“Hubris.”

And at the top of the article is a photograph of a World War II P-38 fighter airplane. The P-38 is a symbol of heroism and sacrifice. Many of America’s finest young men laid down their lives as P-38 pilots. We owe them our greatest respect and honor for their ultimate sacrifice. Using that photo is just another example to what level some will stoop to steal glory unto themselves from whom the honor rightfully belongs. It is akin to traipsing over the graves of veterans to produce a self-glorifying promotional video.

Driscoll is such a joke – he and others like him are the reason Christianity gets mocked and ridiculed. Funny he didn’t mention anything about a ‘mile high club’ on his airliner.

Excuse the typos please.

It will take a long time before there will again be someone in my life who can hurt me and I will trust him or her that it is OK.

Mark Driscoll’s “Intensive Training.” (All documented at TWW)
• Bachelor’s degree in communications from Washington State University with a minor in philosophy and hold
• Master of Arts degree in exegetical theology from Western Seminary.
• He wrote a book on sex…

A book on sex involving both ends of the alimentary canal. Don’t forget that.

Are there any pastors you trust, besides Pastor Wade? Every post reminds me that you both appear to have a very low view of pastors. — Joe

Wipe Driscoll’s brown off your nose first, Joe.

“Are there any pastors you trust, besides Pastor Wade?”

For my part, there are some pastors I trust, but to different degrees. But I trust them when they earn my trust, not because they stand on a platform. And there is no pastor right now that I’d trust if I was wearing my drink, my luggage came flying out of the overhead bin, and I needed to buy new underwear to replace the ones I was wearing- not unless he explained very clearly why all that was necessary.

The person who demands my trust automatically loses it.

thanks for the great post Dee. Just when I thought MD could not surprise me. His arrogance and elitism shines through once again.

@ Jeff S.:

Amen to your whole comment!

Well thought out and written post…(and quite funny)…

The thing that really bothers me about Driscoll’s analogy…

Shouldn’t Jesus be the Pilot? Where does he fit in this analogy…If at all?

As someone said above… I see complete humility in Sully and complete Hubris in Driscoll…

Another thought: Driscoll is asking his congregation to “trust” him when there are clearly some shady things that have happened between him against those other elders?

I would never trust any pilot who “shoves” their “co-pilots” out of the plane without a parachute….

Who, after all, would trust a pilot who practices “blessed subtraction” by throwing people under the bus! Then turns around and asks for trust….

Dee and Deb:

Great post.

The comparison of education and experience between Sully and Driscoll is excellent.

Reminds me of some comments I made recently just a day or 2 ago trying to encourage people to see that it’s better for us all to listen to people with education and expertise, and not flash in the pan, entertainer types that are all too common in many Christian circles these days.

That’s especially true if the entertainer types affirm things we believe. Because our critical analysis often goes to sleep in such situations.

Thanks for such a good reminder.

Dee-

Off the top of my head & extensive reading of your blog for almost a year now: Denver Driscoll, Duncan, Mahaney, McArthur, McDonald, Mohler, Piper, D Wilson, J. Wilson to name a few are all pastors you don’t trust. The only pastor I have read you speak highly of is Burleson. Care to enlighten me on “I often speak about pastors that I like” cause I must have missed those posts?

But i do not know of outright bleeding from insde the eyeballs to the outside. So, I shall defer to an expert

I thought MD was saying something like “all the blood rushed out of [into] my head,” which is a whole ‘nother thing to bleeding, right?

Wouldn’t extreme G force cause a drop in blood pressure + lowered blood flow to the extremities – and maybe other parts of the body as well?

At any rate, that’s how I took MD’s statement. if he literally meant that people bled form their eyes, then every test and combat pilot – not to mention astronaut – would have had that experience. As is, I can’t believe it’s anything but a jumped-up urban legend.

Dee – MD was referring to tunnel vision at once a plane hits certain levels of G force, so that’s why I assumed he was alluding to a drop in blood pressure, not bleeding.

Dee – I had no intention of “correcting” you – just thought that maybe there was some confusion over what MD was actually saying.

For once, I actually agree with MD [shudder].

If Driscoll had been making the analogy that the church is like a plane wreck, that may have been the most sensible thing he’s said in a while!

And *thank you* for your comment re. MD quoting an author or (imo, more likely) something he saw in a movie or on TV. 😉

Miguel – + eleventy-one! (*Great* comment.)

First time posting here.

What I find so curious is that Mark Driscoll’s M.A. program is not even considered a track to ordained ministry by Western Seminary. Who is the world ordained him?

(FYI, I googled “Western Seminary M.A. ordination” to find a .pdf file with this information.)

“The program is not recommended for those preparing for a ministry where ordination is expected or required (e.g., the pastorate, chaplaincy, evangelism, and church planting) or for those who anticipate subsequent doctor of ministry studies.”

Oh. My. God. What the hell? “You take the blue pill, the red pill, it’s like the Matrix?” What is wrong with him????????? “I don’t talk about it….” he says in front of a large TV audience…..

Dee-

I am just working with the information you make public on the internet, so it’s currently a 3 to 1 dislike to like ratio. If your trajectory stays consistent, I predict that ratio will increase as you continue to write. This is an underlying issue that is applicable to this post. Does your husband make diagnosis about random people’s heart condition’s he passes in the grocery store? If he does, that would relate to what we are talking about.

“When I get up to preach I’ll see somebody get raped like a screen in front of me….” For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications..sounds to me like Mr Driscoll’s thought life might need a little cleaning up. I truly think he is obsessed. And that sounds like some possible demon oppression as well. Scary.

“Does your husband make diagnosis about random people’s heart condition’s he passes in the grocery store? If he does, that would relate to what we are talking about.”

What makes you think Dee’s sample is random? She has absolutely said it is not.

Joe, one more thing- there is very little to “trust” when it comes to famous pastors. I’m not going to trust someone for pastoral care who I’ve never interacted with. So when it comes to that kind of “trust”, it goes to local pastors or pastors I work with.

I don’t distrust all famous pastors, though. I listen to RC Sproul almost daily on the ride into work. I have a lot of trust (though not complete) for his teaching. I’ve read (and plan to read more) Tim Keller- I think he has a lot of good things to say about how we are Jesus to this culture. But I don’t know how these men treat people in real life- I’ve never seem either one interact with human beings, the most telling trait of how I would know how far to trust a fellow Christian. So I put these kinds of men in spheres of limited trust in my life- I think they have a positive influence in me as I grow as a believer, but they are never going to be people who I let my guard down with in a significant way.

But there are many public preachers I do not trust at all- I feel completely fair in that. The public spotlight easily attracts those who hunger for power and control. Would I think that it is easy for a false teacher to desire this and get the support he needs to become famous? Absolutely. So if you are guessing that some have a predisposition to mistrust those standing in big spotlights, well I don’t think it’s a bad caution to have.

Mara and Sophie –

Agree!!

And MD gets a free pass by TGC and others (because of body parts??) and RHE gets criticized by TGC.

It all seems turned upside down!

Joe:

One thing that might help you gain perspective is the reason behind Dee's and Deb's founding this blog. I don't want speak for them, but my understanding is that addressing abuse is a high priority.

Given that, you will find more posts about what Dee and Deb consider to be abusive forms of leadership. I don't always agree with their analysis, but I understand why they write negatively about many religious figures they cover. This blog is not designed to be a happy, cheery place.

They do post inspiring items, but they also focus on the negative a lot by virtue of what they feel is their special charge or interest. I agree with them sometimes. Sometimes I do not.

Hi Joe

I knew you would show up! For a guy who has no “connection” with Driscoll, you sure seem to be concerned about all things Driscoll. You must have some sort of program that puts you on red alert when I post on him! — Dee

Is Joe a known Driscoll Fanboy?
Or just a scavenger following an apex predator for the scraps?

HUG, WtH met someone who came across MD when he was just a callow high school student and the person noted two things 1) MD gave no indication of becoming a preacher or a serious Christian at that stage but 2) the kind of preaching he’s since been famous for fits how he behaved pre-conversion. It’s unlikely as best I understand things that Driscoll was ever a beta or omega male as such.

The bus/car analogy has apparently reached its expiration date.

I love how NT Wright uses the example of Captain Sullenberger as a metaphor in this video. He mentions this example at about the 9 min mark. Entire message is excellent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukyNU51OcnA

Joe,

Tell your hero pastors to stop providing so much material. :o)

Numo-

I think the post on Salsa Dancing gives us insight on what Dee thinks about Anyabwile. She did reference him, but only if she thinks he disagrees with others @ TGC, which is the post you are referring too.

JeffS- My comments are directed at Dee. Fair enough in regards to your thoughts on trust & famous pastors. I would encourage you to extend your same reasoning to Dee "diagnosing pastors" from her internet perch. This is especially when she seems to have a propensity to distrusting the majority of the ones mentioned on her blog, which is what we are talking about, not the world. Still standing at a 3 to 1 ratio of trust to distrust (which is only a partial list on the distrust side).

Joe – I happen to agree completely on the post re. Thabiti’s salsa dancing metaphor.

So… never let it be said that TWW ignores good things someone might do/say/write/preach.

As others have noted, this site is mainly about spiritual abuse, and Dee and Deb call ’em like they see ’em. Your opinion – and mine – may not be the same as theirs, but they’re providing a valuable service here and I deeply appreciate the support I’ve found on this site.

Your mileage, however, may vary.

I watched the second half of the 60 minutes video and I believe one of the amazing things about Sully was that he did not rest until he knew all of the passengers were accounted for. Before he got into his life raft, he checked the sinking plane twice for passengers left behind. After, he rechecked the number of passengers that were alive to make sure it was 155. Sully took care of his flock, even when the situation was grim. He had the professional training, vast experience in more than one area of his industry, as well as displaying humility and professionalism.

I can't help but be reminded of a certain MH bus (I am currently on said bus, hoping to jump off soon, but that's another story). Though the bus quote is from years ago, I feel like it's relevant to this article and this comparison. It makes me think: Would MD stay behind to make sure EVERY. SINGLE. SOUL. was accounted for? If a plane landed in water, would he be quickly escorted out by his ever-present body guards? Would he react calmly to the situation? Would he ask for all of his passengers stuck on the plane's wing to be saved from his sinking plane first? Oh, the questions we can ask about this ministry called Mars Hill.

I think Mark Driscoll has left souls behind in his many years of ministry. While I don't think this was done purposefully, nor because he doesn't care for his congregation, I think it may be because he doesn't understand the 1) seriousness of his position and 2) that leaders are to serve and care for the people they lead. I've heard him speak more than once on the seriousness of the task of being an elder, but the "vision" of MHC might have gotten in the way of this.

Joe – dude, there is a big difference between “bashing” and legitimate critique of what a person says/publishes/writes/preaches.

But I suspect this will not make any difference to your argument.

Joe –

You seem unable to grasp the main purpose of this blog which has been specifically pointed out to you.

The people discussed on this blog are all outspoken men and women who preach, teach, write books and blogs, and constantly speak in the public arena. Since they choose to do this, anyone is perfectly free to judge their words. As Christians, we are actually called to weigh their words.

You are doing exactly the same thing by commenting on TWW. The big difference here is that you are allowed to say what you have to say, which is not usually the case on most of the blogs written by other teachers and pastors. They don’t tolerate discussion or disagreement.

Feel free to go read and listen to MD. You sound like the perfect yes man to assist him in convincing people to buckle up for the bumpy ride and the possible crash and burn if the turn is too sharp. Don’t mind the debris strewn about in the fields either. MD concluded his article with the fact that God is ultimately the one steering since He is sovereign. It appears MD is not responsible for anything.

Joe

Do we care if Dee hasn’t made a list of all the pastors she likes for us to critique?
No.

Now are you willing to talk about the post, or will you continue trying to take Dee down for not having positive, fluffy, Ostrich-like self-affirming blog content?

Joe, instead of hanging around here moaning, why not start your own blog entitled ‘sycophants R us’ where you can celebrate Driscoll et al to your heart’s content?

Fighting For The Faith did a great podcast (only ~23 minutes) on Driscoll’s post, breaking down everything that is wrong with it. He’s of the opinion that this post shows all the hallmarks of cult leadership, not church leadership. I highly recommend giving it a listen.

Joe, Dee mostly falls into the same category of people who I trust in limited areas. Like Sproul or Keller, there are points I disagree with her point of view, and that’s fine (if you go back to her post on the SGM conference you will see an example where I disagreed and said so). In fact, being a Reformed believer there have been more than a few disagreements I’ve had with people on this blog. But I value what Dee does in the name of defending the oppressed, so I welcome that which helps me grow and be more Christlike.

