FBI: Did Jack Schaap take teen across state lines for sex?

http://global.christianpost.com/news/first-baptist-church-of-hammond-more-united-than-ever-following-jack-schaap-adultery-scandal-79977/

“The investigation is still open, and they are saying that he could be charged at any time, but there are no new findings. We speak to the local authorities just about every day, just to find out what’s being done,” Wilson added, revealing that the church has little information on Schaap’s current whereabouts, though they believe he is out of state.

Showing their Midwest bias, they got the location of Jack Trieber’s pastorate wrong.

He is located in Santa Clara, California, not St. Claire. We got Spanish speaking RC’s not French.

Jack Schaap No Cause For Self-Satisfaction.

http://www.proclaimanddefend.org/2012/08/09/jack-schaap-no-cause-for-self-satisfaction/

I note these lines:

Appropriately, we abhor the shameful betrayals of the Gospel that make headlines. More importantly, it is time to ask the question, “What am I tolerating in my own heart that is blinding me to the snare?”

He said: “Why is God allowing all fundamental Baptists to be slandered by Jack Schaap’s betrayals?”

Answer: Well it could be because so many were on the same platform as he.

It would seem some folks didn’t learn the Billy Graham lesson. Back in the day, BG was lambasted for who he had on his platform. You’d think folks would be more careful of whose platform the were on.

[Jim]

He said: “Why is God allowing all fundamental Baptists to be slandered by Jack Schaap’s betrayals?”

Answer: Well it could be because so many were on the same platform as he.

It is one thing to invite people to your own platform. It is another thing to be on someone else’s platform who also invites someone with whom you disagree. And it is another thing to keep going back to that platform after an error has been discovered.

And it is another thing to demand absolute perfection at all times.

And it is another thing to demand absolute perfection at all times.

Let’s hope that lesson has been learned by the people who have worked so hard to teach us that very demand for so long.

And if it has been learned, now would be a good time for a statement. To someones other than the fraternity board.

when Don asked him about the medical leave (about 2/3 of the way down):

I know Schaap does have some medical issues, so I think it was a convenience for them until they got a handle on it.

So, when someone on this thread said there was no medical issue, you didn’t have all the facts. Also, I think someone said they only came out with it after the authorities got involved. That is not true — they were the ones who contacted the authorities.

So anyway, almost certainly they did put him on medical leave, so it wasn’t a lie to say that he was on medical leave.

Would it have been better if they fired him immediately and told people the entire story right from the beginning? Sure. But what they did tell people was true, as far as it went.

Is it too bad that they didn’t do it right immediately? Yes, but they DID get there, and didn’t take a long time to do so.

I think we would do better to save our fire for their failure to have any kind of accountability for their pastor before this happened. The medical leave thing is kind of sad, but it was at least a small step in the right direction to get him out of the pulpit immediately. If they had stopped there, they would deserve all kinds of condemnation for it — but they didn’t stop there.

Perhaps we should think about what is repentance. Repentance is a change of direction. If there was any thought of covering sin, if that was behind the medical leave thing, they repented of it. You can see that in what they’ve actually done.

I hope that when I get in a horrible mess, I’m not judged too harshly on the intermediate stops on my journey, as long as I keep moving in the right direction and end up in the right place.

FBCH is still not, in my opinion, in the right place. But the medical leave was a small and rather pathetic step in the right direction which was followed by a huge step (for them) — firing a pastor. Praise the Lord, and may they keep going.

[JG]

when Don asked him about the medical leave (about 2/3 of the way down):

I know Schaap does have some medical issues, so I think it was a convenience for them until they got a handle on it.

So, when someone on this thread said there was no medical issue, you didn’t have all the facts. Also, I think someone said they only came out with it after the authorities got involved. That is not true — they were the ones who contacted the authorities.

So anyway, almost certainly they did put him on medical leave, so it wasn’t a lie to say that he was on medical leave.

If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.

I must say it to be a foreign value system to be willing to accuse people of lying without the facts. But it appears some people are comfortable with this. Hmmm…haven’t we seen this kind of duplicity somewhere else? Oh wait, FBCH!

As I read Romans Chapter 7 this morning I was reminded how sensitive Paul was to his own sinful nature. He didn’t need a Nathan to tell him that he was a sinner. It appears that the indwelling Holy Spirit was enough to convict Paul of the fact and drive him to Christ.

For 30 years I have seen well-known fundamentalists(?) (in their particular circles) who were guilty of drunkeness, immorality, and theft have to be caught and confronted before they are forced to confession and repentance. Then the sheeple are told to “tell it not in Gath”, because talking about the sins of leaders would hurt the ministry, As I’ve said before, I know of only one pastor who, when he behaved inappropriately with a lady, turned himself in for church discipline and resigned his position within 48 hours. That’s why I’m not surprised at the rumors of denial, cover-up and equivocation that surround this incident. The behavior is typical.

