Bob Coy resigns, but followers still want access to his sermons

[sword]

Bob Coy, Pastor of one of the largest churches (top 20) in the U.S. resigns after moral failure, but many still want his very popular sermons.

New church leaders say they are no longer available. Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/april/popular-pastor-resigns-moral-failure-bob-coy-calvary-chapel.html

 

[4everfsu]

God said his word would not return void. Is 55:11. Nothing is mention about a pastor standing the test of time.

 

[Ransom]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches that have scrubbed all mention of their recently former pastor after he got caught diddling teenagers. Seems like standard operating procedure to drop his stuff down the memory hole.

In CC Ft. Lauderdale's case, however, they have made a statement: while Coy's messages have been invaluable, they've suspended access for now to prevent malicious use, which has already happened.

They've got a valuable asset that they wish to protect from devaluation. Sounds reasonable.

 

[ItinerantPreacher]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches that have scrubbed all mention of their recently former pastor after he got caught diddling teenagers. Seems like standard operating procedure to drop his stuff down the memory hole.

In CC Ft. Lauderdale's case, however, they have made a statement: while Coy's messages have been invaluable, they've suspended access for now to prevent malicious use, which has already happened.

They've got a valuable asset that they wish to protect from devaluation. Sounds reasonable.

Does to me as well Ransom. As a young christian some of the most challenging messages I heard were preached by a man that has since seriously disqualified himself from the ministry. Just bringing up his name is controversial, but the reality is I grew from what I heard. I held on to material the helped me for quite a while.

The problem with using the material of someone who has fallen into sin is that the truth once taught loses its effectiveness as a teaching tool because of the tainted/wrecked/destroyed testimony of the voice speaking the truth. I am not sure how they could use this man's material as a future tool without hiding the sin he has committed.

In this case the conversation would be a little like "you should listen to this message, it will help your problem." Who preached it?" "Pastor Bob" "Who is he?" If they are forthcoming, most won't listen to it.

That does not mean those who were helped weren't helped.

 

[Frag]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches.....

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.  Don't let the facts get in the way your bias. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches.....

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.  Don't let the facts get in the way your bias.

It's rsc2a"s contention that he is an IFB for all practical purposes...something I don't see at all.
But, it just goes to the point that on the fff all sin is in essence IFB sin....

 

[Ransom]

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.

Didn't say he was, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good butthurt.

 

[BandGuy]

What's this?  Some fish named Bob was a pastor?

 

[bruinboy]

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.

Didn't say he was, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good butthurt.

Frag can't figure out what CC means evidently.  I guess it may be pretty challenging for a nit wit. 

 

[rsc2a]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches.....

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.  Don't let the facts get in the way your bias.

It's rsc2a"s contention that he is an IFB for all practical purposes...something I don't see at all.

Pretty much. In fact you stated they are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods", a point at which I listed about fifteen similarities off the top of my head without even bothering to consider it for more than two minutes. Instead of pointing to any substantive differences, you boiled it down to (paraphrase) "Well, they don't have a problem with pants on women."

Or maybe you thought of another difference?

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches.....

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.  Don't let the facts get in the way your bias.

It's rsc2a"s contention that he is an IFB for all practical purposes...something I don't see at all.

Pretty much. In fact you stated they are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods", a point at which I listed about fifteen similarities off the top of my head without even bothering to consider it for more than two minutes. Instead of pointing to any substantive differences, you boiled it down to (paraphrase) "Well, they don't have a problem with pants on women."

Or maybe you thought of another difference?

What I said was that they are not legalists in any sense of the word.
I also said I had forgotten who I was addressing...oh obtuse one!

They are not hyper separationists....we are the only church(s) that have pure doctrine.
They are NOT IFB...not even IFB lite.
They are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"...which are things that make IFB, IFB!

 

[rsc2a]

Is this throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I've seen plenty of IFB churches.....

And yet Coy is not........... never mind.  Don't let the facts get in the way your bias.

