City Bible - Vancouver
Posted on May 17th, 2005 by catalyst into the Uncategorized categoryCity Bible is opening a campus in Vancouver.
They will begin meeting Sunday, June 12 at Fort Vancouver Highschool. The service will be led by Larry Wade.
Specifically, City Bible asks, “If you live in Vancouver join us as we begin to explore what the Lord has in store for CBC and our third campus.”
I would love to know how Bob MacGregor feels about this. I know Clark County is the one of the fastest growing counties in the Northwest, but can it accommodate two City Bible clones?
Probably.
RSS feed for posts
May 17th, 2005 at 2:04 pm
I think Bob and City Harvest are above your stupid little blog. Try to leave us out of it.
May 17th, 2005 at 2:17 pm
It took you less than an hour to respond to this post.
Someone is reading this blog on a daily basis…. …and it’s not me.
May 17th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
I guess City Harvest doesn’t like being called a City Bible clone.
May 17th, 2005 at 4:59 pm
What makes a stupid blog big or little?
May 17th, 2005 at 5:09 pm
This post has been removed by the author.
May 17th, 2005 at 5:51 pm
But PF said in his sermon last Sunday morning that the church leaders don’t spend their money on fancy cars. OK, that’s not verbatim, but that was the idea.
He also said a couple of weeks ago that someone asked him how much he liked his job, and he replied that he loved it. They asked him if he loved it enough to do it without pay, to which he said, “Sure! — well…”
I’m shocked that you think $$ has anything to do with opening a church in Vancouver when City Harvest and Bob Isabel’s church are there already. Just shocked.
May 17th, 2005 at 6:27 pm
Never been there, but thanks anyway….Bradsblog
May 17th, 2005 at 9:53 pm
oh my, i’ll have to ask my parents about this one as they attend city harvest. and wow, larry got himself promoted. way to go larry and carolyn! i love mrs. wade, not that i learned anything in careers and personal finance, but that has nothing to do with her. i just suck with money.
May 18th, 2005 at 12:12 pm
So, is Larry Wade to be the new pastor, or will it be like the West Campus where PF preaches via satellite? If so, they’re not starting a new church, they’re just making it easier for people to get to church and tithe.
FICM
May 18th, 2005 at 12:35 pm
Let’s not loose focus on why they moved to the west side: Better donuts.
From their website:
“Why will people come to the new West Campus?”
“Krispy Kreme donuts have just opened a new store by our house! I don’t have to go to Seattle or wait until someone brings me these unique and wonderful delights! It’s a new store, but it’s offering a brand that I know about and trust. This is how we see our new location. We are a trusted “brand” of church with 53 years in our city.”
I looked into Buddhism for awhile but they didn’t rate very well with Consumer Reports. City Business offered a great warranty package and I even get road side assistance when I register my tithe.
It really is “A place for you (‘re money)”
May 18th, 2005 at 5:11 pm
Next time a Republican feels self righteous they may want to take this to their pure “snow driven” heart. According to the 2000 census, not including Washington D.C., Senate Republicans represent 138,025,690 people. Senate Democrats represent 142,824,157 people. That’s a surplus of nearly 5 million people that Democrats have been elected to represent in the United States Senate. So, in actuality, the Democrats are in the real majority.
No small wonder Americans are recoiling at what this administration has been foisting upon us. The Republicans DO NOT represent the majority of Americans. They just won the numbers game in the Senate.
Perhaps if these figures were made public, the Republicans could be shamed into letting go of their rhetoric about Democrats not representing the “mainstream” of America. It couldn’t be further from the truth. If church leaders like PF aren’t buying fancy cars then maybe they are buying fancy politics. I wonder what kind of car and house Pat Robertson resides in…
NOTE: I took the 2000 population for each state and gave half to each representative senator. Information taken from: http://www.demographia.com/db-2000stater.htm
Sheri Sanders
Michigan
May 18th, 2005 at 5:46 pm
I live in “The Couve” and I say to CBC…stay out of our city!
