Kevin Swanson and Womb Tomb Babies: The Christian Responsibility to Tell the Truth

 Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbor, for we are all members of one body. Ephesians 4:25

800px-Laagheia3
Jorunn's hometown-Elnesvågen, Norway by Andreas Saebjoernsen
 

Today, I dedicate this post to the memory of a wonderful Norwegian lady, Jorunn, who epitomized love, grace and honor. This morning, in Oslo, at the age of 89, she went home to her Savior, surrounded by her loving family. She and I had a unique relationship. Although I could not speak Norwegian and she could not speak English, we seemed to be able to communicate our ideas just fine. That was a gift from the Holy Spirit. And she was a gift from God to me.


Three types of truth-Updated 10 PM 2/6-see end of post

The Bible is replete with commands to be honest and truthful. Truth and honesty means that we must always pursue the truth and present the truth. We should give the full story as clearly as possible, without obfuscation. There are several forms of truth. The first sort of truth is giving a factual answer to a question, even a difficult question. "Were you speeding?" "Did you kiss my boyfriend?" "Was that you screaming hysterically when you were stuck at the top of the Ferris Wheel when it broke down?"

Let me clarify that we are not to go around insulting people. "She looks like a beached whale in that dress, bless her heart." Bless her heart is a Southern term that is used so that one can insult another person in a Christian manner.

The second form of truth is giving the full truth about a person or situation. We should not try to cover up an serious matter that has implications for the integrity of the Christian message that is about to be heard. For example, later this week, we will be discussing CJ Mahaney's appearances at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and a church in Raleigh. In both instances, he was presented only as an extremely successful church planter and an ace pastor.

However, the recent departure of 15 of the SGM churches was not mentioned. There was no hint of the breathtaking scope of the class action lawsuit involving the lack of response of SGM to child sexual abuse in which Mahaney is named as a defendant. His introduction was truthful to the letter of the law but not honest, giving a false impression of his not-so- pristine record. If an institution is embarrassed by the full truth, then why invite the speaker? But, more on that later this week. (Too late web guys. We have downloaded CJ's talks).

A third form of truth is making sure that the story or fact one is reporting on is true. A few years ago, a pastor, at a former church, told a touching, "true" story about a teacher who was kind to a student which inspired him to become a great doctor. There was not a dry eye in the pews. Except, I happened to know that his story was not true. It was based on a fictional short story in a magazine. So, I dropped him an email and told him that the story he told was fictional and gave him the reference. He thanked me. However, 6 months later, he repeated the exact same story and I happened to be present! I reported the incident to the head pastor who was mad at me and said that story-telling like that is a pastoral prerogative. I asked him if that meant pastors could lie with impunity? I was not well received. I do not like having my emotions manipulated.

Stupid rumors hurt all of us.

I have heard many stories like this get passed around the Christian circuit. Who can forget the "Proctor and Gamble executives worship Satan" nonsense? I confronted more Christians about that hogwash than I care to count. Not one of the people passing the story believed that they did anything wrong! They said they knew it had to be true because they heard it from a "good source." In other words, they had absolutely no compunction about passing on faulty information.

We should never pass on faulty information in order to shore up a particular "religious" position. Better yet, Christians should use their brains when evaluating a piece of information. If it sounds shocking, it should be investigated. It's probably not true. 

If such people tell others about the information, and it is a whopper, they will come across as yahoos, worthy of derision by others. And one's fellow Christians will bear the brunt of this judgment.  Folks, this stuff makes us look stupid in the eyes of a watching world. That is why TWW makes a point to focus on stupidity. It is our hope that those outside the faith will see that there are some decent Christians who are trying desperately to contain rank foolishness.

The Pill 

As many of our readers know, there are some who now believe that the Pill should not be used as a contraceptive because it may cause abortions. There is no definitive proof for that perspective at this current juncture. So, when there is no absolute "proof" there appear to be Christians who are willing step into the gap and provide their own "understanding." The reason appears to be that there is a deeper agenda that is more important that the truth.

Who is Kevin Swanson?

Such an agenda has resulted in a statement in the past week that has caused an uproar. Kevin Swanson, a homeschooling advocate and host of a little known talk show, made a bizarre and untruthful claim.

Before I get to that, just who is Kevin Swanson? It should surprise no one that Swanson has ties to the Christian film industry through a highly controversial film, Divided, which TWW reviewed at this link. This film also has ties to the NeoCalvinistic Vision Forum and the National Council for Family Integrated Churches and includes the following cast of characters:

  • Ken Ham (Answers in Genesis)
  • Brett McCracken (Hipster Christianity)
  • Tryg Jacobson (founder of Jake's Cafe and Jackobson Rost Advertising and Producer of Divided according to Leclerc website)
  • Scott Brown (Director of NCFIC and author of A Weed in the Church)
  • Dr. R.C. Sproul, Jr.
  • Doug Phillips, Esq. (Vision Forum)
  • Dr. Voddie Baucham
  • Craig Houston (Westside Baptist Church)
  • Kevin Swanson (Generations With Vision)
  • Paul Washer (Heartcry Missionary Society)
  • Geoffrey Botkin 

This association continues with an appearance by Swanson at Vision Forum's Reformation 500 Celebration link. He gave a talk called Great Calvinistic Lessons for Homeschoolers of the 21st Century. In case you think he is relegated to the backwaters of Vision Forum, I found that Kevin Swanson, Doug Phillips and R.C. Sproul Senior produced an audio series called The Reformation of the Church in the 21st Century – Bringing God Back to Center link.

So who is this guy? From his website link

Homeschooled himself in the 1960′s and 70′s, Kevin Swanson and his wife, Brenda, are now homeschooling their five children. Since graduating from his homeschool and then serving as student body president of a large west coast university, ( ed. note- he does not name the university) he has gone on to other leadership positions in corporate management, church, and other non-profits. Kevin has 35 years of experience in the homeschooling movement and serves as the Director of Generations with Vision – a ministry he founded to strengthen homeschool families around the country. As a father who wants to leave a godly heritage for his own five children, Kevin’s passion is to strengthen and encourage the homeschooling movement all over the world, and to cast a vision for generations to come. For the last 4 years Kevin has hosted a daily radio program – Generations Radio – the world’s largest homeschooling and Biblical worldview program that reaches families across the US and in over 80 countries.

Kevin has also served as the Executive Director of Christian Home Educators of Coloradofor the last nine years. He has also authored several popular books for homeschoolers, including Upgrade-10 Secrets to the Best Education for Your Child, The Second Mayflower, theFamily Bible Study Guide Series, and others. Serving as a passionate supporter of home education, he has been interviewed on hundreds of media outlets, including Dr. James’ Dobson’s Focus on the Family and the Fox News Network.

Note how he describes his program.

The vision of the program is to present life from the perspective of a biblical worldview and within the framework of a relational model of living. Worldview and relationships. There are no professionals on this program. There are no psychiatrists, professional counsellors, (sic) bureaucrats, and seminary professors. But you will find fathers, mothers, grandparents, pastors, and friends. We are introducing modern life to a different social context. We also assume the existence of God and the foolishness of human thought without the benefit of transcendent truth.

The Christian philosopher of the 1960s, Francis Schaeffer, is a major impetus behind our work. His work of 50 years is summarized in this simple statement – modern man is lost and lonely. We are working to provide a solution for both problems – transcendent truth in the context of relationship.

The womb is a tomb for dead babies.

He claims to be concerned about truth. Yet, last week, Kevin Swanson made a statement that is causing a firestorm in the media. Unfortunately, his silly words are being picked up by groups who believe that Christians are represented by men such as Swanson. Sadly, I have been unable to find any Christian blogs calling him on this. That stops now!( Contrary to some sentiments, we are a Christian blog. 0 The following is his statement in question followed by an audio of the statement link.

I’m beginning to get some evidence from certain doctors and certain scientists that have done research on women’s wombs after they’ve gone through the surgery, and they’ve compared the wombs of women who were on the birth control pill to those who were not on the birth control pill. And they have found that with women who are on the birth control pill, there are these little tiny fetuses, these little babies, that are embedded into the womb. They’re just like dead babies. They’re on the inside of the womb. And these wombs of women who have been on the birth control pill effectively have become graveyards for lots and lots of little babies.

If the video does not show up on your computer, please go to this link. We may be having technical difficulties.

Attempts to verify information and contact Swanson

The statement has no basis in fact. Was Swanson taught about the function of the menstrual cycle?  I have searched, in vain, for any medical study verifying this shocking statement and have come up empty handed. I have to believe that Swanson had no intent to verify his information since he proudly tells us that no professionals are ever invited to appear on his radio program. I attempted to contact Swanson for a statement but he did not return my phone call which did not surprise me in the least.

Contrary to his claims, I could find no recorded or written interviews with Kevin Swanson, either at Focus on the Family or Fox News. Perhaps they have been deep sixed due to this controversy. However, the Denver Post interviewed Swanson following the shootings in Colorado by Matthew Murray who blamed the writings of Bill Gothard for his actions link.

Gothard's teachings have been criticized by other conservative Christians who allege he has deviated from true Bible teaching and that his stand against rock music — even Christian rock — suspicion of modern medicine, belief in spiritual roots of disease, and opposition to women working outside the home and "evil" toys are wrong. Gothard warned followers in a 1986 letter that Cabbage Patch dolls can cause "strange, destructive behavior."

Swanson does not blame Gothard's teachings for Murray's actions and pointed out that Murray seemed in his writings to be following the example of Columbine shooters Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, who were educated in public schools. But he said there are home-schooling lessons that can be taken from the Murray shootings.

"If we see some anger issues that can't be dealt with though parental intervention," he (Kevin Swanson) said, "we must learn to seek help."

I find his statement odd since he appears to say that he does not use professionals and psychiatrists on his program. Methinks he speaks with forked tongue. He also seems to deflect blame to the public schools. What a surprise!

However, I did find this video in which Swanson's agenda is revealed.  if the video does not show up on your computer, please go to this link. We may be having some technical difficulties.

I believe that Swanson sounds a bit unbalanced and he should seek some "professional" counsel. Better yet, he needs to do a word study on truth and honesty in the Scriptures he claims to represent. He should also tell us what university he attended and link to his "interviews" on Focus on the Family and Fox news.

In the meantime, Christians everywhere should repudiate such frank stupidity.

Addendum: 10PM 2/6/13- We are grateful to thatmom who provided us with a disturbing link to a post that she wrote in which Swanson advocates disciplining children 20-30/day as needed! Once again, I must raise the question of the lucidness of this man's advice.

Lydia's Corner: Deuteronomy 21:1-22:30 Luke 9:51-10:12 Psalm 74:1-23 Proverbs 12:11

Comments

Kevin Swanson and Womb Tomb Babies: The Christian Responsibility to Tell the Truth — 375 Comments

  1. Hey Dee: Waving my hand in the PNW – I called Swanson out on it: http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/02/04/kevin-swanson-spews-nonsense-from-his-mouth-to-further-his-agenda/

    Furthermore, I e-mailed him, Tweeted, and posted on his Generations Radio Facebook wall asking for sources of his information. Swanson has not responded. I’ve also been in contact with his friend, R.C. Sproul, Jr. on Twitter who said he would try to ask Swanson when he sees him tomorrow (Thursday). I’ll keep you posted.

  2. Julie Anne

    There will be no response. There is no literature. This whole thing is a figment of the imagination of a really stupid person.

  3. This has really pissed me off. Some of our tribe spread misinformation like crazy. Then they wonder why no one takes them (and us) seriously. If you want to be part of the public discussion, you have to bring facts to the table. Did he really think that he was going to scare some woman off from using the Pill? Probably only someone who wasn’t going o use it anyway.

    Why are there so many Christians who are so ignorant of basic physiology?

  4. The sad fact, as Julie Anne and others involved in the homeschool movement can attest to, is that people in the homeschool community will believe this simply because Swanson said it. They will not think for themselves enough to verify it. In fact, in some churches it would be tantamount to heresy to question someone such as Swanson. He needs to be called on it until he either retracts it, or produces sources to verify it (which I doubt exist).

  5. Oh, yeah. And how many here would wager that Swanson probably has more square footage of drywall than most of the rest of us?

  6. Yea, Dee, you and I know there will be no literature. But it’s good for everybody to know. Because there are so many in that movement who buy everything these guys say.

  7. Julie Anne

    There are a lot more questions. Which university did he attend and why doesn’t he name it, for one?

  8. Steve D wrote:

    Why are there so many Christians who are so ignorant of basic physiology?

    Two basic reasons.

    We can’t know everything. So for this I don’t hold this against them. Too much.

    We all want to listen to things which confirm our beliefs. This is a big one. He pontificates on something he doesn’t have any expertise in but since he is someone who has “respect” in other area the people he’s talking to will believe him because it confirms what they want to hear. That the pill is evil.

    The basic issues is when large numbers of people accept “things” from non experts without checking them out.

  9. Godly heritage…
    Cast a vision for generations to come…
    Biblical worldview…
    Foolishness of human thought…
    Columbine shooters…educated in public schools…

    Is anyone else getting vibes of both Buzzword Bingo and Dominionist Taliban Madrassas?

  10. Lynn wrote:

    We can’t know everything. So for this I don’t hold this against them. Too much.

    I’m not really expecting Christians to know everything. I certainly don’t 🙂
    However, in certain areas (like sex) some seem to be especially ignorant. And they don’t want to be corrected. They stand proud in their ignorance and are not willing to yield. Even when proven wrong.

  11. @ Steve D:

    Which was my second point. Something that reinforces a belief is believed much faster and with less critical though than something which does not confirm our beliefs.

    Look at politics.

  12. Okay. I’m officially ill. Swanson needs major psychiatric intervention ASAP. Oh and why the hell hasn’t someone shut down his radio program after this??!

  13. I got so carried away with my thoughts after reading the post that I forgot to say:
    R.I.P. Jorunn. My condolences to all who loved her.

  14. Interesting comments over on You Tube. Swanson’s view is… not very popular.

    This might be the best one, by “Shirley Foster”

    I am not impressed when pastors just make stuff up to scare people into submitting to their point of view.

  15. Had to do a running commentary on the Swanson quote you referenced, Dee.

    “I’m beginning to get some evidence from certain doctors ,[ Love to get a namedrop here, Swanson.] and certain scientists[Love to get a namedrop of the research institution here, Swanson.] that have done research on women’s wombs after they’ve gone through the surgery[I’m sorry “the surgery” is a little vague. What surgery are we talking about here?], and they’ve compared the wombs of women who were on the birth control pill to those who were not on the birth control pill[Wow, doctors and scientists are just opening up wombs all over the place!]. And they have found that with women who are on the birth control pill, there are these little tiny fetuses, these little babies, that are embedded into the womb. They’re just like dead babies[Are they like dead babies or are they dead babies? I just want to be clear on what kind of dead we’re working with]. They’re on the inside of the womb. And these wombs of women who have been on the birth control pill effectively have become graveyards for lots and lots of little babies[And one more thing I want to know… have lots and lots of men have donated their sperm to grow these graveyards?].”

  16. BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

    I got so carried away with my thoughts after reading the post that I forgot to say:
    R.I.P. Jorunn. My condolences to all who loved her.

    Yes, me too.

    My sympathies, Dee.

    Jorunn, who epitomized love, grace and honor.

    I would like to be like this.

  17. What nonsense. I can’t believe anyone would be gullible enough to give this even a minute’s consideration. And for what it’s worth, we are a homeschooling family and have never heard of Swanson. Thankfully.

  18. So many truly ignorant and fear wondering quotes from Kevin Swanson, so little time! He also believes that women who go to college will sell their flesh cheap in the market place and have at least two abortions by the time they are thirty.

  19. Swanson’s LinkedIn bio says he has a BS in Mechanical Engineering from Cal Poly SLO (1983-87) and he has a M. Div. from someplace called the Southern California Center for Christian Studies (1998-2002).

    I’m betting Human Physiology wasn’t one of his Gen.Ed. courses …

  20. OMG! I can’t even. Y’all can take this one. This ******* (ed.) doesn’t deserve any mention of his name in all the earth. One should be able to search to and from, from as far as the east is from the west and find no mention of him. Imprecatory wishes (ed. note) Where is natural selection when you most need it??? Somebody is doin meth fer shureee. Not one single brain cell left. (Drops the mic… Leaves the stage)

  21. @ thatmom:

    thatmom wrote:

    So many truly ignorant and fear wondering quotes from Kevin Swanson, so little time! He also believes that women who go to college will sell their flesh cheap in the market place and have at least two abortions by the time they are thirty.

    So I’ve got just over five months in which to have these abortions to fulfil his prediction. Guess I’d better get, ahem, busy.

  22. Well it’s obvious why he says his program has no professionals. Because anyone who’s a ‘professional’ could smell the bovine droppings on this a mile off. Anyone who’s read a chapter on the reproductive system in a basic biology textbook should easily be able to tell this is crap – heck, anyone who can spell the word menstruation should have the intelligence to be able to think about this claim and realise it’s a lie.

  23. 1. Thank you for using the words “stupid” and “stupidity.” They are two of my favorite words and so applicable in everyday life. Unfortunately I know Christians who teach their children that “stupid” is a “bad word” and the kids avoid it just like they would avoid “hell” or “damn.”

    2. Not sure we can call Vision Forum a “backwater” since they do millions of dollars of business in the Christian homeschool community and have a death grip on many megaphones.

    3. I’ll just state again, unnecessarily, how mind-blowingly stupid Swanson’s claim is. The uterus builds up and sheds a lining every month, so the only way these fetuses would even have a chance to stay in place would be if menstruation stopped, but even then the woman’s body would reabsorb them. If it didn’t, the dead tissue would do what all dead tissue does (decompose) and things would become septic VERY quickly and lead to a medical emergency.

    But then again, they can’t seem to grasp that a Fallopian tube is too small to hold a full-term infant either…

  24. @ Trina:

    “Where is natural selection when you most need it???”

    He probably doesn’t believe in natural selection.

    @ Pam:

    “…heck, anyone who can spell the word menstruation should have the intelligence to be able to think about this claim and realise it’s a lie.”

    Dang! And here all this time I thought it was “menstrayshun”…

  25. @ Jenny: Jenny, I’m betting biology wasn’t one of them either. He probably thinks you can get a girl pregnant by kissing her; and that bloodletting is a most effective way to release the humors to cure the diseased. Somebody go to the barber and get the leaches. You never know with this Black Plague running around. Apparently scholarship and the modern medicine that has most lkkely kept his dumb arse alive so long is optional and worthy of dismissal. Excuse me while I go sweep the cave and put out the dinosaur traps. My caveman husband wants meat tonight. It would be nice if the earth wasn’t so flat. We could go for a sail without falling off the edge.

  26. @ thatmom:

    “He also believes that women who go to college will sell their flesh cheap in the market place and have at least two abortions by the time they are thirty.”

    How did he ever develop this characterization? Did he actually know a college-educated woman who did this, or did he just pull of out of his…well, let’s go with hat?

  27. @ Trina:

    I assume your husband is out killing mammoths with an atlatl like a good Neanderthal? ; )

  28. Kevin Swanson never worries about facts. I can never understand how he has so many fans. He is an ordained pastor in the OPC, too. I sure wish his own denomination would muzzle him.

  29. The only doctors he could have possibly got this information from are witchdoctors.

    There’s misinformation/ misunderstanding, and there’s total absurdity! None of us can possibly know everything in this information-explosion age, but there’s a level of common-sense understanding of everyday life that is obligatory to be a functioning adult. If this level of crazy is what his home-schooling system produces, well, there ain’t no polite words for it. Even if they don’t understand the mechanics of menstruation, they should at least know that dead tissue in the body leads to massive infection. Having nearly lost my sister to sepsis a few months ago (she’s doing fine now), I’m finding it hard not to be annoyed with that kind of foolishness. Will, people who have been taught this not take other potentially horrendous sources of infection less seriously?

