FBCH 2013 Homecoming Bible Conference!

[RebeccasRants]

Got my invite today.  I'm really disappointed in FBC.  I agree with those who have already stated that perhaps FBC should just concentrate on having their own revivals for the next 100 years or so.  When Dr. Hyles passed away, I heard a rumor that there would only be one more Pastor's School to commemorate his life because the next pastor would not have earned the right to host Pastor's School.  Of course, that never came to pass but it would have been better to have come to pass.  I grew up attending and working in SOTL conferences and Women's Jubilees, but the truth be told, I'm rather burned out on conferences now.  When I hear preachers bragging on other preachers or themselves for that matter, I just want to throw up!

 

[16KJV11]

The question remains, at least in my mind...
Doesn't the hierarchy at FBC/HAC know the disgust that many feel over the reputation that Schaap and his willing staff accomplices have brought on themselves over the last 10 years?
I don't hate HAC, I'm not disassociating myself with it all, but I'm certainly not going to sit under their tutelage at a 'pastor's' type of conference for a week.
On a different note, a friend of mine was asked to pastor FBC, but he mentioned to another friend of mine that the only way he would accept the job was that two things would have to be mandated:
1. The dismissal of most of the staff.
2. The closure of Hyles Anderson College.
As much as I hate to think of HAC closing, that may not be a bad idea.
There's too much manusha associated with it all.

 

[longlivedunkin]

The question remains, at least in my mind...
Doesn't the hierarchy at FBC/HAC know the disgust that many feel over the reputation that Schaap and his willing staff accomplices have brought on themselves over the last 10 years?
I don't hate HAC, I'm not disassociating myself with it all, but I'm certainly not going to sit under their tutelage at a 'pastor's' type of conference for a week.
On a different note, a friend of mine was asked to pastor FBC, but he mentioned to another friend of mine that the only way he would accept the job was that two things would have to be mandated:
1. The dismissal of most of the staff.
2. The closure of Hyles Anderson College.
As much as I hate to think of HAC closing, that may not be a bad idea.
There's too much manusha associated with it all.

I would have to agree with you on most every point given here. I guess, as a member, I'm still scratching my head as to why we're doing a conference that involves inviting outside delegates to come here. I DO understand the disgust that many feel over the reputation that has been thrust forth in the last decade or so from here.... I totally understand Pastor Wilkerson wanting to host a conference for just his church people, but inviting the nation....  ??? Oh well...

 

[Exell]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

 

[Bravo]

Okay, so wait a second here. So this isn't about the Gaithers? Bill and Gloria will NOT be there? That title is SO misleading!!! :-\

 

[myeyesareopen]

On a different note, a friend of mine was asked to pastor FBC, but he mentioned to another friend of mine that the only way he would accept the job was that two things would have to be mandated:

Really? That is how it worked? They shopped the job around until they found someone who said yes? Then that person was presented as The One They Miraculously Prayed Down From Heaven?

 

[RAIDER]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

So why have staff people (who sat there and let Schaap teach and preach heresy) teach afternoon sessions?  Why not have a FBCH revival meeting with an evangelist?

 

[16KJV11]

On a different note, a friend of mine was asked to pastor FBC, but he mentioned to another friend of mine that the only way he would accept the job was that two things would have to be mandated:

Really? That is how it worked? They shopped the job around until they found someone who said yes? Then that person was presented as The One They Miraculously Prayed Down From Heaven?

What should they have done?  Waited until someone contacted them?

 

[BALAAM]

The question remains, at least in my mind...
Doesn't the hierarchy at FBC/HAC know the disgust that many feel over the reputation that Schaap and his willing staff accomplices have brought on themselves over the last 10 years?
I don't hate HAC, I'm not disassociating myself with it all, but I'm certainly not going to sit under their tutelage at a 'pastor's' type of conference for a week.
On a different note, a friend of mine was asked to pastor FBC, but he mentioned to another friend of mine that the only way he would accept the job was that two things would have to be mandated:
1. The dismissal of most of the staff.
2. The closure of Hyles Anderson College.
As much as I hate to think of HAC closing, that may not be a bad idea.
There's too much manusha associated with it all.