May 18th, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Is CBC infiltrating Vancouver because they care for the lost people of Clark County, or is it just another way to promote themselves and their numbers? (Or to get recognized in an article about the mega-churches of America in the next issue of Charisma?) Do you realize with most church plants, whether it is stateside or international, those who are involved immerse themselves into the culture of the people and/or city to cultivate relationships before thrusting “the church” upon them? Hmmmmmmmm. My question is, what has God shown to the pastors of CBC about the people of Vancouver? Vancouver may be a suburb of Portland, however I can tell you that it is culturally different. Now, if CBC really feels God has shown them a way that the lost, broken and discouraged can be restored through being visible in Vancouver, I apologize, however, I am not convinced. CBCers, I’d like to know what God has put on your hearts for Vancouver.
May 19th, 2005 at 1:22 pm
Vancouver is about as culturally different than Portland as a cheeseburger is from a double-cheeseburger. That had to be the worst thing I’ve ever read.
May 19th, 2005 at 5:23 pm
The comment on Portland and the Couve having different cultures is the most uneducated statement ever made on this blog. CBC is already one-third full of Couve members. They are just trying to make church more convenient for the members in the city.
May 19th, 2005 at 5:38 pm
Remember,
Sometimes you want a lemon filled and sometimes you want a cinnamon twist.
Sometimes you want Krispy Kreme and sometimes PF is on his 8th straight week of the same sermon so you run down to Annie’s.
May 19th, 2005 at 6:02 pm
“Doh! Nuts! Mmmmmm, donuts!”
May 19th, 2005 at 9:17 pm
Vancouver is culturally different…it is a hapless, disorganized, extreme automobile centered, badly laid out, and totally culture-free. It is full of the worst kind of me-first cheapskates who tie up our freeways, bridges and main roads in their mad, Simpsons style quest to make it to work and home every day, while disregarding all speed limits and courtesy on Portlands roads. It is a city without a face, without an identity, and without a soul. No wonder the mega-church is frothing at the mouth for a chance at this unclaimed tithe potential. It should readily accept a church without a soul as well. Strip mall culture. Road rage warriors. Vancouver, the city without culture, hope or identity. Peace and love to you my dear Vancouverites.
May 19th, 2005 at 10:46 pm
You obviously have no clue about educated comments. If you knew people who are native “Vancouverites” you would know there is a difference. They don’t work in Portland and rarely even go to Portland. I am more convinced than ever that most people on this blog are more consumed with themselves than seeing people led to the cross.
May 20th, 2005 at 3:49 pm
Ok….
First of all, I think we should’ve stopped with the donuts…and the mention of Annie’s just brought on a pleasant rush of vicarious nostalgia.
Is the “cultural difference” or lack thereof really the issue here? Last I checked, “In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female.” Compared to race, captivity, and gender, the Columbia just simply ain’t that wide.
Churches are biblically described as communities of faith and support and like-mindedness. People got together because they needed one another (and, presumably, liked one another). The formality and construct of the parish (or any other kind of geographical division), etc., is a much later idea. The idea of name brands…I’m not sure that came up until the industrial era, and I’m really not sure that it’s theologically grounded.
It makes a lot of sense from a business perspective…I mean, look at Kleenex tissues. One has become synonymous with the other, somehow….similar to the way that, in my childhood and youth (though part of this was due to my childishly limited perspective), there was just Church. The notion of other people going to different churches was just a little silly. Bible Temple (its name at the time) was God’s permanent address, and if you didn’t get it, then you just weren’t paying attention. So, what to do with this kind of product? Exportation. Franchise. Anybody need a kleenex?
It’s not about church.
It’s about a budding monopoly.
It’s not about providing/creating an environment of care and support for the membership that’s already there. It’s about getting more.
It’s not about quality.
It’s about quantity.
Capitalism in action, my friends.
May 20th, 2005 at 9:54 pm
My dear Vancouverians, I am not consumed by myself. I am merely making a little joke about the Vancouver vs. Portland debate/battle/war/problem/whatever/….thou shouldst thankest that no tolls are charged thee for crossing the mighty river to plunder our sales tax free zone. Yes, Vancouver does have an interesting history….but the Oregonians that have moved there, seeketh not to carry any potential love and concern for thine dear city. Tis merely a cheaper little place to live, thanks to our Multnomah county tax specialties/sewer project costs/special income tax/whatever zone. No offense intended..unless you treat our little streets like your personal racing zones, which I have encountered oh so often.