Jack Schaap has spewed false doctrine, exhibited pulpit behavior that would make Mark Driscoll blush, and willfully sinned against a Holy God and the Body of Christ. He has been found out and should be made a public example. I Timothy 5:20

[Ron Bean]

…

Jack Schaap has spewed false doctrine, exhibited pulpit behavior that would make Mark Driscoll blush, and willfully sinned against a Holy God and the Body of Christ. He has been found out and should be made a public example. I Timothy 5:20

Here! Here! I’ll carry the kindling; you bring the torch!! FORWARD TO THE STAKE ALL…………………………………!!!!

[Lee] Here! Here! I’ll carry the kindling; you bring the torch!! FORWARD TO THE STAKE ALL…………………………………!!!!

[JG] when Don asked him about the medical leave (about 2/3 of the way down):

I know Schaap does have some medical issues, so I think it was a convenience for them until they got a handle on it.

So, when someone on this thread said there was no medical issue, you didn’t have all the facts. …

So anyway, almost certainly they did put him on medical leave, so it wasn’t a lie to say that he was on medical leave.

I am not following. It seems like you conclude that Glover’s statement substantiates the accuracy of the church’s “medical leave” explanation, but I do not see why. Glover’s statement was rather general and non-committal (whether because for some time he has “had little to do with the place” [see his next answer] and thus lacks direct knowledge of this situation or because he is a cautious attorney avoiding the invitation to dive into this particular issue, or some combination of both, I do not know).

Glover affirmatively states that Schaap has medical issues. I do not know Schaap’s medical situation, but I have no reason to doubt that he has medical issues of some kind (indeed, many—most?—of us have medical issues of some form or another). Thus, I do not doubt that general statement. But that is not the point. Instead, the more important issue is whether any such medical issues were the reason for Schaap’s absence, as the church’s statement would naturally imply. Did those medical issues cause Schaap’s absence from the pulpit on that day? I do not know, and Glover does not say.

I observe that, since Glover seems not to be speaking from recent knowledge, the medical issues seem to be long-standing ones. I note that a video on Schaap’s 10th anniversary as pastor at FBCH states that in 10 years as pastor he preached 2,455 sermons and conducted 39,500 counseling sessions: an average of almost 5 sermons and 76 counseling sessions per week. Health does not seem to have been slowing him much. Of course, these summary facts do not prove that there could not have been a medical impediment on the particular Sunday in question. Nonetheless, these facts are probative, and I would not be surprised to learn that they get used if this matter goes to court.

[JG] Also, I think someone said they only came out with it after the authorities got involved. That is not true — they were the ones who contacted the authorities.

Can you point to a definitive church statement on that point? The statements that I recall reading and hearing are somewhat vague and leave room for the possibility that the church did not make the initial contact to law enforcement. I hope that the church did make the initial contact, but I wonder.

Hi, Brent. No, Glover’s statement doesn’t prove the “medical leave” statement was true, you are correct. But it’s the most natural conclusion, and the most charitable.

He apparently has medical issues. I’m willing to take Glover’s statement on face value. He had no reason to say it if it wasn’t true. I don’t know what they are. Obviously, they are things that have not kept him from functioning, but the reasonable (and charitable) conclusion is that Glover’s statement is true.

If he has medical issues, and they said he was on medical leave, the most natural and charitable conclusion is that they almost certainly did put him on medical leave initially. I see no reason to doubt that he was on medical leave, and that the statement to that effect was true.

He shouldn’t have been put on medical leave. He wasn’t on leave because of a medical problem. But it seems to me almost certain that he indeed was on medical leave (I see no reason to doubt it) and therefore extremely likely that their statement about it to the church was technically accurate.

I am very hesitant to say that these people set out to deceive. They were trying to cope with a spiritual, mental, emotional, and social earthquake for which they had never been prepared by their pastor. Some of them may have had deceit as their intent, but it is uncharitable, in my opinion, to interpret this as anything other than fumbling around trying to find the best way forward.

In the interview with Glover to which I linked, he says Gibb told them to contact the police. Again, I’m assuming he wouldn’t say that unless he knew. So they asked an outside attorney (something that never would have happened in Hyles’ day) and then went to the police. Again, that’s the natural and charitable conclusion. Unless we have some pretty solid evidence, we should avoid accusing anyone of trying to cover it up until someone involved the police.

I’m not sure why we’re trying to make the deacons out to be the bad guys here. In my opinion, they have done better than I would have expected them to do, even though it wasn’t perfect, and I praise the Lord for it. There seems to be sufficient evidence that they are trying to move in the right direction for us to be gracious and encourage them.