at these baptismal services instead of every Sunday.  

From a website called Center for Reformed Theology and Apologetics  I got this from a lengthy article on the subject:  

"The real origin of the creed has now been traced with great exactness. The original germ of it is to be sought for in the baptismal confession made by converts in the reception of that rite. . . .    In any case, the fact is certain that before the middle of the 2nd century the confession at baptism had crystallized into tolerably settled shape in all the greater churches. 

It really appears from this and other such sources that Pastor Tullian is absolutely correct in his assertions and all he is doing is returning CRPC to a more traditional and historic reformed practice of reciting the Apostles Creed at Baptismal Services.  Hardly the stuff of conspiracies.  

 . . .  and in order to say the Nicene Creed more often they will do more Communions. Since CR always included that as part of the worship service there is obviously a point of disagreement here.   -  Betsy 

One of the fundamental creeds of Christianity, drawn up by the Council of Nicaea, a meeting of bishops in AD 325.

The Council of Nicaea was the first ecumenical (worldwide) council. The church leaders met to discuss teachings about Jesus. The words of the Nicene Creed were formulated by the bishops and were a statement of the most important beliefs of Christianity.

From a similar article I got this statement:

The Nicene Creed is much longer than the Apostles Creed and is usually said by Christians during the celebration of the Eucharist (Mass or Holy Communion). Its three sections state beliefs about God, Jesus and other aspects of Christianity. The middle section, which states Christian belief about Jesus, is the longest. It affirms that Jesus is God ‘of one being with the Father’, which stresses the Oneness of God.

Again, It appears that all Pastor Tullian is doing is bringing CRPC into line with historic and traditional practices.  And, again, this is not the stuff of conspiracies.

Here is the motto of the CRPC Apostates:

CRPC

CORRUPT RIGID PRAGMATIC CYNICAL 

CRPC APOSTATES...Sounds like a good softball team name...better yet why don't you guys go form your own church and call it that? Then you could get your poison out of our church and really let the flock of God grow. Heaven knows you're only hurting our church not helping it.

CRPC APOSTATES...Sounds like a good softball team name...better yet why don't you guys go form your own church and call it that? Then you could get your poison out of our church and really let the flock of God grow. Heaven knows you're only hurting our church not helping it.   - Tullian Supporter

Unfortunately, I think this kind of talk really doesn't help matters and just leads to further divisiveness.  Whether they agree with us or not, these "apostates" are still our brothers and sisters in Christ.  We need to pray for them and for our church.  If they leave it should be because that is a decision that they make on their own and not because they are told to get out.  So, really, comments like this hurt our church as well.  Let's try to refrain from saying hurtful things like this.

With all due respect, and with I pray, humility and recognition of my own sin, may I request that we please stop the quarreling amongst ourselves?  It is no wonder the world watches us with unbelieving eyes.  Changes have been made, yes.  Maybe too quickly, maybe not.  It hurts when you rip off a bandaid quickly and it hurts when you take it off slowly.  Either way , the bandaid needs to be removed.   The church by a 93% vote gave Tullian the authority and the support to make changes and to bring about a revival (we all pray, I think) in South Florida and beyond.  He is the man for the job. God was in this entire process, otherwise it would not have happened.  Let us not forget that everyone who works at and/or attends CRPC, whether former New City or "born and raised" CRPC or anything in between, is affected in some way by this dissention.  (and that we/they are all sinners in need of the Savior, doing the best we can for the One who gave us freedom) Collateral damage is running high. Remember our covenant children are watching this happen with young and inexperienced eyes and ears. Let the pain stop, address the unbiblical dissention appropriately and in the correct forums, and let's all get about the business of sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ to a world who needs Him as much as we do.   Please, I beg you all, get on board and follow the pastor you have chosen to lead you.  That does not mean you cannot disagree. He has demonstrated that he is open to hearing dissenting opinions.  He has on some occasions changed his mind based on dissenting opinion and more importantly, reasoned argument.  He is the leader and he has chosen his team and we must trust him.  So when he says "charge", we charge.  Let's get  behind him and support the vision God has given him for South Florida and beyond.  

You know, Dr. Kennedy was not without his dissenters. I remember Roger McMurrin (former music dir) telling me that one of the reasons for the years of declining membership at Coral Ridge was due to Kennedy's obsession with politics - and injecting it into so many of his sermons.