And to be clear, God is absolutely interested in justice for the oppressed and calling out those who lead falsely. I actually found this blog due to my research online about Driscoll and his teaching (after having him recommended to me as a teacher I ought to listen to). I am glad this blog, along with others who call out Driscoll, are doing what they do. Everything I can see from his own lips causes me to believe that he is an abusive man who should not be leading Christians at all, and people need to be woken up to this fact. The more people who mirror and model his abusive nature, the more corrupt the modern evangelical church is going to become.

“she seems to have a propensity to distrusting the majority of the ones mentioned on her blog, which is what we are talking about, not the world”. If we are not talking about “the world” but only the ones she mentions, then why is it objectionable to you that she distrusts the majority that she mentions? As as been pointed out to you repeatedly, there is a specific reason for this- the purpose of this blog is to point out those she distrusts. If you object to this purpose, then just say so- stop trying to make the case that her percentages are off.

The purpose of warning people from being led astray by false teachers is a Biblical one- read 2 John or Jude. The whole point of those letters was to warn people from being led astray. It also seems to be your goal; however you are not doing it by interacting with the content of what Dee says, which makes your arguments uncompelling.

If you are an apologist for Driscoll and want to explain to us why he is not a false teacher or an abusive man, please do so. If I am wrong and if there is some justification for all the ill he has preached, the please enlightened me. I do not want to view a true man of God incorrectly, and I am sincere about that. However, if this is your goal you better start working because there’s a lot for you to do. As for Dee, I will continue to evaluate what she says fairly in the light of scripture.

“The comparison of education and experience between Sully and Driscoll is excellent.

Reminds me of some comments I made recently just a day or 2 ago trying to encourage people to see that it’s better for us all to listen to people with education and expertise, and not flash in the pan, entertainer types that are all too common in many Christian circles these days.”

Anonymous, Are you referring to the Rachel Held Evans post? If you are that is a big stretch. RHE is like Mark Driscoll? She is telling people she is their pilot? That they should follow her?

Or has been simply been sharing her faith journey in public? And asking tons of uncomfortable questions? Some of which I think are silly and some of which I think are fantastic.

I am simply astounded that she is so threatening to so many men. If you guys who think she is such an ignorant twit had left it all alone, she might have sold less books.

You cannot compare her to the spiritual abusers and charlatans masquerading as pastors. Where has she told people that God anointed her to be their pilot? Or they are sinning by questioning her? In fact, I would LOVE to see Driscoll interact with people on the internet as she does. Same for Mahaney, Mohler, Piper and all the other

“That’s especially true if the entertainer types affirm things we believe. Because our critical analysis often goes to sleep in such situations.”

It is not necessarily ONLY the entertainer types. Many have gone to sleep and given up indenpendent thinking and analysis when they encounter Dever, Mohler or Piper.

Seriously? “Marginalize people”? Jesus was “damned” on the Cross? Keys to the kingdom? These guys have their own issues and they are educated to some extent. Sometimes education can just make a charlatan more diabolically clever.

You know, sleeping on this latest Driscoll BS, having read this post (‘nother good one btw Dee), and the conversation here about the military and all. It made me think of my brother who is an F-16 pilot in the Air Force, a Major expected to become a Lieutenant Colonel. He has spent a lot of time training young men in his years in the military and has just came back from Afghanistan after another extensive tour.

I did a small man series (of which Driscoll was a part) and a strong men series (that my brother was mentioned in where I don’t even get into his military achievements) comparing and contrasting the difference between real men and those who just play at it.

I’m not linking the series. There is something else that stands out in stark contrast between wannabemanpastor Driscoll and real men like my brother and Capt. Sully.

Whereas my brother has just spent months away from his wife and family, meaning voluntarily denying himself the comforts of home and relations with his wife in order to serve his country, Driscoll can’t go without sex for four of five days while his wife is menstruating. And worse, he trains his subordinates to be just as demanding, needy, and undisciplined as his own sorry self.

Shame on Driscoll for even thinking he could compare himself with men like Sully and my brother when he doesn’t have as much self-control and self-discipline in his entire being that Sully and my brother have in their left foot pinkie toes.

http://frombitterwaterstosweet.blogspot.com/2012/04/driscoll-is-anal.html

Baptists get only backrow during church.
Potlucks – I mean – providential suppers are a different matter.

I appreciate what this blog is shining the light on. So necessary in our current times.
A general comment on trust:
It is my understanding that the bible never instructs us to trust our human leaders. We are to place our trust in Jesus Christ. No human being is infallable. The Bereans were commended for fact checking what Paul taught them. We are told to honour those who serve well with the gifts God has given them. That’s not the same as trusting.

Dee, re: Joe and many others —

I have observed a strange phenomenon among these authoritarian comp/patriarchy guys, whether SGM, Mars Hill, or anywhere else.

If you are a fawning sycophant, you are wise and humble.

If you keep quiet, maybe smile and nod from time to time, all is well.

If you speak out against them in any small way, however true or justified, you are denigrated and dismissed as bitter, rebellious, wounded, aggrieved, discontent, unloving, troubled, unbiblical, unsubmissive, gossipy, slanderous, busybodies.

And that goes double if you have the audacity to be found guilty of SWF — Speaking While Female.

And I forgot to include the ironic, “want a perfect church.”

“Whereas my brother has just spent months away from his wife and family, meaning voluntarily denying himself the comforts of home and relations with his wife in order to serve his country, Driscoll can’t go without sex for four of five days while his wife is menstruating.”

To all horny-boiz who “can’t go without sex for four or five days”:

I’ve gone without sex for 56 years. GROW. UP.

“I have observed a strange phenomenon among these authoritarian comp/patriarchy guys, whether SGM, Mars Hill, or anywhere else.

If you are a fawning sycophant, you are wise and humble.

If you keep quiet, maybe smile and nod from time to time, all is well.

If you speak out against them in any small way, however true or justified, you are denigrated and dismissed as bitter, rebellious, wounded, aggrieved, discontent, unloving, troubled, unbiblical, unsubmissive, gossipy, slanderous, busybodies.

And that goes double if you have the audacity to be found guilty of SWF — Speaking While Female.
”

Never Again,

And what I have found is when people realize that these men are NOT their Holy Spirit, they get away from them.

Deb, Hester,

So, what’s the deal with sitting in the back? Perhaps no one really knows — it’s just the done thing, & people don’t analyze why. But you don’t seem the kind of people who do things in a non-thinking way.

Is the motivation to sit in the back out of politeness, denying oneself a good seat so others can have the better seat towards the front (like at a concert or play)?

Is it a false modesty, like no one wants to look self-important by assuming a seat in the front?

Is it non-chalance, not wanting to look overly impressed or enthusiastic about the presentation (as in, “yes, i’m very mature and understand what the minister is going to say better than he does, I’m just here to support those of you who don’t know very much”)?

Not that I would expect any of these motivations to be yours. Just wondering what’s behind the custom.

Mara mentioned,

“Whereas my brother has just spent months away from his wife and family, meaning voluntarily denying himself the comforts of home and relations with his wife in order to serve his country, Driscoll can’t go without sex for four of five days while his wife is menstruating. And worse, he trains his subordinates to be just as demanding, needy, and undisciplined as his own sorry self.”

********

What rang in my memory: “….husbands having sex with their wives at LEAST once a day…”–Mark Driscoll, at Arlington National Cemetary, of all places.

Are men really this needy?? (any care to answer?)

hmmm…. what is now ringing in my memory at this moment:

“Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above.”
–Katherine Hepburn as Rose Sayer in the African Queen

Joe

Wow – You accuse TWW of Bashing Pastors. Then “you” name 15 so-called pastors. That takes some time and research on your part. You sound serious about your beliefs. Well, me too. I was ordained, I was in “Leadership.” And now have a different take on these so-called Pastors. Oy Vey!!! 🙁

And my recommendation, since leaving ‘The Abusive Religious System,” is, Never, Never, Never, Ever, Ever, put your trust in a “Mere Fallible Human.” When you can put your “Trust” in Jesus, Hear His Voice and Follow Jesus.

Jer 17:5
Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm…

Ps 118:8-9
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.

For me, if someone has the “Title” Pastor/Leader/Reverend.” A “Title” NOT found in th Bible…
All “Trust” is gone. – They might be a nice guy. Might even be saved. (I have pastor friends.) 😉

But, “Trust” – NOPE, NOT anymore. Even my friends know, NO Disciple had the “Title” Pastor.

And like Jeff S – “The person who demands my trust automatically loses it.” (Great quote)

Why would anyone, who said the Bible is God’s Word, Take a “Title/Postion” NOT in the Bible?
BUT – I cudda missed it.

I’ve asked a few you mentioned for help. But some “banned” me. And others “Ignore” me;-)

Maybe you can help. Seems you’re good at research. And you’re serious about your beliefs.
Would you answer these questions, from the Bible, that those you named refuse to answer?

In the Bible – How many of His Disciples – Are “Called” – Pastor/Leader/Reverend?
In the Bible – How many of His Disciples – “Call themself” – Pastor/Leader/Reverend?
In the Bible – How many of His Disciples – Have the “Title” – Pastor/Leader/Reverend?
In the Bible – How many of His Disciples – Are Hired or Fired – as a – Pastor/Leader/Reverend?

Deb:

You are welcome. I believe that after reading your story about your former church, it gave me a great deal of perspective on this blog.

One of the things about the internet and email is that it allows communication, but often does not promote full understanding.

If I was sitting down with almost every person on this blog, I think that the conversations would be different because I could learn more about the perspective of each person.

Once you understand a person’s background and perspective, it helps with communication.

So I clearly get why the main focus of your blog is abuse and poor leadership.

When you historically look at the early church leadership, (Pastors, Deacons, etc..) you find that part of job description for these roles includes the following: If, by any reason, the government authorities come to persecute the church, the leader is to stay behind and purposefully be arrested, as to make sure that the followers have the time to escape.

So ultimately, those who are in these pastor roles are supposed to be so trustworthy that the entire community would rely on them for escape. This is quite a feat, and involves great humility. And it also raises the question if any of these celebrity “holy men” pastors were to come under persecution, would they run and hide, allowing the followers to be arrested, or would they hold ground and take their place instead. If a pastor cannot fulfill this role, then they have no business being in leadership. And although this is indeed a hypothetical situation, I do not see the public humility in Driscoll, or any of the big name celebrity pastors today. To do what they early church pastors did would require true humility, true courage, and true love, and anyone willing to “throw someone under the bus” does not exhibit any of these characteristics.

Anonymous,

I am grateful that my testimony helped you understand our focus here at TWW. Perhaps providentially, I heard the current pastor of my former church on a Christian radio program earlier this week. I don’t have any problem with him, but it would be impossible for me to return to that congregation given what happened.

During that broadcast, he happened to mention that three church members are running for office in North Carolina – one is running for Congress, one for Lieutenant Governor, and one is seeking re- election on the NC Supreme Court. Yes, there are some highly influential people at my former church…

A. Amos Love,

Excellent posts. Thank you!

So, according to his analogy, co-leaders are the ones more likely to trust the leadership, and all resistance will be coming from inexperienced newbies?

I guess that explains why some of the stiffest criticism of Driscoll and Mars Hill has come from former elders.

Just quickly, it’s interesting that Crew Resource Management was mentioned – check out the wikipedia article on this – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_resource_management

The key principle is that the pilot may not know best!

Nick

Excellent commentary! As I was reading it, I remembered that Mark Driscoll was mentored by two individuals outside of Mars Hill when he came under fire for his Song of Songs interpretation. Those two mentors were John Piper and C.J. Mahaney.

MHCmember874 – wow. that is *very* revealing.

His definition of “humility” + application of it is just… [no words]

Joe:

As someone who wrote for the Wittenburg Door years ago said, “The best crap detector is a deep love for that which is not crap”. Dee has shown her methods – she is trying to defend the church-abused – because she has seen what a good church can be like, and the abominations that are being put forth as examples of the true Church are reprehensible. I myself would have trouble finding 5 pastors that I trust. I have been in churches where the pastors were good men but bad pastors, churches where the pastors were not good men, and a very few churches where the pastors were both good men and good pastors. God is still on the throne, of course, no matter what pastors may try to assume the crown. I think there are a number of reasons why we have so many poor pastors today – and they are similar to why we have so many sociopaths as executives in business. The limelight and the power attract a certain kind of person – and our seminaries for the most part of made up of people who help people assume both.

A calling is not supposed to be about either of those, though. The calling of teacher is one that should be approached with trepidation – and as the pastor in the old poem “first he wrought, and then he taught”. Those who curse their staff and throw out those who disagree are not the ones we need. Barnabas should be the example of pastors. Timothy and Paul both fed themselves rather than be supported. The son of man did not have his own house.

