My Analysis of Dr. Joel Tetreau's Three Lines in the Sand article on SharperIron

Over at SharperIron, Dr. Joel Tetreau, Senior Pastor at Southwest Valley Baptist Church in Gilbert, Arizona and an Adjunct Professor at International Baptist College in Tempe, Arizona has posted an article entitled, Three Lines in the Sand (this article has been broken into several parts and can be found here, here, here, and here). This article is an extension and revision of an article that he published in May of 2005 entitled, A Line in the Sand. The gist of these articles is the establishment of a taxonomy in which various "types" or "moods" of Fundamentalism (or fundamentalism, if you prefer) are described.

I have basically been waiting until the posting of the entire article was completed before making comments. (I did ask one question about Dr. Singleton after the first post, but I have not posted on any of the threads other than that question, I believe.) I wanted to hear Dr. Tetreau out and see what it was he was advocating. At this point, all but the final section has been posted and it my understanding that the last section is going to discuss his "Type C fundamentalism." I admit that I am making these comments without having had an opportunity to view this last section, but based upon reading and interacting with Dr. Tetreau (or Joel, as he would prefer), I am pretty sure I know where he is going with the last section. (I reserve the right to advise and amend my comments if he comes out with something radically different in the last section than what I have been led to believe.)

These articles have been the source of much discussion in the Fundamental blogosphere - at the time of this writing, the three posts written by Joel have generated over 16,000 views and 400 comments alone at SharperIron. In addition to Joel's post at SharperIron, there have at least two "Filings" threads on SI regarding this topic and one other thread - generating another 3,500 views between them. Away from SharperIron, Dr. Dave Doran has given an assessment of the presentation on Pastor Chris Anderson's Blog at My Two Cents and Dr. (almost) Mike Riley, who serves with Joel at IBC has written an evaluation of Joel's presentation as well at his blog (I have not yet had a chance to read Mike's comments, yet, but expect to do so when I get the chance).

As I read the articles, there is a sense in which part of me thinks that this whole discussion is "much ado about nothing." However, when I consider the fact that this has generated so much discussion, I am inclined to think that there may indeed be value in taking the time to consider what it is that Joel has written. Further, as the terms have been thrown around now for over a year and we now finally have an explanation of the terms, it makes sense at this time to evaluate what Joel has written. Finally, even though the articles are very recent, I have already had one person use Joel's Types to ask me about a church that I had recommended to them, so people are already trying to use the Types for labeling churches and I feel that fact alone warrants a response.

Joel seems to be really good guy. As I told the lady who asked me about the church, Joel "is a good old Arizona boy and us guys from Arizona have to stick together - even if I have not been back "home" to Arizona in over 15 years." I genuinely like Joel from what I know of him. He has a good spirit, can be very humorous at times and has even commented on my blog. Please do not take any disagreement that I may indicate in this argument as a personal attack on Joel. It is not intended to be so.

When Joel first posted his presentation last year, I believe I was probably the first one to take objection to what he had written about Types - albeit there were only two types back then. Many of my same concerns from that original discussion are still unanswered in this more lengthy revision. (My post in this regard can be found here.)

My comments here are not being made because Joel has offended me with his post or that he has struck some kind of nerve. (I find it funny that some of the "Type Bs" on SI - to use Joel's Types - have repeatedly tried to use the liberal methodology of claiming that disagreement with something equals fearing that thing. It has been interesting to see them attack Greg as though he is a "Typophobe" because he has had some legitimate questions about the whole taxonomy.)

So, below, for my two or three readers who are still reading, is my assessment and comments about Dr. Joel Tetreau's Three Lines in the Sand.

1. The Types as presented to Dr. Tetreau are too broad

By this, I am not referring to the fact that there are too many people in each group, but rather, that Joel has joined too many unrelated things together into his taxonomy.

If Joel had limited his discussion to an examination of three different views of separation, I believe that this could have been helpful. If he had wanted to address leadership styles or standards or demeanor or any number of things, this presentation may have been more valuable.

A. This broadness results in inaccurate characterizations

As it is presented, the categories include so many different things that it is hard to imagine that very many people completely fit into any one type and this makes the type system more than just unwieldy, it makes it inaccurate.

For instance, Joel has linked a leadership style of "dictatorship in decision making" to his Type A.

I had seen in Type A Fundamentalism a high degree of "dictatorship in decision making." I had been convinced that in the early New Testament church there was mutual submission and consideration in the decision-making process. I saw almost none of that with most Type A ministries. What I did see were pastors who believed they had a right to make the final call on all decisions. I saw (and continue to see with many of the A guys, ministers who believe they are answerable to no one except God). They might take items to the congregation but only if they absolutely have to. I believe that elders (a plurality of them) should oversee the spiritual sphere of decision making, and the deacons should oversee the physical minutiae of decision making.

Included in this view is the idea that Type A's are opposed to shared leadership and that shared leadership (read: multiple elder rule) is something that is connected to Type B. Notice the following statement by Joel:

Type A's typically hate the concept of a plurality of leadership

(See his comments on Chris' blog for more examples of this view.)

Now, regardless of my position on multiple elder rule, the reality is that this issue is not related to a view of separation. The Free Presbyterians and Bible Presbyterians have been known as holding to a view of separation that Joel would characterize as Type A, yet have a Presbyterian form of government. The Ohio Bible Fellowship - again, a group that Joel has characterized as Type A - also have many churches that hold to a multiple-elder rule type of polity. If Joel's connecting these two issues were a legitimate connection, it would seem that one of the most outspoken groups of Type As (the OBF) should at least fit into his taxonomy.

For what its worth, I doubt that you would find anyone in my church who would claim that I am anywhere close to a "dictator in decision making" - if anything, I tend to wait too long in decisions because I want to have a consensus before we move on just about everything.


B. This broadness results in a limited usefulness

By creating categories that are so broad, he has limited the usefulness of his categories. For instance, when the lady asked me whether the church I had recommended to her was a Type A, B, or C church, I could not answer that question without saying things to the effect - they would probably be described as Type A in regard to this issue, Type B in regards to this issue, etc.

Now, I recognize that there are time when it is helpful to be able to say that a golden retriever is a mammal, but generally it much more helpful for someone to be able to at least say that the golden retriever is a dog.

C. This broadness results in unfair "lumping"
One of the consequences of having such broad categories is that people have to be "lumped together" to fit into the broad categories. Doing so results in characterizing people with vastly different personalities, views and ministry styles in a way that makes others think they are the same thing.

Now, to be fair, I have done this myself. In fact, one of the results of this discussion is that I have seen this error in my own approach to others. I have been the type of person who has held on to the designation of "New Evangelical" to describe men like Dever, etc. I have been wrong to do this . I still do not believe it is accurate to refer to them as Fundamentalists, but I do agree that they do not fit into the mold of what Ockenga described when he coined the term. For example, the conservative evangelicals do not question the legitimacy of separation (although they apply it or fail to apply it in a way that I believe is accurate), they do not focus on social concerns, or achieving intellectual respect, etc. I have not changed my position on my issues with this position, but I do see that I have unfairly labeled them by using too broad of a category.

When I look at Joel's taxonomy, I find the same problem. He lumps fine and reasonable men like Dr. Dave Doran with men and ministries who are dictatorial and abusive. The basis for that lumping? Not because there is really that much of a similarity between these ministries, but because they have similar views when it comes to separation from disobedient brethren.

Another example of this comes in the third part of the article, where Joel comments,

Because of their understanding of separation passages, they have developed their own forms of music, literature, even Bible versions.

Here Joel indicates that Type As have developed their own forms of Bible versions. The only thing I can imagine he would mean by this is something to do with the King James Version. The problem of lumping is again seen here, as two of the people he is currently discussing this with - including one he has essentially accused of being the prototypical flagship producer of A clones (Dr. Dave Doran) - uses the NASB. Furthermore, many of the A schools that were listed by Joel were in the Coalition that produced the video in response to PCC's attacks about Bible versions. Again, this is an example of the unfair and inaccurate lumping produced by the taxonomy and explanation that Joel has produced.

2. The Types wrongly connect positions with dispositions.

A second significant issue that I have with Joel's Three Lines in the Sand (by the way, would not there only be two lines in order to produce three groups) is that he wrongly connects a position with a disposition.

While Dr. Tetreau repeatedly comments that being an A is not a bad thing, his words belie the fact that it is indeed a bad thing.

Notice some of the language and descriptions used by Dr. Tetreau concerning Type As.

"The pyramid" refers to the strict and often abusive approach to a centralized and dictatorial approach to decision making found with (IMO) an usually high percentage of Type A senior pastors.

Friends, I am saying that Type A's do have more of these unpleasant distinctives....and in part because of the way your sub-culture has engendered militancy. (ellipses in the original)

Now we disagree with the Type A and Type A+ regular practice of internal strife over ecclesiastical politics (see the history of the MBA from the 60's and 70's).

But I have become very choosy as to which Type A's I will work with. The list grows smaller with each passing year

He will be loyal to "it" and only "it. ("It" being Fundamentalism.)

