Well, I actually did post indirectly about the BGC -- in my entry re: Piper & the FBFI. What I said there was
The second point underlined above is that Piper has never separated from the BGC in spite of its association with Open Theism. I would propose that the BGC cannot be reformed from its error unless men like John Piper stay in the body to refute errors and turn a brother away from sin. At the same time, I would also note that you cannot find open theism in Piper -- it is without any evidence. So to say, "well, he hasn't made his church find a new fellowship so he must be in cahoots with those Open Theists," is to make him guilty by association, not by example or evidence.If the statement "The second point underlined above is that Piper has never separated from the BGC in spite of its association with Open Theism" offends, it is a reference to the FBFI position on the matter. I'll admit it was a glib summary of their position, and in that it does not scrutinize their position very closely -- nor does it scrutinize the truth claim thet the BGC embraces open theism.
The statement raised the hackles of jeffmickle, and to him and anyone else offended by the statement I apologize.
(2) I also apologize to my wife for blog-checking while on vacation. My body clock wakes me up no later than 6:45 AM and she and the kids will sleep, if unassailed, until 9 AM. Internet access was free at the hotel, and I capitalized.