  30. Jenny

    I do not know how someone could receive a BS in Mechanical Engineering and believe this nonsense. Are we sure he actually went to college? As for the M Div…well seminaries are not known for their concern for science or physiology-just that they are against it-whatever it is.

  31. thatmom

    Hmmm, maybe I will look up an address for the OPC. Perhaps some reader would like to alert the denominational heads. 

  32. You know every single one of these outrageous patrio fundie movies from the past few years have featured interviews with Kevin. Education, medicine, family integrated churches , birth control, roles of men and women….he is everyone’s expert!

  33. @ Lynne T: Lynn—how many PBS NOVA specials have shown a laparoscopic camera in a woman’s womb? What about TLC? And he still believes this? What an ignoramus. Whatever school he’s lying about going to should snatch his imaginary degree. He obviously let somebody take the tests for him.

  34. Also, on the subject of truthfulness, and putting on my preacher’s hat for a moment:
    Anyone who’s had any kind of tertiary education should know the importance of verifying and attributing your sources. Plagiarism is a major academic sin. Why on earth would the standards of truthfulness be lower in the pulpit. Now I come across many illustrative anecdotes I use, but I always try to give some indication of their veracity. Since one often has no way of knowing if a story is real, I will usually say things like “there’s a story told about XX. I have no idea if it really happened, but it makes a good point.” Or “there’s a legend about ..”, or “XX is supposed to have said..” If it’s a verifiable historical event I say so, if it’s a quote from a writer or commentator, I give the attribution. I’m a long way from being the perfect researcher, but a little bit of academic honesty is good for all of us. I also believe that the way the person in the pulpit speaks is modelling things like honesty, grace, sensitivity etc etc to the rest of the congregation. There’s a reason that those who teach will be held to a stricter account

  35. @ thatmom:

    When it comes to these Visionary Patriarchs of Biblical Homeschooling, why do all roads lead back to Rushdoony and Van Til? Swanson’s graduate alma mater was a correspondence school in Placentia, CA, run by a Reconstructionist named Greg L. Bahnsen. SCCCS was an acknowledged arm of the OPC of Southern California.

    In 2006 the OPC issued a report on the dangers of heretical pastors (my read: rabid Reconstructionists, Federal Vision nuts and the rest of the usual suspects) within the denomination. It seems many felt the report did not go far enough to call these guys out and deal with them. The report contained particular mention of false gospel shenanigans at SCCCS. The school appears to have been abandoned soon after (website disappears end of 2007). The “faculty” for this school were OPC and PCA pastors all over the US. It looks like most if not all of them remain in their pulpits today. Wonder if some of them are moonlighting for Mohler now.

  36. thatmom wrote:

    I have written a lot about Kevin Swanson over the past few years. Here is one of my favorites: http://www.thatmom.com/2010/02/24/kevin-swanson-on-the-need-to-discipline-20-30-times-a-day/

    Wow. Anyone who ‘disciplines’ their kid that often is extremely abusive. It boggles the mind thinking about it. If they’re ‘disciplining’ that often, do they ever even have any time left over to do anything else? And do they really think any child being ‘disciplined’ that often is going to at all the the person/people beating them care for them at all?

  37. RIP Jorunn. We need more who epitomize love, grace and honor.

    It’s ironic that he eschews professionals but that his bio touts his leadership positions and experience like crazy. Seems like they want to have it both ways on that score. Then they just make up stuff to suit their beliefs. To anyone outside their echo chamber, this is just nuts.

    On a related note, does anyone else notice that people who work jobs that are relatively low on the social and economic scale are never speakers at Christian conferences, rarely leaders in the church? Seems like some great achievements and high positions at work, including secular work, is almost a prerequisite, as though that has anything to do with one’s spiritual depth or insight. I believe in this and other areas the American church at least has accepted the American ethos over the gospel ethos, and the church is poorer for it.

  38. I read this to my husband and neither of us can stop laughing. He said, “Some doctors and some scientists somewhere are going around opening up the wombs of anonymous women and finding kittens in there! No, trust me, it’s happening!”

    It’s called basic science. This is so ridiculous that I can’t even compute this in my brain. If this were true, wouldn’t tons of people know about it? If nothing else, wouldn’t women who deliver healthy babies also see tiny dead fetuses from past unsuccessful pregnancies coming out along with their newborn? Furthermore, wouldn’t people have known about this for, like, centuries? If these fetuses are visible to the naked eye? (which is what he’s implying)

    Then again, the branch of the homeschooling movement that is uber-conservative and reactionary is VERY well-known for having little-to-no grasp on basic scientific principles, largely because the scientific community is believed by them to be corrupt, secular, and out to destroy people’s faith. I bet if you asked him, he would say that doctors invented the lie about unsuccessfully implanted fetuses being shed with the uterine lining during your period. I bet he would say doctors made that up to cover up something about the pill.

    My friend who was homeschooled by an extremely strict religious family said that she was taught that scientists didn’t know what electricity was, where it comes from, or exactly how it works. So, y’know. Consider the source.

  39. @ Trina:

    His bio says he graduated Cal Poly SLO with a BS, but whether or not that’s true is another matter. This guy’s truthometer looks like it could use recalibrating.

    I wonder how he treated the coeds when he was a student. Maybe his misogyny didn’t develop until after his time with SCCCS.

    Not only does he give Christians and homeschoolers a bad name, but he’s also dissing the Mustangs and mechanical engineers. Ugh.

  40. @ Pam & thatmom:

    My ex-pastor said that he once spanked his eldest daughter 17 times in one night. You see now part of the reason why he is my EX-pastor.

  41. @ Jenny:

    That’s funny because according to Gary North, Reconstructionists pretty much own the OPC and are well on their way to owning the PCA too. He kinda bragged about the fact that they managed to do it without leaving a paper trail. I’ll look up the exact quote tomorrow but I’m ready to go to bed now.

  42. Addendum @ Jenny:

    Also, isn’t it true that Van Til’s philosophy (Presuppositionalism) basically states that only Christians can reason (since only their minds are renewed by God)? Ergo it is useless to try and convince unbelievers of anything?

    FYI, the only Reconstructionist anyone in my family ever came into personal contact with was Dutch…just like Van Til. Is it wrong of me to be automatically suspicious of any (recent) Dutch Calvinist simply because they are Dutch (because I currently am)? I really don’t wanna be racist/nationalistic…but every Dutch Calvinist I’ve ever read about/encountered has been off their rocker.

  43. Maybe he just said it because he is desperate for attention. I’m imagining a six-year-old running into a room and yelling BOOBIES!!!!!

  44. The proper term re Swanson is “bless his little black heart”. Little is necessary, cause he sure isn’t big hearted. Black is necessary to support that kind of lying.

  45. Folks, this stuff makes us look stupid in the eyes of a watching world.

    Fortunately, this wholesale lying is pervasive in the culture at large. The watching world is quite messed up to begin with.

  46. @ Hester:

    Yes, I believe you are correct. Van Til asserted that because non-Christians reject God’s Word all their presuppositions are false so they cannot arrive at true rationality. I think he wrote that the way for Christian apologists to engage non-Christians was to demonstrate how their presuppositions reduce to absurdity.

    Way to show the love of Christ to the lost, Cornelius.

    Is it any wonder that Van Til’s disciples are so famous for their elitist, loveless eggheadery? The fact that this stuff is now the mainstream of Christian homeschooling just makes me crazy.

    Maybe Dutch Calvinists end up going bonkers because they’re surrounded by great beer that they’re not allowed to drink?

  47. Pam, I read that link — totally did my head in! Hoo boy — where do I start? Do they even know that a foundational principle of feminism is that a woman’s worth isn’t dependent on her looks? And of course, their patriarchy REALLY appreciates ugly (oops, attractively challenged) women? How to hear 2 men who really appreciate a woman’s inner worth NOT! her they know as little about women or relationships in any sense as they do about female biology

  48. @ Jenny:

    Jenny, do you have any links to the OPC report on their heretical pastors? Also would love to know more about PCA connections, as well.

    As I posted on the other thread, this Swanson comment just makes me literally sick to my stomach.

    I really believe, much like extremist Muslim suicide bombers, that these guys actually worship death in a way – a bit different than the idea that by killing themselves they will get an EZ Pass to Paradise, but in their obsession with “dead babies” they show their fanaticism and from there, it’s only a small step to wanting to literally destroy women.

    I think they’ve idolized death and decay in some sick way.

  49. Jenny wrote:

    Yes, I believe you are correct. Van Til asserted that because non-Christians reject God’s Word all their presuppositions are false so they cannot arrive at true rationality. I think he wrote that the way for Christian apologists to engage non-Christians was to demonstrate how their presuppositions reduce to absurdity.

    Not really familiar with Cornelius Van Til, but some time ago I attended a short talk about him and those were the conclusions I got from it.

    Way to show the love of Christ to the lost, Cornelius.

    Especially this! After the talk I got feeling that Van Til’s approach was extremely mechanic and systematic, if this makes any sense, and that it simply was wrong. I couldn’t really pinpoint the reason though. But the expression “loveless eggheadery” seems to fit quite nicely with it and with the approach I’ve seen in some people in Reformed circles.

    Maybe Dutch Calvinists end up going bonkers because they’re surrounded by great beer that they’re not allowed to drink?

    Loved this! Such poor, poor people, bless their hearts!

  50. thatmom wrote:

    So many truly ignorant and fear wondering quotes from Kevin Swanson, so little time! He also believes that women who go to college will sell their flesh cheap in the market place and have at least two abortions by the time they are thirty.

    Compared to his normal spew this is relatively insignificant but did it ever occur to this pinhead that some women start college after they’re thirty thusly rendering his assinine assertion moot.

  51. I am having trouble with Kevin Swanson’s stated bio and how young he looks. Has anyone verified the truthfulness of his personal story?

  52. I remember hearing Kevin give the testimony of his formative years. His dad looked around at the 1960’s culture and decided he needed to take his family out of it so he became a missionary to some south sea islanders and that is where Kevin and his siblings grew up. While they were there,supposedly someone sent his family a recording of the Sound of Music (How they did this before VCR’s is a mystery to me since Kevin is in his early 40’s) and as they watched, when it came to the part where Liesl and Rolfe are dancing and they exchange a kiss, Kevin’s father turned it off because he wanted to protect his children from sexual immorality. Whether or not this is true doesn’t matter but the fact that Kevin spins his upbringing this way tells us a lot about his views of life and normal sexuality. He also says he was only 16 when he began college and was Student Senate president during his senior year.

  53. @ Jenny:

    “I think he wrote that the way for Christian apologists to engage non-Christians was to demonstrate how their presuppositions reduce to absurdity. Way to show the love of Christ to the lost, Cornelius.”

    Then the Christian homeschool bubble has adopted at least some of his ideas wholesale. They all put their kids in debate to learn how to “defend the truth.” None of them can grasp that debate is not about truth, it’s about winning an argument. If anything it teaches relativism because they force you to defend things you don’t believe in. (The classical education folks in homeschooling get into this too.) I think they really believe that if they just explain to atheists, Muslims, etc. why they are wrong from a logical standpoint, they will magically see the error of their ways and convert. There’s just two problems: 1) most people hold the beliefs they hold for many more reasons than just logical consistency; and 2) given that every kid I’ve ever met who was into debate only parroted Christian apologetics sound bytes ad nauseam, they won’t be converting anyone who’s actually committed to their beliefs anytime soon.

    My personal opinion, debate is only necessary if your kid wants to become a lawyer or a politician. Speech is enough for the rest of us. Debate really is idolized in Christian homeschooling.

  54. @ thatmom:

    “He also says he was only 16 when he began college and was Student Senate president during his senior year.”

    Don’t you mean 16, going on 17? ; )

  55. @ Thy Peace:

    “Fortunately, this wholesale lying is pervasive in the culture at large. The watching world is quite messed up to begin with.”

    I doubt that will stop them from portraying Christians as especially stupid due to Swanson’s comments.

  56. @ Wisdomchaser:

    “I am having trouble with Kevin Swanson’s stated bio and how young he looks.”

    Some homeschooled kids start college at ridiculously young ages (IMO before many of them are socially/emotionally mature enough even if they can handle the academics). (I know a woman who sent her daughters to college at 10 and 11.) You’re almost looked upon as “delayed” now if you don’t graduate at 16. No idea what Swanson’s educational upbringing was like, but if he finished high school early in any way it’s hardly unheard of among homeschoolers.

  57. @ Hester:

    Yes, Hester, debate is the Be All End All activity for many evangelical homeschoolers I know as well as evangelicals with kids in other educational settings (Christian private schools and “classical” charter schools).

    And the promotion of debate is all tied up with the ultimate goal of teaching evangelical Christian worldview and apologetics.

    Now, I’m not completely dismissing debate and the great skills it promotes: confidence in public speaking, research and preparation, analytical thinking. All good stuff for sure.

    But heck, I grew up in the public schools and was an avid Model U.N. nerd – I’ve not really heard of evangelicals getting all excited about getting the kids into Model U.N. to work on their debating skills (IIRC in Model U.N. you’d get to do some mock Security Council meetings and bring up resolutions and you had to defend them to the other “nations” etc.).

    I’ve even slyly said to some evangelical parents that Model U.N. is also a great vehicle for teaching debating skills, etc. and I got the distinct impression that a) they were evaluating the size and sharpness of the horns growing out of my head and b) they were appalled that I’d encourage any contact with the Evil One World Government body. Sigh.

    Again, there are some great skills acquired by debating but personally the evangelical teens I’ve met who are serious debaters are in it for the express purpose of acquiring skills to “defend the faith.”

  58. Velvet Voice

    Thank you for my laugh of the day. I stii remember my son in first grade and his best friend getting in trouble for marching through the corridors of the school chanting “We’re sexy, we’re sexy, the people say we’re sexy.”

  59. “My personal opinion, debate is only necessary if your kid wants to become a lawyer or a politician. Speech is enough for the rest of us. Debate really is idolized in Christian homeschooling.”

    Couldn’t agree more! I have taught several groups of homeschoolers in a public speaking class and they always ask if we are going to include debate. And I always explain that we need communication skills to be successful in our jobs, in marriage, in parenting, in all walks of life. I then go on to spend the year training them to spend at least half their communication time listening rather than speaking. There is a huge high place among homeschoolers in the area of debate an along with it comes this pompous attitude that I abhor. I remember reading one young man’s testimony of how he learned absolutely nothing from anyone, especially in his college classes. If I had been his mom I would have been so embarrassed but since his mom was a patriarchy leader, I suppose this was an example of manhood. Bill Gothard likes to quote Psalm 119:99: “I have more understanding than all my teachers, for your testimonies are my meditation” and somany young debaters think his applies to them!

  60. Phoenix

    I think he is having a mental break. I hope there is someone around his fringe group who has enough sense to get him help/

  61. Dee, I think Kevin Swanson is really no different than any of these other guys with their celebrity status. He just does what the rest of them dream of doing…pontificating nuttiness with no social restraints.

  62. thatmom wrote:

    and along with it comes this pompous attitude that I abhor.

    Yes, thatmom. I am in particular thinking of one evangelical teen debater I’ve met who took an outsized pride in their “rhetoric” studies. Pomposity and arrogance is pretty chilling in a 15 year old. 🙁

  63. John

    What a grea comment! You said  “does anyone else notice that people who work jobs that are relatively low on the social and economic scale are never speakers at Christian conferences, rarely leaders in the church?”

    Matt Redmond, in his book The God of the Mundane makes this same point in another way! He said something to the effect of “If all of us are missionaries in our work, according to pastors, then why have we never seen a plumber speak at a missions conference?”

    The American church has integrated the Wall Street success model, given it a Chrstianese covering and call it good. It has become our reigning model, complete with 38 year old pastors living in $500,000 homes and living large on the tithes of the faithful as they flit about to conferences. As Redmond said “There are two types of pastors. Those who speak at conferences and those who want to speak at conferences.”

  64. sad observer

    As you know, science is one of my hot button topics. I roundly reject Christians who have been indoctrinated to believe that all scientists are out to disprove the faith. Yes, there are some idiot scientists but their work is vetted by the community at large and screwball stuf eventuall gets found out. For example, the past couple of years uncovered a fraud in a cabcer researcher at Duke. he was found and exposed by his peers.

    However, until recently, screwballs like Swanson and others have been allowed loose in the Christian community and celebrated. This group of Christians are worse than the few screwballs in science out there.They drive their cars and eat their clean food in homes that are heated and cooled while loudly proclaiming that scientists are liars and atheists. They should eschew all advancements made by scientists and go back to living in the Dark Ages.

  65. Hester

    That is abusive. “My ex-pastor said that he once spanked his eldest daughter 17 times in one night” This only gets a pass in Christian communities. Outside of that group, such actions are known as child abuse and children get taken away.

  66. Anon by Choice

    I am trying to figure out if he is intentionally lying or if he is mentally unstable. I am not sure as I watch him. What I wouldn’t give to spend an hour with him to figure him out. 

  67. Jenny/Hester

    I believe that my conversion disproves Van Til. I grew up in a non-Christan family, surrounded by non-Christians. I never rejected God’s Word. In fact, at 16 I attempted to read through the Bible but got bogged down in Leviticus (still do, in fact). It was the idea of a God who loved me and wanted to relate to me that caused me to come to faith. Thati s why, to this day, I speak about the love of the Father for His children instead of a Piperesque angry God waiting to cut me down at every turn.

  68. I’m just thankful those docs aren’t finding aliens in all those wombs!

    Thank you, Dee, for your list of people and their associations. Two years ago, I dropped out of “religion” and “church” and solely read scripture. I got back into “christian” society two months ago, and imagine my shock at what I’ve heard so far. My spidey-senses have been tingling listening to others spout their “biblical” doctrine that really is none other than name-dropping. Your lists really help me to find out more about what’s behind all this “doctrine”.

  69. One of my favorite verses: “Do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?” (Romans 2:4).” These people have forgotten this truth!

  70. “My spidey-senses have been tingling listening to others spout their “biblical” doctrine that really is none other than name-dropping”

    Lola, You know, it is hard for us to see how much we allow ourselves to be desensitized to stuff when we are in it all the time. I can relate to your leaving church and just reading scripture….I did the same thing. Just the Gospels for 3 years. And boy Jesus reads NOTHING like what we are seeing out there. And I am convinced we cannot understand Paul until we really understand and know Jesus Christ.

    Being in the middle of it, makes it harder to discern the smaller stuff…it has to be more and more bold for folks to question. This came home to me in another way, too. We did not have a tv in our house for about 10 years. We watched some videos on a player but not much else. Not because we are some wacko fringe group but because we really did not enjoy it, did not want our kids to be addicted to it and thought it was a time waster. Imagine the shock when we brought it back in a few years back. Just the shallow commercials, reality stuff, etc was a real shock. Sure you heard about all this sstuff but take the time to actually watch it and think it is entertaining? No way. Now, about the only thing we can stomach is PBS documentaries, Masterpiece Theatre, etc.

    I say all this to make the point that people are desensitized to this stuff in Christendom. That is why Piper sounds normal in what he teaches. And all the arrogant brash YRR? Their behavior is becoming the norm…and defined as love. Comp doctrine which was very much promoted by non Cals for years, was seen as the norm….there was nothing else “chrisitan” out there. Think about it, now we are seeing guys like Doug Wilson being mainstreamed in reformed circles. it was not just 6-7 years ago he was considered fringe and wacky by many. Now he is a darling of PIper and other YRR are talking about him being brilliant and witty.