Type B fundamentalists are almost to the man, painfully aware of the rude image many of their Type A mentors demonstrated throughout years of leadership

The overall picture of Type A that has been painted is abusive, unpleasant, dictatorial, loyal to Fundamentalism instead of loyal to Christ, rude and ungentlemanly.

Now, I will grant you that Joel does make qualifications - it is not ALL Type A, but it is "most", "many", and an "unusually high percentage." Clearly the understanding is that something about the position of Type A (assumed to be their view of separation) leads them to this disposition of being abusive and rude. It may be that it is not the position that leads them to this disposition, but their disposition that leads them to this position. Either way, it is clear that the two things are connected in Joel's taxonomy.

In making this connection, Joel discredits his taxonomy in two ways.

A. This connection is inaccurate.

When I look at the men who are currently living and ministering that have been referred to as Type A, I fail to see how a charge of abuse and rudeness can be made fairly as a general charge against those who hold to a strict view of separation.

For instance, in this very discussion one only needs to look at some of the principals to see that gentlemanly behavior is the norm, not the exception for those labeled Type A. Dr. Dave Doran has been blasted as a Type A in this discussion, yet his responses on this issue (as on all other issues that I have seen) has been very gracious and respectful. Pastor Chris Anderson, Matt Herbster, Pastor Mike Harding, Dr. Rolland McCune and Pastor Greg Linscott have all responded kindly and appropriately - even when being accused of responding out of fear that Joel's taxonomy has hit them where it hurts. Even if I give you that Don Johnson (who seems to be a favorite whipping boy of the Type B guys) may have responded too strongly (a charge I am not sure I agree with - at least not in the initial response by Don that was jumped on), you still have the vast majority of the men who would be labeled Type A by Joel's taxonomy who do not even come close to fulfilling the disposition that Joel applies to them.

When you go beyond this discussion and consider some of the other most frequent posters on SI who are probably labeled "A", you will find the same thing to be true. Christian Markle and Pastor Scott Markle are exemplary gentlemen in everything that I have read from them at SI. Mr. Andy Efting is always gracious and reasonable. Missionary JGleason is a kind gentleman. I am not picking out random people here to prove my point. I went through the top posters at SI and chose out the 10 posters who were most clearly identifiable as or accused of being Type A. Of those top posters, (which also includes Greg Linscott, Chris Anderson, Julie Herbster and Matt Herbster who I have already mentioned) I cannot see anyone legitimately laying the charge of rudeness on any of these men except for possibly me and Don Johnson (and I think that most of Don's curmudgeon reputation is not really deserved).

I would further add to this by pointing out the fact that many of the "Type B" individuals are just as forceful and rude as the "Type A" are accused of being when it comes to the issues about which they are passionate. See the responses on some of the threads where people's salvation was questioned and consider the response to some of the Type Bs on some of the KJVO threads where Type A+s and Type Bs exchanged barbs going in both directions. (I am not excusing the Type A+s that were involved in those threads, I am only pointing out that the supposedly "kinder, gentler" Fundamentalism - oops, fundamentalism with a small f :) - can be "not so kind or gentle" themselves.

The problem with the rudeness or the abuse or the dictatorial leadership, etc. is not a Type problem, but a people problem. All men are sinners and even saved sinners still have a sin nature that can rear its ugly head. It is patently unfair to ascribe the sinfulness of some individuals as a characteristic of a whole group of individuals.

B. This connection builds onto itself.

Not only is the connection inaccurate, but by placing this description as part of his taxonomy, Joel is actually encouraging the idea that this describes these individuals and is causing the perception to be built up even further.

In other words, if something is said by a Type A that could be viewed as mean or insensitive, it is assumed that it was meant as mean and insensitive and is just part of his "A" ness. So, when Don commented about "lengthy meanderings" it was jumped on as "meanspirited" and "small" and a call was made for a moderator. When the moderator did not find anything wrong with the statement, even he got questioned about it. Now, I know a little about "lengthy meanderings" - this post is proof of that. - and while I may not have used the same expression, I don't think it was intended as "meanspirited." I would also venture that if the same kind of comment were made about a post like the post I am currently writing no one would jump at the Type B person who made such a comment to me.

By including the disposition as part of the Type, Joel is encouraging people to think of Type As in this way.

In a post on Bob's blog about two months ago, Bob Bixby (surely one of the prototypical Type B leaders) said rather boldly to Don, "You are not my friend." Can you imagine the reaction if Don had said this to Bob instead of the other way around? It would have been seen as characteristic of his being a "Type A" and his rudeness would have been brought up as another example of Type A.

There are other additional comments that could be made on this. I think Chris Anderson and Dave Doran have both done a good job of addressing some of the things. It is getting late and I have a busy day tomorrow, so I will close this down for now.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Standards and Fences - Rerun

There has been a lot of discussion lately about Fences again on one of the blogs that are popular in Fundamentalism. I have not had the time to read all of those posts, yet, so please do not interpret this post as an answer to Tom's posts. (I may have a desire to answer Tom's posts once he has completed all of them - including his explanation - but, this is not it).

Standards and Fences (Originally posted - August 5, 2006)

There are many today who like to equate having standards and guidelines as a form of legalism or Phariseeism and as contrary to the grace of God working in a person's life. The end of this equation is that anyone who advocates that others adopt standards in their lives to help keep themselves from falling into a particular sin is "adding to the Scripture" and is teaching for doctrine the commandments of men.

It seems interesting to me that the ones who I most often interact with on this type of conversation are people who have previously been in Fundamentalism, usually of the more extreme variety. It seems to me that there must be something in leaving the extremes that tends to move you towards the opposite extreme.

In one recent conversation on this topic, one individual commented (not to me) that "You don't have a supernatural religion, therefore you can't keep your thoughts pure without ‘going beyond what is written.'" Another an individual commented that "standards are a human-based solution to a deadness so profound that only God can change it" and "Standards promoters feel it is important to have faith, the correct doctrine, and the Triune Deity, but instead of actually having these things, they may only image (sic - I assume he meant imagine) that they do. The commands and wisdom of the Scriptures must be shored up where necessary by fences and rules. The Pharisees believed in this way..."

So, if I follow this reasoning, the following things are true about those who believe that having and maintaining standards can be a good thing.

1. They do not have a supernatural religion, but a fake religion.
2. Standards are "going beyond what is written" because you can't keep yourself pure with that fake religion.
3. Standards are the result of a profound deadness.
4. Standards promoters do not have faith, correct doctrine or the Triune Deity, just think they do.
5. Standards promoters do not believe in the sufficiency of Scripture.
6. Standards promoters are following the path of the Pharisees.

The reality, of course, is that numbers 1, 3, & 4 (at least) are all the same thing - those who believe in having, keeping, and encouraging others in the area of standards are lost.

I recognize that there are many groups out there who believe that keeping their standards are what makes or keeps them holy. Sadly, those individuals are severely mistaken. We do not merit grace, it is the gift of God. However, there is a large difference between having, keeping and encouraging standards and believing that it is those standards that make me right with God.

I am married. As a result of being married, there are some things that I will not do because I love my wife. There are some guidelines that I have set up so that I will not displease her (even though I am sure that there are plenty of other areas where I do displease her). I follow these things because I love Missy and I do not want to displease her, not because I believe that keeping those guidelines is all I need in order to keep my relationship with Missy what it should be.

Not only are having appropriate guidelines and standards helpful from a practical standpoint, they are also consistent with Biblical teaching about these things.

For instance, the Apostle Paul writes in Romans 13:14,

But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.

It seems to me that in order to fulfill that admonition, one must have an understanding of what types of things provide for our flesh so that we can avoid making provision for it.

Even more pointedly, Jesus Christ Himself seems to give a radical view of the seriousness of setting up fences so that we do not fall.

Notice these words of Jesus Christ,

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

It seems strange to me that when someone argues, "If having unfiltered internet access causes thee to look after a woman to lust, thou shouldest get a filter on your internet rather than persist in that sin" they are viewed as being legalistic and having a false religion, when Christ says "pluck out the eye" if it causes you to stumble or "cut off that hand" if doing so will keep you from going down this pathway to sin.

Now, I recognize that the "non-standards" people will argue that "well, you are not Christ", but it seems to me that the principle from Christ is still applicable - if there is something we can do that keeps us away from those temptations (e.g. erecting a standard or a practice to avoid the problem - or "cutting off our hand"), then surely this is a wise and prudent thing to do.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

File under - Christianity, Fundamentalism

An Interview of Evangelist Mark Kittrell

Bible Community Church in Mentor, Ohio has been hosting Evangelist Mark Kittrell for a week of meetings at the church this past week. Soon after I began this blog, we had Evangelist Kittrell at our church - Fellowship Baptist Church of Salisbury, Maryland - and I posted a series of reports about those excellent meetings at our church. (Those reports can be found here, here, here, and here.) Pastor Andy Rupert (who is the Assistant Pastor at Bible Community Church in Mentor, Ohio)over at Isle Kerguelen has posted an article and an mp3 of an interview with Evangelist Mark Kittrell - here.

In the interview, Mr. Kittrell discusses some aspects of his personal testimony, some practical questions about life on the road and its effect on the family, the concept of "evangelist" and some questions about Fundamentalism - both its definition and some current issues regarding Fundamentalism.