A church that went from 10,000 members to 2,000 better come up with some pretty darn good reasons to want to get rid of a new pastor who may be a little wet behind the ears and headstrong - but has ALREADY reversed years of declining attendance.    

Personally, I agreed with Kennedy's views (well, most of them) - but I don't think he went through with his detractors what you're putting Tullian through.

If ANYBODY would have told a detractor to "join us or leave" - it would have been D. James Kennedy!  

- tim

Paulus, don't you think if Tullian preached his exact same sermons, wearing his exact same clothes - but threw in one "gay people must go down! woo hoo! Congress must return to the Republicans! Yeah!" you dissenter types would be pleased as punch? I do. Because that's what this is about isn't it?

To the question that where Tullian said "No ma'am I think you're done." Tullian was replying to a question where the woman followed up her questions about those that were laid off "Well if you get fired or quit within in 90 days you'll get a nice severance check of $4000 too." Then she asked Tullian "you know what I mean?"...To which he replied "No ma'am I think you're done." About the man that saw Graham in Denmark in the 50s he was talking way beyond the alloted time that was appopriate for one to speak. It was rude and inconsiderate of this older gentleman to tell Tullian that his grandfather needed to be humbled in such a rude way. Then the lady with the black hat said "You're always defending yourself. That's all you ever do." My whole point is if you were as viciously attacked from the get-go as Tullian was then you would defend yourself too. Tullian is not some robot that doesn't hurt when attacked and he is not our personal punching bag. You bark at a dog long enough, he's going to bark back.

Both DJK and WGTT were unregenerate heathens prior to conversion. DJK was not raised in a Christian home and Tullian was. About the only difference when you think of just the START of their ministry. Don't compare the last part of the ministry. Obviously Tullian's has yet to be done. DJK was a hard-partying, cussing, carousing, promiscuous, rich Tango instructor before his conversion. Read the books. They will tell you the truth. Tullian fell off the beaten, South Beach party path himself before God saved him at 21. Tullian's whole point in his book is that it takes more than the sinner's prayer to save one's soul. Someone must know your story. Then say the sinner's prayer.

To take a cheap shot at Tullian's mother is way uncalled for. We've all made mistakes. I myself have been handcuffed twice by Davie police. I am a sinner. We're all sinners. The moment you are above reproach mystery person write on here and I will be glad to come talk to you. I'd like to find out how you got that way. I don't imagine I'll ever talk to you because that day will never happen for you.

add that day of above reproach comment as saying that day will never happen for you or anyone...any that has not sinned throw the first stone. Don't see any stones thrown.

Paulus, don't you think if Tullian preached his exact same sermons, wearing his exact same clothes - but threw in one "gay people must go down! woo hoo! Congress must return to the Republicans! Yeah!" you dissenter types would be pleased as punch? I do. Because that's what this is about isn't it?

-Steph

Ah, now I think you're on to something. I believe there's alot of validity in this statement. I can't believe it hasn't been brought up yet. Tullian is not the political crusader DJK was. He's not going to go on Larry King and complain about Obama and the gay agenda like DJK would have done.

And, in all honesty, even though I agreed with and supported DJK all these years, the fact is - the religious right has accomplished very little and has almost nothing to show for their efforts.

I can't speak for Tullian, but I betcha he agrees with Kennedy on the issues, but feels a different approach is neccesary since Kennedy's didn't work so well. He's entitled to that, and should be given a chance to prove it.

BTW, watch Jonathan Falwell sometime.He NEVER talks about moral issues. NEVER. Jerry is probably rolling over in his grave.

No, Steph, you're on the right track.                

About the man that saw Graham in Denmark in the 50s he was talking way beyond the alloted time that was appopriate for one to speak. It was rude and inconsiderate of this older gentleman to tell Tullian that his grandfather needed to be humbled in such a rude way.

Ron Lester: Are you a New City or a CRPC of origin?

What was the exact t alloted time?

As I heard the man saying was that he saw NO humility in our new Pastor and he compared him to his grandfather at younger days, and that he hoped he would develope the kind of humility Billy Graham certainly is projecting now in his older age.

He pointed out that Billy Graham was not able to "save" because of his aggresive preaching, but Dr. Kennedy succeded!

Is that being rude. huh?