    We are seeing the redefining of Christianity right before our eyes with the bar for truth being moved constantly.

  71. Lola

    Keep the “spidey sense” alive and well. For a minute, after reading your comment, I flashend back to the movie, Alien, and had this vision of alien babies emerging from the womb, “Alien” style. I contemplated shaving my head and becoming the Sinead O’Connor of the Christian blogging world.

  72. dee wrote:

    sad observer
    As you know, science is one of my hot button topics. I roundly reject Christians who have been indoctrinated to believe that all scientists are out to disprove the faith. Yes, there are some idiot scientists but their work is vetted by the community at large and screwball stuf eventuall gets found out. For example, the past couple of years uncovered a fraud in a cabcer researcher at Duke. he was found and exposed by his peers.
    However, until recently, screwballs like Swanson and others have been allowed loose in the Christian community and celebrated. This group of Christians are worse than the few screwballs in science out there.They drive their cars and eat their clean food in homes that are heated and cooled while loudly proclaiming that scientists are liars and atheists. They should eschew all advancements made by scientists and go back to living in the Dark Ages.

    A scientist must back up claims with documentation
    She must cite her sources.
    Her work must be able to be replicated by others.
    A fraud will be easily exposed.

    I had to deal with this type of pompous homeschooler when my older children were little. Alwas nitpicking my kids, praising their own work as though they were God’s gift to the world. The identification of young prodegies (always male for some reason) and promoting them always sets off my spidey senses. Reminds me of the way the oldest Duggar was following in his papa’s footsteps and started his own political consulting business in which he featured a webpage full of obvious mistakes.

    Legends in their own minds but what do they do differently from the rest of humanity?

    Lets see…reject science 1)(bear in mind, science is a human construct that exists to explain the world around us iow, the truth.)2) Isolate themselves from the rest of the world and 3) employ draconian methods such as spanking a preschooler 20-40X/day and physically assaulting a 17 year old girl to maintain control of children.

    I wish these folks would pull their heads out of their metaphoric anal cavity long enough to realize that what they are doing is shaming the Gospel!

  73. @ Anon 1:
    “Being in the middle of it, makes it harder to discern the smaller stuff…it has to be more and more bold for folks to question. This came home to me in another way, too. We did not have a tv in our house for about 10 years. We watched some videos on a player but not much else. Not because we are some wacko fringe group but because we really did not enjoy it, did not want our kids to be addicted to it and thought it was a time waster. Imagine the shock when we brought it back in a few years back. Just the shallow commercials, reality stuff, etc was a real shock. Sure you heard about all this sstuff but take the time to actually watch it and think it is entertaining? No way. Now, about the only thing we can stomach is PBS documentaries, Masterpiece Theatre, etc.”

    You know, most people, myself including, would look at my former church as being one of those wacko fringe groups. I haven’t watched TV or movies for 2 decades. We’ve started watching some movies now, though we can’t quite bring ourselves to include the TV. I still don’t attend a church, though I do pray and read my Bible. But, after reading here, my former wacko church doesn’t seem as wacko anymore. Mainstream Christianity has moved closer to their ideology. My father has been trying to steer me back into the SBC churches of my youth. One of his big selling points is congregational polity. But, after reading here, I realize that is changing in some SBC churches. I’m pretty alarmed at the trend, because I know only too well how damaging an authoritarian church is. It is not only damaging in a spiritually abusive sense, but also damaging to one’s very faith in Jesus. This new breed of pastor wants to BE Jesus to the congregation. I’m just grateful for all of you who share here. If I ever approach another church I’ll be far more discerning.

  74. Been there done that,

    You make such a great point!!!! The mainstream is moving closer to the fringe wacko!

  75. Jenny wrote:

    His bio says he graduated Cal Poly SLO with a BS, but whether or not that’s true is another matter. This guy’s truthometer looks like it could use recalibrating.

    Makes me glad I was Cal Poly Pomona.

  76. As for “The Christian Responsibility to Tell the Truth”, I am reminded of a quote attributed to the “Bill” who founded Alcoholics Anonymous:

    “If you don’t want to call it ‘God’, call it ‘Truth’.”

    This of course assumes “Truth” means something else than “Whatever we can say to Advance Our Agenda”.

  77. I don’t even know where to begin on this one. If you’re gonna lie about something, at least try to make sound remotely plausible. My reaction same as yours….does he even understand the workings of female reproductive system, other than simply that women have wombs?

  78. Debra Baker wrote:

    I had to deal with this type of pompous homeschooler when my older children were little. Alwas nitpicking my kids, praising their own work as though they were God’s gift to the world. The identification of young prodegies (always male for some reason) and promoting them always sets off my spidey senses.

    I was a promoted young prodigy (male for some reason). Diagnosed a kid genius when I entered school two years after Sputnik and fast-tracked for the next twelve. Trust me, it’s not all that hot a life.

  79. dee wrote:

    Thank you for my laugh of the day. I stii remember my son in first grade and his best friend getting in trouble for marching through the corridors of the school chanting “We’re sexy, we’re sexy, the people say we’re sexy.”

    You said the magic woid, Dee:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YUXIKrOFk

  80. Wisdomchaser wrote:

    I am having trouble with Kevin Swanson’s stated bio and how young he looks. Has anyone verified the truthfulness of his personal story?

    Probably sounds as truthful as the official bios of Comrade Ogilvy and Kim Jong-Il.

  81. Rafiki wrote:

    Yes, Hester, debate is the Be All End All activity for many evangelical homeschoolers I know as well as evangelicals with kids in other educational settings (Christian private schools and “classical” charter schools).

    And the promotion of debate is all tied up with the ultimate goal of teaching evangelical Christian worldview and apologetics.

    I have encountered debating champs. Doesn’t matter if they’re arguing black is white, war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, whatever — they will hammer you and hammer you and hammer you with debating tricks and semantics until THEY WIN. PERIOD.

    “The winner is never asked whether he has won fairly; all that matters is that he has WON!” — A.Hitler

    The one I had the most experience with was a former Berkeley Debating Team member who hammered me down with his Superior Intellect (and how the Soviet Union was morally superior in every possible way).

  82. It also begs the question that since Swanson is so obviously anti-professional and no one from the establishment is to be trusted, who exactly are these “doctors” he references and why are they cutting open women’s wombs if they are not actually MDs or DOs???

  83. Hester wrote:

    That’s funny because according to Gary North, Reconstructionists pretty much own the OPC and are well on their way to owning the PCA too. He kinda bragged about the fact that they managed to do it without leaving a paper trail.

    Straight out of Russian Bureaucratic tradition — “If there’s no paper trail, if nothing was written down, It Never Happened.” Plausible Deniability. (And after their takeover, Lenin added & Stalin perfected “and Dead Men Tell No Tales”.)

  84. Been There

    You made an interesting observation that has struck me as well. “Mainstream Christianity has moved closer to their ideology. My father has been trying to steer me back into the SBC churches of my youth.”  Funny thing I have noticed is that SOME of the mainline churches, which I had been taught were ALL whacked out liberal, are not. Some of them just ran scared from some of the legalists (who claim they are against legalism.)

  85. HUG

    Anyway you could find out if he actually went to that school since you attended the Cal Poly system?

  86. “thatmom” This quote from Kevin is horrifying: “The use of the rod is very clear, no lasting harm allowed, period. Now this should relieve the conscience of every Christian parent here who from time to time leaves a bruise on a child, it’s legitimate, it’s not lasting harm, it’s not lasting harm. You understand some children bruise just like that, some children don’t, but children are very different in this way. But I’m bringing the word of God to bear on your consciences today. The state should not be an issue here when it comes to obeying the word of God. Now granted we do everything we can to agree with our adversary while we’re in the way with him.

    My hands are shaking as I type- This is appalling- Capital letters: ABUSE. Bare with here folks, my adrenaline is pumping… I would like to leave some bruises on Kevin- since there is no lasting harm-

  87. Kristin

    He is either incredibly stupid or he is having a meltdown. He appears somewhat in the zealot category to me so the latter explanation has appeal.

  88. Kristin

    These are alien doctors. Don’t you ever listen to Coast to Coast in the middle of the night?

  89. Ah, it’s all making sense now…alien doctors beaming up unsuspecting women on the pill for secret experiments…

  90. @ Gail:
    “The state should not be an issue here when it comes to obeying the word of God.” This is the same mantra SGM used to justify not reporting child molestation to the authorities. You’re right, Gail- abuse.

  91. *bear with me*

    Wonder how the parents would react if one day their adult children confronted them on how they experienced “legitimate”(puke)spanking with bruising…

    Mom & Dad, are you sorry for hurting me?
    Do you even realize the extent of my injuries?
    No, you didn’t leave visible scars on my skin,
    but I am tormented from the damage within.

    I can still hear your controlled anger
    echoing through my mind,
    your shaming discipline becomes more
    entrenched with the passing of time.

    Why did you have to harm my soul,
    I was defenseless against your rigid control.

  92. Debra Baker wrote:

    A scientist must back up claims with documentation
    She must cite her sources.
    Her work must be able to be replicated by others.
    A fraud will be easily exposed.

    Debra – Do I have permission to copy and paste this on Swanson’s Generations Radio facebook wall? I’ve been silent so far today. I must say something.

    BTW, this is the day Sproul is supposed to be meet with Swanson and he said he might ask him about sources. I “reminded” them both yesterday on Twitter. Just in case they forgot.

  93. Thank you! One of the most frustrating things I find is when Christians persist in passing around rumors, half-truths, and outright lies even when they are called on. It doesn’t seem to occur to them that they are violating the Ninth Commandment, which is part of the “Big Ten” that these same people scream MUST be posted in every school and courthouse in the country. For those that aren’t aware, the Ninth Commandment is “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor”. For the definition of “neighbor”, see the story of the Good Samaritan.

  94. Steve D wrote:

    This has really pissed me off. Some of our tribe spread misinformation like crazy. Then they wonder why no one takes them (and us) seriously.

    Yep. Back when Barack Obama’s citizenship was first being questioned (and for the record, I am a conservative that believes Obama IS an American citizen) I asked someone, “Why don’t people believe he’s a citizen?”

    The answer I got was, “I don’t believe he’s a citizen and so do a lot of other people.”

    I asked again, “You didn’t answer my question. WHY don’t people think he’s a citizen?”

    The answer I got: “The bloggers wouldn’t be all over it if there weren’t something to it.”

    Sigh.

  95. Gail wrote:

    “thatmom” This quote from Kevin is horrifying: “The use of the rod is very clear, no lasting harm allowed, period. Now this should relieve the conscience of every Christian parent here who from time to time leaves a bruise on a child, it’s legitimate, it’s not lasting harm, it’s not lasting harm. You understand some children bruise just like that, some children don’t, but children are very different in this way. But I’m bringing the word of God to bear on your consciences today. The state should not be an issue here when it comes to obeying the word of God. Now granted we do everything we can to agree with our adversary while we’re in the way with him.
    My hands are shaking as I type- This is appalling- Capital letters: ABUSE. Bare with here folks, my adrenaline is pumping… I would like to leave some bruises on Kevin- since there is no lasting harm-

    At the risk of inspiring this (feminine product that is used on a summer’s eve’s container), why not WATERBOARD the kid because waterboarding does no lasting damage. Or perhaps rubber hoses to the babies because they leave no marks. Seriously, dude, you are disturbed. Disturbed on many levels.

    Hey, KS (feminine product that is used on a summer’s eve’s container) why don’t you get a grown man to beat your bare ass 40X for a couple of weeks and see if you like it.

    I suspect when I started telling my SGM story and related the incident when I was in the nursing room listening to two pastor’s wives whining and grousing about their toddlers and how they had to use the rod 20-40 times in one day that a lot of people thought I was exaggerating.

    You have no idea how I wish I was exaggerating considering how widespread this harsh methodology is in conservative circles.

    Weren’t we supposed to be known by our love?

    Summer’s Eve’s Bag is contributing to the perception that we’re known for our ignorance of science, psychology, and our draconian parenting….good times.

  96. Gail wrote:

    Wonder how the parents would react if one day their adult children confronted them on how they experienced “legitimate”(puke)spanking with bruising…

    Gail: When you’re drinking the Kool-Aid, it all gets turned around. Those parents, if they are still “in” the system and drinking the Kool-Aid will say that the adult child must have sin in their life to want to question them because they were being obedient to God’s word “spare the rod.” Do we question God and His Word? To question is like questioning a pastor in a spiritually abusive church.

  97. To our readers

    The following is a comment by John Immel who is well known for his work on Spiritual Tyranny. he is responding to a post we did on resigning you church membership. Here is a link to his blog http://spiritualtyranny.com

    Hey guys, someone sent me a link to a post you put up: 
    ​ http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/02/02/mark-dever-9-marks-edict-you-cannot-resign-wo-permission
     I thought about posting something but couldn’t find the means. So I am 
     presuming the comments are closed. Since I wrote this out I figured I 
     send it to you to see if you thought it comment worthy. If not that is 
     all right. If yes, than I’d like to offer my 87 cents worth.

    > John Immel

    > Comment:

    I haven’t read through all the comments on this thread so maybe this has already been said, but it is crucial to understand how dramatically historic church doctrine stands in opposition to the American Constitution. Deaver et. al., are advocating the foundations of the Reformed Theocracy that dominated Protestant Europe for hundreds of years. And their implicit logic is that the “righteous” ideal of “God” word is the plumb line of government action. They presume that civil law is subordinate to “Gods” law. And if civil law falls short … they will stand firm against an “unbiblical” standard and suffer the persecution as good soldiers.

    They do not see their doctrine as wrong when compared to American freedoms they see the freedoms and misplaced … at best. As a true Christian you should willingly abandon those freedoms (most likely called license) and submit to the sound doctrine within the church.

    This is at no point a new Christian idea. To be sure this idea is what dominated Western thought as far back as that nut Athanasius . . . maybe even Tertullian. And it was this Statist/Collectivist presumption that our founding father fought with all of their might. The reason they rejected the merging of the power of Church and state so vehemently is 
    because they knew the bloodshed that emerged from Church AS the State. When James Madison wrote his /Memorial and Remonstrance Against 
    Religious Assessments /he was combating the prevailing world view that the church mixed with state power was the leading tyrannical force in the oppression of men. Statist/Collectivist governments presume the right to dispose of people’s lives as the STATE sees fit.

     What Dever et al are advocating is pernicious and destructive because he presumes the right to dispose of people’s lives as HE sees fit. Make no mistake they are making the beginning arguments that —taken to the logical conclusion — justify the bonfire and the rack. They are offering doctrines that are slowly building toward Augustine’s 
    justification for what amounts’ to church sanction mass murder.

    You think that last statement inflammatory?


     Let me ask this: if the men in the Neo Calvinist movement did not have the force of the State compelling them to STOP church “Discipline” what would stop their action? What would curtail their use of force? Good will?

    When the state owns the people there is no such thing as good will. And when the Church owned the people . . . well as James Madison said: /What 
     influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on Civil Society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual  tyranny on the ruins of the Civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny: *in no instance*  *have they been seen the guardians of the liberties of the people. *

  98. Gail wrote~

    ““thatmom” This quote from Kevin is horrifying: “The use of the rod is very clear, no lasting harm allowed, period. Now this should relieve the conscience of every Christian parent here who from time to time leaves a bruise on a child, it’s legitimate, it’s not lasting harm, it’s not lasting harm. You understand some children bruise just like that, some children don’t, but children are very different in this way. But I’m bringing the word of God to bear on your consciences today. The state should not be an issue here when it comes to obeying the word of God. Now granted we do everything we can to agree with our adversary while we’re in the way with him.”

    I wanna be Southern too and say bless his heart, lol, but cannot in any way bless such a sick, sick, heart like that.

    I have posted this link before. In this show, “When the CPS Comes for Your Children: The Rise of Tyranny in the Family Jurisdiction” Swanson gives advice on how to choose a family physician that will overlook the bruises so you won’t get reported. Shocking and heartbreaking.

    http://www.heritagedefense.org/2012/08/28/kevin-swanson-says-join-heritage-defense/

  99. Julie Anne:

    I hear ya, I know how corrupt & controlling & sick these systems are. I didn’t have eyes to see how I was harming my daughter when I was in a spiritually abuse place- I refuse to call it a church.

    Yes Debra- by our love. Thanks for the belly laugh too!

  100. As an ex-CHBCer, I find Immel’s observations and conclusions compelling. And that is why THIS http://www.9marks.org/blog/%E2%80%9Cmark-dever-doesn%E2%80%99t-practice-separation%E2%80%9D should be a red flag to many.

    “Mark Dever doesnt practice separation. Really? Some have said this. But, I must confess that this comes as a surprise to me. I think defining marks of my time at CHBC have been involved with separation. So at our members’ meeting in May of 1996 we separated ourselves from most of our church’s members (256 disciplined for non-attendance!). Also, I remember the tears many of us shed over a marriage broken up in those early years, and the first of a number of excommunications we’ve decided (the latest being for a member who joined the Roman Catholic Church). These are sad duties, but we must separate ourselves from those who are openly disobedient to God’s command in His Word, whether that be to not forsake the regular assembling of ourselves, the command to marital faithfulness, to adhere to the Gospel, etc. For all of these matters, corrective church discipline which issues in separation (until the sinning party repents) is what is called for, and our elders have tried to lead our church into faithfulness in this area. And we have known not only the sadness of separation, but rejoicing in repentance. Regardless of what we experience, we see God’s Word is clear on this separation in the local church, and we intend to practice it.”

  101. @ Diane:

    Hi Diane- I looked at the link, will listen later when I can stomach it. I think the sarcastic southern expression of bless his heart really means screw him. Not 100% sure on that ( :

  102. Trina, The entire church decides. Not a few men with titles. I read not long ago on a pastor blog a YRR explaining 1 Corin 5 as involving elders! Please show me where? The closest thing we can get to elder in 1 Corin is that “CHLOE had people” who told Paul the problems.

    These men are POWER mad. Nevermind Devers coddling of Mahaney the blackmailer and protector of perverts.

  103. Debra- Clarifying on my belly laugh: “Hey, KS (feminine product that is used on a summer’s eve’s container) why don’t you get a grown man to beat your bare ass 40X for a couple of weeks and see if you like it.

    Debra Baker wrote:
    <I suspect when I started telling my SGM story and related the incident when I was in the nursing room listening to two pastor’s wives whining and grousing about their toddlers and how they had to use the rod 20-40 times in one day that a lot of people thought I was exaggerating.

    You have no idea how I wish I was exaggerating considering how widespread this harsh methodology is in conservative circles" Heart-wrenching, anger producing stuff.

  104. “I think the sarcastic southern expression of bless his heart really means screw him. Not 100% sure on that ( :”

    Ok-I see, Gail. If that is the intended meaning then bless his heart I shall!

    I thought it meant something more along the lines of pity-fake or real? I won’t even give Swanson my fake (or real) pity. But I have no idea. Not a phrase I hear in the midwest.

  105. dee wrote:

    Let me ask this: if the men in the Neo Calvinist movement did not have the force of the State compelling them to STOP church “Discipline” what would stop their action? What would curtail their use of force? Good will?

    Dee – This whole comment by Immel is so, so important to understand in abusive church systems. Hopefully not many will experience churches like this, but think about my experience. We were not even church members and Chuck O’Neal told his Kool-Aid drinking congregation that we were in church discipline (reading the church by-laws would have told them that it was impossiblility). These pastors/church dictators are able to bring their whole church behind them in supporting their spiritual tyranny. Guess who recently signed the check on the $37,000 attorney bill – – – the church, not Chuck O’Neal. It’s a group effort starting from the top down.