In answer to your question; No most of the hierarchy thinks the disgust is for Jack S and nothing more. As one of them said to me, "We had a huge problem with what Schaap did but that is behind us now. We took care of the problem."

Until some of these guys step away from their mecca and see fbch as a lot of others see it, they will never see the problem taken care of.

 

[16KJV11]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

So why have staff people (who sat there and let Schaap teach and preach heresy) teach afternoon sessions?  Why not have a FBCH revival meeting with an evangelist?

When you have an evangelist preach a series of messages at a church, you as a church are humbly submitting to what God is going to teach you thru that man of God for that period of time.
Not only the church people are submitting, but the pastor as well.
As a pastor, I always look at revivals that way.
God has something to teach me and the church.

My estimation is that the prevailing attitude at FBC has been and is now: that there is no one that can teach us anything. 
Letting an evangelist who has no one to impress preach would be like saying that there is something we don't know and we need to grow and become more spiritual.
We need to humble ourselves.
The leadership at FBC has yet to figure this out.
I don't believe that can happen when you have a bunch of guest preachers all preaching their 'sugar stick' messages.

 

[myeyesareopen]

What should they have done?  Waited until someone contacted them?

I was under the impression that the selection committee fasted and prayed until God showed them who they were supposed to ask, but then that person was not "asked to be the pastor" but rather was "asked to candidate for the position of pastor"

Sounds like someone was basically approached and told he could have the job if he wanted it...and that totally takes out the candidating / membership vote aspect of it.

Of course, I was also disappointed that there were not a number of candidates presented...I envisioned it would be a process whereby several candidates were introduced over a period of time, and then the church would vote and whoever got the most votes would win.  I didn't realize we were going to be presented with one candidate only.

 

[16KJV11]

What should they have done?  Waited until someone contacted them?

I was under the impression that the selection committee fasted and prayed until God showed them who they were supposed to ask, but then that person was not "asked to be the pastor" but rather was "asked to candidate for the position of pastor"

Sounds like someone was basically approached and told he could have the job if he wanted it...and that totally takes out the candidating / membership vote aspect of it.

Of course, I was also disappointed that there were not a number of candidates presented...I envisioned it would be a process whereby several candidates were introduced over a period of time, and then the church would vote and whoever got the most votes would win.  I didn't realize we were going to be presented with one candidate only.

I apologize for making a statement that I should not have.
I do not know that this person was 'asked to be the pastor' or not.  I do know that they wanted him to candidate and he did not even want to candidate.
I am sorry for mis-leading you.

 

[prophet]

What should they have done?  Waited until someone contacted them?

I was under the impression that the selection committee fasted and prayed until God showed them who they were supposed to ask, but then that person was not "asked to be the pastor" but rather was "asked to candidate for the position of pastor"

Sounds like someone was basically approached and told he could have the job if he wanted it...and that totally takes out the candidating / membership vote aspect of it.

Of course, I was also disappointed that there were not a number of candidates presented...I envisioned it would be a process whereby several candidates were introduced over a period of time, and then the church would vote and whoever got the most votes would win.  I didn't realize we were going to be presented with one candidate only.

It is "not going to be a popularity contest"-Jack Hyles
  It is the way the candidating was set up by Pastor Hyles before he died.  One candidate at a time gets an up or down vote.  The leadership knows this, but uses language to the effect that 'this is the one'.  So the last 2 Candidates were presented as 'God's will...now let's vote'.

Anishinabe

 

[prophet]

What should they have done?  Waited until someone contacted them?

I was under the impression that the selection committee fasted and prayed until God showed them who they were supposed to ask, but then that person was not "asked to be the pastor" but rather was "asked to candidate for the position of pastor"

Sounds like someone was basically approached and told he could have the job if he wanted it...and that totally takes out the candidating / membership vote aspect of it.