You say she found 5 pastors she trusts? WOW! I doubt I can list that many pastors I trust. But I have not known that many pastors. Clearly there are a lot of pastors who I don’t know personally (Benny Hinn, for example) who I do NOT trust – Jim Bakker is another, and the list goes on. Of those I never met but would trust, C.S.Lewis now long gone to his reward would certainly be on the list, but only because of books I have read from people who knew him (A Severe Mercy for one).

Joe, what do you use to determine who to trust? Do you trust anyone who puts pastor in front of their name? Anyone who makes a lot of money? What criteria do you use? In the OT I am told that people thought that the wealthy were blessed by God, and hence must be doing right. That isn’t my impression of what Jesus thought.

Hi all:
I just starting reading here recently but have listened to MD sermons for a while. Once you realize how crazy he sounds it gets kind of entertaining. He reminds me quite a bit of my ex-brother in law, who is now disqualified from ministry because my sister-in-law divorced him. But I digress…

I think the following section of MDs rant is the most telling:
“1. JUMP OUT OF THE PLANE
Stand up, freak out, make a scene, grab a parachute, and jump out of the plane with your résumé in hand hoping to land a job somewhere else. If you are really freaked out and negative, you can try and take as many passengers with you as possible, which is in your mind some kind of heroic act.”

Bitter much?? People starting to see through the smokescreen and leaving, so lets compare that to jumping out the plane!

“Obey” a pastor?? I think I’m going to be sick.

This pastor people species has mutated into something freakish.

I don’t think any of what Mr. H describes is relationally/organizationally/emotionally sustainable. I’m fairly sure implosion is in the cards.

You know, the Calvinistas aren’t the first group to make the mistake of pulling all the eager young men into leadership and creating a maturity vacuum. But with the internet making the world smaller, their brand is going further than before. When this all crashes and burns, and it will, people will look to Tradition, or right doctrine, or whatever.

If people would just look at the Bible, this pattern would get solved. Paul says not to put a young believer in charge too soon – this works either way: too young or too new to the faith.

In the 90s, it was like this in the denomination I attended. It was a young, new denomination. It was growing fast and often drew pastors from other denominations in. Those pastors would start a church, then move on. They would raise up a leader from within. Since this was a new denomination, most of the congregation was 20s and 30s – very few 40s. This meant many young pastors got moved up to senior positions quickly.

Those churches often fell apart. Sometimes due to pastoral infidelity. Not sure why that was the main reason, but I have a hunch the Calvinistas have decided that is the number 1 reason new church plants fail. Not the obvious problem of putting a, young naive, new-to-the-faith believer into the pastoral role who isn’t tested by the sands of time. No, just poor victims of wives “letting themselves go*” or inattentive wives, only possible reason according to them.

My observations of the time are: the excitement of a new-found faith wears off quickly once storms hit. Many of these younger guys may have been brought up around the church, but hadn’t become believers until quite recently, they hadn’t tested their faith through life’s trials. Also, many younger pastors felt that the denomination had what no other denomination had, the right balance of Charisma and teaching. To some extent it did, but only at the beginning, when trained pastors – with years of experience and seminary training – joined.

The newbies, lacking the seminary exposure (which, due to most seminaries around our area being anti-Charismatic, were not considered beneficial) and lacking pastoral experience, couldn’t lead as well over the long run. Problems arose, people left the church, the denomination as a whole lacked the deep well of experience to draw from when members went through tough times. Pastors often looked for a “type” of person to lead, due to some prophecy saying that God was going to move in this group of people or this type of vocation, so people were chosen based on their racial, economic or vocational background rather than giftings. Others felt slighted at being overlooked when a new guy was picked and so on.

I see this happening in the Calvinista circles too. The young are being put into lead roles, far above their experience, often with no formal training they grasp at authority. Now, people are being told not to question their leadership. This is not a good combination.

The sad thing is, no amount of doctrine or tradition can make a movement immune to this. It happened in the Charismatic movement in the 90s, now the Calvinist camp. But Paul’s advice for Timothy is wise. Pastoring/Eldership is not about charisma or leadership abilities. It is about finding God through a tried and tested faith.

The Top Gun comparison was especially fitting, since it’s a film known for its homoerotic subtext.

Dear all

I think the following article taken from the Let us reason.Org website I is very helpful.

The mindset of a cult leader

Cult leaders are not instantly made; they often have a gradual ascension to their position of control. Many times they come from among the church as the apostle Paul warned.

Cults have not vanished from America’s landscape (or other countries), in fact they are on the increase. Not all cults are religious in nature. There are religious cults, secular cults, personality cults and Political cults. Cults are all about control, dictators can be cult leaders. Today, there is a wide variety and cults and religions that come in various flavors. They teach either their way through their church or group is the only way to God or that all religions have their own way to God and are acceptable. Neither extreme is true. Jesus said he was the way and told us that we are saved by grace through faith in HIM.

To identify a cultic church we need to know what a Church that is free in Christ looks like. A church can only operate correctly under Christ by knowing its limits of control and maintain an attitude of servanthood. True shepherds abide by the Christian constitution. This is not man made doctrines or creeds but the Bible. Peter writes to the elders to “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers” (1 Peter 5:2). The word for overseers means to beware and watch carefully. You can tell a true shepherd (pastor) by how he guards the sheep against what would harm them. They will address falsehood from their pulpits when necessary for the protection of the sheep; they will give their lives for the sheep (Jn.10). They will not compromise their convictions because of friendship or hardship of money.

They neither subtract nor add to the word, they do not overlook church discipline nor do they abuse the discipline they can implement by their authority, or position. They are men filled with grace looking to lift people out of bondage they are trapped in.

They leave the choices to the people, allowing genuine faith to be present to accomplish the needs. Allowing the Holy Spirit to move the person to do the right thing. So they pray for the people to be led of Jesus and glorify God. That they will hunger for the word and read and study on there own, and not be negligent in their relationship with God and their fellowship with man. True spiritual growth is accomplished in an atmosphere of freedom, liberty that Christ gives and God’s appointed leaders will exert their influence to have the church live in this manner. When the church lives this way, it flourishes and everyone benefits because love is present.

The real God-appointed pastor remains responsible, vigilant, as he watches over his flock as a protective mother hen, making sure they become mature in the faith and can stand on their own. “But we were gentle among you, just as a nursing mother cherishes her own children” (1 Thessalonians 2:7).

Understanding what our freedom in Christ is helps us identify what can be taking away our freedom. A cult leader justifies nearly everything they do as right and will never admit doing something wrong, (especially to you personally). Paul said, “Of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:30). They do this by speaking contrary to sound doctrine and lifting themselves to an authoritarian position by abusing Scripture. They use portions of the truth as a platform for their own unique doctrine. If they have no respect for God’s word, they will certainly have no respect for his children, they too will be abused. Paul said, “I did not abuse my authority in the gospel” (1 Corinthians 9:18).

I Jn. 2:19: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.” (Acts 15:24). Many who run cults or are cultic shepherds came out of Christian churches and know what they believe but disregard it to have people follow them.

Cult deprogrammer Rick Ross lists those who are victimized come from all walks of life, but the most vulnerable to mind control are those going through a difficult time in life or a transition:

1. Recently divorced 2. Illness 3. Personal tragedy 4. Career failure 5. Away from home for the first time.

When you ask questions about their history or teachings and they avoid answers, it is a warning sign. This is why it is so important to look into a church before you join to know how they began and their history. Too many waste years in churches because they neglected to do research on which would have only taken a few hours.

Sometimes a church that began right can adopt a new program or has a new pastor come in that changes their whole way of ministry. Often times it promoted about expanding but it can also be about a Christian teaching that they themselves are deceived in. Again, research on the subject is pertinent to ones spiritual health. When one finds out something is drastically wrong, they should not hesitate but leave as soon as possible. The longer they delay the harder it is to leave.

They are persuasive in a manner that one is not prepared to counter. One goes through a process of what is called behavior modification by the control used by the leader. In cult churches there comes to a point where one cannot question them because of the unique position. That they are right no matter what is found to be wrong, even if it is plainly stated in Scripture. They will not entertain and challenges by questions though they may acknowledge a concern of what you are seeing. They feign compassion and response to individual needs when they are really more concerned of the whole congregation. The amount of people corralled around their magnetic personality, or purpose of God. It becomes apparent that they are not there to serve you, but you them. “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave–just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:25-28). True authority comes from God as one serves the people. “Jesus style” is one of servanthood not as the world rules over people taking control of their lives .

The less resistance they have in what they are doing the faster they work to extend their control. Once peoples liberty are refrained it is never regained, no matter how many “sincere” conversations you may have with the leader[s]. When they begin to disallow you the freedom to talk to others it becomes a warning sign that they will not discuss it anymore and they are about to exercise more control over you so that you are no longer resisting them.

They will eventually break your will and ability to seek truth and have you submit to them. They will take advantage of any insecurity and use and abuse you under the false authority of God. This trains the member for a dependency on man and at the same time a lack of faith in God. This produces “victims,” subject to even more control to the leader.

Like Luther who stood against the manmade teaching of purgatory in the Roman Catholic Church that he was a priest in. The church wanted people to believe they still had some control over their loved ones who died and could be purged by them paying money for their release. So many schemes are implemented for the people to work for the church or its leader to move up the ladder into leadership, or to be in good graces. They may stop being friendly to you, to move you into a greater commitment. Performance is always tested and used for acceptance as their control mechanism. They will make to feel you are not up to God’s standard for their group. After you have voiced questions they will have you go through more rigorous courses or do works for the church.

They require a great amount of commitment without allowing you a freedom of choice. Time, talent are all at the disposal of the church or leader. This is especially done with money. The people are told that the church has a mission, that they may be unique and they are obligated to give their money and time to it because it is following God. The leaders often live a lifestyle of opulence off their members and followers.

“…nor did we eat anyone’s bread free of charge, but worked with labor and toil night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, not because we do not have authority, but to make ourselves an example of how you should follow us” (2 Thessalonians 3:8-9). The apostles did not use their position to get their way, but showed the gentleness and love of God through their ministry.

God does not manipulate people by promising a blessing or answer their prayer faster or better if they give money to a church or its mission. God tells us to trust those who have shown themselves to preach his word correctly and actually show care for us, we are to distance ourselves from those who do not, for our own safety.

The most dangerous of all is the religious that wrap themselves in God’s service as his spokesman. Galatians 5:1 says, “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” They promise liberty but the people only get bondage. Under these leaders the people end up serving them, the more the people serve the less they have. The longer one is under a leader like this the more fear sets in when questions arise. There comes a time when the person will either leave or completely trust the leader no matter how they are manipulated or abused. Job 12:11; “Does not the ear test words and the mouth taste its food?

Signs to watch for. They will always use the point that God chose them as the leader for you betterment, they become the mediators. God spoke to them even if it contradicts the word. They ascribe new meanings to the Scripture contrary to what you may have once known. They will have you change to the leaders words, that are a unique interpretation of the Bible – without knowing why.

When you’re following their teachings it affects your time and relationship with your mate, family and friends. And they have you choose between them and God – which is interpreted as serving the church or them.

The cults recruit people who have wandered from the truth or have a background in the church and are searching. Even a Christian can be deceived into a cultic church that looks like it is more dedicated and more loving than any church they have gone to.

You need to know you can always exit out. Prov. 15:14: “The heart of him who has understanding seeks knowledge.” Prov. 18:15: “The heart of the prudent acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.” It can only happen by being convinced that they do not have the truth which means you will have to examine the Scripture and decide what the real meaning is on key passages and doctrines.

Once you know that they are wrong it’s going to take sheer will power to stand to make a move. Prov. 24:5: “A wise man is strong, yes, a man of knowledge increases strength.” When one finally makes up their mind to go to different church and let them know you are leaving threats or curses will be issued. Such things will be said like, you will be out of God’s will. This is where God wants you, if you leave his blessing or anointing of the Spirit will leave your life. They may even prophesy to bring guilt or scare you. When you see this occur then you can know for sure that you have made the right decision. Go and do not look back and doubt what you have learned from your time of deception. Many who leave also leave good friends inside. Do not allow them to draw you back in. Only when you become strong and have prayed should you go back to contact your friends to help them exit. Always be accompanied with a friend who is strong in the Lord and understands the situation to be a support for you”.

It’s all the more relevant because of the similarities identified between such groups and emerging terrorist groups. Research by Lorne Dawson at the University of Waterloo, Ontario published in Terrorism and Political Violence in 2010 makes a couple of points worth repeating.”Reducing complex factors to a few rudimentary insights,it can be said that the highly personal character of the charismatic bond formed between charismatic leaders and their followers is more susceptible to disruptions. These disruptions stem from both the experiences of failure and success. The growth attend and on the success of a group can introduce a distance between the leaders and their followers that counter-intuitively works to promote the aggrandizement of the leader’s charisma in ways that can prove problematic with time, since charisma rests on a degree of detachment from reality, of wish fulfillment, that can support an unrealistic confidence in the efficacy of violence in the face of challenges to that authority.”