    And we must not forget – – these church systems don’t care about civil authority. Remember Chuck’s response to his day in court: he didn’t think he had his day in court. The court did not allow him to bring the evidence to court. It was the court’s problem. He and his church were slighted. The court system failed him in his eyes. Extend this to SGM – -they believed they had better ways of handling sexual “sin.” They did not trust civil authorities to adequately address the issue and interfered with those who tried to get help outside of church. These people think they are above the law. The law is a nuisance to their agenda. They think they ARE the law. Who is going to stop this?

  106. @ Anon 1:
    Take a look further at his sabbatical posts and you’ll see more often than not, who he spent time with.. :/ Now, suffice it to say, I have never known Dever to be like Mahaney in his weirdness and lying. But it does make me wonder why he would keep time with a man like CJ. Maybe even Dever isn’t immune to CJs sociopathic whims.

  107. Julie Anne wrote:

    Those parents, if they are still “in” the system and drinking the Kool-Aid will say that the adult child must have sin in their life to want to question them because they were being obedient to God’s word “spare the rod.” Do we question God and His Word? To question is like questioning a pastor in a spiritually abusive church.

    i.e. “The Party Can Do No Wrong. Ees Party Line, Comrades.”

  108. @ Anon 1:
    Are you saying that the entire church is supposed to decide? Because we both know who gets the last word, right? And how can the entire church make a decision that is heavily influenced by their leaders? Is the decision really theirs? How can one make an objective decision without all of the heavy indoctrination.

  109. Anon 1 wrote:

    Trina, The entire church decides. Not a few men with titles. I read not long ago on a pastor blog a YRR explaining 1 Corin 5 as involving elders! Please show me where?

    And these guys go foaming at the mouth over Romish Priestcraft????

    25 years RCC, and I have NEVER encountered a priest or bishop with an attitude like that. I view priests as specialists within the congregation.

  110. Debra Baker wrote:

    Summer’s Eve’s Bag is contributing to the perception that we’re known for our ignorance of science, psychology, and our draconian parenting….good times.

    Don’t forget lording it over the rest of us in the Restored Christian America.

    (Or is that the Theocratic Republic of Gilead?)

  111. Diane wrote:

    “Maybe Dutch Calvinists end up going bonkers because they’re surrounded by great beer that they’re not allowed to drink?”

    Well, that explains Temperance/Prohibition:

    “IF I CAN’T HAVE IT, I’LL MAKE SURE NOBODY CAN!”

  112. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    I would go crazy too! I just had this Southern Tier “Choklat” beer from New York last night at happy hour, and it was like Guiness with a nice hint of dark chocolate. I almost lost my mind! ***** (ed).

  113. Didn’t Augustine (whatever one thinks of some of his theology) specifically call out this sort of shooting from the hip that brings discredit on Christians when they speak ignorantly? And that was over one and a half millenia ago.

    Also I think these people are a bit selective with using Francis Schaeffer. He was against abortion, but I think (again, whatever you think of some of his work) that he was also strong on telling the truth – not peddling disinformation or using angry rhetoric and sales techniques to push a message (these were some of the reasons that he left his original fundamentalist church in the early 50s because he disliked their attitudes).

  114. BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

    You know, most people, myself including, would look at my former church as being one of those wacko fringe groups. I haven’t watched TV or movies for 2 decades. We’ve started watching some movies now, though we can’t quite bring ourselves to include the TV. I still don’t attend a church, though I do pray and read my Bible. But, after reading here, my former wacko church doesn’t seem as wacko anymore. Mainstream Christianity has moved closer to their ideology. My father has been trying to steer me back into the SBC churches of my youth. One of his big selling points is congregational polity. But, after reading here, I realize that is changing in some SBC churches. I’m pretty alarmed at the trend, because I know only too well how damaging an authoritarian church is. It is not only damaging in a spiritually abusive sense, but also damaging to one’s very faith in Jesus. This new breed of pastor wants to BE Jesus to the congregation. I’m just grateful for all of you who share here. If I ever approach another church I’ll be far more discerning.

    Like you, many people in my former church didn’t even own televisions. I found that shocking, I grew up in front of the television, it’s my teacher, my comforter, my escape. It’s generally okay not to watch the average fare, but when you also don’t watch news or read newspapers or listen to the radio, I find it equally shocking. The people in my congregation didn’t know about the Cheshire home invasion, and I wasn’t allowed to mention it in front of the kids, the youngest who is 12 years old, shouldn’t she know of some of the evils in the world? I’m sure most of them will swallow this junk science whole. I am embarrassed to call myself a Christian.

  115. Womb tombs?

    Ridiculous.

    My pastor is a doctor. And re the pill, made it clear to me that there is no “Pill” in the sense of just one formulation. There are many many. Some are stronger than others, some have estrogen and some do not.

    Depending on a woman’s size, age, stage of reproductive life, and personal hormonal make-up some are indeed better at preventing ovulation than others. So to avoid taking one that might have a higher risk of being abortifacient, all she has to do is talk to her dr.

    I was not interested in taking one that had a high chance of not preventing ovulation but still had a high success at preventing pregnancy because that type would risk being abortifacient.

    We chose one that had a very low risk of not preventing ovulation. If you don’t ovulate, you have no egg to be fertilized.

    Where do these nuts come up with this stuff? Are they still believing men produce tiny infants and no need of an egg?

  116. Eagle wrote:

    Let me ask this: if the men in the Neo Calvinist movement did not have the force of the State compelling them to STOP church “Discipline” what would stop their action? What would curtail their use of force? Good will?

    Probably the same self-restraint that curtails North Korea and/or the Taliban.

    Absolute Power plus Utter Righteousness is a very BAD combination.

  117. linda wrote:

    Where do these nuts come up with this stuff? Are they still believing men produce tiny infants and no need of an egg?

    Which would make the woman nothing more than an incubator for The Man’s Seed (and Precious Bodily Fluids(TM) — Dr Strangelove), so it wouldn’t surprise me. And it would back up Young Earth Creationism as it is easier to do the seed-within-seed for 6000 years/300 generations than 1.5 million years/75,000 generations. Grab a couple proof-texts, hammer them into shape, and it’s backed up with Cosmic Authority — God Hath Said, It Is Written, Scripture Scripture Scripture and all that…

  118. dee wrote:

     Funny thing I have noticed is that SOME of the mainline churches, which I had been taught were ALL whacked out liberal, are not. Some of them just ran scared from some of the legalists (who claim they are against legalism.)

    Like you, I am considered very conservative. But I think what passes for conservative today is hard-core fundamentalism. Maybe the liberal churches today are more like the conservative churches of yore.
    Thank you for the comment from John Immel. You won’t find that being taught in the majority of homeschool curriculum today. Also, the link to your post on 9-Marks is good (including the comments). There is so much info on this blog I have yet to discover. If I only had more time . . . I’m afraid I can’t afford not to find the time.

  119. “Absolute Power plus Utter Righteousness is a very BAD combination.” HUG

    Indeed it is HUG, and I don’t see where Jesus ever advocated for this combination. When you have all the NeoCals, with their heads stuck in the Reformation as if IT was the Messiah instead of Jesus himself, you will get the same outcome as the Reformers did; a tiny bit of truth and an enormous amount of “doctrine” to rule the Christian AND heathen masses. Where is the Holy Spirit in any of this? I don’t believe for a minute that this is what Jesus meant when he prayed for “God’s will to be done on earth as it is in heaven.” God is not browbeating the angels or saints to do his will.

  120. My first job after college was with the pharmaceutical company Wyeth, makers of Ovral. I had to learn the details of the menstrual cycle. Even 40+ years later I know what takes place and know Swanson is full of baloney.

    To use-or-not-use an oral contraceptive is a personal issue. However, having said that, something like the ‘morning after’ pill, which is an abortifactive since it cause the fertilized egg to slough off of the endometrium after nidation does seem to go too far.

  121. Koyla

    Calvinists using “Selective Theology” … GASP! Say it aint so?

    >snicker<

    Of course these men are selective in their use of “authoritative” sources, because unless they are able to pick and choose their interpretive methodology to weave together their tapestry of Government despotism, they would be rendered rationally irrelevant in about ten seconds.

    For all of the Neo Calvinist posturing over holding “Absolutes” they are really capitalizing on their endless ability to subjectively demagogue the moral and intellectual high ground. They don’t have a “conversation”. They clear the intellectual playing field by whatever means available: whether it be by demanding intellectual obedience to those sitting in the pews or denouncing lowly bloggers in their underwear with fully specious ad hominem attacks. And if they ever get a hold of the government apparatchik they will do exactly what Mystic Despots have always done. Kill those who disagree with their revelation.
    And this is the problem at the very roots of the Reformed Construct. It is founded on subjectivism deeply invested in the Intrinsic foundations within Augustinian theology. (The pedigree goes like this: Augustine to Luther to Calvin to Beza to Owen the American Puritan thinkers to the Australian Forum to the modern shills infesting the Pulpits of America)

    But all Neo Calvinist Theology is really rooted Plato. Brother Augy got his philosophical foundations via Plotinus: a second century Platonist.
    I should probably back up and explain Intrinsic so that my comment makes sense. Plato presented a Metaphysical world view that made concepts (e.g. Chair, Cat, Dog, Church) the product of another realm. That realm held a perfect FORM; man only gets a shadow of the FORM by the INTRISINC power of the thing to project its thing-ness.

    And this is the problem with this world view: If Man cannot understand the world in which he lives because he sees but a shadow, then HOW CAN MAN KNOW ANYTHING?
    The answer is: He cannot because knowledge is INTRINSIC. Or said in Christian Parlance: Man’s knowledge is Special Revelation.

    And those of you with blazing fast minds will ask the next question: Who then is qualified to get this Special Revelation!?

    Bingo!

    That is the million dollar question. And this is the answer that the Neo Calvinists are seeking to own without question. THEY are the ones “qualified” to receive, define, and defend (at all costs) this Special Revelation of Intrinsic knowledge.

    How can they be so sure? How can they defend such a presumption? Simple: because they can pick and choose their interpretive methods (be selective with their points and authorities) with impunity because THE revelation is Intrinsic to the inside of THEM. That fact that they have the insight is the proof that they are qualified to defend the insight. Alakazam poof!

    I know what I just said is a tautology but that that is exactly their root argument.

    Therefore, they are in charge of the interpretive methods and the interpretive conclusions. Selective Theology? Piffle what are you talking about? They are in charge and how dare you challenge them!!!!

    And that is exactly what all Religious wars are fought over. WHO has the right to determine who hears God best.

    Welcome to the insanity that is Religious totalitarianism.

  122. @ VelvetVoice:
    “I am embarrassed to call myself a Christian.”
    I’m starting to feel a little that way myself. I grew up with the TV, too. I feel a little “underdeveloped” in some ways for not having more flow of information into my life for the past 20 years. When 9-11 happened, my sister called me in a panic. After realizing I didn’t know what was happening, she told me, “Ummm . . . You need to turn your radio on.” I felt pretty backwards. Now I realize my former church had a vested interest in keeping us all uninformed. Fewer people would swallow their junk if they could read a little TWW occasionally.

  123. To John Immel:
    I think you are going way too far in your denouncement of Reformation theology. Neo-Calvinism and the likes of Swanson and R. C. Sproul, JR. do not represent the Calvinism of the vast majority of folks like me, or of the long line that includes Spurgeon, Whitefield, & Machen. Your line from Calvin to Australian Forum is, frankly, absurd and clearly shows you have an inadequate understanding of the theology of the Reformers.

  124. @ Eagle:
    Eagle, this was a very good and well-thought out synopsis of what has happened. I am in total agreement with you.

  125. @ thatmom & Rafiki:

    THANK YOU! I’m not the only one who’s noticed the Biblically-named teenage boys with Marine Corps haircuts, lint-free suits, oh-so-very-shiny shoes and egos like peacocks! : )

    More seriously now – yes, there is definitely an attitude that comes with Christian debate, though usually it’s more subtle than what I wrote above. But like thatmom said, debate skills aren’t applicable to, really, MOST of your life. I know how to argue. I could push someone to the wall and go for the throat if I had or wanted to…but I don’t think it would be a very pleasant conversation and there probably wouldn’t be much goodwill on the other side of it. It’s the kind of thing that makes comment threads get very nasty very fast.

    I can only remember one time I used that kind of tactic on TWW – it was against a very hostile commenter who parked here for about a day accusing Dee of all sorts of things without producing any proof. I called him on it very sternly and – amazing! – he immediately vanished from the thread. But if I used that method here every day I’d be very unpleasant to talk to.

    Also, my mom has been pestered almost to death by debate parents to come judge even though she has no experience in debate. I think it’s very telling that when they judge the kids’ performances, they don’t bring in professional lawyers or senators…they bring in other parents who know nothing about the field, who then (of course) say that the kids were OMG SOOOO GREAT!

    I’m a musician and if I were to audition for a college music program, I would be judged by other musicians…NOT geologists, economists or random dudes off the street. So these folks, at the same time they decry “self-esteem,” are stroking their kids’ egos with the praises of friends, relatives and non-professionals who, in all honesty, may not know what they’re talking about. It’s no wonder their heads are so big.

    Debate is overrated…I took a Toastmasters class instead.

  126. @ Velvet:

    My ex-pastor (the same one who spanked his daughter 17 times in one night) didn’t know about the Cheshire home invasion either. He and his wife also forgot about the 10th anniversary of 9/11. It was a Sunday and they never even mentioned it during the service, and on top of that, the opening hymn he chose was “Day of Judgment, Day of Wonders.” In case you’re not familiar with that hymn, here’s the text:

    Day of judgment, day of wonders!
    Hark! The trumpet’s awful sound!
    Louder than a thousand thunders,
    Shakes the vast creation round!
    How the summons
    Will the sinner’s heart confound!

    See the Judge our nature wearing,
    Clothed in majesty divine!
    You who long for His appearing
    Then shall say, “This God is mine!”
    Gracious Savior,
    Own me on that day for Thine!

    At His call the dead awaken,
    Rise to life from earth and sea;
    All the powers of nature, shaken
    By His look, prepare to flee:
    Careless sinner,
    What will then become of thee?

    Horrors past imagination
    Will surprise your trembling heart,
    When you hear your condemnation,
    “Hence, accursed wretch, depart!
    Thou, with Satan
    And his angels, have your part!”

    Satan, who now tries to please you,
    Lest you timely warning take,
    When that word is past, will seize you,
    Plunge you in the burning lake:
    Think, poor sinner,
    Thy eternal all’s at stake!

    But to those who have confessed,
    Loved and served the Lord below,
    He will say, “Come near, ye blessed,
    See the kingdom I bestow:
    You forever
    Shall My love and glory know.”

    Under sorrows and reproaches,
    May this thought your courage raise!
    Swiftly God’s great day approaches,
    Sighs shall then be changed to praise:
    We shall triumph
    When the world is in a blaze.

    I was so angry that I cried. And anyone who knows me personally could tell you how big a of a deal that is.

  127. @ Eagle:

    Eagle –

    Do you remember my email response to you about what you should encourage your friend at the SGM church with? When you look at the Gospels and learn about Jesus and what Jesus does and says, you get a very different perspective of what the Church should look like. I see you are looking at the head of the Church 🙂

  128. Trina

    I edited out the word “Jesus” as stand alone. I don’t think yo umeant to do that. I hope it was OK.

  129. Brian

    John Immel is no fool. he has done more than most to stand against the abuses in churches.

    Your response is one that I see often on this blog. There are many here who have had very bad experiences with Neo-Calvinists who call themselves Reformed. This group can include people like Swanson but also those like Mahaney, Mohler, Dever, et al. It  all may seem very clear to you, but it is not to me, as well as others. 

    Instead of using language like “absurd” or “inadequate understaning” it might be helpeful to many of us if you would merely outline your differences and add the knowledge that you feel we, or another, lack. Preferably without making us feel stupid. Conversations go so much better that way.

  130. Hester

    I joined the debate club in high school and was totally a fish out of water. We were required to use debate books which set up the arguments on a particular topic. We were to use only those arguments. So, it was my turn. Suddenly I remembered a fascinating tidbit to defend my point of view which was well documented in the local newspaper. I started to share it, was told that it was not allowed and I lost the debate. I never returned. I found it too confining but I understood their purpose. I, however, had no interest in spending my free time chained to memorizing a set of preconceived arguments. You sound a lot like me.

    Thanks for your defense of me, BTW. I try not to defend myself too much because it can appear self-serving. Besides, when people get all bent out of shape, they usually call me names and I get to add the names to my running list of “What the world is saying about The Wartburg Watch.”

  131. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    To John Immel:
    I think you are going way too far in your denouncement of Reformation theology

    I agree John goes too far.

    Also, for anyone interested in the line of philosophy, RC Sproul (Sr) has an excellent overview of Western Philosophy called “The Consequence of Ideas”. It is very balanced in his presentation (the only time he mentions Luther or Calvin is not flattering, which is surprising coming from Sproul) and certainly shows the impact of Socrates/Plato/Aristotle/Other philosophers on Christian thinking.

  132. @ Jeff S:

    Jeff –

    You might want to read “Blight in the Vineyard” by John Immel. It is about the workings of the “family of churches” known as SGM. John knows what it is like to be the target of spiritual abuse . . . but maybe you are familiar with his blog and thoughts?

  133. I have a problem linking Mohler & Dever to Swanson. Yes, I am somewhat concerned about issues connected to CJ Mahaney and how others within T4G may or may not be responding. However, I am not yet ready to throw the bath water out for fear of dumping the baby as well.

    I regularly read Modern Reformation and listen to lectures, etc. from Westminster (PA and CA), a couple of PCA churches in Georgia, a couple of URC churches, and The White Horse Inn. I find D. A. Carson’s work exceptional. When I think of current expressions of Reformation theology, these are the men I think of. Swanson, Doug Wilson, Doug Phillips, and the like represent an extreme form of Calvinism that angers me (as Dee knows from a paper I wrote.)

  134. Bridget wrote:

    @ Jeff S:
    Jeff –
    You might want to read “Blight in the Vineyard” by John Immel. It is about the workings of the “family of churches” known as SGM. John knows what it is like to be the target of spiritual abuse . . . but maybe you are familiar with his blog and thoughts?

    Not at all, but I’m certainly interested.

  135. @ Rafiki:

    I didn’t post links last night because I didn’t want to give TGBTC fits. I just googled Swanson and followed the trails. This crew has a huge scary agenda and they’re using the money they make off gullible Christians to fund it. We need to keep sounding the alarm.

    Busy day today – be back later.

  136. I can’t take the craziness anymore! Homeschooling families need to stop burying their heads in the sand. I started a thread about “womb tombs” today on the homeschooling forum I go to. Two weeks ago I started a thread about the SGM lawsuit.

    Two weeks ago a friend said his family visited an SGM church. I blurted out, “No, don’t go there!” and launched into a ten minute rant about the lawsuit. The wife seemed a bit defensive (“look at all the lovely families I know that go there” – not her words, but close enough) but the husband looked up the lawsuit the next day. He said they won’t be going there after all he read. Phew!

  137. Anon 1 wrote:

    And I am convinced we cannot understand Paul until we really understand and know Jesus Christ.

    Some weeks back I heard a Bible teacher proclaim it the other way round’, that we cannot know Christ unless we look through Paul’s lens. He went on to elaborate that although the Gospels are there for our edification, they are primarily for the Jews of the old covenant and that Paul has the last word for the Gentiles in the Church age.