Of course, I was also disappointed that there were not a number of candidates presented...I envisioned it would be a process whereby several candidates were introduced over a period of time, and then the church would vote and whoever got the most votes would win.  I didn't realize we were going to be presented with one candidate only.

It is "not going to be a popularity contest"-Jack Hyles
  It is the way the candidating was set up by Pastor Hyles before he died.  One candidate at a time gets an up or down vote.  The leadership knows this, but uses language to the effect that 'this is the one'.  So the last 2 Candidates were presented as 'God's will...now let's vote'.

Anishinabe

 

[bgwilkinson]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

So why have staff people (who sat there and let Schaap teach and preach heresy) teach afternoon sessions?  Why not have a FBCH revival meeting with an evangelist?

When you have an evangelist preach a series of messages at a church, you as a church are humbly submitting to what God is going to teach you thru that man of God for that period of time.
Not only the church people are submitting, but the pastor as well.
As a pastor, I always look at revivals that way.
God has something to teach me and the church.

My estimation is that the prevailing attitude at FBC has been and is now: that there is no one that can teach us anything. 
Letting an evangelist who has no one to impress preach would be like saying that there is something we don't know and we need to grow and become more spiritual.
We need to humble ourselves.
The leadership at FBC has yet to figure this out.
I don't believe that can happen when you have a bunch of guest preachers all preaching their 'sugar stick' messages.

That is what many IFBs seem to believe. It gives employment for retired pastors I guess.
I do not ever remember Bro. Hyles having a Man of God evangelist come in for a church wide revival.

He always said he was the evangelist and he would lead the revival meetings. We had them every week.
We did not need some outsider coming in.

As a church congregation we were not accustomed to having a big time Man of God type monopolize a whole week of our time. Bro. Hyles was the only Man of God we needed.

We do however have them come in for our youth dept. on a regular basis.

 

[bgwilkinson]

What should they have done?  Waited until someone contacted them?

I was under the impression that the selection committee fasted and prayed until God showed them who they were supposed to ask, but then that person was not "asked to be the pastor" but rather was "asked to candidate for the position of pastor"

Sounds like someone was basically approached and told he could have the job if he wanted it...and that totally takes out the candidating / membership vote aspect of it.

Of course, I was also disappointed that there were not a number of candidates presented...I envisioned it would be a process whereby several candidates were introduced over a period of time, and then the church would vote and whoever got the most votes would win.  I didn't realize we were going to be presented with one candidate only.

It is "not going to be a popularity contest"-Jack Hyles
  It is the way the candidating was set up by Pastor Hyles before he died.  One candidate at a time gets an up or down vote.  The leadership knows this, but uses language to the effect that 'this is the one'.  So the last 2 Candidates were presented as 'God's will...now let's vote'.

Anishinabe

During the last weeks of 2012 we had many men speak for us. They had to know that they were really a candidate for our top job. Go look at the You Tube videos from those weeks and you will see that we did have many candidates preach for us.

When it gets down to it, we were unable to find many men that were qualified.
You had guys who had huge family problems. Guys with bad reputations etc. Not Blameless. Famous but disqualified for the pastorate. They could still be evangelists though. I will not go any further.

All the deacons and many members prayed for months for God's wisdom. As the months went on it became obvious who our new pastor should be. It was a process of elimination. There was only one man left standing.

There were very few men who were qualified to pastor our church.

You have to be willing to do it the FBC way.

You might say the pond is very very small and the number of fish is even smaller.

 

[myeyesareopen]

You have to be willing to do it the FBC way.

wow.

 

[16KJV11]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

So why have staff people (who sat there and let Schaap teach and preach heresy) teach afternoon sessions?  Why not have a FBCH revival meeting with an evangelist?

When you have an evangelist preach a series of messages at a church, you as a church are humbly submitting to what God is going to teach you thru that man of God for that period of time.
Not only the church people are submitting, but the pastor as well.
As a pastor, I always look at revivals that way.
God has something to teach me and the church.