Some isolated quotes from the interview (of course, listen to the full interview to understand the context):

Regarding the ministry of the Evangelist:
When God's people are perfectly equipped, then God's people will become busy about true ministry and then the entire body will be built up.

It does entail a particular passion and burden for the "good news", the Gospel, seeing people saved.

Regarding Fundamentalism

I think that separation is inherent, almost, with a definition of Fundamentalism.

A fundamentalist, though, is not just a fundamentalist based on his stand on the doctrines, he is also a fundamentalist based on his spirit of holding those doctrines.

Your spirit and your stand must agree.

I can take a strong stand, but I can be very gracious in that stand. I can be firm in believing and adhering to the doctrines of Scripture, but I can do it with the right spirit.

Regarding "Conservative Evangelicalism"
I think we can emulate their desire for exegeting and expositing the Word of God and having a real love for the truth, because we have a real passion for God. But, I should be able to do that as a Fundamentalist.

Regarding the "infamous Frank Sansone"

Frank traveled one summer with our team and did an excellent job.

I noticed that he wanted to move on pretty quickly beyond this question when it was asked :). He failed to mention that once I had traveled with them, they never again took out another team of guys - we were too much of a hassle. (In truth, they never did take out another team, but I think - hope - there were other reasons for that decision - such as the birth of their first child, etc.)

As I think I mentioned on one of those other posts that I referenced at the beginning of this post, Mr. Kittrell is not only a good preacher, but a Godly man who humbly walks with God. Mark and Tammisue Kittrell both had a great influence on the lives of me and my wife and we are thankful for their ministry. (I am hoping one of these days to actually do a web-site for their ministry, but I have not done so yet.)

Anyway, head on over to Isle Kerguelen for the interview.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Very funny cartoon

I know nothing about the comic strip Foxtrot, but the one from yesterday (Tuesday, Nov. 7) is very funny. The author manages to combine a few of my favorite things in a short comic strip - theology, football, and alternative word meanings.

You can find the strip at this location.

Just someone else's thoughts,

Frank

How Should A Person Respond to False Accusations?

(In a way, this reminds me of some things that were raised on a previous post about The Rights of the Victims and the Accused that I wrote back in January.)

Most of us have heard about the accusations that have been made against Ted Haggard. I imagine that, in time, we will know the truth regarding these accusations and I tend to think the best way for those not involved in a situation to respond is with a "wait and see" attitude. Over the years, there have been plenty of times in which false accusations have been made. And, over the years, there have been plenty of times when true accusations have been made - including accusations that shocked people.

Now, I am not a fan of Mr. Haggard or of the NAE (I think the inclusivism of the NAE waters down the Gospel, among other things), but I don't think this is the time to deal with those issues - especially if one wants to use this still unproven accusation as a club.

My question, however, stems from the response to this situation.

Well-known blogger Phil Johnson has written an article entitled, "Thoughts on Today's Scandal".

While I actually agree with Phil on much of what he says in this article, I do have a question - not necessarily even a disagreement - about his first point.

Phil states,

If he really didn't do it, he should not have resigned. If the accusations against him were totally false, there was no reason whatsoever to resign—in fact, that would be a totally wrongheaded and completely counterproductive thing to do

The question that has been bugging me is "How do we respond to something like this?"

Let me lay out a couple of parameters and then I would love to have some input on this.

1. Assume this accusation is againts you or against your Pastor.
2. Assume this accusation is totally baseless and untrue.
3. Assume that there is some type of constituency involved that is also being harmed by the mere accusation (e.g. a church, Christian college, etc.)


On the one hand, there is definitely a view out there that to resign or step down is essentially an admittance of guilt. This seems to be the view that Phil is taking here. When I watched Countdown with Keith Olberman (sp?) this morning, (something I have seen maybe three times in my life), he seemed to taking the same view - as have many of the headlines I have seen online.

On the other hand, if you do not resign, the organization you are part of generally gets accused of being involved in a cover-up, etc. It seems that, in general, when there are accusations against police for false shootings, etc., the general policy is usually that the officers in question are placed on some type of "administrative leave" while the investigation is ongoing. If I understand what happened here, it seems like the person in question did not actually resign his church, but temporarily stepped down while the allegations could be investigated.

So, what is the right response? Is there a third response? How would you recommend handling something like this? Assuming (for the sake of discussion) that an accusation like this was made purely for political motives or due to some personal animosity (it would not be the first time), how does this affect the concept of "blameless" and "of good report of them which are without"? (I am not saying it should affect this, I am just asking the questions).

I would love to hear the thoughts of those who are wiser than I on this topic.

Just my questions,

Frank

Don't get an education - get stuck in Iraq

Caution: The following post is political in nature.

By now, almost everyone has heard the comments by Sen. John Kerry in which he stated that if you don't make the most of your education, you get "stuck in Iraq."

Mr. Kerry now says that this was a "botched joke" that was aimed at President Bush.

Assuming that he is being honest on this, that it really was not meant to be an insult to the troops like it appeared, what about what he is claiming that he was trying to say? It seems that he is saying that President Bush did not "try to be smart" and that this is why we are involved in what he views is a wrong war in Iraq.

For most of my life, I have heard repeated attempts by the liberal elites to paint all conservatives as uneducated and stupid. During my teen years, I repeatedly heard that President Reagan was a populist hack who was only successful because he could speak well from having been an actor.

During the last six or so years, it has often been portrayed as though President Bush is dumb. In 2000, it was Bush is dumb and Gore is really smart. In 2004, it was Bush is dumb and Kerry is really smart.

I will grant you that President Bush probably brings some of this on himself due to time when he messes up what he is trying to say.

However, for Kerry to indicate that Bush is dumb is an example of the pot calling the kettle black and the fact that the media generally aides in this portrayal is preposterous.

When Kerry was in Yale, he received 4 D's in his freshman year out of 10 classes. He had a cumultive 76 for his four years. (By comparison, the man who he is claiming he was trying to say was dumb had a cumultive 77.) So, by Kerry's own claim, he was saying that Bush is "stuck in Iraq" because of a lack of success in his educational experience when Bush actually did better at the same school (Yale). It would seem to me that he, for one, should at least keep his mouth shut before calling other people dumb.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Reformation Sunday

On October 31, 1517 Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the church in Wittenburg, Germany. While the 95 Theses were originally written in Latin and designed as a challenge to debate, they were soon translated into the common German tongue and the flames of the Reformation had begun.

Surely, Martin Luther never expected the results that came from his simple act, but God chose to use it and a great work of God was done throughout the continent as people were called back to a more Biblical view of Christianity.

Reformation Sunday is a great opportunity to teach important truths. Unfortunately, many in Fundamental circles fail to use this opportunity and for many this day goes right on by without so much as a thought about what God began in Germany in 1517.

Last year for Reformation Sunday, I preached a message that dealt with the Five Solas of the Reformation. Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone), Sola Christos (Christ Alone), Sola Fide (Faith Alone), Sola Gratia (Grace Alone) and Sola Dei Gloria (Glory to God Alone). The message was very well received as we looked at these important truths - examining the historical context as well as the Biblical support.

This morning, I went a little different direction for Reformation Sunday. Rather than focusing on the specifics of the Reformation, I instead used the backdrop of the Reformation to urge us to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3 or Jude 1:3 depending upon your preference and the preference of your computer Bible program).

As Luther stood up and contended for the faith and against the error of his day, we are called to do the same today. It is not enough to rejoice and admire those who have fought before, we must ourselves take a stand and be willing to fight for the faith.

I dealt with the charge to contend for the faith - that it was needful and an exhortation (and that similar charges repeatedly appear throughout Scripture). I wonder if sometimes the reason we need such strong words about contending for the faith is because it is to easy to "go along to get along" and we live in a Rodney King "Why Can't We All Just Get Along World" that values tolerance as THE Supreme Virtue (unless, of course, the toleration is being asked for Biblical Christianity).

I also dealt with the characteristics of our contention for the faith - primarily focusing on the word "epiagonizomai" and its roots - "agonizomai" and "agon". It is a great study some time to think about how God tells us to contend. (It is also a challenging thought to think through the Paul's use of this concept to describe the prayer life of Epaphras for his people - see Colossians 4:12).

Lastly, we considered the content of our contention - it is to be for "the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." It is important that when we are contending, we are contending for the faith, not just that we have a contentious personality or that we are always fighting over our pet peaves or hobby horses. It is also important that we are willing to fight in the arena that is currently under attack. The sale of indulgences is an issue that doesn't really affect anyone that I personally know right now, but Luther contended against that error of his day and God used that to bring about much greater Biblical change. We need to be willing to contend for the faith in the areas that are under attack today - whether that is Boyd's Open Theism, a seeker-sensitive mentality that designs church services to please the lost rathrer than to please God, or an 1-2-3 pray after me mentality that teaches a false and cheap repentance-free Gospel.

Anyway, we enjoyed our Reformation Sunday. I pray that yours went well, as well.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

I am thankful for my team and parents

Many of my readers are aware that I am coaching my son's Youth Soccer (U-10) team (I have even been trying to maintaining a blog about the team (www.soccerscribbles.wordpress.com).