  138. My understanding is “absurd”?

    LOL…

    You are welcome to point out the error of my progression but I doubt you will be able to do that. The specific pedigree of the doctrinal evolution is easily verifiable. (Although tedious to write out in a blog forum)

    Augustine did get his ideas from Plotinus and Plotinus was without question a Platonist.

    Luther was an Augustinian Priest and Calvin got his root ideas from Luther … and then came Theodore Beza (Calvin’s Brother in law) and then then John Owen (European Puritan thinker) and then to Cotton Mather and Jonathan Edwards (American Puritans). I might have skipped a few historical figures but these players represent the primary intellectual leadership of the Calvinist doctrinal trend from circa 1550 to what … circa 1750? (Give or take a couple decades)
    As I said this is easily verifiable within any good history of Christian thought. Might I recommend Justo L. González- Abingdon Press- 1970- Paperback- 362 pages- ISBN 0687171830. And also Charles Freeman, Closing of the Western Mind Rise Faith and the Fall Reason. For a much more full treatment of the evolution and impact of Augustinian thought on Christianity.

    And this is hardly the only sources. A brief google search will yield thousands of results addressing the intellectual progression I am outlining.

    The current Neo Calvinist movement does have direct intellectual ties to the Australian Forum. Paul Doseh has done a great job of showing the modern historical trend is rooted in that early movement, but certainly it is not solely responsible for its current evolution and shape.

    The overarching Metaphysical highlights of Plato’s Intrinsicism and the subsequent epistemological consequence I gave are not really arguable. You are welcome to show how Special Revelation squares with Individual Reason as plumb line if you are inclined. (St. Thomas Aquinas did a fair job but still kept the underlying premise.)

    “John, you just go too far?”

    Actually no… my critique is exactly on target. I understand that it seems inflammatory and subsumes a lot of “nuance” and theological hairsplitting. I understand that people try to pick and choose elements of the Reformed Construct as it suits their purpose. I understand that the whole of Protestant Christianity comes in a few hundred flavors, each with the assertion they are free to disagree at whatever point suites their spiritual feng shui . But whatever the outcome of those parochial debates might represent, they all agree with the root premise. They all remain metaphysically Augustinian.

    Any time people agree in principle the only argument left to have is over “How Much.” The post that inspired my original comment was precisely over this question. How MUCH power does the pastorate have to compel parishioners to toe the local church theological mark? My point is and remains that this is rooted in the logical consequence of the Intrinsic Metaphysics. This foundation inevitably finds its expression in issues of Government force at the hands of a select few who presume the right to determine for all others their Special Revelation.

    Since I contend that the prime mover of human action is Man’s root ideas, I am merely observing the trend from those root ideas to men like Deaver’s specific government action. His moral justification for ruling the local congregation is exactly the same (only different by degree) for Augustine’s justifications for the Totalitarian Christian State.

    At the base premise they both agree on the principle.

    I reject the principle and therefore take to task the full theological statement that gives rise to the despotism. So when I hear the charge that “John has just gone to far…” it tells me that I’ve successfully revealed people that still insist on fidelity the root ideas while pretending that those ideas have no bearing on the overall conduct coming out of oppressive church practices.
    The dirty little secret is . . . You can have freedom and liberty or you can have Reformed Theology (of the Luther/Calvin kind)

    You can’t have both.

    And history does a great job of vindicating that assertion . . .

  139. John Immel wrote:

    You can have freedom and liberty or you can have Reformed Theology (of the Luther/Calvin kind)

    You can’t have both.

    I don’t understand why having a philosophical line to Agustin means I can’t have freedom and liberty?

  140. @ HoppyTheToad:

    Hoppy the Toad – Which homeschooling forum do you frequent? I think the homeschool boards/e-mail groups were some of the most influential ways the homeschool movement has perpetuated some of this nonsense.

  141. I believe John has issued a challenge; I shall gladly take it up. I will need to spend some time putting together a properly reasoned and documented response. Keeping in mind, though, that this is a disagreement between gentlemen and will be conducted as such. 🙂

    However, this debate should not take us away from the real issue of Keven Swanson and his “absurd” (yes, I’ve used it again) statements.

  142. I will just say: I look at theology through the lens of how I understand scripture. I do admit that I can be wrong so I do not force others to agree with me. However, my view is that the basics of Reformed theology come from Paul and Jesus, through Augustine and others. I realize Augustine got some stuff wrong, as did Luther, Calvin, and all the rest. But still, for me, fundamentally Reformed Theology offers the best systematic understanding of scripture I’ve seen.

    I don’t particularly care what Augustine, Calvin, Luther, or anyone else believed unless I see it as something that comes from the scriptures themselves. I understand that Western Philosophy has influenced the thinking off all of these men, which is fine. I believe in general revelation and that Socrates/Plato/Aristotle were all wrestling with important ideas and they had some good thoughts among them; still, scripture is the final authority on truth.

    I DO hope we can all agree that there is a big difference between “Calvinistas” and “Calvinists”. I’m OK with people disagreeing with me on Reformed theology, I just don’t want to be lumped in with folks teaching a very different kind of faith from what I believe.

  143. I find the linking of Luther and Calvin (as “Luther/Calvin”) a real stretch, but then, I grew up Lutheran and am a revert.

    I also think Plato = Augustine = Luther is a sweeping generalization, but then… that’s just me. Neoplatonism is more like it (Plotinus and others), not Plato per se.

    I could go on, but hey… it’s not really my strong suit and people have written many, *many* books about both the history of the Western church and Western civilization and philosophy.

    My take is that the reality is far more nuanced – even Augustine’s writing are far more nuanced than some here are claiming. (Not just John.)

    But again, that’s probably a debate for a different forum.

    P.S.: Love your avatar, John! (“Screw you guys, I’m goin’ home!” “Respect mah auhtori-tah!!!”)

  144. @ Muff Potter:

    My goodness! Well I guess we should just stop reading Jesus’ words altogether then, since most of us here are Gentiles !?!?

    Did you question Mr. Pastor, Muff?

  145. @ Jeff S: Ha – I’m *not in the Reformed camp, and I agree with you, Jeff S!

    So would most Catholics, I suspect. 😉 (There were some pretty important theologians and thinkers in both the Western and Eastern churches between A.D. 300 and the Renaissance, after all…)

  146. Brian

    Never fear. Your adorable blog queens will not let Swanson go quietly into that dark night!

  147. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    do not represent the Calvinism of the vast majority of folks

    But labels get associated with the PR not the silent ones. Just like the word gay over the last 50 years the term Calvinism is taking on a new meaning due to how the loud and in your face people are using it.

  148. Muff

    I agree with half of what your teacher said. Here is what I mean. Paul looks back at Jesus and emphasizes the Cross and Resurrection.He rarely, if ever, focuses on the miracles of Jesus. So, as we look at the ministry of Jesus, it is helpful to know that Paul thinks the money is on those two events. As we look at the ministry of Jesus, we then think-Why is he saying this? What does this have to do with the main things that are coming?

    I also find it helpful that to view Jesus’s ministry as the Intertestamental Period. He was bridging the gap and pointing to things that were coming. He extended the Law to show us just how impossible it is to live a perfect life. That would include things like “Moses tells you that adultery is wrong. I say if you look at a woman with lust in your heart, you have committed adultery.” Well, that screws just about every man on the planet. Why? Was He being cruel?

    I think not. If you look at His words in light of the Cross and Resurrection, Jesus is telling us it is worse than we thought but something better than we thought is coming. There is the ultimate solution! 

  149. @ dee: I think one thing that we all need to keep in mind is that there were no written Gospel’s during Paul’s time, though doubtless some of the literate early church members were trying to collect Jesus’ sayings.

    so… Paul can’t appeal to what Jesus said, so much as what he did, though clearly, the former is incorporated into the latter.

    Which makes his letters pretty remarkable, all things considered…

  150. Permission granted. It is essential to voice another perspective in the Christian arena of ideas lest the rest of the world think all Christians believe the twisted pseudodoctrine of the male supremecists.

    Julie Anne wrote:

    Debra Baker wrote:
    A scientist must back up claims with documentation
    She must cite her sources.
    Her work must be able to be replicated by others.
    A fraud will be easily exposed.
    Debra – Do I have permission to copy and paste this on Swanson’s Generations Radio facebook wall? I’ve been silent so far today. I must say something.
    BTW, this is the day Sproul is supposed to be meet with Swanson and he said he might ask him about sources. I “reminded” them both yesterday on Twitter. Just in case they forgot.

  151. @ numo:

    So right, Numo. And all that Paul did write about came from what he heard of Jesus and what the Holy Spirit revealed to him about the Jesus.

  152. dee wrote:

    Anyway you could find out if he actually went to that school since you attended the Cal Poly system?

    Probably not. I’ve been out of the loop for some 35 years.

  153. @ dee:

    Dee, I’m reading Redmond’s “The God of The Mundane” now. So far I really like it. It’s nice to have some voices saying this. Some days I wish Dorothy Sayers were still around, or at least that people were more aware of her writings. She had a lot to say about the spiritual value of ordinary work and life.

  154. Bridget wrote:

    Did you question Mr. Pastor, Muff?

    Actually, no. I remembered what the writer of Proverbs said about prudence & discretion and I thought the better of it. Teacher/Gurus will brook no dissent, especially when it comes to the hearts and minds of their teachees. Besides, I figured the guy probably has enough on his plate without getting frazzled by an old hell-bound reprobate like Muff.

  155. Debra Baker wrote:

    Permission granted. It is essential to voice another perspective in the Christian arena of ideas lest the rest of the world think all Christians believe the twisted pseudodoctrine of the male supremecists.

    Simple request for Debra Baker: Please truncate your above phrase to 140 characters or less. I’m feeling a Twitter itch with phrase 🙂

  156. I’m going to recklessly add my two (sterling) pence worth to the debate here:

    1. Undoubtedly Augustine was influenced by Platonism, probably in its Neoplatonist form. Such was the milieu of the day among educated people. However one editor of a concise book of Christian thinkers suggested that the Platonism in Augustine can be sifted out, unlike that in, say, Origen, which permeates most of the latter’s work.

    2. The real problem as far as I am concerned with Augustine’s work (where there is a problem) is that (a) he used a Latin Bible and had no knowledge of the Greek or Hebrew, and (b) was prone to flights of allegory which occasionally make one’s jaw drop. This is not to detract from his achievement – City of God is still worth reading, despite both the allegory and the occasional fanciful interpretation.

    3. While I do not revere Calvin, I will say that he gets the blame for what some of his disciples wrote or claimed. For example the idea of limited atonement is found in Owen, not Calvin. His successors may have made the doctrine of predestination too central to their systems, putting everything else out of skew.

    However I do not claim to be an expert in these areas and I will be interested to read any further remarks, comments or rejoinders from John, Brian and Jeff!

  157. “But labels get associated with the PR not the silent ones. Just like the word gay over the last 50 years the term Calvinism is taking on a new meaning due to how the loud and in your face people are using it.”

    Lynn, I have to agree. The current crop of YRR are following the typical line of Aug/Cal history. If they had the power of the magistrate today? I think we can see by the actions and words of the movement we would be in big trouble…..

    Historically, the Calvin determinist god either dies out or goes more liberal as in social Gospel types. What happened to Geneva? The Puritans? South Africa? We could go on and on. There have always been nice Calvinists, though. Roger Williams was one! Oops, he was bannished by the Puritans, though for daring to disagree. :o)

  158. @ Kolya: Nobody can escape their own time, and Augustine was no exception. Neither were Luther or Calvin.

    I’m not saying that to make “man/woman of their time” excuses; more to say that one’s society is one’s society, and there’s no getting away from that. I’m American, and even if I spent the remainder of my life in another country (English-speaking or not) and became a citizen there, I would still be an American.

    You cannot make Augustine into someone other than who he was, no matter how hard one tries. Same for Calvin – and I agree that Calvin’s followers are more to blame than Calvin himself for the (imo) emphases that characterize much of what passes for “classical” Reformed theology these days.

    It’s a bit like saying that Shakespeare is somehow responsible for post-Renaissance Western anti-semitism, since he wrote “The Merchant of Venice” and created the character of Shylock.

  159. “I think one thing that we all need to keep in mind is that there were no written Gospel’s during Paul’s time, though doubtless some of the literate early church members were trying to collect Jesus’ sayings.

    so… Paul can’t appeal to what Jesus said, so much as what he did, though clearly, the former is incorporated into the latter.”

    Excellent point!

  160. @ Kolya: Origen was pretty extreme that way, yes.

    I also believe that we tend to think of the Roman world as being culturally all of a piece, when in fact it wasn’t at all.

  161. Debra

    She likes what you had to say and she want to tweet it. Twitter limits you to 140 charcters (incudes spaces) er tweet. 

  162. “You cannot make Augustine into someone other than who he was, no matter how hard one tries. Same for Calvin – and I agree that Calvin’s followers are more to blame than Calvin himself for the (imo) emphases that characterize much of what passes for “classical” Reformed theology these days.”

    Do you think Calvins beliefs drove his behavior? He horribly micromanaged the lives of Genevans even down to the amount of courses they could have at meals . He insisted on power before he would agree to come back to Geneva. One of the reasons “man of his time” won’t work is we know there were folks willing to go to prison or give their lives to disagree with the state church in Geneva.

  163. But strangely enough, I once read that John Knox was taken aback (not sure in a positive way) because he found Calvin played boules on a Sunday!

  164. @ anon 1:
    Thanks for putting the article up, it was worth reading. I wonder if part of the problem as outlined in the text was that Augustine was somewhat removed from the original languages of the OT and NT. However it is worth noting that not all of the Christian tradition up to then was completely free from preconceptions either, for example the downplaying of marriage and the equation of sex with “the flesh” (though arguably Augustine continued the latter emphases).

  165. ” However it is worth noting that not all of the Christian tradition up to then was completely free from preconceptions either, for example the downplaying of marriage and the equation of sex with “the flesh” (though arguably Augustine continued the latter emphases).”

    Do you have any specific examples you are thinking of? Are you familiar with Augustine’s life and how he sent his long time concubine away even from her own child as he would not marry her even after becoming a believer?

  166. dee wrote:

    Debra
    She likes what you had to say and she want to tweet it. Twitter limits you to 140 charcters (incudes spaces) er tweet. 

    Yes, what Dee said 🙂 You’re good, Debra!

  167. John wrote:
    Of course these men are selective in their use of “authoritative” sources, because unless they are able to pick and choose their interpretive methodology to weave together their tapestry of Government despotism….

    My reply:
    Geneva was ready to be Protestant, but it was not ready to follow Calvin’s understanding of church practice. Bern, the city’s patron was Zwinglian in its church order; this meant that the civil government was charged with the practical oversight of church life, including discipline and liturgical ceremony. In Calvin’s view, the church must be autonomous in its own life; it should not only be free to preach the gospel but also to control its own government and worship practice.
    John Calvin: Writings on Pastoral Piety. Edited by Elsie Anne McKee, ©2001, page 6

    John wrote:
    Augustine did get his ideas from Plotinus and Plotinus was without question a Platonist.
    As I said this is easily verifiable within any good history of Christian thought. Might I recommend Justo L. González- Abingdon Press

    My reply: (quoting from the book above)
    A History of Christian Thought. Justo González, Vol 2, page 37
    In creating the world, God knew beforehand all that he was to make. This was not merely because he foresaw his creatio, but also because all things have existed eternally in the divine mind. This is Augustine’s Aexemplarism@ whose roots are to be found in Plotinus, but which is, however, very different from the doctrine of that philosopherCa difference that shows that Augustine was a aware of the distance between Christianity and pagan philosophy. According to Plotinus, the exemplary ideas were the cause of the origin of the world as an emanation from the One. According to the Christian Bishop these ideas are found in the WordCthe second person of the Trinity@ and they result in the origin of creatures only through a free decision on the part of God.

    On the Web page by John about a book he wrote: http://blightinthevineyard.com/review-by-paul-dohse/
    In fact, Calvin also coveted (sic) with the government of Geneva and had his share of heretics burned and beheaded.

    My reply:
    Servetus was the only individual put to death for his religious opinions in Geneva during Calvin’s lifetime, at a time when executions of this nature were a commonplace elsewhere.
    Futhermore, the trial, condemnation and execution (including the selection of the particular mode of execution) of Servetus were entirely the work of the city council, at a period in its history when it was particularly hostile to Calvin.
    A Life of John Calvin, Alister E. McGrath,©1990, page115-116

    This will conclude my response to John.

  168. Brian, You are quoting Reformed history. It is much more nuanced than that. Just one example…there is documented PROOF that Servetus’ burning was premeditated by Calvin. It is as clear as day as he wrote in a letter that if Servetus ever came to Geneva he would not leave alive.

    There is a whole back and forth on the Calvin/petit council dealing with this issue. Calvin wanted a beheading because a beheading signified civil crime not an ecclesiastical heresy crime. Now why would he lobby for that? Some say it is because it is nicer way to die and Calvin was being compassionate. As to Calvin having nothing to do with the trial, his right hand man handled most of it. There is a reason. Quite a few were not pleased with the Servetus situation. We forget that years before Servetus sent Calvin some of Calvin’s writings with his “corrections” in the margin. This infuriated Calvin and that is when he wrote his friend that Servetus would never leave Geneva alive if he showed up. He had it in for him. Servetus passed through Geneva after fleeing France and on his way to Northern Italy. He went to hear Calvin preach and was recognized and arrested.

    Servetus was not a citizen of Geneva and the actual Genevan law at the time called for bannishment not….. burning/beheading.

    You are discounting the other imprisonments,tortures, bannishments and drownings on Calvins watch as he micromanaged Genevans. As if our standard for judging a tyrant is by burning.

    If you can show any documented proof in an archived letter, council documents (which they kept) that Calvin went to the mat to argue for bannishing Servetus instead of burning/beheading, now is the time to do so. History has nothing. In fact, it is just the opposite…it is documented it was premeditated by Calvin himself. Calvin was a tyrant.

  169. To anon 1:
    Here is a bit more from the citation I made:

    The trial and execution of Michael Servetus as a heretic have, more than any other event, coloured Calvin’s posthumous reputation. It is not entirely clear why scholars have singled out the execution of Servetus as somehow more notable or significant than the mass executions carried out within Germany after the abortive Peasants’ War (1525) and after the siege of Münster (1534). . .Nor is it entirely clear why the affair should be thought of as demonstrating anything especially monstrous concerning Calvin. His tacit support for the capital offenses such as heresy which he (and his contemporaries) regarded as serious makes him little more than a child of his age, rather than an outrageous exception to its standards. . . To target him in this way — when the manner of his involvement was, to say the least, oblique — and overlook the much greater infamy of other individuals and institutions raises difficult questions concerning precommitments of his critics.
    A Life of John Calvin, Alister E. McGrath,©1990, page 115-116

    This weekend I will research the remainder of what you wrote.

  170. @ Brian Grawburg:
    I think the reason many people get unhappy about what Calvin did is because there’s some evidence to suggest that Calvin lied about his intentions to get Servetus within his grasp.

  171. I’m sorry I missed this earlier, but if it were me writing this, I would have been more blunt: “Kevin Swanson is a liar. Why Christians shouldn’t lie to score political / social / doctrinal points.” But that’s just me.

    However, this does bring up a point I know I’ve made here before but is worth making again. And that is: “If you’re going to tell lies to me about something that is objectively, provably false [in this case, so-called ‘womb babies,’ which flies in the face of all evidence from anatomy and physiology], then why should I believe you on things where you’re asking me to take you on faith?” At least for me, the answer is, “Of course I shouldn’t believe you, because you lied to me.”