It's rsc2a"s contention that he is an IFB for all practical purposes...something I don't see at all.

Pretty much. In fact you stated they are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods", a point at which I listed about fifteen similarities off the top of my head without even bothering to consider it for more than two minutes. Instead of pointing to any substantive differences, you boiled it down to (paraphrase) "Well, they don't have a problem with pants on women."

Or maybe you thought of another difference?

What I said was that they are not legalists in any sense of the word.
I also said I had forgotten who I was addressing...oh obtuse one!

No....you have just shown that you know nothing about CCs. Sit in one for four or five years, then come back to me. Until then, I'll remain convinced that my personal experience trumps something you made up out of thin air.

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]They are not hyper separationists....we are the only church(s) that have pure doctrine.[/quote]

And then you ignore the fact that I was asked to leave by a pastor because I didn't toe the doctrinal line. In fact I was told, "The unity of the church is a big thing to you and it's impossible to have unity when people disagree, so maybe you should find a church that agrees with you," showing that a) the pastor had no idea what unity actually means and b) that they are hyper-separationists.

[quote author=Tarheel Baptist]They are NOT IFB...not even IFB lite.
They are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"...which are things that make IFB, IFB![/quote]

Let me post the list again:

CC is an "independent" association of churches set up where one man completely runs the church with the a group of hand-picked individuals serving in a "advisement" capacity, an association where a small handful of people have an extreme amount of influence.

They completely disregard the difference in the word of God (Ps 1:1) and the Word of God (Jn 1:1), frequently equating the two in both word and practice. They are very vocal on the importance of the tithe and hold a pre-trib, pre-mil eschatological view, considering it a fundamental of the faith. They are openly hostile to anything even smelling like something that might be mistaken as Reformed theology.

They are YEC and strongly dispensational with a huge "rah!rah! Israel" leaning and, all and all, extremely conservative politically and socially, including many who strongly advocate for home schooling.

So, yet again, how again are they "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"?

 

[ItinerantPreacher]

They are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"...which are things that make IFB, IFB!

Let me post the list again:

CC is an "independent" association of churches set up where one man completely runs the church with the a group of hand-picked individuals serving in a "advisement" capacity, an association where a small handful of people have an extreme amount of influence.

They completely disregard the difference in the word of God (Ps 1:1) and the Word of God (Jn 1:1), frequently equating the two in both word and practice. They are very vocal on the importance of the tithe and hold a pre-trib, pre-mil eschatological view, considering it a fundamental of the faith. They are openly hostile to anything even smelling like something that might be mistaken as Reformed theology.

They are YEC and strongly dispensational with a huge "rah!rah! Israel" leaning and, all and all, extremely conservative politically and socially, including many who strongly advocate for home schooling.

So, yet again, how again are they "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"?

Firstly concerning Sign Gifts. Secondly concerning Eternal Security. Thirdly concerning "Casual Christianity". Fourthly concerning Theocratic Church Polity. Fifthly concerning Church Membership. Sixthly concerning Communion.

Just off the top of my head.

 

[rsc2a]

They are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"...which are things that make IFB, IFB!

Let me post the list again:

CC is an "independent" association of churches set up where one man completely runs the church with the a group of hand-picked individuals serving in a "advisement" capacity, an association where a small handful of people have an extreme amount of influence.

They completely disregard the difference in the word of God (Ps 1:1) and the Word of God (Jn 1:1), frequently equating the two in both word and practice. They are very vocal on the importance of the tithe and hold a pre-trib, pre-mil eschatological view, considering it a fundamental of the faith. They are openly hostile to anything even smelling like something that might be mistaken as Reformed theology.

They are YEC and strongly dispensational with a huge "rah!rah! Israel" leaning and, all and all, extremely conservative politically and socially, including many who strongly advocate for home schooling.

So, yet again, how again are they "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"?

Firstly concerning Sign Gifts. Secondly concerning Eternal Security. Thirdly concerning "Casual Christianity". Fourthly concerning Theocratic Church Polity. Fifthly concerning Church Membership. Sixthly concerning Communion.