I recently came across this article on ESPNabout a parent who pulled a gun on his son's youth football coach because the son was not getting enough playing time.

I have always been a big sports fan. When I was in 6th grade, my older brother made a plaque for me for my birthday that included a walnut shell and a miniature sports ball and said "Sports Nut."

When I read things like this, however, where a man pulls a gun on a coach over the playing time of a 6-7 year old football player, I am thankful that God has allowed me to understand a better priority in regards to sports.

I am also thankful, that, as a coach, the players and parents of the Green Machine have been a good and supportive group of folks. The players have listened well and the parents have been very supportive - in fact, I have been asked to keep the team together and coach an indoor soccer team this winter.

Folks, if you have children in sports, please think strongly about what you are teaching your children as you watch or coach a team.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Great Time at Hardingville Bible Conference

What a blessing we had at the Hardingville Bible Church Bible Conference on Wednesday. It was great to be able to get up to New Jersey and to see some old friends and have a little time of fellowship with the good folks up there at Hardingville. I only wish that our schedule would have worked out so that we could have spent more time with our friends and so that we could have heard the other men preach.

In previous years, Hardingville has had a number of great men preach in their Bible Conferences. Speakers in the past have included men like Pastor John Ashbrook (long-time Pastor of Bible Community Church in Mentor, Ohio), Dr. Bob Jones, III (former President of Bob Jones University), Dr. Dave Burgraff (former Dean of Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary), Dr. Sam Horn (Vice President at Northland Baptist Bible College), Dr. Stephen Hankins (Dean of the Bob Jones Seminary), and others.

This year, Hardingville did something a little bit different with their Bible Conference. Rather than bringing in one of the more well-known preachers, Hardingville brought back six men (and their families) who have served at Hardingville Bible Church in the Church Internship Program. In addition to each man preaching, the wives were to give a testimony about life in the ministry and the men were to give an update on their current ministries and relate some things from their training at Hardingville that has impacted their current ministry.

I think the concept was a great concept for a change of pace. The Church Internship Program is a vital part of the ministry at Hardingville and, through this program, God has worked through Hardingville in the preparation of a number of men for ministry. While my situation was unique (I originally came to HBC as an Assistant with Youth Emphasis with the plans of remaining in such a capacity for as long as God allowed me and eventually went through an abbreviated form of the Church Internship Program due to the experience that God had already given me in ministry), I believe that this program - or something like it - should become a part of many more Fundamental churches. Men need to be trained for ministry and a solid, Fundamental, local church is the best place for the practical "hands-on" aspects of that training. It is my desire that one day we would be able to incorporate a similar program here at Fellowship Baptist Church of Salisbury for young men who have finished their academic schooling (probably having at least an M.A. before starting here) and are in need of further training for ministry.

As my part of the Bible Conference, I did a PowerPoint presentation to update the folks on what God is doing in our lives and ministry and I preached from Romans 12:11 on Serving the Lord - in keeping with the Conference theme.

Missy did a great job with her testimony. She is not really used to speaking before people and it makes her very nervous, but she did great. She was clear, articulate, funny, and practical - maybe we should change rolls :).

Anyway, it was good to see a lot of friends and to be able to preach God's Word as part of the conference.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

You are INVITED!

This coming Wednesday - October 11, 2005, I will be preaching on Wednesday night at a Bible Conference at Hardingville Bible Church in Monroeville, New Jersey. The theme for the conference is "Serving the Lord" with a theme verse of Romans 12:11.

Hardingville Bible Church is the church where I had the privilege of serving as an Assistant from 1999-2004 - first with a youth emphasis, and then in an internship role. The Pastor, Pastor Mark Franklin, is one of the best expository preachers that I have ever heard - and I have been privileged to have heard a number of good preachers through my years.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Pastor Franklin and Hardingville Bible Church have had an internship program for a number of years in which Pastor Franklin and the folks at the church have helped to prepare young men for ministry. Rather than a short three-month program that many churches have, HBC's internship program usually lasts about 2 1/2 to 3 years before the gentleman moves on into his own ministry.

For this year's Bible Conference, Hardingville is bringing back six men who have been through the HBC Internship Program and who are now pastoring churches. Each of us gets one service, and I have the last service, which is Wednesday night at 7:00 p.m.

Looking forward to seeing some of you there.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Patience and Ministry

I recently came across these words from Dr. John Dreisbach, a long-time missionary, in an open letter to GFA missionaries. Dr. Dreisbach is a senior statesman in the area of missions and has given his life in the cause of Christ.

In the following "open letter" he reminds the younger missionaries who he has the opportunity of encouraging about the need for patience and hard work in ministry. I have thought much about similar thoughts in recent days and thought I would pass on these thoughts. (Italics are in the original - this is borrowed from a booklet on family devotions for February 1995 from Mt. Calvary Baptist Church in Greenville, SC)

How many of us have used or heard used the following familiar passages? The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few (Matthew 9:37). Behold, I say unto you, Life up your eyes, and look on the fields: for they are white already to harvest (John 4:35).

We are often led to believe that we will find people out on the mission fields of the world with open arms to receive us, eager to respond to the Gospel messages we have come to preach. Most of the time this will not be the case. As we lift up our eyes, we will see fallow, untilled fields full of rocks and choked with weeds.

Our first task - and often a lengthy one - will be to remove the rocks, pull up the weeds, and break up the fallow ground. I quote from an old book "addressed to missionaries only" in reference to new missionaries: "There they are with a scythe in their hand, when it ought to have been a plow. A basket for their fruits instead of a bag of seed." We should remember that it was seven years before Carey baptized his first convert in India: it was seven years before Judson won his first disciple in Burma: Morrison toiled seven years before the first Chinaman was brought to Christ: and Moffat declares that he waited seven years to see the first evident moving of the Holy Spirit upon the Bechuanas of Africa. Many other missionaries have toiled for many years without evident fruit at all, and yet they faithfully carried out their ministries. There needs to be that breaking up of your fallow ground (Jeremiah 4:3).

Then follow the words of the Psalmist, They that sow in tears shall reap in joy. He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him. The lord concludes his parable of the sower and the soil with the words, bring forth fruit with patience. James instructs us to be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and the latter rain. Be ye also patient.

Patience does not mean inactivity, but rather it is the faithful planting and nurturing of the seed of the Word of God and allowing the lord of the harvest to, in His time, bring the increase. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not (Galatians 6:9).

As a young man in ministry (I still consider myself a young man - although, now that I am over 35 some may start to dispute that), I find that this area of patience is one that is often a struggle.

The eagerness that is in me can get discouraged that I can't just look at the lives of everyone at our church and see that not all of us are spiritual giants (myself included). The eagerness in me can get discouraged when I look out before me on Sunday morning and see many chairs that are not filled. Even though we are growing (numerically and hopefully, spiritually) as a church, the eagerness in me wants to see much more growth and can easity get discouraged when that growth is not at a level which I would desire. God, however, does not promise a time table on when fruit will be ready for harvest. Instead he instructs us to plant the seed and to water that seed with our tears.

So, if you happen to be struggling with not seeing the progress you have wanted to see, remember that God's time table is not ours and that God's requirement is faithfulness not numbers.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Bauder Linscott?

Pastor Greg Linscott of Faith Baptist Church (and SharperIron) recently announced that he and his wife are expecting a son.

In the comment thread of that post, he makes reference to naming the son "Bauder Linscott."

Based on that comment and considering an earlier post of Greg's , I thought I would update a shirt he is offering on his web-site.



What do you think, Greg?

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Elijah

On Sunday, we finished our series on Elijah that we have been studying at the church. When we started this series before Mother's Day, I did not expect that we would still be on Elijah in September.

After studying the life of Elijah for the last few months, part of me feels like I just said "good- bye" to an old friend in Sunday's sermon. It has been encouraging and challenging to read and study the life of this man who James tells us "was subject to like passions as we are (James 5:17)." It is challenging to see this man of God rise up out of obscurity and boldly proclaim God's message to a king, queen, and nation that had rejected God's ways. It is encouraging to see God's provision for this man and remember that God will take care of His children. It is challenging to see this man of God standing against the prophets of Baal and praying earnestly for the rain that God brings. It is encouraging to remember that the same God who sent the rain in answer to Elijah's prayer desires that we bring our prayers to Him, as well.

One of the most encouraging things that showed up in the study for Sunday's message was thinking through the ramifications of Elisha's actions after Elijah was taken to heaven. When Elisha asks "Where is the God of Elijah?" and then God parts the Jordan, the simple, but very important truth rings out - the God of Elijah is still in control and the God of Elijah will continue to "shew Himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward Him (2 Chronicles 16:9)."

We plan on adding the last sermon of this series on the church web-site this week and then have plans on making the entire series available soon (except for the one week when we were without electricity and could not record). I'll let you know when those plans are completed.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Numbers and Verses

One of the areas of study that has intriqued students of the Bible throughout the ages has been the study of Biblical numerology. Books have been written upon the subject and some individuals tend to make this a major theme in their preaching - being certain to point out any time significant numbers are used and reminding their listeners with certainty of what those numbers mean.