    Moreover, in Kevin Swanson’s case, I’m sure he’s going to continue to compound his lying lies because, well, that’s how guys like him roll. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if he doubles down on the lies.

    Signed, a never-married, not celibate, job-holding, taxpaying, voting, pants-wearing ex-church-attending middle-aged feminist woman who calls her parents every day. (So much for *family-destroying*, Kevin Swanson. Pfffth.)

    NB. I see you all are collecting stories about singles and the church. I really don’t think I have anything to contribute to the discussion, except to state that the church treats single adults as fifth wheels, not useful for anything except, PLEASE, pay your tithing while we praise the joys of marriage and children over and over and over again in one sermon series after another. OK, that was a long sentence. Anyway, I think the church, in general, is a hostile environment for singles in general since it is designed to slot people into the marriage & family continuum. If you’re not interested in marriage and family, then you’re not going to fit. That is all.

  172. @ Brian Grawburg:
    This point has been made elsewhere, I think. One writer noted that Thomas More (now regarded as saintly, and certainly a man of principle) was no less ferocious as regards heresy and heretics than Calvin or others. Perhaps More is looked upon more kindly because he stood by his principles even though it cost him his death.

    I stand open to correction here, but I believe Calvin, although not sorry to have Servetus put to death, was not the one who proposed to have him burnt.

    As regards that unfortunate term “spirit of the age” it should also be noted that in Geneva some early Anabaptists were persecuted to death, including death by drowning, for (as I understand it) theological offences rather than capital crimes against people or property. And of course the Roman Catholic church has a similar record from Spain, both under Torquemada and during the Counter-Reformation.

    But to those who say that religion causes such cruelty, one only has to point out the even greater sea of blood spilt during similar persecutions in the 20th century, which were mostly about non-religious belief.

    Not that any of this is an excuse!

  173. All of our discussion about what Calvin did or did not do, is actually a bit of a red herring (IMHO). We should, instead, try to keep focused on primary doctrinal issues. So for me, I am probably out of the conversation.

    As a Presbyterian I have a different view of baptism than do my many Baptist friends. On a blog such as this a discussion of baptism (who, how, & why) would not be productive and I probably would not say much. However, if the topic becomes something such as justification, the atonement, the deity of Christ, or the resurrection of Jesus I will weigh in quite vocally.

    I will also chime in when the topic is Vision Forum and The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy. That one is guaranteed to evoke a response.

  174. “It is not entirely clear why scholars have singled out the execution of Servetus as somehow more notable or significant than the mass executions carried out within Germany after the abortive Peasants’ War (1525) and after the siege of Münster (1534). .”

    Perhaps it is because there is a systematic theology called “Calvinism” but there is not one called “Munsterism” or a Peasants War ST? I do not find it odd at all that folks want to know about the person an entire belief system is named after.

    So,it is a red herring to discuss the behavior and beliefs of someone whose ST is believed and practiced by many? That, I will never understand. But it is following the trend of history. And I understand it is uncomfortable so it is easier to try and make folks out to be silly who bring it up. And there is a lot of confusing history on this. Many archives did not really open up until after WW2 when more and more researchers from the states went over to do research. The victors always write the history and the researchers/scholars (best ones are secular) dive into the archives when they are long gone.

  175. @ Anon 1:
    It is a read hearing if we are following Christ, not Calvin. That is, if we believe that this ST is the theology of scripture, merely taught by Calvin, but not originating with him.

    I do wish that “Calvinism” did not bear the name of the man, but I was convinced of its doctrines from scripture, not by reading Calvin.

  176. Keep in mind that, like Luther, Calvin did not want a denomination/belief system/etc. named after him, anymore than did Jacob Arminius. My systematic theology is not Calvinism but Covenant Theology. It so happens that the moniker applied to the theology of the post-Luther Reformation is Calvinism. I would much prefer the description to be something like this: Reformational theology as initially systematized by John Calvin and summarized in such creeds and confessions as the Heidelberg, Belgic, Dordt, and Westminster. All this with the full understanding that none of these writings are scripture and as such are not on equal footing with the 66 books of the Bible. No “Calvinist” thinks that John Calvin ever spoke ex cathedra.

    Calvinism is a convenient shorthand description for a theological system that stresses: the sovereignty of God in all things; the centrality and necessity of the Cross; and the belief that the entire Bible is the history of redemption.

  177. Anon 1 wrote:

    . . . the researchers/scholars (best ones are secular)

    I must disagree most strenuously. There is, in reality, no such things as a “secular scholar” since everyone comes to a subject with some form of bias. Far too often, those individuals who claim they are unbiased are operating under the presuppositions that there is no God, or if there is one, he/it did/does not intervene in history, the supernatural is not possible, there is no ultimate truth, and if the person of Jesus was an actual historical person he most certainly did not die on the cross as a propitiation for the sins of mankind.

  178. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    No “Calvinist” thinks that John Calvin ever spoke ex cathedra.

    But some do speak like it at times.

    For example, it’s always shocking to me when RC Sproul has anything negative to say about Luther or Calvin because he brings them up with almost awe every time he preaches. I give him the benefit of the doubt that he really doesn’t worship these guys (he is one of my favorite teachers), but sometimes I do get uncomfortable that he doesn’t make clear the difference between scripture and the words of Luther/Calvin/Edwards.

  179. Bridget wrote:

    I think it’s more likely that you, he, and I will sup at the same table in the future!

    Thanks Bridget and I hope you’re right. At the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin is purported to have quipped:

    “…We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately…”

    Permit me to modify the quip for those of us (and I know I’m not alone) who have signed our own declaration of independence from large swathes of Western theology:

    “…Burn brightly together we must for conscience sake and for fellow humans. For if the Almighty is indeed an angry magistrate who demands satisfaction from innocent blood, then most assuredly we shall all burn separately…”

  180. @ Brian Grawburg:

    . . . the researchers/scholars (best ones are secular)

    “I must disagree most strenuously. There is, in reality, no such things as a “secular scholar” since everyone comes to a subject with some form of bias. Far too often, those individuals who claim they are unbiased are operating under the presuppositions that there is no God, or if there is one, he/it did/does not intervene in history, the supernatural is not possible, there is no ultimate truth, and if the person of Jesus was an actual historical person he most certainly did not die on the cross as a propitiation for the sins of mankind.”
    ***********

    “Far too often” makes it sound like it’s chronic. How can you or anyone possibly know what secular scholars in general think think about God? It’s deeply personal, sometimes beyond words.

    I tend to think that a religious scholar’s top priority is to protect his/her doctrine. Research and analysis takes place, but whatever conclusions are reached must not comromise doctrine. If necessary, the information which the conclusions are built on will bend to accomodate the doctrine.

    I have more confidence in “secular” scholars because they don’t have quite the rigid mesh to filter information through. The concept of “God” is all-important. It is a huge influence to thought and behavior. Just as someone can manipuate and be manipulated by others when the “God” card is played, I think the same thing can happen in scholarship, in one’s thought processes. I think facts and conclusions from observable data are too easily manipulated by the concept of “God”.

    Instead of seeing the data for what it is. God is still God, regardless of the data.

    I know i haven’t fleshed out my ideas here very far.

  181. At the end of the day there is thankfully still a free marketplace, or open arena, of ideas in most democracies. So someone may produce research with a hidden agenda but others are free to examine that research and test its claims. This should be paramount in any community – adding the word “God” to research doesn’t automatically sanctify its claims. Theology must be tested by the Scriptures, and science by work in its own field.

    All scholars are fallible, sinful human beings, but I think some Christians go too far in rejecting scholarship they don’t like because of this. The argument cuts both ways, after all. The idea that “it depends on your point of view” (as I believe is adduced by some Christians) is ironically one that post-modernists also espouse.

  182. Eagle, I think we may be talking about a different set of covenants here! (I can see the word “covenant” is going to end up going the way of so many other words nowadays, ie debased because given too many different meanings, if we’re not careful!).

    But I’ll let Brian put his view/explanation for that one.

  183. Wow, Eagle, tell it like it is!! Adding rules and regs to the laws of God is what the Pharisees did. The Pharisees were the experts at teaching how to worship God. But Jesus tore them a new one. If Jesus was on Earth now…oh, but wait, the Body of Christ is…he would admonish the Covenant Theologians just like Eagle did, calling them vipers who shut up the kingdom of God by their rules.

  184. I must disagree most strenuously. There is, in reality, no such things as a “secular scholar” since everyone comes to a subject with some form of bias. Far too often, those individuals who claim they are unbiased are operating under the presuppositions that there is no God, or if there is one, he/it did/does not intervene in history, the supernatural is not possible, there is no ultimate truth, and if the person of Jesus was an actual historical person he most certainly did not die on the cross as a propitiation for the sins of mankind.”

    What I meant is that they are not looking to affirm a position. They focus on the historical evidence, connect disparate dots that most positional researchers would never follow and the result is that usually present both sides of an event or issue that does not look so innocent or great when they are done. :o)

    Personally, I think we should read all sorts of authors from different politico/religious tradition if we are interested in a specific subject or person in history. And read around that person/subject in the same era. Looking at it from all angles gives us the best understanding. History is never as cut and dried or black and white as it is presented by some. I guess I should say I would hope we can read beyond the Evangelical/Reformed ghetto when it comes to history.

    A great book with documented archival info on some of Calvin’s shenanigans like ordering green wood for Servetus is from a “Christian” named Leonard Verduin called The Reformers and Their Step Children. It was researched and written with a grant from the “Calvin Foundation”. Warning, you will need to do some Swiss German translating.

  185. anon 1 wrote:

    Personally, I think we should read all sorts of authors from different politico/religious tradition if we are interested in a specific subject or person in history. And read around that person/subject in the same era. Looking at it from all angles gives us the best understanding. History is never as cut and dried or black and white as it is presented by some. I guess I should say I would hope we can read beyond the Evangelical/Reformed ghetto when it comes to history.
    A great book with documented archival info on some of Calvin’s shenanigans like ordering green wood for Servetus is from a “Christian” named Leonard Verduin called The Reformers and Their Step Children. It was researched and written with a grant from the “Calvin Foundation”. Warning, you will need to do some Swiss German translating.

    While I agree that it is a “nice to know” how Christianity got to where it is today, or to put it in another way, why do people believe what they believe, the men in history are dead. Why should we really be concerned with what dead people thought in a different era? For some, it has significance. For others, such as myself, it is only for the purpose of finding out why Christianity got so screwed up in the first place.

    I think, overall, that we read way too many books. These books tend to re-direct us away from the LIVING Word of God, who is Eternal. We begin believing the books, rather than the only book, that used to be called the Good Book. You know, that dusty thing in the corner of the book shelf, the one that sits next to your favorite romance novels, or sports magazines?

    Too many people are buying books, making the author rich, and some of these rich authors are preachers.

    Isaiah 55:1 (KJV)
    Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.

    Free is my favorite four letter word.

    Time and time again, Jesus pointed us to “The Law and The Prophets”, as it is in those books that reveal him. That is the book that he used to reveal himself to his disciples after he rose from the dead. That is what he used to Open the Eyes of the Blind.

    Christendom has somehow moved away from the only book, and are consumed in other books, making what was intended to be free, come at a price at amazon.com

  186. @ anon 1:
    When I was a scholar in the university and a Christian, I did not think of myself as a “Christian scholar”, but as a scholar. That is, I was not doing research from a particularly “Christian” perspective, but from the perspective of trying to find scientific facts that would support a better understanding of the world. And, while I believed in God and in the person of Jesus Christ and his redemption of me, I was not being a scholar for the purpose of proving anything particular about God or any principle derived from scripture or my understanding thereof. So, if there is to be a distinction, I would have been a “Christian secular scholar” or a “secular scholar who is a Christian”, since my research was not particularly directed at exposition of some supposedly “Christian” concept.

    I suspect that the majority of scientists who were minted (obtained their Ph.D. or M.D.) prior to 1980 or so were Christians. It was that way at the two universities where I taught, one religiously affiliated and one a state school. Of course, that was before the latest rounds of attack upon all things intellectual by the religious right.

  187. Arce

    I have come to believe that all truth is God’s truth. 1+1=2 is as much of an insight into the wrold God has given us as a lecture on theology.A true scholar seeks truth and does not fear the outcome. We study the world that the Father gave us and it is marvelous in its complexities.  

  188. The problem with the hyper-Cals is this: the emphasis on the Sovereignty of God is misplaced and extended into a hyper-predestination, and eliminates God as one who loves his creation and all of his creatures, and, instead, has created some for the explicit purpose of having some to send to a predetermined eternal torment. It is a god that I cannot worship or serve, because it is an evil and tyrannical god that is more satanic than godly.

  189. @ Jeff S: Which Sproul – Sr. or Jr.?

    There are *always* people who think so-and-so spoke ex cathedra, or the equivalent… no matter what their beliefs, religious or political.

    Brian G: No such thing as “secular” scholars? I am feeling confused by the way your comment is phrased (seriously). “Secular” does not equal “atheist”; very far from it, in fact, though some people who are scholars in the secular world are atheists.

  190. @ dee:
    Dee, I do not disagree. All creation is God’s truth (note small t). But theologians believe they are talking about God’s TRUTH, as do many pastors, etc. So doing science is seeking truth b/c it is an attempt to better understand His creation. But that does not mean it is sectarian or “Christian” per se, because it does not seek to advance a particularly “Christian” idea or issue, like whether birth control causes the death of little babies who end up in a uteris wall.

  191. “Too many people are buying books, making the author rich, and some of these rich authors are preachers”

    Well Ed, You are going to have to give me a break. History is one of my dearest loves. Some folks garden and do sports, I read. One thing I do NOT read at all anymore are books by celebrity pastors unless I am analyzing it for some reason and even then, I never buy them. I do not read any books to understand or know Jesus unless it is something to give me another view of context. About the only book written by a preacher (and I have read tons in the past including most of Pipers) that I give any thumbs up to is JC Ryles Holiness. He was the Bishop of Liverpool about 100 years ago. :o)

    Reading the differences in early Eastern Christianity vs the Christianity that spread through the West has been a real eye opener for me. I think it is worthy of a look, myself. The problem with debating theology at all is that we all bring some interpretive filter to the table. So debating scripture can be a big waste of time if one believes in a determinist God speaking to one who believes in a non determinist God.

    Personally, I have decided not to view Christianity as really beginning or defined through ST in the 16th century and unfortunately, much of Western Christianity does. When I was a kid, I once asked my mom if we were protestant. She said, tongue in cheek, she did not know of anything we were protesting. Now I understand that comment.

    But I do view history as important in understanding why things are as they are today.

  192. Arce, I hear ya and thanks for clarifying. I did not explain myself well at all. There seems to be a strain in certain segments of Christendom who write history from their perspective. All “sides” do it. But the “Mongeristic” folks have it down pat the best. I will read them but all but trust the ones the most who are not making their Christian sect bonafides a factor.

    One Author who is very good at being upfront about his beliefs but seems to be as balanced as possible is Paul Johnson.

  193. Anon1,

    As one who loves to read anything relating to history, do you recommend any specific books that describe Early Eastern Christianity vs Western Christianity?

    I have a few books that go into this subject, but it is far more a broad general overlook rathern than a specific analysis…

    Thanks for your help!

  194. Eagle wrote:

    Christian history teaches that you have the Old Covenenat in the OT which man failed to live up to. My understanding is that the law was used to show man’s guilt and sin. However, in the Old Covenent you had prophets and others (from my understanding) pointing to the Messiah and A New Covenant that was to come. This is why Isiah, and Elijah were so crucial. So then the incarnation happened and God supposedly became flesh. This led to the New Covenent..when God was sacrified it created a NEW and FINAL convenant that was good for all.

    Eagle, this IS what Covenent Theology teaches.

    So now you have the Neo-Cals (or Nazis as one can call them…. ) come on the stage and introduce New Covenants. In these Covenents the following is being done:
    1. Coveneant between Member and Pastor
    2. Coveneant between Church and Member
    3. Coveneant between Member and Elders

    This is not a part of Covenent Theology (even if a lot of Calvinistas do it)

  195. dee wrote:

    I have come to believe that all truth is God’s truth. 1+1=2 is as much of an insight into the wrold God has given us as a lecture on theology.A true scholar seeks truth and does not fear the outcome. We study the world that the Father gave us and it is marvelous in its complexities.

    This is the historical position of the church, though it seems a lot of folks today don’t seem to think so. RC Sproul (Sr) agrees with you quite strongly, though!

  196. numo wrote:

    Which Sproul – Sr. or Jr.?

    Sr.

    Jr. is a whole different ballgame.

    RC Sproul Sr. sometimes goes overboard with his love for the Reformers, but I think in general he is a wonderful Bible teacher even if I don’t always agree with everything he teaches. Jr. scares me to death, and I wonder how his father allows himself to be associated in ministry. I do not give money to Ligonier because Jr. works there as much as I’d like to support Sr. (I listen to his sermons a lot and feel it would only be right to contribute back, but I can’t in good concious do so).

  197. Seeker, one reason I hate to recommend books to read for something specific is because I often disagree with parts of books, the author on conclusions even if the history is interesting. So it is never a recommendation on it being an absolute truth. Some that I have read recently that are very interesting from an early church perspective:

    Justo Gonzales The Story of Christianity, Vol 1 and 2
    Thomas Cahill (gift of the jews, middle ages, the world before and after jesus)
    David Bercott (Dictionary of early Christian beliefs, Real Heretics please stand up, Will theologians sit down)
    Irenaeus–anything
    Making of a Christian Empire: Lactantius and Rome

    Oh there are a ton more that I cannot even think of….so much to read so little time!

  198. “So it is never a recommendation on it being an absolute truth”

    I hear ya…I will wade through them carefully..

    Appreciate the recommendations..I have read a bit through Gonzales before, but need to check out more of the others..

    Thanks again!

  199. yay, glad to see you’re back Southwestern Discomfort. I echo your thoughts on singles & the church, 100%.

  200. Anon1 and Ed Chapman, I hear you both. At the end of the day our main resource for learning about God should always be the Bible. At the same time some books can give us an insight into why people think, or have thought, the way they do, although again any claims need to be tested against Scripture.

  201. Elastigirl, your comment on Friday, Feb 8 at 4:34 pm, spot on! This why I distrust authority so much.

  202. I’d like to know a whole lot more about early Christianity, and a lot more about Revelation too, but I cannot possibly fit any reading into my schedule at this time. I work a full-time job, I’m sure you all do too, that’s why I hoped that the church people would help lead me out of this pit of knowledge. But I find that no one can do that for me, because I have to be aware of their filters, and that takes too much energy. I can barely. Keep up with the postings here. How do you people do it? Dee, I especially have sympathy for you. I can’t keep track of my own email, and that’s only my stuff!

  203. I think scripture is the sole authority concerning God’s redemptive plan for/relationship to humanity. It is not the only source of revelation about God, and scripture itself points to both general knowledge of God and experience as a teacher. All truth we glean, however we get it, is truth that tells us something about the nature of God.

    Regarding past theologians, my only interest in them is to see if their insights were influenced away from scripture or toward scripture. Knowing their biases might show how error crept in. But I hold to no believe because a historical figure held it.

    I think books are important, depending on what kinds of books we are talking about. Scripture must be interpreted within a lot of context, and we also must understand that our English translations are interpretations in themselves done by men with bias. Books that help us understand the context better and understand scripture are good for us. Books that make cases for consistent systematic theology are good for us, as long as we realize they are not scripture unto themselves.

    I think particularly about David Instone-Brewer’s work on divorce and remarriage. He takes a subject on which the plain reading of our English translations seem unclear, even contradictory, and shows us the context in which it all makes sense. Those are good books.