Regards
Gavin

“If people would just look at the Bible, this pattern would get solved. Paul says not to put a young believer in charge too soon – this works either way: too young or too new to the faith.”

And add to this the word “teen” was not even in our vocab until about 100 years ago. Young men were usually raised with more responsibility and were working. So age is also relative when looking at a 1st Century “young man”. As an example, the age of thirty in the 1st Century is nothing like 30 now. Thirty is when one could be a full Rabbi after studying under from age 7.

W. A. Criswell decided that the pastor is the “ruler” of the church.
At Southern Baptist seminaries, the students are being taught that the pastor is the ruler of the church. He and the deacons or elders run the church as the rulers.

The Southern Baptist Convention has its own issue with the Pastor having the wrong view of himself–please notice I used himself–because Women are not allowed to be Pastors.

1st Timothy 2:12 is basically used for the reason to not allow them this position.

Where have all of the servant-leaders gone?

Mot, If you want to get some insight into Criswell, read Joel Gregory’s “Too Great A Temptation”. If you can find it.

“Obey” a pastor?? I think I’m going to be sick. — Elastigirl

Does the phrase “White Night” in Jonestown ring any bells?

Mot, If you want to get some insight into Criswell, read Joel Gregory’s “Too Great A Temptation”. If you can find it. — Anon1

When anyone says “Criswell”, I think first of the Fifties pop psychic who used to hang out with Ed “Plan Nine from Outer Space” Wood.

Dee, I am starting to notice a shift in language and focus in Christendon. those who are leaving the institutions but not leaving their faith speak more about Jesus Christ then they do about the gospel, being missional, biblical or any of the otherbuzzwords that are quickly becoming meaningless.

yesterday I had an interesting conversation with a 75 year old woman who is been in Southern Baptist Church of her life. she was reading about the ‘nones’ and made it clear to me that many in her age group are in that category they just are not counting them. her church was taken over by the YRR. she was even telling me about her 80 yr oldbrother who is a retired Southern Baptist pastor. he is a none, too. he has not been able to find a church where the priesthood is a reality. he does not understand the concept of a pastor being specially anointed that is prevalent in most Southern Baptist churches today.

elastigirl – Sophie – Anon 1 – Hug

Rated – Best – 5 Stars – *****

“Obey” a pastor?? I think I’m going to be sick.

This pastor people species has mutated into something freakish.

What happens when the YRR lose their “enthusiasm”. The older folks in these churches had been supporting their churches for years.

I predict many of these churches will fold and leave a testimony against them.

MHCmember,

Is it just me, or is Driscoll’s sermon video on “Jesus Is a Better Servant” edited around the 43 second mark, when he jumps from how happy he is about the church to “and so”. It just seems abrupt and the edit is choppy. Is something left out?

Sophie

Hmmm? Trusting Pastors??? NO thanks – Tried that a few times…

Don’t know if you-all ever checked – But the word “pastors” is only nine times in the Bible.
Only once in the NT KJV – and 8 times in OT – Jeremiah, and 6 times God is NOT happy.
Here are 7 verses from Jeremiah I’ve never heard “Pastors” preach from the pulpit. 😉

Jeremiah 2:8
The priests said not, Where is the LORD? and they that handle the law knew me not:
*the pastors* also transgressed against me, and the prophets prophesied by Baal,
and walked after things that do not profit.

Jeremiah 10:21
For *the pastors* are become brutish, ( beastly, carnal ) and have not sought the LORD:
therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered.

Jeremiah 12:10
*Many pastors* have destroyed my vineyard, they have trodden my portion
under foot, they have made my pleasant portion a desolate wilderness.

Jeremiah 22:22
The wind (ruwach = Spirit) shall eat up *all thy pastors,*
and thy lovers shall go into captivity:…

Jeremiah 23:1
Woe be unto *the pastors* that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!

Jeremiah 23:2
…thus saith the LORD God of Israel *against the pastors* that feed my people;
Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them:
behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.

Jeremiah 50:6
My people hath been lost sheep: *their shepherds* have caused them to go astray…

Hasn’t anyone ever wondered why? In the Bible?
NOT one of His Disciples was called – or had the “Title” Pastor/Leader/Reverend?

Hey Amos, Thanks for the book recommendation. I found Pagan Christianity several years after leaving the business of Christendom. It gave me much more insight and affirmed some things I had been studying myself. Like why a pulpit when there obviously were not pulpits in a NT church. Why one guy “speaking” to people week after week? Why has the building and programs become more important than the people in the pew who pay for it? What is going on with all this personal “branding” of the pastor?

I will check it out. I might even recommend it to my new senior citizen “none” friends. This woman I spoke with (grandmother of a boy who attends school with my daughter) left a church I am familiar with. She named 5 other friends her age who are not going anymore either. Of course growing up and living most of their lives in church–now they are totally lost because it was their life. But they cannot support what they are seeing so they are in quite the dither.

She said they were particularly concerned about tithing. I suggested they find a single mom to help out anonymously in the Name of Jesus and how much that would glorify God. She really liked that idea. (I did not have the heart to explain the tithe was not for the NT. Don’t think she was ready for that one!!!)

So we also have to remember those for whom church has been their life and are in their last years with no church family as they were used to. Broke my heart, I gotta tell you.

Dee:

Forget attending the trial for now.

See if you can get copies of the deposition testimony, and post it as it becomes available. It would have to be redacted to protect the victims.

You are likely to find out more facts that way.

I owe a great debt to this website. A couple of years ago I realized I had been duped by Bill Gothard’s patriarchal doctrine, and to my shame I nearly fell from that right into Calvinista doctrine. I’m so glad I took the warnings from Deb and Dee and extricated myself before I was totally brainwashed AGAIN.

BTW, I love RHE’s book.

Amos, Fantastic!

Sophie – I notice that you, too, refer to Scotland as “here”! I’ll understand if you’d rather not answer this, but furryboots in Scotland were you at the time?

one other thing that I didn’t see mentioned in the post (or maybe I missed it), there is no humility in the leadership of MD. Sullenberger? He drips humility and is clearly a level-headed leader. Total contrast to MD.

BTW, I actauliy knew a situation not far removed from the above scenario (at Mars Hill), I lost touch, but I believe they are divorced now.

Sophie – all that stuff is kind of why I realise you might not want to answer! 😉 I tend not to say too much specific about my church history for similar reasons. God has not given me any permission to speak out against anyone, I think because he’d rather I concentrate on building the life he’s called me to live.

We live north of the Forth as well, though I have to climb a few hundred feet up the Ochils behind the house to get a view of Auld Reekie. 🙂

Val,

What a fascinating description of Mars Hill. That makes perfect sense. Thanks for helping us get a glimpse into the Mars Hill Meat Market.

Val, modify the long-haired hippy dippy girls into SPU education students and nursing students. 🙂 Mars Hill is across the Ballard bridge from SPU and Mars Hill made for a more entertaining “bedside Baptist” than First Free Methodist.

Amos, it’s comforting but also very sad to think that anyone can relate to me when I say that church makes me feel physically sick. I’m glad you can say that you still trust Jesus at the end of it all. It’s not so bad anymore. I went to a church a few weeks ago actually. I’m not exaggerating when I say that if anyone had turned round and seen my face at any point during the service they would have seen the kind of expression they might make if they accidentally hit an animal while driving and had to reverse back to put it out of its misery. But it was an improvement on my previous reactions nonetheless.

There’s the Driscoll Mars Hill and the Rob Bell Mars Hill. They both started around the same time, it seems.

There’s a positively sprawling series of posts tagged “real estate and Mars Hill” at Wenatchee The Hatchet if you want to read through those. It’s still on-going. Have taken a break from that one to deal with some off-line projects but hope to get back to that when time permits.

Upvote for the list – GLOL (gutteral laugh out loud). They’re fabulous insults, I’d be flattered. The “In Need of ESL” one – don’t they mean “In Need of English as FIRST language”? And I learnt what x#&**#xx!@ meant when I was a child from reading Asterix comics, ha ha.

This discussion got me curious to look back at my church’s statement on submitting to authority. Notice that while they do say church leaders have authority, they say submission is earned (not demanded). Also when it discusses behavior, it is the behavior of the leaders that determines if submission is possible. I’m sure many of you would still disagree, but you must admit this is a far cry from Driscoll. The most important thing to me is that I can agree to this statement without agreeing that I will submit to spiritual abuse (because that would fall under the leadership exhibiting behavior that does not allow me to submit).

“The ability to submit to someone is earned. It is first earned by positional authority, but that authority must be maintained by the leader living out character qualities which continue to earn and maintain the relationship that makes submission possible (1 Timothy 3:1-7). Submission to authority is part of living in a healthy relationship in community. All communities must have a base for authority and leadership. God has established the church with this authority and leadership base, and he has also established standards of behavior for that leadership to maintain in order to allow the community to submit to their authority.”

Val, the situation WTH describes re. real estate and keeping people in a “Hotel California”-type situation (you can check out but you can never leave) is something I experienced in two different “discipleship movement” groups during the 70s.

I’m willing to bet that the strategy was old even then…

From JeffS’s church’s statement on “authority”: God has established the church with this authority and leadership base, and he has also established standards of behavior for that leadership to maintain in order to allow the community to submit to their authority.

Love how some guy starts an organization (usually a government registered 501c3 organization) and then asserts he is God’s established authority to whom others must submit – even going so far as to claim “It is first earned by positional authority…” Positional? Take a hike.

Sophie –

I SO relate to you when you say that the thought of going to church makes you, quite literally, sick. Your description of your expression during the service made me chuckle, though I also know that it is a serious issue.

I too feel almost ill at the thought of returning to church and being pressured to conform to a certain mould of Christianity. When I walked past a Christian/church stand at a university societies event recently (and the smilingly solicitous people manning it), my heart rate increased and I got fidgety until I was safely out of its vicinity!

“Love how some guy starts an organization (usually a government registered 501c3 organization) and then asserts he is God’s established authority to whom others must submit – even going so far as to claim “It is first earned by positional authority…” Positional? Take a hike.”

This isn’t really “some guy starts an organization”– it is the PCA who started the church and and they asked this man to be the leader of the church while it was still forming– so his leadership was initially derived from his position rather than earned trust, but it’s not a position he picked for himself.

Anyway, I’ll try not to spent too much time defending this. It seems like a reasonable statement to me, but I know it will raise red flags for some people, especially those who have been through the ringer with the church (which I have, so believe me, I get it).

Dear Sophie
I agree that these groups just recycle tried and trusted routines. The mainstream churches are partially at fault as well, though, as they succumb to the latest sales technique that promises to increase numbers, income and influence. In their rush to try the next great idea they throw their power of discrimination out the window. If they would only look and consider first, they might have saved themselves and others a lot of pain and suffering. And I’ve noticed over the last few years a dramatic increase in such missionary organisations coming from the USA to establish bases here in the UK. We do have a few home grown ones as well. Those pastors who like to quote Hebrews 14:17 to justify and demand complete subservience to them, tend to forget about the last part of the verse which shows the kind of care they are meant to exercise as caring for your soul and remembering that they will have to give an account of their actions to the One Shepherd of the flock. The reformed churches have made it a point of principle that any religious leader is to be obeyed only insofar as their teaching is in accordance with Scripture. The believer in the pew also has the Spirit of truth and is equally exhorted to discern the spirits to see if they be of God.

I hope you continue to recover in His grace and care.
Regards
Gavin

Hi Jeff S, your words resonated with me as a fellow band musician. I’ve often thought of that in the context of church leadership. Even if one is the founder of the band, any authority from that is purely moral and most musicians will leave pretty quickly if the leader or founder starts demanding unquestioning obedience from them, unless he/she really delivers the goods in other areas such as getting gigs/recordings etc. Even then I think there’s a limit to how much people will tolerate, as the history of several famous bands illustrates.

“Kingdom Hearts: This Man Is A True Christian Shepherd?”

HowDee YaAll,

Has this man “missed the mark”?

hmmm…

“A true shepherd of God’s sheep, if he honestly believed his example had led others into sin, would be broken over it. He would have sought their forgiveness (not arraigned them before a kangaroo court) and then bent over backwards to set a different example to the congregation at large.” Nick Bulbeck

Bingo!