I will readily admit that there does seem to be a significance to some of the numbers that are in the Bible. For example, the numbers 3, 7, 12, 40, 666, etc. all seem to have a significance behind their use. Many people will state that 3 is perfection (because of the Trinity, etc.), seven is completion, etc. To a degree, I would think that there may even be some merit in some of those ideas, as well, but would caution about using these numbers to make any kind of point, since God does not give us the meaning of any of the numbers.

What I have found a couple of times,recently, however, is that not only the numbers in the TEXT of Scripture are being used as a basis of interpretation, but even the numbers that are in the DIVISIONS of Scripture are being used as part of the interpreation.

A while ago, someone game me a book entitled, What Hath God Wraught by William Grady. This book is subtitled A Biblical Interpretation of American History. Being an amateur historian, I thought it might be an interesting read. In chapter three, where he argues for the idea that America is mentioned in the Bible, I came across this interesting paragraph.

To find our nation in Scripture, one must tun from Revelation to Genesis, the book of beginnings, for it is not America's ignominious demise but rather her glorious conception that is magnified by the Holy Spirit. And as the number nine in Bible numerology just happens to be God's number for fruit bearing, we know where to find the birth announcement. In Genesis chapter 9, verse 27 (2+7=9), we read: "God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant." (italics his)

Recently, I also came across a post on SharperIron (in the forums) that used similar reasoning.

Please note first of all that there are 13 verses to this parable. This alone should send up a red warning flag. If the number 13 is involved, more than likely, a misunderstanding is forthcoming or, there is evil lurking.

Later in that same post, the auther commented:

12. National rejection, Kingdom takes on a mysterious form, Watch out for # 13. Mat. 13:11, 13:24, 13:31. 13:33, 13:44, 13:45, 13:47,

Now, despite the fact that I am not sure that 13 is unlucky for the people of God in the Bible (did not the walls of Jericho come down on the 13th time around the city?), there seems to be another more obvious problem with this thinking to me - we are talking about VERSE numbers and CHAPTER numbers here!

Our Bibles were not written in Hebrew and Greek with chapter and verse divisions already there. While there was some divisions in the Hebrew (O.T.) from around 200 A.D., the chapter divisions as we have them were created by Steven Langton in the 1200s A.D., and the verse divisions within the chapters were done in 1488 (O.T.) and 1551 (N.T.).

It seems incredible to me that someone could think that they are making a valid point regarding the significance of a verse or the interpretation of a verse based upon anything to do with chapter and verse numbers that did not exist for well over one thousand years after the verses were written.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Special Day at Fellowship Baptist Church

I wanted to post this earlier this week, but do to some difficulty with the networking aspect of the computer that I use for pictures, it has been delayed until today.

Sunday was a special day for us at Fellowship Baptist Church of Salisbury.

In addition to our regular Sunday Morning Worship Service (in which we are still looking at the life of Elijah), we had a fellowship lunch and Baptismal service down at the Nanticoke River. This was the first Baptisms that we have had since our arrival down here in Salisbury and the first Baptisms that I have ever done as Sr. Pastor. (I had the privilege of Baptizing one other person when I was a Youth Pastor at Heritage Baptist Church in Mt. Laurel, New Jersey.)

The time of fellowship was great before the Baptismal service and the Baptisms went well. It was neat for me to help these three individuals take this step of obedience to the Lord. A special treat for me was the privilege of baptizing my own son, Josiah. As a father, it is a blessing to me to see the growth in his life. I also had the privilege of baptizing Victoria, who came to know Christ on our last Sunday in the old building, and Dave, who has been saved for a number of years, but had never before been baptized.

Having the baptisms at the river was a really nice touch. We do not have a baptismal at the church building (yet), so the location on the Nanticoke River seemed like an ideal spot. (Another church in the area had hosted a previous baptism in the winter by Pastor Wagner.) The Lord gave us good weather for the baptisms and the water was not too cold.

Below are some pictures of the baptisms that my wife took.

Praise the Lord for His working in these lives and in our church.

Just my thoughts,

Frank









Cross posted at The Pastor's Pen

A. W. Pink quote

I would have loved to have heard A. W. Pink preach, at least judging by the way that he writes.

I have been preaching through the life of Elijah on Sunday mornings in our church for the last couple of months. (The first of those sermons is available here and here.) It has been an exciting and challenging study as we have examined the life of this man so greatly used of God and so repeatedly emphasized in the New Testament. It has been encouraging to me that Elijah is a man subject to like passions as we are (James 5:17), for it reminds me that service to God is not limited to those who are on some type of special plane, but that God can use me as well.

Anyway, in preparation for Sunday's message, I came across this excerpt from A.W. Pink in his book, Elijah.

‘And Ahaziah fell down through a lattice in his upper chamber that was in Samaria, and was sick.' Here was where mercy was mingled with justice: here was where ‘space for repentance' was granted the idolatrous king. O how long-suffering is God! Ahaziah's fall did not prove immediately fatal, though it placed him on a bed of sickness, where he had opportunity to ‘consider his ways.' And how often the Lord deals thus, both with nations and with individuals. The Roman empire was not built in a day, nor was it destroyed in a day. Many a blatant rebel against Heaven has been pulled up suddenly in his evil career. An ‘accident' overtook him, and though it may have deprived him of a limb, yet not of his life. Such may have been the experience of someone who reads these lines. If so, we would say to him with all earnestness, Redeem the time that is now left you. You might now be in hell, but God has given you a further season (brief at the most) to think of eternity and prepare for it. O that His goodness may lead you to repentance! Today, if ye will hear His voice, harden not your heart. Throw down the weapons of your warfare against Him and be reconciled to Him, for how shall you escape the everlasting burnings if you neglect His so-great salvation?

Just my thoughts (and A.W. Pink's thoughts),

Frank

I have been a baaaaaddd blogger

To the few of you who remain loyal readers, I am sorry that I have not posted anything lately.

I am coaching my son's U-10 soccer team this fall and we had our first game a week ago (we won 3-1) and my blogging time this week has been used to set up a web-site for our team. The site is called "Soccer Scribbles with Coach Sansone" and can be found at http://soccerscribbles.wordpress.com. If you have any suggestions for the Soccer site, I would love to hear them.

I have also been in the process the last couple of weeks of preparing for the launch of another blog and trying to figure out a way to make some significant changes to the FFBC Forums. Hopefully this will be completed shortly and I can announce the launch of the blog and the improvements to the FFBC Forums.

In my real life, we are preparing as a church for a Baptismal service and picnic next Sunday (see my article on The Pastor's Pen for more details) and we are preparing as a family for school to start on Tuesday.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

At least this guy let's you know where he stands

An old friend sent me this picture via email. I thought it was funny enough to pass along.



Just passing on someone else's thoughts,

Frank

File under Miscellaneous

It must be election season

"For the last three years we've been fighting a war over foreign oil."

Thus begins an advertisement that a senatorial candidate has been airing in this area for the last month or more. I am fairly new to this state and know next to nothing about local politics, but from that sentence alone I know enough to know that I will not be voting for this individual, if he manages to get past the primary.

This statement reveals to me one of two things about the person making this claim.

It reveals to me that he is either stupid or dishonest. If he really believes that the war in Iraq is over foreign oil, then he is too stupid to hold such a high office. If he actually understands that the war in Iraq is not over foreign oil, then he is too dishonest to hold such a high office.

Now, if this individual wanted to make some legitimate arguments about why he thinks the war in Iraq was a wrong decision or to argue about the execution of the war in Iraq, that would be an entirely different thing. I can respect someone who honestly and truthfully disagrees. I cannot respect someone who spews this type of rhetoric in order to gain political points.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

2006 FFBC Annual Conference - Monday & Tuesday

As I mentioned in my last post, this week is the 67th Annual Conference of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches at Tri-State Bible Camp and Conference Center in Montague, New Jersey. Last year I had the privilege of writing a series of reports about the conference for SharperIron. They can be accessed both on A Thinking Man's Thoughts by following these links (FFBC - Introduction and History, FFBC 2005 Annual Conference - Monday & Tuesday, FFBC 2005 Annual Conference - Wednesday & Thursday) or by finding the same articles on SharperIron - including resolutions at these links (FFBC - Introduction and History, FFBC 2005 Annual Confeence - Monday & Tuesday, FFBC 2005 Annual Conference - Wednesday & Thursday, FFBC 2005 Resolutions - # 1, FFBC 2005 Resolutions # 2, FFBC 2005 Resolutions # 3, FFBC 2005 Resolutions # 4, FFBC 2005 Resolutions # 5, FFBC 2005 Resolutions # 6).

As I mentioned on a previous post, the speaker for this week is Dr. Ralph Colas of the American Council of Christian Churches. Dr. Colas is a very gracious man whom God has used for a number of years. He has served in a number of different ministries and has preached in hundreds of churches over the years. In addition to his fruitful ministry as a preacher of God's Word, Dr. Colas also serves Christ and the ACCC by visiting (with reporters' credentials) various national and international meetings of a religious nature and producing reports on those meetings. These reports have been helpful in knowing what is going on in ecumenism and evangelicalism over the years. Many of these reports are available at the ACCC website.