May 21st, 2005 at 3:56 pm
Knowing the Bobs (MacG & Isabell), they are above reading this blog and pulling anyone into their office to have an intervention so that that person never again feels the need to have an independent opionion. Having had Bob Mac for a youth pastor, I never felt belittled or squashed for having my own ideas and opinions, even if I didn’t necessarily agree with him. I can’t say the same for Hankie boy. As for CBC branching into Vancouver, if you think about it, it’s really a way to “reach” more people without having to “hire” more people. The same number of employees now doing triple the work = more money to help with the building fund. What I think it says about Hank is that he’s basically letting people know that the two church plants he endorsed aren’t doing things his way, so he’s just going to have to get in there and show them how it’s done. Go Hank.
May 21st, 2005 at 6:54 pm
I’m not a big fan of the multi-campus model, but for Christ’s sake (literally), show some respect to the people with whom you will be sharing living quarters for eternity.
CBC’s Tigard campus has reached many people that were previously unchurched — particularly first-generation Hispanic immigrants. I know this from volunteering on the West Campus for several months. Whether you agree with the way City Bible chose to move into that community or not, you cannot deny that it is a boon to the community spiritually to have people who didn’t know anything about Christ now attending church on a regular basis.
The multi-campus (as many others have noted) makes perfect business sense. Again, I don’t necessarily agree with the model that City Bible is pursuing, but the plain math of it is that the West Campus costed much less to start up than a traditional church plant, for the simple reason that all of its major initial costs were covered by the home campus. After a year and a half, it’s on its feet, supporting itself, with no debts to pay off over the next decade and with more money in the bank to spend on community-oriented projects like S.T.I.T.C.H.E.S., PSU-campus evangelism, and urban ministry.
Even if you don’t agree with the way City Bible plants other campuses (which I don’t, for a variety of complex reasons), and even if you don’t agree with Pastor Frank’s theology on tithing (which I’m not sure I do), and even if you have a bad history with City Bible from past experience, the only Christian way to disagree is with thoughtful, gracious, reasonable, and Biblical proofs of specific points of disagreement. Not random snipes at very general concepts, snide comments about “Hank’s” speech impediments, or rude (and ultimately defenseless) gibes at “City Business” and its unseen, ulterior motives. (The Bible specifically tells us never to judge people’s motives.)
So unless you’re prepared to reason honestly, debate fairly, and judge purely, you honestly are not qualified to speak ill of another member of Christ’s Body — which is exactly what many of you have been doing.
May 22nd, 2005 at 12:32 pm
you’re absolutely right. multiple campuses does make more business sense, because, like I said, it means you have the same amount of employees doing three times the work. And if the extra money was going to stitches or other community-oriented ministries, then that would definitely justify a whole church full of employees who hardly see their families or, for that matter, the light of day - unless, of course, they get picked to go get Hank a latte. As for disagreeing in a thoughtful, gracious manner, if you read half of these blogs you would realize that’s exactly what they’re doing. They’re just disagreeing, and having gone to CBC for over half of my life even I know that that is forbidden territory. If you don’t even agree with the way CBC is multi-campusing, then what exactly is your point?
May 22nd, 2005 at 4:42 pm
Just a thought. wasn’t the main reason for forward together to retire the debt. What money do you think they’ll be using to start the vanc location?
May 23rd, 2005 at 6:26 pm
Anonymous - whichever one of the many Anonymi you happen to be:
You wrote: “multiple campuses does make more business sense, because, like I said, it means you have the same amount of employees doing three times the work.”
Perhaps so; perhaps not. Are you reflecting actual complaints from the people who work at CBC, or are you projecting your own disenchantment onto others? I haven’t heard complaints from people working three times as much for the same pay; I’ve seen people who were doing certain things on the East Side migrate to the West Side and do the same things in a different context.
“And if the extra money was going to stitches or other community-oriented ministries, then that would definitely justify a whole church full of employees who hardly see their families or, for that matter, the light of day - unless, of course, they get picked to go get Hank a latte.”