Now there seems to be a great evil stirring within Mars Hill Church. The leader, Mark Driscoll has just been recently slapped down for a “type” of impropriety by his peers in the christianity community at large. In effect, he was sent home. He broods, with no repentance in sight? Woe unto his associates, woe, woe unto the members of this church organization, woe, woe, woe, unto the christianity community at large!!

(sadface)

“For the kingdom of Heaven is like a king who decided to settle his accounts with his servants. When he had started calling in his accounts, a man was brought to him who owed him millions of pounds. And when it was plain that he had no means of repaying the debt, his master gave orders for him to be sold as a slave, and his wife and children and all his possessions as well, and the money to be paid over. At this the servant fell on his knees before his master, ‘Oh, be patient with me!’ he cried, ‘and I will pay you back every penny!’ Then his master was moved with pity for him, set him free and cancelled his debt.”

“But when this same servant had left his master’s presence, he found one of his fellow-servants who owed him a few shillings. He grabbed him and seized him by the throat, crying, ‘Pay up what you owe me!’ At this his fellow-servant fell down at his feet, and implored him, ‘Oh, be patient with me, and I will pay you back!’ But he refused and went out and had him put in prison until he should repay the debt.”

“When the other fellow-servants saw what had happened, they were horrified and told their master the whole incident.”

“Then his master called him in. ‘You wicked servant!’ he said. ‘Didn’t I cancel all that debt when you begged me to do so? Oughtn’t you to have taken pity on your fellow-servant as I, your master, took pity on you?’ ”

“And his master in anger handed him over to the gaolers till he should repay the whole debt. This is how my Heavenly Father will treat you unless you each forgive your brother from your heart.”

“Greater is He that is within us than he that is in the Pulpit.” Sopy

✿*´¨with joy,

S“㋡”py!
___
p.s Sophie, it’s wonderful dat you stay so close ta Jesus, he won’t forget you! never, never, never… 🙂

Dee,

They are nice. I was actually surprised that was used as an insult. The Assyrians here are mostly from Iraq and are orthodox as opposed to the Chaldeans (also from Iraq) who are Roman Catholic. This is the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_people.

Jeff – this is a really heartening anecdote…

The pastor said they’ve only come close to using church discipline once before and they guy left before it got to the public stage. The guy in question was being abusive toward other people in his views on Reformed theology (which were essentially in alignment with the doctrines of the church, but the leadership felt his attitude and way of interacting was harmful to others).

For one thing, a church eldership that is honestly prepared to use a disciplinary process (and I agree that the concept is biblical and necessary) but rarely does, if ever. For another, a disciplinary process that is not there to keep an elite in power but to protect the congregation as a whole. In fact, it seems to have a lot to do with strengthening the faint-hearted and supporting the weak, as they’re the ones most likely to be knocked sideways by someone abusively pushing doctrine. And finally, a leadership who understand that technically accurate doctrine, without love, is counterfeit christianity.

May their tribe increase!

As for Driscoll calling the pastor “effeminate”… I believe that Driscoll is a deeply troubled man who has something going on inside himself that he is struggling with. The sad thing is that the people around him feed it and I believe that they are complicit in allowing this to continue. — Dee

Not just deeply troubled, I figure he has some sort of closet sexual addiction/obsession that’s going to blow sky-high someday. Like Rush Limbaugh with is secret Oxycontin addiction years ago. Compounded by the fact he’s the CELEBRITY pastor who cannot show ANY ungodly weakness whatsoever. Especially when his personality has influenced those around him in the MH elders into something resembling a feral dog pack (i.e. go for the throat of anyone who shows any weakness — “I CAN BEAT YOU UP!!!!”)

And as for the “people around him”, they’re nothing but Yes-Men basking in the scraps dropped by the Alpha Male. Like remora suction-cupped to a shark or Tabaqui the Jackal hanging around Shere Khan. Courtiers praising the God-King, out-praising and out-flattering the other for Royal favor du jour. Anyone else was thrown under the bus long ago.

Anon1: In response to a post waaaay up there…. good for you suggesting to the woman that she and her friends “tithe” to a young, single mom!

One of the main problems that we had with the churches we attended was tithing. We did not agree with the “philosophy” or the “methods” of the church, and we struggled with giving them our money. I compared it to giving to another non-profit organization. If I didn’t agree with the practices of the organization, there would be no hesitation in not giving to them. So, why were we giving to a church that we did not agree with? We certainly were not giving cheerfully. In fact, I was angry every time I wrote that check to the church.

It was such a freeing moment for us when we left church and we realized that we could give to whatever organization we wanted to, not just the church! I hope that these women find that even though they have left the church, there are still needs out there that they can freely give to. When we are freely able to give to whatever needs we see, it makes giving a pleasure and not a burden.

…demagoguery…

Gavin, Who was the intern at FBC Dallas?

Doug Wilson needs to go run this national organization . . .

http://www.medievaltimes.com/buenapark/abouttheshow.aspx

. . . and leave the Bride of Christ to Jesus.

Bridget,

Although I’m newer to all of this, I completely agree. It seems to be all about protecting what is “sacred”. They cling so tight that they make a fist, which can only be used to hurt. But the thing about Jesus is that he allowed himself to be vulnerable, having an open palm. In doing that people could see what he had, look at it and share it, without fear of losing it. That is what true love is, becoming vulnerable to serve and love others, not closing into a fist and punching them in the face.

Bridget,
The Medieval Times describe the woman’s role, from a Wilsonian POV:
“Surrender to an age of bravery and honor and witness epic battles of steel and steed” 
Speaking of “battles” a very young restless and reformed male former-fellow-care-group member of my former formerly Acts29 church has begun his own blog! Here’s the facebook announcement:

My new blog. Click on “Home” to see the first post.
**** Fair warning to friends and family****: In the spirit of 2Cor. 10:5, I consider the public discourse of ideas to be an integral sort of war-zone, and as such I will respond with a war like mentality to false ideas. If you leave publicly visible comments in which you disagree with something I’ve said, I will openly refute the ideas presented in your comments in a way that decimates them to the best of my ability. Don’t take it personally. If you’d like to have a “nicer” conversation about an issue, please email me in private.

What do you folks think? (BTW, in his blog, he seeks to synthesize the teachings of Ayn Rand with “classical Christianity”).

Jeff S 🙂 🙂
I must confess, I read the one with Orcs when I was 14, but never read anything by Rand. I did hear her name used as a past tense verb by Simon and Garfunkle, however. “I’ve been Ayn Randed”
Being ignorant about her, I couldn’t dream of disagreeing with anything my young friend says about her.
I could only say with certainty that she died for precisely no one’s sins, and has yet to rise from the dead after 30 years. I suppose he could decimate those arguments, and explain how the II Tim passage isn’t applicable in a war-zone!

Wow, thanks Dee- that’s really great of you!

What happens when two YRR disagree? Is it like tying toast butter side-up to the back of a cat? — Hester

The Universe cannot have two centers.

How long before the Spectral Evidence for WITCHCRAFT appears?

Dave AA,

Something tells me that this guy is convinced of what he thinks. It would be nice to get the whole world to boycott him. He doesn’t deserve to hear anyone else’s ideas. But alas, people will try to interact with him and he will feel far more intelligent and important than he is.

On the Ayn Rand note – this is my hobby horse. The way that so many conservative Christians have jumped into bed with Rand (I’ve read other YRR guys defend her) is really appalling. She was a godless capitalist in the same way that Stalin was a godless communist. The pursuit of one’s own self-interest as the highest moral good is the bedrock of ‘objectivism’. I love watching Christians try to make her biblical – it is a wonderful display of the absurd. Samuel Beckett couldn’t have made it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7c-Ei7btbI

Rand is a perfect example of how you can go too far in opposing an oppressive philosophy. It’s hard to fault her for her views coming out of communist Russia, but you’d think those who follow her would be a little more balanced. I am shocked how many Christians embrace her work given how absolutely opposed to mercy she is. She has her main character shoot a human in the heart and feel no guilt because he was not worthy of being considered a human. There’s no way such a philosophy is consistent with Jesus.

I became familiar with Rand by way of my favorite band Rush who was briefly enamored with some of her works. I think Atlas Shrugged does a great job of showing why Communism fails, but also unintentionally shows the absurdity of going full tilt the other direction.

Finally, having a 100 page monologue is not a good example of literary prowse, even if it IS John Galt himself, Rand’s idealized man.

elastigirl-

If I could “like” your ‘demagoguery’ comment a dozen times I would!

Thanks everyone for your thoughts on Rand and my YRR acquaintance.

Okay, at the end of that article, they mention what your attidue towards “the organization” and “the leader” should be, way more than they mention what your attitude toward Jesus should be.

There is something wrong here, people!

Dave A A on Mon Nov 05, 2012 at 03:35 PM said:
Your quote re: Ayn Rand “I could only say with certainty that she died for precisely no one’s sins, and has yet to rise from the dead after 30 years”.

Oooh, she may have died but her philosophy is very very much alive. It’s the dominant paradigm.

I read “The Fountainhead” when I was a teenager and loved it. I had utterly no idea of and was blissfully ignorant of the worldview she was promoting – ‘untrammelled capitalism’.

She was definitely a product of her times – coming out of Bolshevik Russia. We have a similar woman in Australia called Helen Hughes. I’ll shut up now or I’ll start raving about how the right-wing is influencing indigenous policy.

Objectivism (partial cut and paste below)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_%28Ayn_Rand%29

…the proper moral purpose of one’s life is the pursuit of one’s own happiness (or rational self-interest), that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights embodied in laissez-faire capitalism…

It could be both, TedS, which would make it even creepier.

Hi Little Canuck – I know what you mean about the Gospel Coalition’s influence on this area. No concern from church attenders, such an easy take-over. Sigh. I also think you are representative, many first or second generation Dutch and Mennonites in the area. I wonder if that is why many don’t feel the sting of patriarchalism the way those of us from less gender-divided churches do, as the more traditional churches were/are pretty patriarchal, making the misogynist tendencies in guys like MD just seem “biblically” complementarianism-normative in the influenced churches?

Be thankful it is just MD you had to deal with, some churches in your area love all the conference guys – Piper, Driscoll, Mahaney, etc., etc. Once people reacted negatively to Driscoll’s marriage (I mean sex) book, then all the others got quoted endlessly (insert eye-roll).

Dee – Vancouver area is a unique case (I hope) the churches seem more like they react to the west-coast, anything goes, laid-back lifestyle by being different from that, rather than really going for God. Not all churches, mind you, but many of them. For Christians: large families, early marriage, that sort of stuff, but it really contrasts the Vancouver norms – few kids, many child-free adults, late to very late marriages. Working women.

She claimed medicare benefits? I’ll be reading up on that one. There’s probably even more worth telling.

In my internet hunting this afternoon (it’s like that), I found these other two posts on Ayn Rand by Morgan Guyton. I like how Christians are challenging that belief set, because she is so compatible with the brand of churchianity.

http://morganguyton.wordpress.com/2012/08/12/ayn-rand-vs-jesus/

http://morganguyton.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/3-gospel-stories-made-into-atlas-shrugged/

I should qualify one point from the above (as though I hadn’t written enough already).

The mere fact that a christian becomes well-known obviously does not, in itself, make him/her the antichrist. Like you all needed me to tell you that. I also note its influence on me. I think it’s only now that I’ve finally shaken off the craving for ego-boostingly large audiences and readerships that blighted my spiritual development for over two decades. (As I’ve hinted in previous posts: by God’s grace, that craving was not satisfied.)

Ayn Rand was a CULT Leader who got abused by the Russian Revolution. Fleeing the Bolshies’ regime of Forced Unselfishness and Collective trumping Individual, she flipped one-eighty in the other direction into an Ideology of Utter Selfishness. And then turned that Ideology into a CULT with herself as Cult Leader, in a funhouse-mirror reflection of what she fled and reacted against.

I have no doubt if she’d been given the same absolute power over a country as Comrade Stalin, her Objectivist regime would have been just as bloody as Stalin’s Communist regime. Purity of Ideology and all that.

Atlas Shrugged is Rand’s Sacred SCRIPTURE(TM)in every sense of the Word; after the 2008 elections and the start of the Second Great Depression, I heard it quoted chapter-and-verse as Fulfilled Prophecy.

Though some months ago, I had an insight: Atlas Shrugged is Left Behind for Brights, an apocalyptic escape/revenge fantasy. Both are the same story and fanservice pitched for different audiences.

1) Initial Situation: Persecution of the Righteous.

The Righteous (Those Just Like You, Dear Reader) are a minority, a Chosen Elect who actually make the world go round, outnumbered and persecuted by the Unrighteous.

2) The Escape Fantasy:

A mysterious Messiah figure calls out the Righteous (Those Just Like You, Dear Reader) and spirits them away to a hidden Place of Refuge where they wait out the coming/resulting Apocalypse/Armageddon.