Just off the top of my head.

Let's start: give me the CC beliefs on each of those issues.

 

[ItinerantPreacher]

They are "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"...which are things that make IFB, IFB!

Let me post the list again:

CC is an "independent" association of churches set up where one man completely runs the church with the a group of hand-picked individuals serving in a "advisement" capacity, an association where a small handful of people have an extreme amount of influence.

They completely disregard the difference in the word of God (Ps 1:1) and the Word of God (Jn 1:1), frequently equating the two in both word and practice. They are very vocal on the importance of the tithe and hold a pre-trib, pre-mil eschatological view, considering it a fundamental of the faith. They are openly hostile to anything even smelling like something that might be mistaken as Reformed theology.

They are YEC and strongly dispensational with a huge "rah!rah! Israel" leaning and, all and all, extremely conservative politically and socially, including many who strongly advocate for home schooling.

So, yet again, how again are they "poles apart in doctrine, practice, philosophy and methods"?

Firstly concerning Sign Gifts. Secondly concerning Eternal Security. Thirdly concerning "Casual Christianity". Fourthly concerning Theocratic Church Polity. Fifthly concerning Church Membership. Sixthly concerning Communion.

Just off the top of my head.

Let's start: give me the CC beliefs on each of those issues.

Sure.
CC's identify themselves as Charismatic, that tongues are for today. (Doctrine)
CC's regard eternal security as an optional belief. Some do, some don't, no big deal. (Doctrine)
CC's norm is casual attire (Philosophy)
CC's polity is based upon the "Moses" model. The pastor is not accountable to either congregation or board. They do not identify with any of the three traditional models ie Presbytery, Congregational, or Episcopal (Polity)
CC's do not have a formally recognized church membership. (Doctrine, Polity, Practice and Philosophy all in one)

How Do I Become A Member at CC Santa Cruz?

Membership at Calvary Chapel Santa Cruz is participatory.  That means that there are no vows, tests, or classes. . . you just need to get involved! http://www.calvarychapelsantacruz.org/#/who-we-are/church-membership

CC's practice Open Communion. Without a formal membership, it is the only option left. (Practice)

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's identify themselves as Charismatic, that tongues are for today. (Doctrine)[/quote]

Further, Calvary Chapel rejects human prophecy that would supersede the Word of God, and teaches a balanced approach to spiritual gifts, stressing the importance of biblical teaching.

Now do I need to actually pull sermons down from IFB pastors where "God told me..." or "We prayed and God healed..." because these are functionally the same thing? Even better, would you like me to post videos of IFB nuts running around the building, diving into baptistries, throwing clothing, etc?

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's regard eternal security as an optional belief. Some do, some don't, no big deal. (Doctrine)[/quote]

Maintaining a Bible-centered balance in these difficult issues is of great importance. We do believe in the perseverance of the saints (true believers), but are deeply concerned about sinful lifestyles and rebellious hearts among those who call themselves “Christians.”  - Chuck Smith

(This also covers your "casual Christianity".)

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's norm is casual attire (Philosophy)[/quote]

Big deal? Or are you also making this about pants on women?

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's polity is based upon the "Moses" model. The pastor is not accountable to either congregation or board. [/quote]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Oh wait...you were serious.

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]They do not identify with any of the three traditional models ie Presbytery, Congregational, or Episcopal (Polity)[/quote]

See 'hahaha' above or should I spell out a fairly normative IFB leadership model?

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's do not have a formally recognized church membership. (Doctrine, Polity, Practice and Philosophy all in one)

How Do I Become A Member at CC Santa Cruz?

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]Membership at Calvary Chapel Santa Cruz is participatory.  That means that there are no vows, tests, or classes. . . you just need to get involved! http://www.calvarychapelsantacruz.org/#/who-we-are/church-membership

[/quote][/quote]

See exhibit A: the IFB churches I know, none of which require "vows, tests, or classes".