Doesn't matter what origin I am. Doesn't matter at all. That's the kind of thinking that is leading to this dissention. It's rude to compare Tullian to anybody but Tullian. Especially to giants of the world faith in DJK and BG. The older gentleman was not allowing other people to talk. That's going passed the natural alloted time. He was taking up way too much time. Anybody around him could tell that. Mystery no-name person I think you just like to complain to complain don't you? You're seeking anything you can to gripe. And who are you anyways?

Ron Lester: Please also understand the man's address was directed to our Pastor and NOT to Mr. Clark Cochran who constantly interupted by  attempting to grabb the mike away from Pastor, which was totally uncalled for!

Unfortunately, the comments in this post, as more than commenter has remarked,  have degraded to the point of the absurd and malicious. All comments that rudely or unfairly portray any of the parties involved or spread false rumors will be aggressively deleted.  If these comments persist, the comments section for these posts will be turned off. Thank you for your understanding.

"Tim"

"In 5 or 10 years, no one will even remember this whole nightmare."

Have you attended any History class during your schooling years? History is history; and may I add (HIStory). All this "nightmare" will be in both New City's and CRPC's history, including Tullain's history AND the PCA history AND in the church history of mergers, etc. No one will forget this "nightmare." Do hope all this will be swept under the rug? Think again; there will be a "bump" underneath the rug and everyone will trip on it and question it.

It is a part of history now... if you like it or not. Years ago, my great grandmother used to say, "Whatever you do here, you pay here." That is it.

Clark Cochran did not constantly grab the mike. He was offering a point of view for things that maybe Tullian couldn't answer because he hasn't been here long enough. Mystery person you just like to complain and you are looking for anything you can to complain about. You forget that there are two sides to every debate and you're always for the people at the mike. You seem to not talk about their sin at all.

 . . . "All this "nightmare" will be in both New City's and CRPC's history, including Tullain's history AND the PCA history AND in the church history of mergers, etc. No one will forget this "nightmare." Do hope all this will be swept under the rug? Think again; there will be a "bump" underneath the rug and everyone will trip on it and question it.

It is a part of history now... if you like it or not."  . . . -  Why does it concern you?

I have been under the impression for many years that God is in the business of rewriting our histories and blotting out our past sins.  In other words He removes the history of my sins from my past.  I can assure you that I wasn't born a Christian and, before I accepted Him as my Savior, I had more than one "bump" underneath my carpets.  So did you and everyone else who sits in any church you care to name.  

Thankfully, God, through His son, removed those bumps and somehow made me acceptable to a holy God.  In fact, he removed my history from ever being brought up and used against me - ever.  

Don't you think it's possible that He is more than willing to do the same thing for this church?  When His people come to Him, and they will, and ask forgiveness and get back to the real work of the church, He will wipe that history out of existence.  Please don't sound so gleeful that this history will be hung around the neck of the church forever like a millstone because it won't.  

As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. Psalm 103:12

Repent, then and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out . . . Acts 3:19

I will blot out our sins . . . Isaiah 43:25

Paulus, don't you think if Tullian preached his exact same sermons, wearing his exact same clothes - but threw in one "gay people must go down! woo hoo! Congress must return to the Republicans! Yeah!" you dissenter types would be pleased as punch? I do. Because that's what this is about isn't it?

-Steph

Ah, now I think you're on to something. I believe there's alot of validity in this statement. I can't believe it hasn't been brought up yet. Tullian is not the political crusader DJK was. He's not going to go on Larry King and complain about Obama and the gay agenda like DJK would have done.

And, in all honesty, even though I agreed with and supported DJK all these years, the fact is - the religious right has accomplished very little and has almost nothing to show for their efforts.

I can't speak for Tullian, but I betcha he agrees with Kennedy on the issues, but feels a different approach is neccesary since Kennedy's didn't work so well. He's entitled to that, and should be given a chance to prove it.

Steph, is that really what think Dr. Kennedy was all about, that simple?

Are you aware of his previous "D.James Kennedy Center for Christian Statesmanship" in Washington D.C., a city with evils like in Sodom & Gomorrah. There they held regular bible studies for members of Congress and their aids and presented the Gospel in an EE format. He didn't give a hoot from which political party they came from.

Tell me when he has been on Larry King. Wherever he was invited he used the opportunities to present the Gospel, and when took air travel - he did not have a private jet or fancy cars - he made sure it was on economy class and the seat in the middle so he could present the Gospel to the persons on each of his sides, because he jokingly said, they could NOT run away from him.