3) The Revenge Fantasy:

Without The Righteous (Those Just Like You, Dear Reader) to leaven the loaf and prevent the Apocalypse, everything melts down as the Unrighteous destroy themselves and take the entire world down with them. Armageddon.

4) End Situation: Triumph of the Righteous

After everything outside the Place of Refuge has been destroyed in the resulting Armageddon, the Messiah figure leads The Righteous (Those Just Like You, Dear Reader) out from the Place of Refuge to take rightful possession of the world now cleansed of the Unrighteous. And The Righteous inherit the Kingdom prepared for them…

Aside: Break-the-Fourth-Wall preaching

In both, the authors break the fourth wall and preach directly to the reader, whether Altar Call Invitation or 100-page one-sentence Objectivist rant.

Atlas Shrugged and Left Behind — Twins Separated at Birth?

I went out this morning and was reminded of another Facebook friend who mixes conspiracy theories in with religious posts. (sample: “Isn’t Jesus Wonderful!” 0 comments “Was ‘Sandy’ created by the government to stop the election?” 45 comments)
So I looked up in the sky on this election day and saw–at least 6 contrails! You hardly ever see them here. Coincidence?! I think not! In other conspiracy news, “Was Sully’s plane shot down by Mars Hill security team? You decide!!!”

Dave AA —

Use proper Conspiracy terminology.

Not “contrails”, “Chemtrails(TM)”.

It’s worth noting that I think Rand saw herself as Dagny, not Galt in Atlas Shrugged. That is, I think she still felt she was a work in progress whereas Galt was perfection personified.

Dee, it’s hard not to have a simplistic view of Rand, as her philosophy was very simplistic. The whole “the answer to poverty is hard work” line of thinking is unscriptural. Even Johnathan Edwards held very strongly that mercy to the poor was a core Christian value and he has a sermon where he dismantles all of the (still used) excuses conservatives make for not helping the poor. But I guess people only listen to Edwards when he’s talking about hell, not the poor.

After breathing the chemtrails, I feel Strange Compulsion to go out and vote to re-elect Great Leader as Eternal President. — Dave AA

Dare you to dial up Coast to Coast AM next time they open up the lines at 3 Ayem and see if you can get them to believe that.

Dee
And this link gives you Edwards, sermon in full

http://www.biblebb.com/files/edwards/charity.htm

Gavin

@ Nick:

“I know individuals hereabouts who explicitly believe the state of emotional arousal they experience as a result of modern CCM equates to ‘entering the presence of God.’ And that mindset seems to be widespread.”

Combine this with the “spiritual capitalist” idea you mentioned earlier (CCM is largely controlled by corporate interests) and you pretty much have the entire Christian music industry in a nutshell. Backbeats and the trancelike state they can induce seem to have become a necessary “preparation” for or “gateway” into “true” worship. Kind of like getting absolution from the priest. Which any good anti-Catholic CCM-loving Baptist would fiercely decry.

I wish CCM advocates would just start admitting these things up front. It would make their (old and tired) objections to traditional music much easier to rebut.

@ Dee:

“It surprises me that there are Christians who believe that Rand’s philosophy is consistent with the faith. They often quote ‘if you don’t work, you don’t eat’ rarely taking into account the complexity of such a situation. They ignore Jesus’ command to care for the poor. That is what frustrates me about Rand. It all sounds so simple, doesn’t it? I am waiting for a Rand fan to take me to task for my simplistic view of her.”

I always understood 2 Thessalonians 3:10 to be referring to those who actively refuse to work, not those forced/born into poverty through circumstances, illness, etc. or who just can’t rise above a certain income level no matter how hard they work. Many people work very hard, multiple jobs even, and they’re still poverty-stricken. We’re told to help these people.

I’ve never read any Rand and from what I’ve heard, I don’t want to. She sounds like a real piece of work, to be honest, and her followers are annoying. (Careful about daring a Randbot to “challenge” you – they will!) She is NOT compatible with Christianity, not in the slightest. Ironically the only “Christian” I ever met who LOVED LOVED LOOOOOVED her also tried to bully all the other people in our homeschool group into following her [this person’s, not Rand’s] rules on debatable issues (which she insisted were not debatable). So apparently what’s good for the goose is not, in fact, good for the gander.

On the other hand I do think Christians can legitimately disagree on the role of government in charity…and not all conservatives are libertarians. BUT. This doesn’t change the fact that we are commanded to help the poor in some way.

(Another libertarian idea I take issue with is the pervasive idea that all taxation is “theft.” It’s just silly for Christians to espouse this when we’re clearly commanded at least twice in Scripture to pay taxes.)

Atlas Snubbed?

 “Who is John Galt?,” in the book Atlas Shrugged , people use this unanswerable question to express their sense of hopelessness. However, “Who is Jesus Christ?,” in the Bible, people use this answered question to express their sense of hope. Real lasting hope. The rest is a no-brainer.

Consider Carefully?

You Decide.

IronClad

Dear Hester

This is turning into an eye-opening discussion. I’ve just come across a sermon by John Newton, ex-slave trader, on the Advantages of a State of Poverty. Apparently it’s okay if you’re an unbeliever because it restrains sin and if you’re a sanctified believer you only reap benefits!
Regards
Gavin

HUG (et al) – have you considered the possibility that Ayn Rand was slightly bonkers? Just guessing, as I don’t know a fat lot about her. But I’ve just googled a photo of her and she looks like the person from the archetypal monster movie who is the first to see The Creature.

Haitch – I know relatively little about the Peterloo Massacre, unfortunately, though one might say it was effectively Britain’s Tienanmen Square. But you could also call it another tragic parallel between the repression of the industrial revolution and the rise of the celebrity-led megachurch, with its wounded people who are supposedly to be ignored, and whose “attacks” only seem to harden the hearts of the powerful. I didn’t know what Malthus’ epitaph was until I looked it up just now. Hard to say, but it was evidently written by (or on behalf of) his friends. It is long on how noble he appeared to them, and short on what good he actually did beyond writing books and preaching. I don’t want to sound like a stuck record on the “parallels” thing, but…

BTW – are you intending physically to stick a post-it thereon, entailing a visit to these shores, or am I over-interpreting you there?

@Nick – yeah the bit on Rev Tosser Malthus “he lived a serene and happy life” got me stirred up when he was busy depriving others of the same. Born into a life of privilege and left it just the same. grrr That epitaph is very much writing history in his favour.

The sticky note thing is the seed of an idea but I haven’t dusted off the passport just yet – it will be awhile but the passion (?fury) won’t dissipate. One word might do it – “tosser”. However I think I’ll upgrade to a larger sticky note and get a little more articulate to honour my poor coachmaker relative. Don’t worry, I won’t deface the epitaph or anything so you don’t need to tip them off. “Occupy”….. with sticky notes ! (PS I have a friend who does guerrilla knitting, so I’m in good company)

Wow, that Rand was in a world of her own. What a brutal and terrible thing Hickman did. Before now, all I really knew about Ayn Rand came from The Simpsons episode in which Maggie is sent to the Ayn Rand School for Tots.

This is turning into an eye-opening discussion. I’ve just come across a sermon by John Newton, ex-slave trader, on the Advantages of a State of Poverty. — Gavin White

I suspect John Newton wasn’t in a State of Poverty himself. I understand slave trading in the period was quite a big business.

@Nick – yeah the bit on Rev Tosser Malthus “he lived a serene and happy life” got me stirred up when he was busy depriving others of the same. Born into a life of privilege and left it just the same. — Haitch

Remember Britain’s and Europe’s class system, descendant of European Feudalism. And the attitudes it bred. And the resulting blind spots.

I remember Malthus best as the guy who got quoted Chapter & Verse during the “Population Bomb” scare of the early Earth Day movement. Overpopulation was the Nuclear War or Global Warming of its day, which demanded “drastic measures” to avoid — in that case, massive birth control and abortion to stop population growth in the “most rapidly growing” (i.e. Third World) countries. And they all quoted Malthus in justification.

“You obviously do not have a Rational Mind. If you had a Rational Mind, you would agree completely with Me.” — Ayn Rand

Why does this make me think:

“You obviously do not have a Gospel Mind. If you had a Gospel Mind, you would agree completely with me.” — ????

For those who didn’t spot it already …

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/the-ethics-of-ayn-rand

I am glad people are making the connections with Ayn Rand’s thinking with that of certain Christian groups. Same thinking only one uses “rational” and the other “biblical”.

The thing that made Ayn Rand attractive to many was her overarching question: Who owns your labor?

@ WTH:

“Happiness, for Ayn Rand, ‘is a state of non-contradictory joy—a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction’ (VS, 29). On the basis of this definition, I am willing to say yes to the following sentence: ‘The achievement of his own happiness is man’s highest moral purpose’ (VS, 27).”

She used the word “joy” and said it was man’s highest purpose… So did Piper get “Christian Hedonism” from Ayn Rand, or come up with it on his own and then find it in Ayn Rand?

@ Anon 1:

“Yes we are commanded to help the poor but we are not commanded to ask Caesar to be the one who does it.”

I agree with you on this point, but I wasn’t talking just about funding social programs. I’ve heard many people claim that taxation is theft in and of itself. But we are commanded to pay our taxes (Matthew 22:21, Romans 13:7). There’s no footnote to these commands – it’s not “pay your taxes, unless you think they’re too high” or “pay your taxes, unless you didn’t vote for they guy who instituted the tax hike.” Paul says we pay taxes because God has instituted the governing authorities (Romans 13:6). It’s not presented as a matter of turning the other cheek as someone robs you. So for a Christian to go around claiming that taxation is automatically theft is problematic in my view. If you don’t like high taxes, the solution is to work to get people into office who will lower them (since, as you correctly pointed out, we can vote for our leaders) – not to redefine all taxes as an evil/sin.

Who is Ayn Rand?

    Hello,

       What is Objectivism? Why all the fascination with it, and why the resurgence of it today? Why did so many influential individuals flock to her, and her philosopy?

Let’s take a closer look:

Ayn Rand called her philosophy “Objectivism”, describing it in its essence as:

 “the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.” Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged,  1992, pp. 1170–1171

Question: Is this the best man can do ‘without’ God?

Has not the fool said in their heart: “there is no God”? 

Blessings!

IronClad
—
Notes: 
Ayn Rand: “The name I have chosen for my philosophy is Objectivism.” “Preface,”For the New Intellectual, viii

Ayn Rand:  “My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute. ‘About the Author,’ ” Atlas Shrugged, Appendix.

Subject matter:

Metaphysics: Objective Reality
Epistemology: Reason
Ethics: Self-interest
Politics: Capitalism

If you want this translated into simple language, it would read: 

1. “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” or “Wishing won’t make it so.” 
2. “You can’t eat your cake and have it, too.” 
3. “Man is an end in himself.” 
4. “Give me liberty or give me death.”

Ayn Rand: “If you held these concepts with total consistency, as the base of your convictions, you would have a full philosophical system to guide the course of your life. But to hold them with total consistency—to understand, to define, to prove and to apply them—requires volumes of thought. Which is why philosophy cannot be discussed while standing on one foot—nor while standing on two feet on both sides of every fence. This last is the predominant philosophical position today, particularly in the field of politics.”

Ayn Rand’s  philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:

“Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.”

“Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.”

“Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.”

“The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.” “Introducing Objectivism,” The Objectivist Newsletter, Aug. 1962, 35.

Ayn Rand: “I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows.”

Ayn Rand: “This—the supremacy of reason—was, is and will be the primary concern of my work, and the essence of Objectivism.”, “Brief Summary,” The Objectivist, Sept. 1971, 

Ayn Rand: “The only philosophical debt I can acknowledge is to Aristotle. I most emphatically disagree with a great many parts of his philosophy—but his definition of the laws of logic and of the means of human knowledge is so great an achievement that his errors are irrelevant by comparison.” Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged,  “About the Author,”Appendix.

Ayn Rand: “Objectivism is a philosophical movement; since politics is a branch of philosophy, Objectivism advocates certain political principles—specifically, those of laissez-faire capitalism—as the consequence and the ultimate practical application of its fundamental philosophical principles. It does not regard politics as a separate or primary goal, that is: as a goal that can be achieved without a wider ideological context.” “Choose Your Issues,”The Objectivist Newsletter, Jan. 1962.

Ayn Rand: “Politics is based on three other philosophical disciplines: metaphysics, epistemology and ethics—on a theory of man’s nature and of man’s relationship to existence. It is only on such a base that one can formulate a consistent political theory and achieve it in practice. When, however, men attempt to rush into politics without such a base, the result is that embarrassing conglomeration of impotence, futility, inconsistency and superficiality which is loosely designated today as ‘conservatism.’ Objectivists are not ‘conservatives.’ We are radicals for capitalism; we are fighting for that philosophical base which capitalism did not have and without which it was doomed to perish. “Choose Your Issues,”The Objectivist Newsletter, Jan. 1962.