As we began our conference on Monday, Pastor Mark Franklin opened up the conference by calling it to order and opening in prayer. After a good time of singing hymns and special music (including "Blessed Assurance" - the hymn that those who were involved in "The Walk-Out" of 1939 sang as they refused to become part of the Methodist merger.

On Monday night, Dr. Ralph Colas preached on Authority. We live in a day in which authority is continually being challenged. In his message, based upon Mark 1:21-28, he dealt with Christ's Authority by looking at the passage where the Bible tells us that Christ taught with authority and that he cast out the demon with authority. For his points, Dr. Colas examined Christ's Authoritative Doctrine (dealing with the manner in which Christ taught), Christ's Authoritative Denunciation (dealing with the manner in which Christ commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man), and Christ's Authoritative Demonstration (dealing with the result and response from the unclean spirit leaving the man). Dr. Colas encouraged us to hold close to the written Word and the living Word.

On Tuesday morning, Pastor Mark Franklin of Hardingville Bible Church preached on Psalm 137 and dealt with singing in a strange land and not hanging up our harps. Tuesday morning also consisted of the routine reports and elections that typically occupy a business meeting.

One of the things that is different at the FFBC Annual Conference is that instead of standing around in coats and ties all day long, it is held in a camp setting, so the attire can be more casual (generally short sleeved collared shirts) and also there are a number of "fun" activities that take place during the week. Every year, part of those activities include the annual Pastors versus Delegates softball game (this year the Delegates - along with some of the camp staff) beat the Pastors rather handily. Other activities include things like swimming, water slide, mini-golf, carpet ball, horseshoes, hikes, and rafting down the Delaware River. This year, my family and I are going to take advantage of the opportunity to go rafting with our children - we have not done so in a number of years, but are looking forward to going again.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Join us at the FFBC Annual Conference

Sorry this is late notice, but I did want to alert my readers to an ongoing Fundamentalism conference.

This week, August 14 - 16, 2006 the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches is holding their 67th Annual Conference at Tri-State Bible Camp and Conference Center in Montague, New Jersey. Our speaker this year will Dr. Ralph Colas of the American Council of Christian Churches. The ACCC is a Fundamental organization that seeks to "contend for the faith" (Jude 3). Dr. Ralph Colas is Executive Secretary of the ACCC, a role which he has held for the last fourteen years.

If you happen to be in the area during this week, please stop by and join us. If you wish to come to an evening service, the services are at 7:00 p.m. There are other events going on as well if you would like to come for more than the preaching. A schedule should be able to be found on the Tri-State website linked above. There is no cost if you are just coming for the evening sessions. If you wish to come for the whole week or over night, accommodations can be arranged by the staff at Tri-State Bible Camp.

I look forward to seeing some of you there, if you can come up one of the nights.

Just my thoughts,

Frank


In connection with this conference, I have posted a copy of my reports that I had published last year on SharperIron about last year's conference.

These reports are located here:

An Introduction and History of the FFBC
FFBC Annual Conference Report 1
FFBC Annual Conference Report 2

Introduction and History of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches

The Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches (FFBC) is a fellowship of Fundamental churches and pastors that seeks to honor Jesus Christ and stand together as a national voice for Fundamentalism. The FFBC is one of the charter members of the American Council of Christian Churches and holds its Annual Conference in August of each year. The FFBC is hosting their 66th Annual Conference the week of August 15-18, 2005 at Tri-State Bible Camp and Conference Center in Montague, New Jersey.

Pastor Frank Sansone (mbfpastor) will be attending this conference and providing reports to SharperIron throughout the week. This first report is designed to provide an introduction to the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches for those who may not be familiar with them and will look at the history, ministries, and mission of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches. Subsequent posts will focus on the conference itself.

The History of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches

The Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches has a long and unique history that traces its roots to 1830 with the beginning of the New York Conference of the Methodist Protestant Church. This New York Conference merged with the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Conferences in 1911 to form the Eastern Conference of the Methodist Protestant Church, which was the direct forerunner of the FFBC.

The FFBC (still known as the Eastern Conference of the Methodist Protestant Church) faced its crucial challenge of the Fundamentalist/Modernist Controversy in 1939 at the 29th and final session of the E.C.M.P.C. At issue was the proposed merging of the Methodist Protestant Church with the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Methodist Episcopal Church South. This merger would form the basis of what is now called the United Methodist Church and would bring the churches and Pastors of the E.C.M.P.C. into direct fellowship with a church group that was controlled by leaders whose doctrinal beliefs were at variance with the Word of God. Among that leadership and a particular bone of contention at the time was Bishop Francis J. McConnell who had been chosen to make the Episcopal address at the first General Conference and who had written a book entitled The Christlike God which attacked the deity of Jesus Christ and taught that "this tendency to deify Jesus" was "more heathen than Christian." (1)

The Reverend Newton Conant, representing a group opposed to the merger, protested the proposed merger. An early report of the meeting comments, "Reverend Conant pointed out very clearly the reasons why the great number of ministers, delegates, and members were not going into the union upon doctrinal basis. He pointed out the real reason was that the Methodist Episcopal Church had in their official offices and institutions men who denied the fundamental truths of the Bible and doctrines of the constitutions of the Methodist Protestant Church."

When a ruling was made by the president that the meeting was now a meeting of the Methodist Church rather than the Methodist Protestant Church, Rev. Conant stated that he could not continue to sit in a Methodist Conference and invited all who desired to do so to withdraw with him and continue their session at the Scullville Methodist Protestant Church. A group of ordained men, supply ministers and delegates left the meeting, singing "Blessed Assurance," "All Hail the Power of Jesus Name," and "'Tis the Old Time Religion" as they made their way to Scullville.

The next year (1940), the name was changed to the Bible Protestant Church and in 1941 the BPC became one of the charter members of the American Council of Christian Churches. The FFBC still enjoys membership in the ACCC to this date. In 1985 the name was changed again to the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches in order to provide clearer identification.

The Ministries and Mission of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches

The Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches provides for a national voice to represent Biblical Christianity and Fundamentalism to a lost and dying world. The Fellowship currently has churches from California to New York and from Michigan to Virginia, although the highest concentration of those churches is in the New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania region where the FFBC had its beginnings.

The FFBC also maintains a year-round Christian Camp and Conference Center in Montague, New Jersey (Tri-State Bible Camp), a Bible Institute (Fundamental Bible Institute), and a number of publications - The FFBC Link, The FFBC Focus, and the FFBC Spotlight.

In addition to these areas, FFBC pastors meet regionally for regular times of prayer, preaching, and Biblical discussion. Usually a Preacher's Fellowship is held annually where the pastors are challenged by men in the ministry (the most recent ones included Dr. Les Olilla and Dr. David Cummins) and the Fundamental Bible Institute holds a yearly Bible Conference.

Every year in August, the FFBC meets at Tri-State Bible Conference for their Annual Conference and business meeting, with a keynote speaker for the year. This year's Speaker is Dr. Tony Fox of Northland Baptist Bible College. Other speakers in recent years include Pastor Chuck Phelps and Dr. Bob Jones, III.

The Positions of the Fellowship of the Fundamental Bible Churches

The FFBC website (www.ffbc.ws) provides a full doctrinal statement of the FFBC, as well as statements of the FFBC regarding the positions of the FFBC on key issues of the day. The summary of these doctrinal positions are that the FFBC is Biblically Literal, Dispensational, Evangelistic and Baptistic.


Materials for this report and recommended reading regarding the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches include the following:

Conant, Newton, How God Delivered 34 Churches, Bible Protestant Press, Camden, NJ, 1964.

Franklin, Mark, The Mission and Work of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches, Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches, Penns Grove, NJ, 1999.

Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches Development Data, Volume 3 (1939-2002)

Assorted minutes and papers from the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches archives located at Tri-State Bible Camp and Conference Center in Montague, New Jersey.

Introducing ... The Bible Protestant Church, Bible Protestant Press, 1975

(1) This quote is taken from a report in the FFBC archives and lists this as being found on page 15 of the book. I could not locate an actual copy of the book. A online search of this book shows a number of websites which speak about this book and take this quote, but attribute the book to being published in the 1940s. The fact that this book, including this quote, was part of the controversary that effected the "walk-out" in 1939 and an examination of the U.S. Catalog of Copyright Entries for 1927 shows that this book was copyrighted in 1927, not in the 1940s.

FFBC - 2005 Annual Conference Overview - Monday & Tuesday

Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches - Annual Conference Overview - Monday and Tuesday

The 66th Annual Conference of The Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches took place Monday, August 15 - Thursday, August 18, 2005 at Tri-State Bible Camp and Conference Center in Montague, New Jersey. The following is a report of the events of the Conference.

The Annual Conference officially began with the opening service at the Tri-State Chapel. Dr. Tony Fox, Exeutive Director of Foreign Development for Northland Baptist Bible College and until recently Vice President of Academic Affairs at NBBC, was the speaker for the evening services for the week. Tapes of the evening services are available from Tri-State Bible Camp.