    Finally, books written on topics that scripture does not claim exclusive domain (mental health, for example) are good books and should not be ignored (otherwise you get stuff like the travesty that is Noithetic Counseling)

  204. Jeff S

    Well, if one keeps probing hard enough, one might find that Sproul Senior agrees with me that clam chowder is perverted if one adds tomatoes.

  205. dee wrote:

    Jeff S
    Well, if one keeps probing hard enough, one might find that Sproul Senior agrees with me that clam chowder is perverted if one adds tomatoes.

    Of course he would. Such is the degree of his adherence to orthodoxy

  206. Jeff S wrote:

    dee wrote:
    Jeff S
    Well, if one keeps probing hard enough, one might find that Sproul Senior agrees with me that clam chowder is perverted if one adds tomatoes.
    Of course he would. Such is the degree of his adherence to orthodoxy

    Naturally, the guy is so old he likely deems tomatoes poison because they’re a member of the deadly nightshade family.

  207. Seeker, Did you read this series?

    the prof who wrote it sounds like he is planning to write a book on this theme of what early Christians believed. His view is that the Augustinian exegesis (determinist God, man has no volition, etc) was novel at the time and no where to be found before the 4th century.

    http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/page/2/

    Scroll down for whole series

    We need a book like this that focuses on that specific segment of history and doctrinal beliefs. I hope more scholars will take it up …..from all sides.

  208. @ Jeff & Dee:

    “Well, if one keeps probing hard enough, one might find that Sproul Senior agrees with me that clam chowder is perverted if one adds tomatoes.”

    But of course. Any New Englander could have told you that. ; )

  209. dee wrote:

    Well, if one keeps probing hard enough, one might find that Sproul Senior agrees with me that clam chowder is perverted if one adds tomatoes.

    Ah Dee! We’d be at logger heads with clam chowder too. Gimme Manhattan style clam chowder anyday. I loathe butter and cream-sauce dishes of any type.

  210. Muff

    I beg to differ. Great clam chowder by old New England traditionalists is not made with a heavy based cream. The purists like it thin, made with milk. However, butter is there as well!

  211. @ Dee:

    “The purists like it thin, made with milk.”

    I’m going to put my life at risk (if there’s any Rhode Islanders here) and say yes, milk or cream. NOT WATER. Please dear God not water.

  212. @ numo:
    Agree. However, if someone is an atheist in the likes of Hitchens and Dawkins he may be secular but hardly objective. That’s what I was thinking. I should have used a different phrase.

  213. I have been a reader for about six months and this is my first comment. This whole birth control thing just burns my biscuits! My stomach turned as I watched the video clips. My daughter was folding laundry in the background as I watched and she quoted these immortal words from the character Rachel on the sitcom “Friends”, “No uterus? No opinion!” It broke the tension for me and made me laugh so hard I just had to share.
    Keep up the good work TWW. Your blog and the stories of others posted here are helping me on my journey of healing.

  214. Re Covenant Theology
    Rather than ramble right now I will put together a short and succinct explanation tomorrow and try and post it Sunday evening. Covenant theology has NOTHING to do with pastor/members, etc. It is ALL about God and man.

  215. I’m not clear on the exact definition of “Covenant Theology” but I do know enough to know Brian is correct. It is not about church covenants, memberships agreements/vows, etc. and probably any attempt to make it extend that far would be illegitimate. Though if anyone was going to do it, it would be the modern Neo-Calvinists (see Mary Kassian’s attempt in her Sex in the Shadowlands post to compare the Father-Son relationship to the pastor-parishioner relationship for a parallel example of an idea taken way too far).

  216. @ Diane:

    The true Southern phrase is: “Bless his little heart.” The “little” is key. It means one needs the blessing to enlarge his heart for people, a need for a God to impose a little grace on the little-hearted person so they won’t be so mean or evil.

  217. @ numo:
    That Paul did not have the Gospels, including not only the miracles but the teachings, makes problematical using Paul to interpret Jesus and limiting our understanding of Jesus to what Paul wrote. Some people extrapolate from Paul’s writings in ways that contradict the teachings of Jesus; rather than interpreting Paul in ways consistent with His teaching.

    Any theology that empowers a pastor to control and discipline a congregation is contrary to the specific teachings of Jesus.

  218. Somewhere above, there was a reference to “absolute truth”.

    That is a problem. Too many pastors act like they have the absolute truth about God and His will. NO ONE on earth, future, past or present (since the ascension) has the absolute truth. And we all should have the humility, in any statement we make about God, to admit we “see through a glass darkly” to quote one who also did not have the absolute truth, even though some pastors teach that he did.

  219. @ Arce~

    “@ Diane:

    The true Southern phrase is: “Bless his little heart.” The “little” is key. It means one needs the blessing to enlarge his heart for people, a need for a God to impose a little grace on the little-hearted person so they won’t be so mean or evil.”

    Thanks. I forgot the little. It’s not just bless her heart…but bless her little heart. lol Got it. So no true pity or sympathy is involved.

    So, when one Christian woman says to another at their local bible study…Oh look, that poor woman looks like something the cat dragged in, bless her little heart…that means she really needs a little help from God for her little heart so she doesn’t look so offensive to the ones who have had lots of help from God, have bigs hearts and look amazing. Or something like that.

  220. 56 years a Baptist, mostly SBC wrote:

    Somewhere above, there was a reference to “absolute truth”.

    I’m not saying anyone other than God knows the absolute truth only that there such a thing as absolute truth. On a practical level I mean , “can truth be known and is such a thing as wrong and right”? The answer is yes. Truth, real truth, is not relative. It is NEVER right, that is, it is always wrong, to fly an airplane into the side of a building and kill thousands of people.

    Depending upon the responses I may have much more to say about this topic.

  221. 56 years a Baptist, mostly SBC wrote:

    Any theology that empowers a pastor to discipline a congregation is contrary to the specific teachings of Jesus.

    Would you elaborate, please? Do you mean that church discipline of any form is not allowed? Can the elders disfellowship me for unrepentant sin (i.e. adultery)? How about openly promoting heretical doctrine (i.e. modalism or Arianism)?

  222. @ Brian Grawburg:
    Jesus said that none of his followers should be superior to any others. The congregation should be responsible and in charge, not someone with a title. Jesus basically said that all are to be servants, not leaders.

  223. anon 1 wrote:

    Oh, Will Durant’s series on Civilization.

    Thanks anon 1, I’m gonna have to give Durant’s works a look see. You’re the second person now I’ve heard a recommendation from. I do remember one of Durant’s aphorisms appearing on the screen in the opening sequence of Mel Gibson’s film Apocalypto.

  224. So Paul’s instructions to Timothy about pastoring, and the qualifications of an overseer/bishop/elder are meaningless unless they understood within the context of a pastor/elder shepherding the flock. Misuse and abuse of the pastoral role does not negate the principle. My pastor is not superior to me any more than my employer (I am retired, so it’s past tense) was superior to me. Nonetheless, I voluntarily submit myself to their discipline and agree to abide by the rules of the church just as I did the company I worked for.

    Jesus was both a servant and a leader. They are not mutually exclusive.

    A plurality of elders is absolutely necessary to mitigate against abuse. Of course, that does not always guarantee it won’t happen.

  225. Brian

    Here is my problem with “heresy.” There are some out there who would claim if I do not buy comp theology or a young earth or a certain form of church polity or Calvinism, that I am skating close to heresy. Obviously, I reject both modalims or Arianism but neither of those belief system invade most of today’s evangelcial churches unless you are buddies with TD Jakes which a few Calvinistas are.

    Unrepentant sin such as adultery is usually dealt with within churches with which I have been associated. However, if one were to exploe some of the disciplinary actions of today’s Calvinista churches, they tend to deal with issues such as “sinfully craving answers”, questioning the pastor’s actions in a church, disagreeing with a change in polity, disagreement when a church switches suddenly from one form of evnagelical theology to Neo-Calvinism, etc. Andy Davis called two wonderful friends “wicked and unregenerate” when he took over his church because they disagreed when he said that women could no longer be deacons. That is one of the new breed of patriarchs-my way or the highway.

    If you sat behind my computer and looked at my emails you would find that discipline for things other than adultery appear to be common with the new form of 9 Marks/Calvinista “We hold the keys of authority” sin sniffing autocrats. That is the problem and that is what we deal with on this blog. You do not have to worry that Arce or anyone else is pointing to letting unrepentant adultery or Arianism invade the church.

  226. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    So Paul’s instructions to Timothy about pastoring, and the qualifications of an overseer/bishop/elder are meaningless unless they understood within the context of a pastor/elder shepherding the flock.

    I would contend that much of these debates and harangues over Church polity are not much older than 40 yrs. Arising mainly from a resurgence of New Testament Biblical fundamentalism which I would argue began in the early 1970s, they are relatively new in Christendom. Here’s what E.W. Bullinger, an eminent 19th cent. Biblical scholar (hardly a liberal) had to say in the Companion Bible on the pastoral epistles:

    …To Timothy were given the earliest instructions for orderly arrangement in the church, these instructions being of the simplest nature, and, as Dean Alford well observes with regard to the Pastoral Epistles as a whole, the directions given “are altogether of an ethical, not of an hierarchical kind“. These directions afford no warrant whatever for the widespread organizations of the “churches” as carried on to-day. (Bullinger p1799)…

  227. @Dee
    T.D. Jakes? I am impressed you know his background. 🙂

    Not sure I’d put 9 Marks in the same camp as VF, Sproul Jr., and Swanson.

    As you are probably aware, the late Roger Nicole was not a complimentarian, and yet was a highly regarded Calvinist. I have my doubts Andy Davis would have called him “wicked and unregenerate”. I heard a great debate/discussion between Tim Keller and Ligon Duncan on the issue of women deacons. Keller holds the position than as long as they are not ordained in the fashion of the elders they can hold the position. Duncan was not fully sympathetic but neither did he dismiss the idea.

    I am opposed to women as pastors/elders but hardly think I can be called patriarchial.

    I certainly oppose the idea of “heresy hunting”, but by the same token I’m very intolerant of a loosey-goosey approach to doctrine. Doctrine DOES matter.

  228. Brian

     “I have my doubts Andy Davis would have called him “wicked and unregenerate”.

    Never ever doubt your adorable blog queen! We have it in writing from Andy himself. And wrote a couple of blog posts on it. Oh yeah, I happen to know the people involved and serve with them in ministry. 

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2011/12/07/fbc-durham’s-andy-davis-electing-a-woman-deacon-is-“wicked”/

    So, here is my question. Why do you have your doubts. Is Davis somehow in a special category? And why would you be surprised that i know about TD Jakes. I could even quote some stuff from his “Woman, Thous Art Loosed” series. I listen to everyone so that i can understand the controversy.
    My favorite TD Jakes line? “We are all leaking issues.” And I am NOT a modalist.

  229. Eagle, I have never heard the term “Covenent Theology” referred to as having anything to do with entering a covenent with a pastor, or a church, or whatever. I know churches do this, but that is not what “Covenent Theology” means.

  230. Anon1,

    Thanks for the link…Have it bookmarked and will check it out soon! I agree, I think more scholars should look at this on all sides..

  231. Seeker, I found this quite by accident. The video is quite interesting and needs to be fact checked. I am just passing it on. I have never heard of these folks and have no idea who they are. So this is NOT a recomendation. But the historical quotes are very interesting and I plan on checking most of them out. Some I had already read. I tend on the side that Augustine did introduce SOME Gnostic doctrine.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhLF-llpFX0

    “Did Augustine Corrupt the Church with Gnostic Doctrine?”

  232. Eagle, Back in around 2008 or so a blogger wrote about Ligonier's financials and mismanagement. (Living high off the hog) and was subsequently sued by Ligonier (if they could find him). It was such a new thing, that the Orlando Sentinel and USA Today reported on it. Glenn Reynolds wrote on it. The problem was that Ligonier filed a suit but then lied to donors about it. Then it was reported on with case number, etc. Guess who was running Ligonier (besides Sproul's incompetent son in law, Tim Dick)….John Duncan, Ligon's brother. Then some donors went to the Presbyterian ecclesiastical folks for discipline and found out Sproul's church was independent all the time! All that time they all thought he was part of the Presbyterian structure as he alluded to. The man is brill. I am telling you. Had all his bases covered. These guys are as thick as thieves.

  233. Brian

    “Doctrine does matter.”

    A couple of years ago I would have agreed wholeheartedly with you without exception until I met the Young Earth doctrince enforcers.They effectively argue your point. Yet they do great damage to the faith.

    Now I have  to say “Which doctrine?” “How do you choose?” “How do you enforce it?” The word “doctrine” has gotten real fuzzy. It is now usually interpreted to mean “my pet doctrine” which rarely has anything to do with the great truths found in the creeds. The word “doctrine” is now overused just like the word “gospel” and “biblical.” Both of those also get translated to mean whatever the biases of the individual making the claims is.

  234. Eagle wrote:

    Jeff S…is this something being redefined? I’ve heard of Covenant Theology in the context of contracts, obedience, etc… I stumbled across this when I was looking into the Evangelical Free and noticed the links they had with the Acts 29 network.

    I don’t think it’s being redefined- I think you have been misled or misunderstood what the term means. Acts29 and other churches (and my coworkers homeowners association) all have membership covenants, but this is a distinct practice from adhering to “Covenant Theology”. Covenant Theology is more along the lines of (but not limited to) beliefs about eschatology (for example, Dispensationalism is in direct conflict with Covenant Theology) and the nature of the Old and New Covenants in scripture (as you brought up). A discussion about infant baptism vs. believers baptism is a lot more related to Covenant Theology than membership contracts and church authority.

    As for why all the flowery language, you should understand that Covenant Theology is basically a systematic theology, so you could write books on the subject trying to address everything it touches; it’s not a simple subject. I understand about not trusting Ligonier (as you know I am a fan of Sproul Sr.’s teaching- I don’t donate to Ligonier for many reasons, not the least of which is Jr’s involvement); however, it’s a reasonable resource to understand what adherents to Covenant Theology believe (and see that it is NOT about church membership contracts).

  235. Jeff S

    It’s funny. I am not a dispensationalist nor am I Reformed. Sometimes, I feel like an orphan. Both seem limiting to me. This is not due to a lack of reading or study. Just so you know I have read Sproul Sr. The more I read, the more I come to believe that there must be soome osrt of hybird or another way. I deny nothing in the great creeds and believe that the Bible is infallible in its words and purpose. I have no problem with either/or for some but I am an ill-defined “something else.”

  236. @ Dan Allison:

    Some definition may be necessary: A sociopath has to know you in order to do you harm. That is, they have a social relationship with their victim.
    A psychopath will harm anyone they can victimize, without the necessity of being in a relationship with the victim.
    Not sure we should call these so-called leaders (Jesus said not to be that if you are his disciple!) psychopaths or sociopaths

  237. @ dee:

    I believe a middle position is totally reasonable. I have spent most of my life in Dispensational churches, FWIW (even while listening to Sproul a lot).

    I just want to clear up that what is meant when people talk about “Covenant Theology” is not about church contracts.

  238. @ dee: You could always switch to a semi-Lutheran or semi-Anglican position on these issues. (Old school, higher[er] church Anglican, that is.)

    I was absolutely baffled (still am, really) by dispensationalism when I 1st encountered it – if you take into account that most of the world’s xtian population hasn’t ever heard of the US Protestant arguments over this, it gives some perspective on its importance – or, imo, lack thereof.

    I guess I’d summarize my beliefs as “Jesus comes back. The end (and new beginning.”

  239. @ dee: Also… you can ditch replacement theology forever if you step outside of certain boundaries.

    It’s nice out here, honest!

  240. “Would you elaborate, please? Do you mean that church discipline of any form is not allowed? Can the elders disfellowship me for unrepentant sin (i.e. adultery)? How about openly promoting heretical doctrine (i.e. modalism or Arianism)?”

    Brian, Can you show me in 1 Corin 5 where Paul says the “elders” must deal with the unrepentent sinner? Or was Paul talking to the ENTIRE church?

    I once heard teaching at a Reformed conference at Noblitt’s church on church discipline where the presenter, Jay Adams, ADDED a step in Matthew 18 saying take it to the elders THEN the church. That is not what it says.

    BTW: An “elder” in the spiritual sense would be the spiritually mature and would hate being called a leader and would constantly point to Christ….not their own perceieved poweer over others.

    Also, perhaps you can tell me why ALL Epistles are not written to elders to deal with the myriad of problems since that is how you seem to think it works. They are never even mentioned in some Epistles so we cannot be sure every single church in the NT had them.

  241. “I would contend that much of these debates and harangues over Church polity are not much older than 40 yrs. Arising mainly from a resurgence of New Testament Biblical fundamentalism which I would argue began in the early 1970s, they are relatively new in Christendom. Here’s what E.W. Bullinger, an eminent 19th cent. Biblical scholar (hardly a liberal) had to say in the Companion Bible on the pastoral epistles:”

    Muff, I agree….much of the organized hierarchical structure of instiutional churches were “institutionalized” when Constantine legalized Christianity and used the Greek chain of being model used in the Roman Pagan Temples they converted to be Christian churches.

    Instead of a “bishop” being a poor guy who was constantly persecuted and putting himself forward to protect the flock, he becamse a guy in robes who lived quite well, had the backing of the state (even paid by the state) and had “authority” over people. What a change!

  242. Discipline & Elders

    This site has a good discussion of church discipline: http://bible.org/node/532
    From this site here are some specific scripture references:
    1 Cor 5:1-13
    Matt 18:15-17
    Titus 3:10-11
    2 Thes 3:6-15
    1 Tim 5:20

    Regarding elders and leadership: see 1 Tim 5:17

    The Greek word for elder/bishop in 1 Tim and Titus 1:7 is episkopos. There is no specific age determination connected with the word. Thus to automatically presume it is simply describing older men is flawed.

  243. When I actually saw a picture of Swanson, my first thought was “High School Dork”.

    I wonder if he follows the same pattern I postulated for Bee Jay Driscoll? A high school Omega Male/dork who became the Alpha Male/big dog in a new environment (with Divine Right of Pastor as justification) and is throwing his weight around?

  244. 56 years a Baptist, mostly SBC wrote:

    Some definition may be necessary: A sociopath has to know you in order to do you harm. That is, they have a social relationship with their victim.
    A psychopath will harm anyone they can victimize, without the necessity of being in a relationship with the victim.

    I thought the difference was a psychopath has no concept of right and wrong while a sociopath does but doesn’t care as long as it personally benefits himself.

  245. Dan Allison wrote:

    Wow. How did so many psychopaths become “Christian leaders”?

    POWER. Psychopaths and Sociopaths flock to positions of POWER.

    “For the hearts of Men are easily corrupted, and the Ring of POWER has a Will of its own.”
    — JRR Tolkien(?) or Peter Jackson’s adaptation of Tolkien

    “Power doesn’t tend to corrupt so much as Power attracts the already-corrupt and easily-corruptible.”
    — Frank Herbert’s corollary on Lord Acton’s “Power tends to corrupt; Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely”

    And you can’t get a headier POWER than the Divine Right of being God’s Special Elect, lording it over the Sheeple by Divine Right.

  246. Doctrine

    The issue is first of all a question of what is orthodoxy. Orthodox are those doctrinal issues about which there can be no disagreement and they are rather limited. Christians of all denominations (Protestant or Catholic) will agree upon them. Disagreement is enough to severe fellowship. Thus, if person A says Jesus did not come in tangible, human flesh and was fully God and fully man I will have no fellowship with him (within a church setting, of course). I would not, for example, attend a Mormon church or a Unitarian/Universalist church.