Ayn Rand: “I regard the spread of Objectivism through today’s culture as an intellectual movement—i.e., a trend among independent individuals who share the same ideas—but not as an organized movement. “A Statement of Policy,” The Objectivist, June 1968.

[See also: Capitalism; Context-Dropping; Free Market; Intrinsic Theory of Values; Market Value; Mystical Ethics; Objectivity; Physical Force; Reason; Social Theory of Ethics; “Stolen Concept,” Fallacy of; Subjectivism; Values.]

See also:

The Ominous Parallels, Leonard Peikoff, 1982.
The Romantic Manifesto, Ayn Rand, 1971.
Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, 1957.
The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand, 1943.
For the New Intellectual, Ayn Rand, 1961.
Philosophy: Who Needs It, Ayn Rand  Le onard Peikoff, 1982.
“The Philosophy of Objectivism” lecture series. , Le onard Peikoff, 1976.

—
For further literary acknowledgments for the above, see: Harry Binswanger:
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/objectivism.html

See also:
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/literature/atlas-shrugged/book-summary.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand#CITEREFRand1992
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

Soooo…Obama has basically officially won. Break out the popcorn, folks! The Antichrist doomcasting show should begin shortly. He’s probably waiting to sign a 7-year treaty with Israel as we speak! ; )

Oh, and I’m obviously not promoting Karl Marx as someone to rigidly live by, just pointing out that both ends of the spectrum ask fundamentally the same question, but respond to it in vastly different (but equally rigid and extreme) ways.

Ayn Rand?

This airplane has been hijacked!

Capt. Sullenberger: An Emotional Reunion?

    Hello,

       “150 people might not be alive today if it weren’t for Capt. Sullenberger and the crew of US Airways Flight 1549. 60 Minutes invited some of the passengers to reunite with them in, of all places, Charlotte NC.”

Youtube: An Emotional Reunion?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQVGglYOhEg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

The actions of this one man effected the very lives of so many more, family, relatives, neighbors, colleagues, etc., 
A pilot, and not a pastor.

When a pastor fails, how do we know? What can we do?

(I teared up watching this video imagining the tremendous level of responsibility presented it this situation.)

How so, the tremendous level of responsibility with believers in the churches?

One can only wonder.

“Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.”

Blessings!

IronClad 

“@ Anon 1, one the ‘who owns your labour’ question, that’s the fundamental question of Marx, too, but he came to a vastly different approach than Rand.”

Bingo! Rand came from a country that exploited Marx for power in order to right a wrong of the idea “divine power of Czars”. They ended up with totalitarianism. Marx sounds great on paper but does not take into consideration human nature. And what is interesting is that with Marx, the unintended consequence was that government still owned your labor.

Regarding CCM- I’m not a huge fan of the Christian music industry, but when I write it’s Christian (my material sounds very CCM). And I like contemporary worship. I don’t really understand why this is an argument. I enjoy worshiping with music that is natural for me, other people enjoy other music. Surely this is a preference and not something to divide over?

I know when I was a worship leader I always chose to include hymns every week because I thought everyone should have a chance to worship in a way that was most natural to them. Of course, being a guitarist I always had to work the music out to fit my capabilities, but I always did the best I could to work in as many preferences as possible.

“Piper’s Christian hedonism is not gaining purchase in the broader evangelical community. I have read his thinking on the subject and it is one of those “Piperisms” that make little sense outside of his little group.”

When I tell Christians outside the Calvinista circle about his “Scream of the Damned” sermon they are shocked. I sent a link to my pastor and he was shocked that so many big names said nothing or said it was wonderful.

it scares me that so many go along with Piper fruitcakiness as if it were just pure brilliance. More checking brains at the door.

I have a sneaky suspiscion that “Christian Hedonism” which has been around a while now, was a response to his Bob Jonesish upbringing in fundamentalism. Sort of a way to make “joy” not sinful. And notice he LOVES the word “joy or joyful”. Applies it to everything. Joyful submission, etc. But I am not a psychologist and don’t play one on TV. So I am just speculating becasue the whole idea of “Christian Hedonism” is incongruous and more of Piper changing definitions like he did with “complementarian” that does not mean what it says at all. These guys are brilliant at hijacking or inventing terms and redefining them for entire generations. Reminds me of Orwell.

Jeff – I believe I was the first to bring CCM into this thread, so although it wasn’t central to my point I have to take some responsibility there. My referring to CCM specifically may have been a bit careless; I was thinking of a particular set of people who, it so happens, are in love with CCM and it is therefore that genre that they’ve learned to use to enter an aroused emotional state. It wasn’t CCM that was the point, in other words, it’s what they’re using it for.

I like CCM as much as any other genre. Quite frankly, if it didn’t exist, then it should – it matters that our own generation has dug its own well of musical expression. Previous generations did, after all. Nor is contemporary music – with or without a backbeat! – the only way to stir one’s emotions. Beethoven’s symphonies and piano sonatas are not dominated by percussion (strictly speaking, the piano is a percussion instrument, but you know what I mean). But listening to them can be profoundly emotional. Same with Handel, Rachmaninov, etc etc etc. And, of course, many old hymns. And on that subject, who said there’s anything wrong with emotion? God gets emotional, and I won’t insult all your intelligences by reeling off a list of scriptures that you all know as well as I do.

My only point there was that emotional arousal is not the presence of God. If I’ve learned anything in 26 years of learning to be a worshipper, it’s that real worshippers – who worship in spirit and truth, after all – don’t ultimately care what musical/liturgical style is going on around them. If people are singing to God, they’ll gladly join in.

I wish I had more time over the last few days to be a part of this conversation. It is great and really important and not enough Christians are having it. You should all take a gander at RC Sproul’s gospel coalition post about the election, where he calls progressive income tax ‘a sin’. Sigh.

On Marx, I think it is important to read him NOT as ideology but as a radical critique. He gets completely dismissed thanks to the Cold War association with Soviet communism – this is one way to read him, but it is ultimately a-historical and we lose the valuable critique that he offers. He ought to be read, if anything, because his historical materialism is probably still the dominant historical method, despite the cultural turn.

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men. — Lord Acton

Frank Herbert (author of Dune) had a corollary on Lord Acton:

“It’s not that power tends to corrupt so much as power attracts the already-corrupt and the easily-corrupted.”

It’s interesting how many people (re HUG’s post) involved in the Russian Revolution did a 180 but embraced ideas equally radical – Quisling, the Norwegian Nazi, had done famine relief work in the Ukraine in the 1920s and lurched to the extreme Right. — Kolya

Actually, I have seen a similar dynamic in both Furry Fandom’s halo of Pathological Furry Haters and Ex-Christian websites. Both were a reaction to a burn job by one extreme, flipping one-eighty from Total Blind Adoration into Total Blind Hatred fueled by resentment. And if you were X-TREME in the first, you’ll be just as X-TREME in the reaction.

“The Devil sends temptations to us in matched opposing pairs, so that in fleeing from one we embrace the other.” — C.S.Lewis(?)

Rand came from a country that exploited Marx for power in order to right a wrong of the idea “divine power of Czars”. They ended up with totalitarianism. — Anon1

No, they ended up with “Divine Right of The Party.” With The Inevitable Dialectic bestowing that Divine Right to Rule.

An economics textbook from my college days had a chapter on Marx. It claimed that Marx the Revolutionary Inspiration has obscured Marx’s real strength as a Systems Analyst. Das Kapital was a thorough systems analysis of capitalism (from a Victorian knowledge base).

Piper’s Christian hedonism is not gaining purchase in the broader evangelical community. I have read his thinking on the subject and it is one of those “Piperisms” that make little sense outside of his little group.

Beth Moore speaks of Christian hedonism but she quotes CS Lewis not Ayn Rand. I love what she said here in “Beloved Disciple” and ITA with the quote from Lewis:

quote from “Beloved Disciple”

‘It’s high time I made a blatant confession. I am a Christian hedonist. Have been for years even before I knew what it means. I wish I had better words for it, but let me just say Jesus makes me happy! He thrills me! He nearly takes my breath away with His beauty. As seriously as I know how to tell you, I am at times so overwhelmed by His love for me, my face blushes with intensity and my heart races with holy anticipation. Jesus is the uncontested delight of my life. I never intended for this to happen. I didn’t even know it was possible. It all started with an in-depth study of His Word in my late 20s and then surged, oddly enough, with a near emotional and mental collapse in my early 30s. At the end of myself I came to the beginning of an intensity of relationship with Christ that no one told me was possible. Now I spend my life telling anyone who will listen…

CS Lewis wrote… “if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.”‘

[grumble grumble]

My husband’s favorite rock band is Rush and their lyricist’s favorite writer is Ayn Rand. or at least she highly influenced him.
I’ve always thought I should read her stuff but I don’t have time.
You all are not making it any easier to try to avoid her.

(never could stand that Rush and Piper are both influenced by Rand. it’s all so very confusing.)

@ Kolya, Nick, and Jeff:

I’m not against CCM (though I personally don’t like it much and never listen to it). However, in my experience, every time a congregation has really embraced it as their main worship style – taken out the pews, organ, hymns, etc. – it did more harm than good. The intellectual and discernment level of the congregation plummets. And when you try to reintroduce the older music, the parishioners set up a deafening chorus of “IT’S BOOOOOORING” to shut you up. They become too lazy to (re)learn the traditional stuff. (And no, I’ve never heard any other reasoning than the standard “lazy and afraid” argument from anti-traditionalists.)

My problems with CCM mostly boil down to 1) dumbing down/forgetting the past; 2) becoming (generally) more of a “show” or “concert” than traditional music; 3) pursuant to 2, removing the congregation from meaningful worship participation; 4) cutting off/ignoring older generations of Christians entirely; and 5) corporate interests in near total control of the industry. Michael Spencer wrote an excellent article summing it all up much better than I can.

I do recognize, of course, that traditional music can be abused just as much. And no, I don’t believe music has to divide, though in my experience, it’s never been the traditionalists who were divisive. But if you get an anti-traditionalist – which is not the same thing as a CCM supporter/listener/fan – in your church, watch out. It will only be a few short years before the spiritual carnage starts.

(I’ve never met the boogeyman of anti-traditionalists – the aging music director who bans CCM with an iron fist and refuses to play anything but hymns over the objections of the congregation. I’m convinced this person is mostly a strawman and does not exist in real life, at least not in a meaningful way. Maybe they did in the 70s and 80s, but not now.)

Nick, per your comment – I do agree that every generation should write its own music. However, that doesn’t mean that they get to throw out the music of all other generations that preceded them. I know this isn’t what you meant, but many CCM folks seem to have a lot of trouble recognizing that the church is multi-generational, and acknowledging that their music would not exist without the “boring dead guys” they frequently bash…

(Per my definition above: an anti-traditionalist is the person who insists that all music before CCM isn’t “relevant” and that the “old fuddy-duddies” need to stop being “afraid” and just “go with the new thing the Spirit is doing.” They are the person who will tear the 150-year-old organ out of your sanctuary and not bat an eye, and be happy when everyone over age 45 leaves your church because they’re getting rid of “dead wood.” This is not the same as someone who enjoys listening to CCM and wants to incorporate it into a larger music program. The CCM-listener can cope with having traditional music also; the anti-traditionalist cannot.)

I’ve stayed out of the CCM thing so far, but here goes…

I played the “worship” variety of this genre (generally the very simple, 3-chord songs) for years, but… as a percussionist. it was much more fun to be up there playing than down in the congregation having to sing it. 😉

I agree with Hester (and Michael Spencer) on what the CCM industry is like here in the US, and feel that for the most part, mediocrity and conformity are encouraged. That’s *not* to say that all music that fits into the CCM genre is bad, though it does seem to me that once a congregation goes all-“contemporary worship,” people *do* start getting closed off to other kinds of music – even hip, contemporary arrangements of older material that they might just like.

I was in my late teens at the time that CCM was beginning, and there’s a big difference between what it was then (still a lot of Jesus People-type material + strong influences from Catholic folk Mass music – which really *is* CCM) and what it became. Liked a lot of the former (though definitely not all), can’t stand most of the latter.

I know someone who left a church because the leaders fired the music director – an extremely creative man who was coming up with new material and new arrangements that many people really enjoyed. They just booted him, like that, w/o severance or *anything.* (He and his wife have several kids + mortgage payments and all of that.)

