In the process of trying to establish and build God’s church here in San Luis Obispo, I have not been able to invest the desired time and energy in posting to this blog. This means that there are relatively few articles communicating my concerns, views, and teachings from Scripture. (BTW, this is primarialy for the benefit of the congregation that God has given me oversight of.)
Last May I published a review of a message that was preached at the 2007 meeting of the CARBC. The message itself communicated a repudiation of the position of ecclesiastical separation affirmed by the GARBC at the national meeting in 2006; this message was very concerning to pastors within the CARBC and to members in our own church.
Two things have arisen out of this:
1. Communication from a friend within the CARBC was that–in its context–the message was meant to be a call for a less caustic and narrow-minded view of separation. This goal is one in which I would affirm; it is easy in the stand for truth to become so tight that one cannot get along with anyone that does not dot his “i’”s and cross his “t”s the same way. This pastor friend gently prodded me to consider how the review came across to my CARBC brethren: an attack against them and the CARBC. After prayer and consideration, I can see how that perception is true. As a newcomer to the fellowship, my only response has ended up being negative, and for that I am truly sorry.
2. Since there are no balancing articles and views expressed, the review appears to be being used to spread the rumor that our church is pulling out of the GARBC. This is not true at all. There is no movement within our church (including its pastor) to change our status with the GARBC or CARBC. We are encouraged that the fellowship stood up and affirmed our historical position of separation and have no cause to go elsewhere. We certainly make no apologies that we are conservative, but there are many others within the fellowship who share our views.
In light of the misunderstandings that have arisen, I have removed the review from this blog. The review was not meant to be an attack so much as a very concerned response, and I apologize for communicating otherwise.