pulpit language)

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

On Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:37:38 -0400, you wrote:


>There is SOO much is this post I disagree with that I am COMPELLED to
>respond.

May I comment on your comments, just to crank the list processor to a
record state of activity :)

>1) Bro. Berger suggests there is a pre-conception in our movement that it
>takes Bible school to make a preacher. Just the opposite is true. There is a
>GREAT bias AGAINST Bible schools.  Otherwise, why is it that only one or two
>percent of young people who feel called into ministry go to Bible college?

You are correct. There is generally a very inadequate support of Bible
schools across the movement. We are doing better on the foreign field
with this than we now are at home. Witness the loss of KCC this year.
There should have been regional support implemented for Bible Schools
long ago, and despite promotional efforts we are looking at too little
too late across the board.

>2) To suggest that the good preachers didn't go to Bible college while those
>who went usually don't amount to anything is ludicrous.  Need I give a roll
>call of the great preachers who have?  Such as Daniel Segraves, Wayne
>Goodine, Hugh Rose, Chester Wright, Lance Appleton, Allen Oggs, I have a
>couple dozen more on my list, but you get the drift.

Add my name as one who WISHES that he had. I get tired of men telling
me "I had a REAL ministry long before anyone ever thought of Bible
School." Again, Bible school doesnt make preachers, but I cant for the
life of me see how that disposes of their usefulness.

We have had Bible schools that cranked out students full of heretical
ideas, and caused great problems. Is there not at least an equivalent
blessing for allowing young people a careful time of separation unto
Christian adulthood, and for the developing preacher, a GREAT chance
to take advantage of proximity and access to great men such as OC
Marler, and Paul Mooney ? The cost seems miniscule compared to the
potential benefits, particularly without a pastoral calling.

>3) Why, oh why, do so many preachers OBJECT to a 3 or 4 year period in a yong
>person's life in which they dedicate HOURS a day to studying the Word of God?
>Where else are they made to spend so much time studying about God?  And why
>does it threaten some Apostolics for them to do so?

This to me is absurd. I cant imagine why the opportunity for such
separation and consecration at a developmental time in life would be
scorned, or disdained. The imaginations I can find, I would not
repeat.

>4) Finally, Bro. Berger said, "Second, if we do not think a Pastor is doing
>right we have no reason to  bring that up here or anywhere else, before we have sat down with him and
> let HIM know what we feel."  Let's try one more time:  I NEVER brought up
>this subject in reference to a specific instance, and CERTAINLY not my
>pastor. 

Well, Im afraid thats where the thread go off the tracks, because the
references, no doubt originating from the student body, and being
dealt with by an instructor, were unmistalkable.

I think respondents would best consider Brother Rich Brown's position
as an instructor, who is charged with the spiritual welfare and
seasoned care of precious young people who will effect the world
around them, and US!

In his position, my emphasis would be less idealistic.

>My pastor, Paul Mooney, is the EPITOME of a gentleman when he
>preaches, yet he does preach strongly against sin.  Somehow he manages to
>preach against homosexuality without calling them the "F" word...Imagine
>that!  Is the suggestion here that we cannot even bring up hypothetical
>situations in which we might disagree with "a preacher" in general?  If so,
>what is the good of this forum?

No, we are doing it, and it is working, but we are all learning too.