Reason for firing the music director: the church “changed direction” and wanted CCM/rock/etc. to attract people. (Kinda like MH and Acts 29 – in fact, a *lot* like.)

There was no quarter given by the people in charge at that church, and afaik, they really did *not* want to hear about redressing any wrongs they did by firing the music director with no notice.

I do think this place is going YRR…

anyway – long, rambling comment! (Not enough sleep last night – stayed up very late with the TV on.)

numo – there was a time when having a pipe organ in a church building was considered shocking!

Hester – our experiences have differed slightly, then, in that I’ve seen both pro- and anti- traditional factions causing division. That is, digging in and refusing to love, honour or respect the motives of others (which side could be said to have “caused” a division often depends on which side of the argument one sits). Also, the CCM-hating musical Luddite may well be a strawman left over from the 1980’s; on reflection, I’m inclined to agree with you on that since 1989 is about the last time I met one. But the 1980’s is also the last time I met a person who despised anything traditional. I think that, in reality, most churchgoers now understand the value of different types of music. And a final one – I was part of a church that replaced the pews with seats, and it helped the church a great deal; I know of other examples where that’s happened too.

I doubt whether either your or my experience is definitive. The real question in each case (and this is likely to be something we agree on) is why the changes were made or resisted, as the case may be. A church that modernises its music in the belief that it will attract new people is treading dangerous ground. If people come along for the music, that’s not a good sign regarding whether they’ve taken up their cross.

Rather like those prominent calvinistas whose theology of the atonement moves them to brazen pride, not worship, thereby proving that they don’t understand the atonement at all… People whose taste in music or liturgy moves them to judgement or contentiousness cannot, by definition, be worshippers.

RE: dee on Wed Nov 07, 2012 at 08:11 AM,

You know dee it’s funny, and I’m sure Graham is a fine man in many other respects, but somehow he doesn’t seem to think the rules and ethics apply to him in this case. It’s ironic too because the very same Pauline texts which he probably holds in highest esteem as the basis of the Christian religion, warn to not even give the appearance of evil to the outside world.

@ Nick & Numo:

“But the 1980′s is also the last time I met a person who despised anything traditional.”

I meet those people all the time. Or at least the “lite” kind – the folks who claim they like hymns, too, but who haven’t actually been seen singing one in several years. Maybe it’s an American thing? Where I’m at, most of my Bible church-type friends only sing hymns at their grandmothers’ funerals; and it has become abundantly clear to me (at the jaded old age of 22…) that, as an organist and trained singer, the conservative evangelical church does not want me or my gifts…and it will take constant vigilance keep this same musical conformity from taking over the Lutheran church too. (But then these same conservative evangelicals criticize me for playing at “apostate” churches like the Episcopal church and say I should only play at conservative churches…even though said conservative churches have no organs…and I am an organist.)

I honestly do wish my experience was different…and that I didn’t sound so cynical. : ( I’m glad yours has been better.

@ Nick:

“The real question in each case (and this is likely to be something we agree on) is why the changes were made or resisted, as the case may be. A church that modernises its music in the belief that it will attract new people is treading dangerous ground. If people come along for the music, that’s not a good sign regarding whether they’ve taken up their cross.”

Yes, you’re right – we do agree. : ) IFBs who are afraid of backbeats because they think they automatically = sex and drugs, are just as bad as churches who completely redesign their sanctuary for no other reason but to attract young people. (I was actually in a church once that had the word “RELEVANT” on the wall of the sanctuary.)

“almost always set just a bit too high for me to comfortably sing.” This is one of the issues I struggled with as a worship leader. That is, everyone ends up signing the melody, which means someone is always straining to hit the notes (because we all have different ranges). When I have access to an alto, I almost always have her “lead” at least one song per service (if not more) just so the altos in the congregation aren’t always screeching through every song.

I remember I once had a guy come up and complain that “that song” (one led by an alto) was too high for him. I told him that now he knows what altos feel like on every other song we sing.

I’m not sure how to solve this problem- back in the day with hymns people would read and sing parts, but even if you do the hymns now the general education of how to read and sing parts isn’t there. People will just screech along with the melody.

I tend to do arrangements with lots of harmony in hopes that some of the altos can pick out a harmony part, but I realize that’s whishful thinking. I just don’t know what else to do.

A disturbing trend I’ve noticed recently is melodies with octave jumps in them (that is, on the second verse you sing the melody from the first verse, but just up an octave). It obviously sounds cool because it builds intensity, but most people just don’t have the range to do this. I reluctantly did a few of these songs because they were in high demand, but I always felt a little uncomfortable when we hit those high parts knowing I was leaving most of the congregation behind. I would usually try to have some of the accompanying vocalists stay down in the original octave to give a cue for those who didn’t make the jump with me.

Finally, one thing I know is that some people simply struggle with syncopation if it’s not a style they are used to. While any person I know who listens to pop music can pick up “Holy Is The Lord Almighty” by Chris Tomlin after hearing the song once, I remember playing it at a retreat of a hymn only church I attended briefly and they were totally lost. After that on that retreat I defaulted to songs like “In Christ Alone” that seem to bridge the gap and work great for everyone.

Re: Music, esp: I do remember when having an acoustic guitar in church was not only innovative (even revolutionary), but outrightly shocking to many.
The semi-Lutheran/semi-Charismatic/greatly experimental church my wife and I started out in had only simple choruses, and no instruments. Later we added hymnals, instuments as folks felt led, and a finally a full-time guitar. The guitar-player started putting scriptures to music, which we sang together. Many songs were initiated by whoever had one on their heart, resulting in many key-corrections partway through, when we couldn’t reach the notes!
Then, after we moved, we were part of a house-church/startup where the pastor was a professional musician (an old friend of Larry Norman). Full CCM worship team, Vineyard/CC songs, and no more than 50 people in the church! The music and singing were gorgeous!
The two churches became close, and the first church developed a regular “team”. As for worship/praise/thanksgiving and enjoying the Lord’s and each other’s presence, I think it was just as blessed in the early, cacophonous days!

@ Jeff:

“A disturbing trend I’ve noticed recently is melodies with octave jumps in them (that is, on the second verse you sing the melody from the first verse, but just up an octave). It obviously sounds cool because it builds intensity, but most people just don’t have the range to do this.”

(shivers up spine) As an alto myself, that is a disturbing trend! ; )

“Finally, one thing I know is that some people simply struggle with syncopation if it’s not a style they are used to.”

That is often true. But there are some of the more contemporary songs that have such weird note values/syncopation that even trained musicians have trouble following them (I can’t and I’ve submitted to multiple ear training exams). Part of the problem is they’re basically transcriptions of semi-improvised solos by the artist, and sometimes the cadences are odd and unpredictable too, which makes it rough on the congregation. This also applies to some of the 20th-century hymns in hymnals, too.

This is an interesting debate.

Re Neil Peart and Rand, I would agree that he left that phase behind him some years ago. On the other hand I was saddened – not to say aghast! – that he should apparently be so influenced by Dawkins, who to me is all sound and no fury. For example, Peart cites Dawkins dictum that “the number of people choosing their faith is vanishingly small” (if I recall correctly – someone correct me if I’m wrong). All I can say to that is that today more than ever we live in a marketplace of choice, at least in the West – you can choose any religion or none, certainly in the UK (the good professor’s home). Having said that, I appreciate some of Peart’s points in his lyrics. He’s a better songwriter than Dawkins is a philosopher 😉

I think the move away from strict harmony parts in older hymns to one or two chords per bar and a looser melody has made it easier for church musicians, especially guitarists. On the other hand the elements some of you have mentioned – octave leaps and syncopation – to my mind do make it harder for the congregation to follow. I’m not sure how music is taught in schools nowadays, but when I was growing up unless you joined a school club or had private lessons you learnt virtually nothing about the technical side of music, in my experience. When I first picked up a guitar seriously I had to learn everything from scratch, and in a more improvised manner than probably, say, a piano teacher would have taught. But hey…. it’s been fun learning!

Jeff S, if I had a Hammond B3 or even a module of the same I would love to play in your church… 😉 However I think the Hammond is one keyboard that can cross the boundaries, at least when played well – from jazz to rock to classical. In the meantime I’m trying to get this freeware VST working on my laptop…. how come the more technological choice we have, the harder it seems to get? LOL

Numo, I know what you mean… when I’m playing with band/friends I can easily flip into syncopated mode. Doesn’t work well with traditional hymns though! LOL

Loving the continuance of this discussion. We’ve gone from Ayn Rand to christian music (via John Piper) and then combined the two !!!

Thanks Caleb W for your point on historical materialism, and Kolya and Gavin White for the references which I’ll chase up in my holidays.

@Dee Wed Nov 07, 2012 at 08:11 AM on Franklin Graham’s exhorbitant salary.

I was very slow to realise that this is often ‘par for the course’ in the ‘development industry’. Exposure in the media has made for some transparency but it’s still a shady area to me.

“He’s saved 10,000 people in Seattle alone”

2,000 of which have been thrown under the bus
2,000 stormed the cabin, were shot, then thrown under the bus
2,000 have jumped off the train because they realized that it is speeding toward a gorge where the bridge is out.
2,000 are looking frantically for parachutes so that they can jump.
2,000 are white knuckling the arm rests of their seats in the plane, praying for direction or safety or wrestling with God as to why He led them to this sinking titanic.

Back to the title of this post — Mark Driscoll: He Ain’t No Captain Sullenberg

In Mark Driscoll’s Own Mind, he IS.

Haha, I do love how Ayn Rand, Karl Marx, John Piper, and CCM can populate the same discussion at TWW! — Caleb of Canada

Ever sit in on a panel at an SF con? No matter what the announced subject, it usually random-associates all over the place.

So for anyone still reading comments on this post, I brought this analogy up to the music pastor of our church. In the process I also mentioned “drink your juice box” and Driscoll’s public announcement of wanting to physically assault one of his elders. His response was surprise coupled with an admission that he doesn’t know much about Driscoll, but that was certainly not the attitude of leadership at the church.

Using the aforementioned example of elders as flight attendants rather than pilots, I expressed that that was the kind of leadership and community I wanted in a church. He thought the analogy was great and really did not like Driscoll’s. I told him if I ever ended up with my drink in my lap, the leaders had better be telling me what was going on 🙂

So anyway, I just wanted to bring this up because I felt like this post sparked a very real conversation at my local level where it really matters, and that’s a good thing.

Jeff S –

Kudos for interacting with your pastor! I need a like button for your last comment.

StillWiggling, I agree, but even that much was unnecessary imo. We all know how children are conceived.

Oh Eagle – you crack me up! Was it MD who basically said masturbation was a homosexual act because it was a person of one sex touching the genitalia of the same sex…or did I have some nightmare?

@Still Wiggling – sorry to put a negative light on the subject – but I would guess that the pastor’s kids would be cringing inside also. I don’t think there should be any mention of them from ‘up front’ ie from the pulpit at all – they intensely dislike being using as props or tools in the sermon or being highlighted publicly in front of a large amount of people. Just my opinion.

Yeah, the mirror bit, where did MD get that from?

Reading posts like this make me wonder. I currently go to an A29 church, and our leadership doesn’t act like this (at least that I have seen, and I am very active in the church). Our pastor is a genuinely humble and considerate guy; additionally, when I spoke with him concerning my Driscoll misgivings, he agreed with me. He even said that he would not have joined A29 if he had to be a mini-Driscoll. Maybe my Church is the exception in the A29 world, but I’d like to think that other A29 churches are like mine

As HUG pointed out a few days ago:

Frank Herbert (author of Dune) had a corollary on Lord Acton:

“It’s not that power tends to corrupt so much as power attracts the already-corrupt and the easily-corrupted.”

There’s something about the gift of leadership that makes those who possess it very vulnerable. [geek alert] The Greek word usually translated “leader” in Romans 12 is “pro-istemi”, which literally means “one who stands out” or “one who goes first”. If I’m not mistaken, this is an important gift, and I know of congregations that are atrophying because they have no-one who is willing or able to set out and achieve something, accepting and dealing with all the criticism and flak that entails.

But like every good and perfect gift etc (you know the verse), it can be abused and carries risks. The one who isn’t afraid to stand out, generally isn’t afraid of what people might think. If they’re not humble and spiritually mature when they take a place of leadership, then they’re apt to deal with criticism “at source” – i.e., by dealing with their critics. At times like that, the young leader desperately needs (though may not want) strong support from mentors they can’t fire. Otherwise a kind of “runaway greenhouse effect” takes hold, with honest critics driven ever further away and fawning, unreal admirers drawn ever closer.

And I found this article which specifically addresses the issue of the penal code, Puritans and the USA. It’s comprehensive and informative.

http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n1/ant_v1n1_juris.html

Regards
Gavin