Who are or is "the glorious right"? It seems to me that there is a lot backstabbing on Dr. Kennedy;s legacy going on here.

Clark Cochran did not constantly grab the mike. He was offering a point of view for things that maybe Tullian couldn't answer because he hasn't been here long enough. Mystery person you just like to complain and you are looking for anything you can to complain about. You forget that there are two sides to every debate and you're always for the people at the mike. You seem to not talk about their sin at all.

- Point to Ponder

The man had two simple questions addressed to the Pastor which was; if he agreed to the lady's telling the majority rules,  -  and if he thought that Jesus would agree with that also. Two very short questions that Mr. Clark Cochran has no reason of trying to interrupt and answer, pure and simple.

The two other gentlemen on the left and right occupied more than double the time that the "old" man did, and it was very rude to shut off the mike instead of answering the questions. The old man was not rude to Pastor, even he gave him a thumbs up before leaving the mike and gave him a big smile. So please don't make a distortion what took place even if you didn't like it. I sat up front and clearly saw the incident.

It seems that if you are not white washed with the Tchividjian detergent you get thrown off this site, and natural Matt CochArane is in his full right to do that and has done it. So we will see if this post sticks and get posted?

I'm not trying to be mystery man, I simple forgot to sign my posts, I thought that was stamped automatically, sorry!

Blessings, Paulus

Regarding the letters sent to the cosigners mentioned by Jan...

It is common sense to wonder, if people at the church are trying this hard to silence those with allegations and grievances, what do they have to hide?

It causes me to question their credibility when they forbid longtime, faithful members from attending, when their offense was distributing petitions per the book of church order.

M, what do you want the church to do about the opposition?  These people had the right to petition but they went about it the wrong way  and now they are doing everything they can to split the church.  They put fliers on peoples' windshields and by some accounts Tullian Tchividjian opposers were standing around in CRPC's Book Store on Sunday trash-talking the church and trying to convince people to take sides.  I would have asked them to leave too

Oh -  people of God. Stop it!

 Fall down on your face and Pray!

Linda A W

John,

"I have been under the impression for many years that God is in the business of rewriting our histories and blotting out our past sins.  In other words He removes the history of my sins from my past."

I think you forgot about the physical reality of life; sure God will wipe our sins clean for us, but what if someone got arrested and put in prison? Innocent or not the fact that you were arrested will stay on your record for life. Pres. Richard Nixon and his story are in our history books. Don't tell me you believe that God will wipe away, what is occuring at CRPC, from the history of life and everything I listed in my last post as long as life continues.

Your argument only applied to the spiritual aspect of Christians; not the physical reality of life.

Sorry should read ...forbidding

It's not about sides. We're all God's family.

It's not about sides. We're all God's family.

There seems to be confusion about what comments are being deleted and which comments are not. Allow me to clear up some confusion. Any comments dealing with personnel issues (e.g. hirings, firings, lay-offs, etc.) will be deleted. Any comments dealing with rumors about what “somebody” told them about what might or might not have happened behind closed doors at the church will be deleted. Any comments dealing with anything that has not yet been made public by CRPC will be deleted. Any comments with rude or profane language directed at individuals will be deleted. Period. This site has not been a rumor or gossip blog for the three and a half years I’ve been blogging and it is not going to start being one now. 

I would have asked them to leave too

- Stephen

Simple question: Do we think that Jesus would have done that? Or, WWJD?

Blessings,

Stephen,

I am not saying this in anger or as an accusation,I am merely curious which part of the answer I gave to yor question qualified as a rumor or worthy of removal?

M,

I assume you meant Matthew since Stephen is just another reader like yourself with no power to remove comments.

By it's very nature I cannot really discuss it here.  If you wish to discuss this in private correspondence I would be more than happy to do so.  You can contact me using the link on top of the page.  Thank you for your continued interest and understanding.

Subject: Attorneys vs the Gospel message.

Dissent is welcome.   Debate is welcome. Gossip and rumors are not. 

• Matthew Cochrane

   

I hope you will allow us to discuss church policies as well?

                                       *****************

Here are some honest questions to those “in the know”.

How many attorneys are sitting on the board of our “Session”

And how many attorneys are elected to be our Elders?

I don't think very many in our congregation know that, because we never see titles connected to names in the Church Directory.