Each night, Dr. Fox preached on the theme of "Struggles in the Ministry." Dr. Fox commented that we the struggles in ministry are universal because we have an adversary that is universal. On Monday night, Dr. Fox preached on The Struggle over our Inadequacy for Ministry and dealt in particular with the example of Moses as found in the book of Exodus. Dr. Fox commented that we have this treasure in earthen vessels (2 Cor 4:7) and that we, who are descendants of lumps of dirt are engaged in communicating divine revelation. Dr. Fox also commented that God had to break Moses in the desert, and that often God has to break us of our own sense of greatness before we are instruments fit for His use. Satan often tries to get us to focus on our selves, but we need to realize that it does not matter who we are or what we lack - what matters is Who God is.

Tuesday, August 16

Tuesday morning featured a message from the Word of God, a business session and a panel discussion. Pastor Steve Snavely of Grace Baptist Church of Highland Falls, New York gave the morning message as he preached on Prayer - encouraging us regarding the frequency and fervency of our prayers.

The Tuesday morning business session included normal business items such as minutes and reports, as well as elections, with Pastor Mark Franklin of Hardingville Bible Church in Monroeville, New Jersey being re-elected as the President of the Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches.

Tuesday mid-morning consisted of a Panel Discussion entitled Key Issues in the Culture War. Panelist for this discussion included Dr. Tony Fox, Dr. Al Martin (Instructor for Fundamental Bible Institute), Mr. Frank D'Agostino (a layman from Faith Fellowship Baptist Church in Mt. Laurel, New Jersey), and Pastor Frank Sansone (Pastor of Messiah Baptist Fellowship of Salisbury, Maryland). The discussion included questions from the floor and essentially focused on three areas of the culture war (life vs. death, marriage vs. sexual idolatry, and expression of faith vs. suppression of faith), dealing with the evaluation of cultural issues as they appear and responding to these issues as Christians. Mr. Frank D'Agostino discussed some issues that laymen face in the corporate world regarding these issues. Emphasis was also made on the fact that the cultural battle is often best dealt with on a spiritual level, a personal level, and an pre-emptive level. Dealing with the cultural issues on a spiritual level involves the recognition that these things ultimately are heart issues and that it is God Who changes the heart and that salvation in Christ brings about changes that no amount of human effort could ever accomplish. Dealing with cultural issues on a personal level emphasizes the importance of dealing with individuals on a one-on-one basis rather than focusing on the groups. Dealing with cultural issues on a pre-emptive level emphasizes the need to respond to corruption in culture before the corruption has been allowed to become the norm. Discussion also involved the importance of not letting the issues take precedence in ministry, and explored the relationship of Fundamentalists to the groups and leaders of these cultural battles.

After an afternoon of food and fellowship (including the annual Pastors v. Delegates Softball Game, which was won this year by the Pastors), the evening service again featured an excellent message by Dr. Tony Fox, this time on the Struggle for Purity in the Ministry. Dr. Fox dealt with the false view of the body as found in 1 Corinthians 6 and then focused on the example of Joseph in Genesis 39, considering two key realities that helped Joseph to remain pure during the time of temptation. The first reality was that sexual immorality is primarily a sin against God because it is a sin against God's temple (our body) and because it is a sin against the owner of the body. The second reality that Joseph understood that the flesh is powerful - its characteristic is weak (Mt. 26:41), its composition is "not good" (Rom. 7:12), its consequences is death (Rom. 8:5) and its confidence is to be none (Rom 13:14, Phil 3:3). In light of these truths, Dr. Fox discussed the problem of men coming into our colleges with problems in this area and encouraged us to put up safeguards in our lives to help us win over the struggle for purity in the ministry.

After a break, Tuesday night concluded with a Question and Answer Time with Dr. Fox for the Pastors of the F.F.B.C. This annual time of heart to heart conversation with the speaker is often a time of great blessing to the Pastors and this year was no exception to that rule.

FFBC - 2005 Annual Conference Overview - Wednesday & Thursday

Fellowship of Fundamental Bible Churches - Conference Overview - Wednesday and Thursday

[b]Wednesday, August 17

Wednesday morning consisted of a message from God's Word, a business session, and a workshop. Pastor Frank Sansone of Messiah Baptist Fellowship of Salisbury, Maryland gave the morning message and focused on the need to be faithful men of God, following the example of Epaphras as found in Colossians and Philemon - dealing with the descriptions of the man of God (fellowservant, faithful minister, etc.), the demeanor of the man of God (humble, zealous, identified with his people), and the duties of the man of God (to proclaim the Word of God, to protect the flock of God, and to pray for the people of God).

The Wednesday morning business session included the introduction of Mr. Chris Jenkins as the new Program Director for Tri-State Bible Camp, reports and other business items, and the passing of two resolutions - Resolution #1 - "The Legacy of Billy Graham" and Resolution #2 - "The Pope and Christianity Today." (These resolutions are posted separately.)

Following the morning business session, Pastor Mark Franklin, President of the F.F.B.C. and Executive Committee member of the American Council of Christian Churches, held a workshop entitled "Trends in Fundamentalism." In this presentation, Pastor Franklin dealt with positives and challenges that we see in Fundamentalism today.
Listed by Pastor Franklin as some positives in Fundamentalism today included the following:
1. Good, open discussion taking place with allowable disagreement,
2. The identifying of some of the non-issues in Fundamentalism, and
3. An openness to a discussion within the family of Fundamentalism.

Other positives listed in the discussion time that Pastor Franklin encouraged included the growth and development of good Fundamental colleges and seminaries, the emphasis upon expository preaching, a depth in preaching and teaching, and the number of men who have a desire to stand true.

Listed by Pastor Franklin as some challenges within Fundamentalism today included the following:
1. There is still a need for clarity regarding Fundamentalism,
2. There is a need to distance ourselves from those men and ministries who are hurting our cause while claiming our label, and
3. There is a need to be relevant without compromise.

Other challenges brought out during the discussion included a danger to follow personalities, a propensity to overly divide, a need to reaffirm the bench marks of what is open for discussion, and the need to shore up the priority of purity.

Pastor Franklin then observed that doctrine is essential to the life of the church (Acts 2:42, 2 Tim. 3:16) and that "words" are important for they are that which we are to study (2 Tim. 2:14-15) and wrong words are to be shunned (2 Tim. 2:16-18). Pastor Franklin concluded that there is a great need in our Fundamental churches for (1) Sound doctrine, (2) Clarity and precision, and (3) Exposing false teachers.

Wednesday is "Family Day" at the Annual Conference, so Wednesday afternoon was reserved for families to go swimming, fishing, relax around the campsite, play games or take short sight-seeing trips to nearby attractions.

On Wednesday night, Dr. Tony Fox gave his last message of the week as he preached on Our Struggle to Compromise in the Ministry. Dr. Fox indicated how that one of the issues in Poland and the Eastern Block during the early days of those nations becoming "open" to the Gospel was the trend to accept everything that called itself Christianity. Dr. Fox emphasized the three "But Thou" expressions in this passage (2 Tim 3:10, 3:14, 4:5) and encouraged us to watch and continue and to proclaim all of the scripture in light of the coming day (2 Tim. 4:1).

Thursday, August 18

On Thursday morning, the conference included a message from God's Word, a business session, and a time of testimonies and prayer as we dismissed. Pastor Robert Rogish of Faith Fellowship Baptist Church gave the morning message as he challenged us to take up the stones of Prayer, Joyful Service, Separation, Standards, and Protecting the Family.

The Thursday morning business session included some final reports and other similar items of business, as well as the passing of six additional resolutions - Resolution #3 - "Progressive Creationism," Resolution #4 - "Judicial Dilemma," Resolution #5 - "Thankful for God's Goodness," Resolution #6 - "Salvation by Christ Alone," Resolution #7 - "A Faithful Servant" (honoring Mr. Keith Lambertson and his family - the property manager of Tri-State Bible Camp), and Resolution #8 - "In Appreciation of our Host". Resolutions # 3, 4, and 6 are posted separately.

Following the meeting there was a time of testimony and prayer at the "Fellowship Circle" (a tradition dating back over fifty years) and the conference was closed with the singing of "Blest Be the Tie that Binds."

Book Tag

Many of you have seen the popular "Book Tag" game that has been going around the Internet. Well, I have been tagged by Chris Anderson, so I will oblige with my answers to the One Book Tag. These answers may be subject to change as I think about them more, but here is at least my initial answers.

1. One book that changed your life.

While not stated, it is assumed that for all of the relevant questions, the Bible is excluded as the obvious choice for those questions. While that should be obvious, I just wanted to make sure I mentioned it up front lest someone get the wrong idea.

This first one, in particular, seems to be tough.

I know I have to narrow this down, but I am torn between two particular books for two vastly different reasons.

On the one hand, I could say, "Jack Hyles' Favorite Soul-Winning Experiences." Now, before you jump on me, let me explain. While I was never a big follower of Hyles, I had a man who had been very influential in my life when I was a new believer and he was a big advocate of the Bus Ministry and, by extension, Hyles. There was a church plant that I had helped with as a teenager and idea had been floated around that if I went to HAC, then when I graduated there would be a Youth Pastor position available for me at that church. For a 17 year-old teen who had only been saved a few years, this was an exciting possibility. Reading this book opened my eyes to the error of the "A-B-C Pray After Me" approach to "Soul Winning."