My estimation is that the prevailing attitude at FBC has been and is now: that there is no one that can teach us anything. 
Letting an evangelist who has no one to impress preach would be like saying that there is something we don't know and we need to grow and become more spiritual.
We need to humble ourselves.
The leadership at FBC has yet to figure this out.
I don't believe that can happen when you have a bunch of guest preachers all preaching their 'sugar stick' messages.

That is what many IFBs seem to believe. It gives employment for retired pastors I guess.
I do not ever remember Bro. Hyles having a Man of God evangelist come in for a church wide revival.

He always said he was the evangelist and he would lead the revival meetings. We had them every week.
We did not need some outsider coming in.

As a church congregation we were not accustomed to having a big time Man of God type monopolize a whole week of our time. Bro. Hyles was the only Man of God we needed.

We do however have them come in for our youth dept. on a regular basis.

Who says he has to be a 'big time' man of God?

 

[bgwilkinson]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

So why have staff people (who sat there and let Schaap teach and preach heresy) teach afternoon sessions?  Why not have a FBCH revival meeting with an evangelist?

When you have an evangelist preach a series of messages at a church, you as a church are humbly submitting to what God is going to teach you thru that man of God for that period of time.
Not only the church people are submitting, but the pastor as well.
As a pastor, I always look at revivals that way.
God has something to teach me and the church.

My estimation is that the prevailing attitude at FBC has been and is now: that there is no one that can teach us anything. 
Letting an evangelist who has no one to impress preach would be like saying that there is something we don't know and we need to grow and become more spiritual.
We need to humble ourselves.
The leadership at FBC has yet to figure this out.
I don't believe that can happen when you have a bunch of guest preachers all preaching their 'sugar stick' messages.

That is what many IFBs seem to believe. It gives employment for retired pastors I guess.
I do not ever remember Bro. Hyles having a Man of God evangelist come in for a church wide revival.

He always said he was the evangelist and he would lead the revival meetings. We had them every week.
We did not need some outsider coming in.

As a church congregation we were not accustomed to having a big time Man of God type monopolize a whole week of our time. Bro. Hyles was the only Man of God we needed.

We do however have them come in for our youth dept. on a regular basis.

Who says he has to be a 'big time' man of God?

Bro. Hyles was the famous Big Time Man of God with the incredible drawing power to pull in the crowds.
We never had anyone come in that could match him except maybe John Rice or Lee Roberson.

 

[BALAAM]

I have no problem with this conference. I talked with several administrators while it was still in the planning phases and told them I thought it was a great idea. It is a "homecoming" conference, it is not about spreading or gaining more national influence. A lot of friends and alumni came to Pastor's School every year and enjoyed a wonderful time of fellowship. This conference is a humble, low-key attempt to recapture that fellowship. I am looking forward to it, and I hope a lot of my old classmates and ministry co-workers are going to be there.

So why have staff people (who sat there and let Schaap teach and preach heresy) teach afternoon sessions?  Why not have a FBCH revival meeting with an evangelist?

When you have an evangelist preach a series of messages at a church, you as a church are humbly submitting to what God is going to teach you thru that man of God for that period of time.
Not only the church people are submitting, but the pastor as well.
As a pastor, I always look at revivals that way.
God has something to teach me and the church.

My estimation is that the prevailing attitude at FBC has been and is now: that there is no one that can teach us anything. 
Letting an evangelist who has no one to impress preach would be like saying that there is something we don't know and we need to grow and become more spiritual.
We need to humble ourselves.
The leadership at FBC has yet to figure this out.
I don't believe that can happen when you have a bunch of guest preachers all preaching their 'sugar stick' messages.

That is what many IFBs seem to believe. It gives employment for retired pastors I guess.
I do not ever remember Bro. Hyles having a Man of God evangelist come in for a church wide revival.

He always said he was the evangelist and he would lead the revival meetings. We had them every week.
We did not need some outsider coming in.

As a church congregation we were not accustomed to having a big time Man of God type monopolize a whole week of our time. Bro. Hyles was the only Man of God we needed.

We do however have them come in for our youth dept. on a regular basis.

Who says he has to be a 'big time' man of God?

That IS the fbc way!