                                                ******************

These questions are quite vital regarding our “divisions” from those called dissenters, or called the “immature” mature population of our congregation. Do we think it is Biblically appropriate to have attorneys “ruling” our churches, the Church of Jesus Christ, founded on the rock solid faith of Peter?

What is the main goal of an attorney when he is in the Court room? Is it not to create division and spread doubt in order to find the “truth”? Do we really spread the true Gospel through legalism? I don't think so, and certainly Jesus did not either!

Who was in majority when Jesus was put on trial, and who spoke up for His defense? Was it not the Scholars who accused Him, meaning at that time, the lawyers? Nobody defended Jesus and the leftover 11 scrambled for cover.

Aren't we experiencing similar legalities in our struggle to sort out our divisions? And who, except for Jesus, spoke up and forgave the woman caught in adultery that the majority and the Scholars threw at Jesus ?

Who was it that stirred up the masses demanding Jesus to be crucified instead of Barabbas, was it not the so called “Scholars”? Our “Scholars,” in my opinion, are using the Scripture of Mathew 18 very cleverly to silence the few by using it as an intimidation “tool”! That scripture is not just a one-way street.

I wish our dear churches were lead by Godly men and not by attorneys, who are bred to sow division. I am NOT trying to put down the vocation of attorneys, please understand! But they belong in our civil court rooms, NOT in our churches' leadership rooms. The churches should only consult attorneys on legal matters because legalism is NOT compatible with our mission statements!

I am sure I will get a lot of flak for this and so be it, but I want us to be fully reminded of how Jesus was treated on his trial and by WHOM!

Something to ponder over!

P.S. As a side note, it would be interesting to know how many of our friends from New City have attended EE?

Blessings

Paulus, I guess my response would be that the congregation votes on our elders.  If you wish to not vote for any attorney eligible, then that is your right, though I would caution you before doing so. 

The Bible lists its requirements for elders (mostly found in I Timothy 3:2-7) and no where does it forbid electing someone from a certain vocation.  When electing elders we should be careful to first and foremost consider how well they match up with these Biblical requirements before adding our own extra-Biblical requirements.

Besides this, there are obviously some practical benefits to having lawyers serve as elders.   Their knowledge has helped our church (in the past and present) avoid liability in costly lawsuits. Their knowledge has helped the church navigate real estate deals and obtaining necessary permits for construction. 

We must remember all elders at CRPC were elected according to the Biblical and Book of Church Order guidelines, making them our God-appointed spiritual leaders. 

Thank you Matt:

That scripture you just quoted was the reason that my wife and I left the Episcopal church more than 15 years ago when they slowly were promoting ordination of homosexual priesthoods which later stirred a huge split when a homosexual Bishop was elected.

Since 1984 I am still in a weekly prayer group of three other men from that denomination, it is called After Cursillo Prayer Group, and they tell that now they are pushing for accepting marriages of guy couple within their church.

Their local Bishop for South Florida, who voted for the homosexual agenda, is still sending us letter requesting donation for his discretionary fund. I have returned them with a question: “As a layman would you please interpreting your view on 1 Tim. 3:2-7? Needless to say he has never answered that question, but he still keeps sending his letters.

Let me just repeat I am not knocking on the attorneys vocations, I have deep respect for them. My wife's grandfather, from whom she was named as the first grandchild in the family, was a Judge, and among his various positions, he ended being a personal secretary for a well known Florida U.S, Senator. So we chit-chat a lot about his accomplishments.

My point is here that Jesus in the Bible often warned about the Scribes and Scholars and he scorned them verbally. He certainly had not much respect for them.

Here is a quote I got: “Did you know that if you are brought before a court of the Session, the Book of Church Order (32-19) forbids you from bringing an attorney? However, the Session can have as many as they want, if they are members of the Session.”

How many of us knew that, - if it is true? I certainly did not know, and that troubles me deeply!

However, on the other side of the coin I do agree with you that it has certain benefits in those matters you have stated.

But when I reflect on Jesus' relationship with the Pharisees and their elders, and when he turned over the Money Changer's tables in the temple, I have great struggles in finding a common ground on churches legalism and the “Message”!

Help me out, please and thank you!

Blessings,

Wow, pretty slow and quiet tonight!

That's just how some like it Paulus!

lol

That's just how some like it Paulus!   - What an Obamanation to the Lord!

lol - jest sain

New City's annonomous??? And Obots???

Blessings,

I heard the name of the church changed to Quarrel Ridge. is that true?