On the positive side of things, I would say that a little biography called Bill Borden: The Finished Course - the Unfinished Task about Missionary Bill Borden was a life changing book for me. This little book was a powerful challenge and example to me of giving my all to Christ.

2. One book that you've read more than once.

I was going to say, The Disciplined Life by Richard Taylor. I first read it as required reading for a Youth Work class with Dr. Walter Freemont at BJU and have subsequently come back to it a number of times, but I see that Andy Efting has already chosen that one.

Another book that I have read repeatedly and found profitable and challenging is Spiritual Leadership by J. Oswald Sanders. This is one of those books I have on my short list of books to try to read at least every other year. Godliness thru Discipline by Jay Adams is another book that falls into this category.

3. One book you'd want on a deserted island

US Army Survival Manual: FM 21-76

I recognize that the spirit of that question is not on survival, so in that light, I would take my set of Spurgeon's Sermons that used to be my wife's Grandfather Marken - a godly saint who planted churches and started Sunday Schools in Ohio during the middle of the last century. It is a gift that I hold dear and it would be a great companion on a deserted island.

If I am not allowed to take a set of books, I think I would take a copy of Living Hymns or some other hymnbook.

4. One book that made you laugh

Reader's Digest Treasury of Great Humor


5. One book that made you cry.

In the Presence of My Enemies by Gracia Burnham - the story of some New Tribes Missionaries taken captive by terrorists in 2001. I admit that I cried as I thought about the ordeal that they experienced and the effect it would have on my family.

6. One book that you wish had been written.

Biblically Based Discipleship - A Theological and Practical Guide towards Assisting Others Towards Christlikeness - by Pastor Frank Sansone (maybe some day)

God Sent Revival - How God Changed Christians and the World during the 20th & 21st Centuries

7. One book that you wish had never been written.

I would say probably the Koran or The Book of Mormon because of the number of people that have been led astray by these books.

On a more recent level, Dr. Spock's Book on Child Care

8. One book that you are currently reading

I tend to have a number of books going on at one time. Since I am coaching my son's U-10 soccer team, I am currently reading about six books on soccer and coaching soccer that I checked out from the library. I am also reading The Wit and Widsom of Abraham Lincoln edited by Jack Lang and The Parson of the Islands by Adam Wallace about a man who ministered on the Eastern Shore during the 1800s.

9. One book that you've been meaning to read

Well, I have been meaning to finish Changed Into His Image by Jim Berg, but since I have at least started that one and am listening to his presentations on it, I guess I would say one of the other books I have been meaning to read is the two-volume biography of Hudson Taylor by Howard Taylor

10. Tag five people

I'll tag the following bloggers.

Andy Rupert of Isle Kerguelen
Jay Camp of The Preacher's Thoughts
Mark Griffin of The View from Windham Hill
Jason down at The Fundamentalist Resource Center
Scott Aniol at Religious Affections

Honesty in Print and Speech

Over the years, I have heard some discussion about Pastors who make themselves the hero of all of their illustrations and who put themselves in stories that were not really about themselves.

I came across the same thing today while reading a book entitled, Life Lessons from Soccer, I came across two well-known stories that have made the rounds via email and jokes for a number of years. The one dealt with the substituting "tents" for "tense" and the other dealt with someone betting on event on TV that they had already seen and then after they won the bet, revealing that they had already seen it only to have the other person say, "I saw it too, but I did not think that he could do it again."

Now, the fact that the jokes/stories are corny are bad enough, but that is not my concern at this time. What bugged me as I read these stories, however, was that in both cases, the author made it appear as though these things were directly related to him. In the one case, it involved his kids' soccer team. In the other case, it involved his two sons.

Now, I would guess that it is possible, however remote that both of these popular things also happened to him, but it seems kind of fishy to me.

When faced in a secular book about soccer, maybe it does not make much difference (I mean, after all, who besides Ben Wright and Bob Bixby actually cares about soccer :)?), however, when coming from a Pastor or one who handles the Word of God, this is a griveous sin. Not only is lying a sin, it is also affects the credibility of the other things that we say.

Hopefully, no one reading this actually has a problem in this area, but after reading these two examples within the space of ten or so pages and feeling like I was wasting my time reading this book, I thought back to comments I have heard in the past about Pastors who do the same thing and thought I would encourage us to be careful in this area.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

Standards and Fences

Standards and Fences

There are many today who like to equate having standards and guidelines as a form of legalism or Phariseeism and as contrary to the grace of God working in a person's life. The end of this equation is that anyone who advocates that others adopt standards in their lives to help keep themselves from falling into a particular sin is "adding to the Scripture" and is teaching for doctrine the commandments of men.

It seems interesting to me that the ones who I most often interact with on this type of conversation are people who have previously been in Fundamentalism, usually of the more extreme variety. It seems to me that there must be something in leaving the extremes that tends to move you towards the opposite extreme.

In one recent conversation on this topic, one individual commented (not to me) that "You don't have a supernatural religion, therefore you can't keep your thoughts pure without ‘going beyond what is written.'" Another an individual commented that "standards are a human-based solution to a deadness so profound that only God can change it" and "Standards promoters feel it is important to have faith, the correct doctrine, and the Triune Deity, but instead of actually having these things, they may only image (sic - I assume he meant imagine) that they do. The commands and wisdom of the Scriptures must be shored up where necessary by fences and rules. The Pharisees believed in this way..."

So, if I follow this reasoning, the following things are true about those who believe that having and maintaining standards can be a good thing.

1. They do not have a supernatural religion, but a fake religion.
2. Standards are "going beyond what is written" because you can't keep yourself pure with that fake religion.
3. Standards are the result of a profound deadness.
4. Standards promoters do not have faith, correct doctrine or the Triune Deity, just think they do.
5. Standards promoters do not believe in the sufficiency of Scripture.
6. Standards promoters are following the path of the Pharisees.

The reality, of course, is that numbers 1, 3, & 4 (at least are all the same thing) - those who believe in having, keeping, and encouraging others in the area of standards are lost.

I recognize that there are many groups out there who believe that keeping their standards are what makes or keeps them holy. Sadly, those individuals are severely mistaken. We do not merit grace, it is the gift of God. However, there is a large difference between having, keeping and encouraging standards and believing that it is those standards that make me right with God.

I am married. As a result of being married, there are some things that I will not do because I love my wife. There are some guidelines that I have set up so that I will not displease her (even though I am sure that there are plenty of other areas where I do displease her). I follow these things because I love Missy and I do not want to displease her, not because I believe that keeping those guidelines is all I need in order to keep my relationship with Missy what it should be.

Not only are having appropriate guidelines and standards helpful from a practical standpoint, they are also consistent with Biblical teaching about these things.

For instance, the Apostle Paul writes in Romans 13:14,

But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.

It seems to me that in order to fulfill that admonition, one must have an understanding of what types of things provide for our flesh so that we can avoid making provision for it.

Even more pointedly, Jesus Christ Himself seems to give a radical view of the seriousness of setting up fences so that we do not fall.

Notice these words of Jesus Christ,

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

It seems strange to me that when someone argues, "If having unfiltered internet access causes thee to look after a woman to lust, thou shouldest get a filter on your internet rather than persist in that sin" they are viewed as being legalistic and having a false religion, when Christ says "pluck out the eye" if it causes you to stumble or "cut off that hand" if doing so will keep you from going down this pathway to sin.

Now, I recognize that the "non-standards" people will argue that "well, you are not Christ", but it seems to me that the principle from Christ is still applicable - if there is something we can do that keeps us away from those temptations (e.g. erecting a standard or a practice to avoid the problem - or "cutting off our hand"), then surely this is a wise and prudent thing to do.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

File under - Christianity, Fundamentalism

100th Post Milestone and Comments

I recently passed a blogging milestone, and in the process made some adjustments to my blog.

I have now made over 100 posts on this blog. Some of which I pray have been helpful or encouraging or at least thought-provoking or interesting. I have been sporadic in my posting (sometimes worse than others), but I have generally posted at least something every week or so (except recently), often times posting multiple items in a week.

While I was on vacation, I thought about some things that I would like to do with my actual posting, but I wanted to take care of some other things first.

The first thing that I wanted to do was to fix the categories issue. I thought a few months ago that I had solved the problem of trying to get categories in Blogger. The problem, however, was that the solution I had followed did not pick up any of the older posts. I have looked for a way to work around this and have been disappointed in my options. I thought about going over to WordPress (in fact I have migrated my blog over there awhile ago, but I have not added anything to it because I can't figure out how to personalize the templates or do anything else of the kind). I finally developed a work around that I hope will work better than what I have been doing. My work around? I created an additional blog called, "Categories for A Thinking Man's Thoughts" (don't you like the clever title?) The purpose of this other blog is simply to point back to articles in particular categories on this blog. We'll see how it works.

The second thing that I wanted to do was to provide a way for other readers to be able to see the things that others were commenting upon. Andy Rupert over at Isle Kerguelen had this feature on his Blogger blog, and he kindly pointed me to how to take care of this problem as well. (It is still not exactly what I want, but it is at least a step in the right direction.)

Anyway, to those of you who have been along with me for many of the first 100 posts, thanks for reading.

Just my thoughts,

Frank

File under Blogging