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's practice Open Communion. Without a formal membership, it is the only option left. (Practice)[/quote]

So do the majority of IFBs I know.

 

[ItinerantPreacher]

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's identify themselves as Charismatic, that tongues are for today. (Doctrine)

Further, Calvary Chapel rejects human prophecy that would supersede the Word of God, and teaches a balanced approach to spiritual gifts, stressing the importance of biblical teaching.

Wanna define "a balanced approach to spiritual gifts"? Now, I never stated they believed in prophetic utterings, I said they believed in the present day use of  tongues. Baptists are cessasionists, they don't speak tongues. You were comparing them to Baptists.

Now do I need to actually pull sermons down from IFB pastors where "God told me..." or "We prayed and God healed..." because these are functionally the same thing? Even better, would you like me to post videos of IFB nuts running around the building, diving into baptistries, throwing clothing, etc?

No, they are not functionally the same thing, you may as well say Baptists are Unitarians because they both meet in a building. Evangelical Christians including Baptists believe in the leading of the Holy Spirit, but not all have thge same belief in the current administration of the sign gifts. Your IFB nuts are the exception, not the rule.

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's regard eternal security as an optional belief. Some do, some don't, no big deal. (Doctrine)[/quote]

Maintaining a Bible-centered balance in these difficult issues is of great importance. We do believe in the perseverance of the saints (true believers), but are deeply concerned about sinful lifestyles and rebellious hearts among those who call themselves “Christians.”  - Chuck Smith

I have talked to several CC pastor's. All have stated to me that Eternal Security is not emphasized or required. All I can go by is what they tell me.

(This also covers your "casual Christianity".)

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's norm is casual attire (Philosophy)[/quote]

Big deal? Or are you also making this about pants on women?

I never said whether it was a big deal or not. No, not about pants on women (although I am a proponent of no pants on women, but that was not my reference) But, let's face it it is different than standard IFB practice. That was the point I was addressing. (Your a little like Sammy from Over The Hedge)

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's polity is based upon the "Moses" model. The pastor is not accountable to either congregation or board. [/quote]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Oh wait...you were serious.

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]They do not identify with any of the three traditional models ie Presbytery, Congregational, or Episcopal (Polity)[/quote]

See 'hahaha' above or should I spell out a fairly normative IFB leadership model?

It is not a normative IFB leadership model, it is the model that has garnered public attention. I was trained by a disciple of JV, and we as a congregation always felt we had the right to hold our pastor accountable. If we didn't, we would have dealt with him. We did not have to.

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's do not have a formally recognized church membership. (Doctrine, Polity, Practice and Philosophy all in one)

How Do I Become A Member at CC Santa Cruz?

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]Membership at Calvary Chapel Santa Cruz is participatory.  That means that there are no vows, tests, or classes. . . you just need to get involved! http://www.calvarychapelsantacruz.org/#/who-we-are/church-membership

[/quote][/quote]

See exhibit A: the IFB churches I know, none of which require "vows, tests, or classes".

Nope, but they require formal membership. By application through three usual means: by letter, by baptism or by testimony  of profession of faith and scriptural baptism.

[quote author=ItinerantPreacher]CC's practice Open Communion. Without a formal membership, it is the only option left. (Practice)[/quote]

So do the majority of IFBs I know.

I know none who practice open communion. None. I have been in some 300 or so, and never one. Closed? Yes. Close? Yes Open? Never.
[/quote]

 

[T-Bone]

Interesting discussion... But I must add something here IP not all Baptist are cessationists.

 

[ItinerantPreacher]

Interesting discussion... But I must add something here IP not all Baptist are cessationists.

I am aware that Baptist come in odd strains, but by and large, the vast majority are cessassionists.

 

[T-Bone]

Interesting discussion... But I must add something here IP not all Baptist are cessationists.

I am aware that Baptist come in odd strains, but by and large, the vast majority are cessassionists.
[/quote

Actually you would be wrong in both your statements, add IFB are mostly cessationists and your statement would be correct...most Baptist are not even IFB.