Is there really an army of bleary-eyed Dickensian workhorses tirelessly turning the cogs inside the domes? Or are there really people with their skin turned vampirishly pale from lack of contact with the sun, pleading with God for a few minutes of hometime? There may well be, but if so, I haven’t met them, and if they really exist, they’re quite insensible for not just quitting the horrible job they have and moving on to someplace else.
“As for disagreeing in a thoughtful, gracious manner, if you read half of these blogs you would realize that’s exactly what they’re doing.”
Well, I can’t honestly say that I’ve read half these blogs, because I’ve only found one. This one. And although you are partly right that some of the disagreements have been gracious — some of the gibes have been well-placed, and some of the comments have been thoughtful and well-reasoned — the ones jabbing at assumed motives and saying things about people that would be rude in public have been neither.
You are right that CBC can sometimes seem like a place where everyone thinks the same way. That’s because it’s big and a lot of people do think the same things. I guess that’s why they’re all at the same church. I have generally found a respectful ear where I’ve placed a respectful disagreement, however, and up the hill at PBC, some of the teachers wrestle with the very essence of what CBC is–disagreeing, debating, and deconstructing everything the church believes on a regular basis, but doing it out of love for the church rather than disgruntlement with it.
“If you don’t even agree with the way CBC is multi-campusing, then what exactly is your point?”
My point is precisely this: that you don’t have to be petty, bitter, and rancorous to disagree. Not everyone here fits any or all of those descriptions, but many do and I think that’s sad because Christ prayed that we would all be one.
Many of my teachers and I disagree with CBC on a regular basis, but when it comes down to it, everything we disagree on is window dressing. We all agree that Christ is everything, and because of that, we love His church and we’re committed to seeing it get better and better. Once you’re agreed on that point, everything else is really just window dressing.
May 23rd, 2005 at 7:33 pm
I appreciate your thoughtful comments John. You genuinely make an effort to understand our point and then argue accordingly. Thank you.
However, I think we fundamentally disagree as to the seriousness of City Bible’s preaching. You call City Bible’s preaching “window dressing”. I call it a perversion of God’s Word.
That’s harsh, I admit. But I wouldn’t be able to continue this blog if I didn’t truly disagree with what City Bible is preaching.
I do believe that most City Bible members are loving gracious people. However, if I may be blunt, I also believe they are deceived.
They’ve sat through so many sermons on giving, they simply accept the message. They watch as, one by one, people leave hurting, and yet they do nothing. They don’t speak up… they don’t complain, they just accept it.
I’m not arguing about window dressing. I’m arguing about the foundation. And City Bible’s foundation is broken.
May 24th, 2005 at 5:18 pm
Adams, excellent posts.
I think the catalyst is missing the grandeur of Mr. Adams posts, which is civil and appropriated disagreements. Catalyst comes off in this post as controlled and void of emotion, but in the mass of his other blogs, we can see the blatant lack of respect and the vicious attacks.
My father always taught me to destroy, by means of argument, the opinion, but never the man. These personal attacks on the leaders of CBC are so distasteful, so juvenile, that they literally take away from the site.
Well-placed, unadulterated sarcasm is an excellent tool for instigation, which is your motive. No one that you want to respond to this site will ever respond because it’s put together in typical American fashion–one nation under-educated.
Instead of an intellectual alchemy den, you get a group-mentality round-about, unchallenged for lack of respect. It’s a Lord of the Flies epidemic, and the fat kid is about to get eaten.
May 24th, 2005 at 6:58 pm
I’m not clear on what you’re disagreeing with, Catalyst. If it’s the idea of giving, then that certainly hasn’t been done away with under the New Covenant. On the contrary, the New Testament seems to call us above and beyond the old tithe–the first believers made a habit of laying all their money at the apostles’ feet for the good of the church.
Another good example can be found in 2 Corinthians 9, where Paul deliberately stirs the church in Corinth towards giving freely of their money, telling them that whosoever sows generously will reap generously in return.
I don’t think you can make the case that giving isn’t required int the NT. The place I’m not sure I agree with CBC is in mandating a 10% tithe–not because I think it’s too much, but rather because it’s too stingy, and I don’t think tithing should be treated as a cause-and-effect relationship. As Christians, we should be willing to give all of our money to the good of the saints and to the work of Christ, not to “get more” but because Christ is good and we love Him and all our money belongs to Him anyway, and to all the other saints who are His Body.
I don’t see where CBC is propagating false doctrine. The only point I think I might disagree with them on that the “10%” part is still the mandatory baseline. Otherwise, giving doesn’t seem to be an option for a Christian. And honeslty, it doesn’t seem like it should be that big of a deal, either.
May 25th, 2005 at 4:29 am
John. I believe in giving and I believe in Tithing. It’s the overemphasis on wealth, that bothers me: “If you tithe God will bles you. If not God will curse you.”
But this could be my subjective experience. Maybe you don’t see that at City Bible, which is fine, actually.
How long have you been going to CBC? I went relgiously during the 90’s when Frank first took over. And he spent the first 12 sermons as City Bible’s Senior Pastor preaching on tithing… and it’s been all down hill from there.
I’m rambling here… but we’re not seeing the same things at City Bible. And that’s fair. It just means I’m probably not going to change your mind and you’re not going to change mine…
May 25th, 2005 at 12:48 pm
Catalyst, I think we are seeing the same things. We’re just reacting differently.
I’ve been going to CBC for about 2 years, but that’s only because I’m a PBC student. We’re required to attend at least 3 times per month. I’ve definitely had problems with the way people act towards wealth here, too, although I suppose I’m reacting with more tolerance toward the whole situation because, well, I’m compelled to go and I’m trying to find the good things at CBC (and there are quite a few) rather than overemphasizing the bad.
I like the fact that I finally know where you’re coming from. You’re not reacting against what the Bible says, but rather against how some at CBC are interpreting it.
As I said before, I don’t think that tithing is a cause-and-effect deal: Give and you will get more. I think the idea that you can get “open heavens” by simply giving more is ludicrous. It’s about heart condition, and even then, I honestly believe that Christians are meant to live within the means that God provides for them — not too much, not too little. And even then, there are some whom God has apparently chosen not to bless–such as the millions of believers in Africa who are persecuted daily for their faith.
I think that most of the leadership at CBC would say the same thing if it came right down to it. I don’t think that Pastor Frank would ever preach salvation by tithing, or even tithing without pure motives. There is probably too much of an emphasis on money here, though, and I thank you for serving as a reminder that the Kingdom of God is about much, much more.
May 25th, 2005 at 1:28 pm
Matthew 5:10
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Sounds to me like the Africans are the ones really blessed.
May 25th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
Would it be fair to say that what ever subject is preached the most is the most important subject?
Last I checked CBC scheduled November – January to preach on Faith Harvest (Giving money to the church and expecting a blessing in return). That’s 1/4th of the year dedicated to money and it doesn’t even include the standard tithe message preached once every 6 weeks.
May 25th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
I agree that all the money is God’s.
This month God decided to pay the water bill.
May 25th, 2005 at 3:01 pm
Anon, you’re exactly right. The Africans are the ones who are truly blessed in the cosmic scheme of things.
May 27th, 2005 at 4:23 am
John: You’re right. It comes down to interpretation. And you are interpreting the messages on giving differently than I and many members. Fair Enough.
And since you kind of don’t have a choice but to attend City Bible, it’s good that you are focusing on the positive instead of the negative. It’s healthier. Not as much fun, but healthier.
I’m just curious though, is there any message that would make you take a stand against the church. Or do you not care what City Bible preaches, as long as they believe in Jesus and preach accordingly.
I’m genuinely curious?
June 8th, 2005 at 4:09 pm
In regards to the comments about people working at CBC never seeing the light of day unless they go get a latte for “Hank” I totally disagree, as I worked for CBC for two years and now I work at another job and there are times when I long for the days of my great schedule I had at City Bible Church…So, you should probably re-check your sources. Have a great day!!
October 24th, 2005 at 2:19 am
Nice post. Check out my site if you can. student loan debt