    Group two items are those doctrinal issues that are less significant and while important are not those which will cause a break in fellowship. An example is the difference between Baptists and Presbyterians regarding the how, why, & how of baptism. As a paedobaptist I cannot, and would not want to, be an elder in a Baptist church. But I certainly have no problem with attending a service there.

    Finally there are those things that Christians of many different “flavors” can disagree upon and yet maintain fellowship. Eschatology could possibly fit into this category.

    Are there churches today who have taken secondary items and moved into the first level? Of course. Does that mean that we should disregard searching the scriptures carefully and reading as much as we can from learned men (that’s a generic men)? I should hope not.

  247. Brian

    From that article we read that discipline can be done for ”

    • Divisive or factious people causing divisions in the church (Rom. 16:17-18Titus 3:9-11).
    • Immoral conduct; sins of the type mentioned in 1 Corinthians 5 such as incest, immorality, covetousness, idolatry, abusive speech, drunkenness, swindling, or idle busybodies who refuse to work and run around spreading dissension
    •  

    Oh my goodness! Can you imagine discipline in the hands of fallible men? Let’s see: Pastor does not like Mary because she questioned his salary. He says “Mary-I over heard you say that you really liked my house. You are guilty of coveting and you are now to be disciplined.” 

     

    This is the problem with a wooden literal translation of the Bible. Egotistical men (yes-there are some in the pastorate) can use this stuff to wreak havoc on their churches.Oh, better yet, down to brass tacks- Wreak havoc on good people. Just like I proved my point about Andy Davis who royally dissed some good people. 

     

    As for older men-it is asinine that churches are putting wet behind the ear young men who buy the Calvinista party line into positions of elders.Most of them do not have the wisdom or maturity to confront the large egos that inhabit many of today’s pulpits. In fact, they are chosen is for exactly that reason. Makes them feel important and part of the inner circle and then they will kiss up to the pastor who made it happen. 

     

    I know another pastor, down the street from Davis who made this comment to me in the presence of my husband. “My elders have only disagreed with me twice in 28 years!!!” 

     

    So , I reject alot of that stuff in that article. And just in case you do not think that I believe that church discipline should never be applied, I was a part of Pete Briscoe’s church-Bent Tree Bible, in which he handled things very, very well. A man left his wife and moved in with honey. Quietly (no big showy accouncement) was asked to leave the church. Elders continued to visit him over the course of the year. He slowly understood that he was in sin, left his honey and reconciled with his wife. Both got up in front of the church and told their story. 

     

    That contrasts with today’s big announcements of disfellowshipping, rules for nonengagement, etc. Oh, that happens but Pete got results.But big showy meetings make churches feel “powerful”, don’t they?

     

    Finally, go ahead and read my own story.http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/02/08/when-pastors-breach-trust-my-testimony-of-betrayal-and-gods-grace/ Imagine-reporting adorable me to another pastor? What a pile of codswallop.

  248. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    Does that mean that we should disregard searching the scriptures carefully and reading as much as we can from learned men (that’s a generic men)? I should hope not.

    Did I hear/read you right (write) – you said learned MEN ? I don’t know what a generic man is. If you were trying to be inclusive of men and women, you’d state ‘learned men and women’. Yes?

  249. Haitch wrote:

    Brian Grawburg wrote:
    Did I hear/read you right (write) – you said learned MEN ? I don’t know what a generic man is. If you were trying to be inclusive of men and women, you’d state ‘learned men and women’. Yes?

    Quite frankly I am sick and tired of hearing all this crap that “men/man” can’t include all human beings! I WILL NOT stop saying, “penMANship”, or “mailMAN”,or any other term that has “man” in it. I refuse to be P.C.! If this bothers some folks, get over it. There are more important things to be concerned about.

    Haitch…you caught me on the wrong side of this.

  250. Brian

    I actually think you do not know who is on the wrong side of this. You have already made a comment that your are complementarian. We have written extensively on this blog about men like Piper who believe a woman cannot read the Bible aloud during a church service.  We get comp and patriarchy jammed down out throats everyday at the Gospel Coalition website.

    So, in fact, since it is the comps who have started this witch hunt on what women can and cannot do in churches, marriage and society, it is perfectly appropriate to question what you mean when you say “learned men.” As you know, there are some in CBMW/TGC who have said the women are gullible and easily deceived nonsense as well.So, perhaps you could even mean precisely that.

    So, stop belly aching and answer Haitch’s question. It is appropriate in this circumstance. I also questioned what you meant and planned to ask you. This is a blog. We are not sitting across the table from one another so that we could read expressions and nuances.

  251. @ Brian Grawburg: This isn’t about being PC or not.

    I hope you understand that there are very real issues regarding the Neo-Cals/calvinistas and their understanding of what women are “allowed” to do. Dee has mentioned a couple of the more obvious examples (of serious problems).

    When you’ve got people running around making statements like “Christianity has a masculine ‘feel'” (John Piper; there’s a post with links and quotes on this blog), it shouldn’t be surprising that people would question whether “men” = humankind or whether it specifically means male human beings only. (No women allowed.)

  252. 1 Cor 5:1-13
    Matt 18:15-17
    Titus 3:10-11
    2 Thes 3:6-15
    1 Tim 5:20

    Regarding elders and leadership: see 1 Tim 5:17

    The Greek word for elder/bishop in 1 Tim and Titus 1:7 is episkopos. There is no specific age determination connected with the word. Thus to automatically presume it is simply describing older men is flawed.”

    Brian, I will be real honest. I can never tell if the Reformed guys are being obtuse or think they are just conversing with theologically illiterate peasants. Most of us here have spent a lot of time studying scripture, too. The reason directing us to scripture is meaningless is some of us do not approach it with the Augustinian/Calvin filter. Some of us do not read determinist God paradigm into it. Some of us also do not read “authority over: into it where you all interpret it that way even though no such Greek is used. You guys tend to focus on the power such titles can bring instead of their “function” which is lowly and about being a servant to others within the Body.

    I spoke of “elder” as the “spiritually mature”. That does not denote age. Take Timothy, for example, who had endured much hardship traveling with Paul, experienced persecution, spent time in a 1st Century prison which is no picnic and walked the talk. That is not the same thing as an arrogant YRR perfumed prince who covets having the title of “elder”. They remind me of the pimply faced boys on bikes who knock on my door with their black ties/white shirts with the name tag of “elder”. Except they are Mormons.

  253. “Quite frankly I am sick and tired of hearing all this crap that “men/man” can’t include all human beings! I WILL NOT stop saying, “penMANship”, or “mailMAN”,or any other term that has “man” in it. I refuse to be P.C.! If this bothers some folks, get over it. There are more important things to be concerned about.”

    Language meanings change over time if you spend any time looking into that. A great example of this is the Greek word Kephale. Studying how that was used around the 1st Century is quite the eye opener. However, perhaps you would think it silly if your 8 year old daughter asked you one night while reading scripture why there were no “sisters”? In her world, that was significant. And it is to many young women, too.

    Many of us have done our homework on this issue in the Greek so the propaganda about it being heretical in some translations won’t work with us. And it is ok if you think me a heretic. I will sleep well tonight. :o)

  254. @anon

    I am bit confused. Why would I think you are a heretic? Seriously, disagreement doesn’t automatically equate to heresy. 🙂

    Please explain this to me: “determinist God paradigm”.

  255. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    Quite frankly I am sick and tired of hearing all this crap that “men/man” can’t include all human beings! I WILL NOT stop saying, “penMANship”, or “mailMAN”,or any other term that has “man” in it.

    “Global replace string ‘man’ by string ‘person'” is not only stupid, but awkward. Ends up with this polysyllable cross between academia and Marxspeak. I think George Carlin had a whole routine on it, how every change to words to avoid possibly offending someone results in longer and more tongue-twisting circumlocutions.

  256. dee wrote:

    As for older men-it is asinine that churches are putting wet behind the ear young men who buy the Calvinista party line into positions of elders.Most of them do not have the wisdom or maturity to confront the large egos that inhabit many of today’s pulpits. In fact, they are chosen is for exactly that reason. Makes them feel important and part of the inner circle and then they will kiss up to the pastor who made it happen.

    Calvinjugend. Young, starry-eyed, on-fire True Believers. Like Hitlerjugend graduating into the SS — “Young, tough, and cocky”. And will do anything for the Fuehrer und Reich.

  257. My personal experience has been, in both Baptist & Presbyterian churches, is that the elders are anything but “wet-behind-the-ear young men.” The Presbyterian church I currently attend is small (65. The church I used to attend has a young pastor and the elder likewise is >60.

    If I may pontificate a moment; likening those who embrace Reformed theology as in any way akin to Hitler Jugend is really out of line. My skin is thick enough not to let it bother me, but I can say I do find it irritating. It seems that some of the arguments being made against Reformed theology are basically ad hominen attacks.

    For every Reformed church like Swanson’s there are dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, who totally reject the message and tactics of men (and I might add, women) like him.

    Okay, end of my pontification.

  258. My personal opinion (which may be quite wrong) is that CJ is entitled to a “trial” and should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Just as the news media often declares Mr. X guilty before all of the evidence has been examined in a court of law, so too can social media. I agree it appears that Mohler/Duncan/Dever, etc are circling the wagons, but until the lawsuits and other charges have been fully examined it seems proper to tread carefully before breaking out the tar and feathers.

  259. Brian

    So, are you ignoring the hundreds of cries of pain and sorrow at SGM Survivors? The Bible talks of 2-3 witnesses before something is taken seriously. You are saying that such a Biblical mandate does not matter, aren’t you. May I point out that the Biblical account does not mention ignoring the hundreds of complaints and waiting for a court decision in my Bible. You will wait for a court decision on a couple of cases? Hmmmm

    And, as for breaking out the tar and feathers, need I say Paterno, Sanduskey, the Catholic church scandal,e tc. Did they, and you, “wait” on those, as well?

    One other thing, have you mentioned your concern for the many, many hurt people or are you more concerned about CJ being “hurt.”

  260. Brian

    “My personal experience has been, in both Baptist & Presbyterian churches, is that the elders are anything but “wet-behind-the-ear young men.”

    You sound a lot like me about 10 years ago. I had been in some awesome churches in which things functioned appropriately with elders who were thoughtful and not part of some YRR thought police.

    Here is where the rubber meets the road. It is only in conflict that you see exactly what stuff your church is made of. Since you have no problem with discipline for gossip, etc (from one of your comments you quoted all sorts of reasons or discipline), my guess is that you have been on the right side of the issues like I used to be.

    Then I saw how a “Calvinista” treated some boys who were abused, stood amazed at his utter arroagnce and inability to say a simple I’m sorry, which would have nipped everything in the bud, and my eyes were opened.he would rather see his church lose many, many members than mutter a simple “soory about that.”

    Your answer about CJ Mahaney clarified my understanding of your assessment of church authority and it makes a lot of sense in light of some of your statements.

  261. I do not for one single moment doubt that hundreds of people have been deeply hurt by some Sovereign Grace churches. The question is, though, what direct involvement did CJ have with individual SGM congregation leaders? Yes, as the ultimate leader he does shoulder the most responsibility for what has transpired. Charges need to be made against the specific congregation leaders.

    As you well know there is a SG church in Apex. Have the leaders there been charged with anything? If not, they should not be grouped with the offending churches.

    It’s not that I am more concerned about CJ being “hurt” than with those who already have, but you know as well as I do that once the charge has been made it’s tough to forget it. Sort of like putting the toothpaste back into the tube…it’s pretty darn hard.

    In summary: tar and feather those directly responsible first, then deal with the next level. And covering up a known and provable offense is a first level offense.

  262. “Here is where the rubber meets the road. It is only in conflict that you see exactly what stuff your church is made of. Since you have no problem with discipline for gossip, etc (from one of your comments you quoted all sorts of reasons or discipline), my guess is that you have been on the right side of the issues like I used to be. ”

    Bingo. And the disagreement, conflict or whatever the issue is dealt with in exact proportion to how influential they think you are.

    Mahaney is already guilty from a spiritual perspective. He trained his pastors with “strong leadership” to fail to protect little children from predators when the facts were right before them. In some cases the predators admitted it and still nothing. No warning other parents. No calling the authorizes because a CRIME was committed. Nada. That is inherent in their system. They will handle it because as the church they are smarter than the authorities when it comes to crimes against children.
    That is why you see a systemic pattern with such thinking as SGM pastors telling one mom to put a lock on the inside of her daughters bedroom door so the dad could not get in to rape her. And then give the dad more sex so he would not be tempted. All of this was told to her so the dad could “remain head of the home”.

    That is how sick CJ’s shepherding cult is and that is ONE of the stories. There are many. So, Brian if you have no problem with that, then I guess the verdict of this lawsuit will tell you whether or not Mahaney is a false teacher and a wolf and he trained many little wolves to follow him. Good luck with that.

  263. For the record, the kind of offenses Anon 1 describe deserve a penalty that I can’t describe in mixed company. Many years ago there were similar problems coming out of Florida with the Shepherding movement (Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, and others). So this is nothing new.

    One of the reasons I favor the presbyterian form of church polity over the autonomous form is because there is someone over the local pastor. Although SGM is not autonomous there isn’t the same multiple levels of accountability that is found within the presbyterian form. While not perfect, at least a church member has somewhere to raise concerns if they are not being addressed on a local level. They can go to the local presbytery, then the state presbytery, and finally the general session.

  264. ” The question is, though, what direct involvement did CJ have with individual SGM congregation leaders?”

    You can’t have it both ways, Brian. The whole strong leadership-obey your leaders-submit to your leaders—which was the foundation of the entire shepherding cult that started as Take and Give then became People of Destiny (does that scream cult to you?) to SGM. Follow the leader. CJ was “head Apostle”. He put the system in place to train the pastors in this shepherding system. He is the brains and mastermind behind developing docile followers who look to their leaders. And the pattern of this stuff is systemic. It is not just one church. Some are worse than others but the CJ DNA is all over the pastors. If you can read the sgmwikileaks docs and think that is a normal way for “leaders” to interact, then we are worlds apart on what is normal.
    But it is quietly becoming the new normal for many with the Reformed big cheeses embracing Mahaney. Perhaps men who love power and position over believers are rooting for Mahaney. The doctrine over people stance is quite popular in those circles. Their “doctrine” that elevates them.
    So now, the hidden evil of this authoritarian shepherding cult comes out and you want to say the “head Apostle” of the movement is not personally responsible for what he taught and modeled for the leaders and what that led to in terms of protecting predators.
    But a great way to keep evil hidden is to call warning others: Gossip. This actually works with many followers of man.

    So, you can’t have it both ways. Was he the lead Apostle, strong leader who should be obeyed who set up a system to train all these SGM pastors OR is he a victim, too?

  265. “Although SGM is not autonomous there isn’t the same multiple levels of accountability that is found within the presbyterian form….”

    That is part of it. Ultimately, everyone was accountable to CJ. But the rules CJ put in place for “degifting” pastors/leaders and other things, were not applicable to him when it came crashing down around him.

    And Mohler, Dever and Ligon Duncan HELPED him break his own rules. Obviously they approve.

  266. Brian

    CJ Mahaney was the church, the ministry, the presbytery, the man! I am still waiting for you to throw a bone to te many victims out there. I know that it is uncomfortableand all but it would show some good will.

  267. @ Brian Grawburg:

    I disagree. The pastors/elders should be accountable to the local body they serve not to someone “outside” the local body who has no idea what goes on in the local body. What you describe seems like a hierarchy system. The truth is — no polity system will work if the people in it are seeking personal gain and not the building up of the Church. It all starts in a personal level and flows from there.

  268. Many good points, Anon. Am I correct that Josh Harris and others have withdrawn from SGM because of the power abuse by CJ and because of the more heinous crimes perpetrated by some local pastors?

    I have a personal connection to the SG/Apex church (which I will not elaborate on) but I can assure you and others I am wary of them. With over 30 years experience teaching and researching cults and pseudo-Christian groups my antenna has been raised for a while.

    My deep concern over Vision Forum and the entire Patriarchy movement is two-fold: first, for the families being sucked into it; second, for the way this movement besmirches Reformed theology in general and individual churches like mine specifically.

  269. @Bridget

    Let me give a hypothetical example to show what I mean.

    Pastor begins teaching heretical doctrine (i.e., Christ was not fully God and fully man). I recognize the error and go to him. He acknowledges that is what he is teaching. I then go to the elders. They say I am misunderstanding the pastor. It appears, then, that they have fallen into error as well. I go to the presbytery (which consists of many PCA churches in a large portion of eastern North Carolina.) Now I can petition for a formal hearing and the pastor will be examined to see if he is teaching heresy. Since there is no single individual holding the reins the matter will not be easily dismissed.

    What I have described is basically what took place with Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church in Louisiana and lead to the denouncement of Federal Vision Theology first by the Mississippi Valley Presbytery and ultimately by the PCA.

  270. Anon 1 wrote:

    “Although SGM is not autonomous there isn’t the same multiple levels of accountability that is found within the presbyterian form….”
    That is part of it. Ultimately, everyone was accountable to CJ. But the rules CJ put in place for “degifting” pastors/leaders and other things, were not applicable to him when it came crashing down around him.

    Anyone remember the Soviet Constitution?
    Especially compared to the reality of the USSR?

  271. Brian

    I am hoping that you might throw a bone at the many, many hurt people from SGM. Is there a reason, I have asked you a couple of times, that you will not do so? Secondly, I proved the Andy Davis point. You did not respond after you first said your “highly doubted” me. Once again, that situation involved two people who were victimized and two people who love the Lord and serve HIm faithfully.

    This blog emphasizes those who are hurting so I am curious about your view on the let down.

     

  272. Brian

    One other point, in your “about” section,there is no real word “fackery” but there is a word “fakery.”  (You asked the question.) Figured out you live close to us so one day you might consider joining us for coffee.

  273. Dee,
    Forgive me if I don’t understand what you mean by “throw a bone”. I do understand the meaning of the phrase, but not what you are looking for.

    My “highly doubted” was only, directed towards what A.D. would say to Dr. Roger Nicole. I do believe what you said about your friends.

    I do think I have made it clear I am very much opposed to what takes place within the patriocentric churches that have been described. But I won’t say the fault lies within the Reformed system of theology. It lies within the hearts of the leaders and supporters of abusive and patriarchial gatherings. They are the ones who are perverting scripture. To those who have been injured and likely shamed I would urge them not to abandon the church. Scripture knows nothing of “Lone Ranger” Christians. Take your time looking, but find a church that preaches the centrality of Christ and his work on the cross. You need the fellowship of other believers who will help you heal.

  274. Brian, I have talked with many abuse victims who are simply incapable of walking in the doors of a church. I don’t think it’s a good idea to heap more guilt on them by talking about “Lone Ranger Christians” and such- that’s not what they are doing. Sometimes we get to such a burdened place that we are not able to be the kinds of Christians on the outside that we’d like to be or look like. This doesn’t mean we’ve abandoned the faith, but it does mean we need some time to heal before putting ourselves out there again.

    Me, I was fortunate enough after my run in with a church to immediately find a wonderful church that supported and helped me through it (A PCA church, I’m sure you’ll appreciate); however, not everyone has been so fortunate. If that church had burned me, it would have been a while before I had the strength to go back.

    Even as it was, I wasn’t able to spend much time reading scripture or listening to Christian music. I just had to put myself in church and just “be” for a while. God got me through that and I am doing so much better now- but it was His grace that brought me through it when I was weak.

    But I know of one wonderful Christian woman who was unable to go to church for a few years, yet stayed in fellowship with a handful of believers and continued to read scripture. Now she’s tentatively trying out a few new churches- her process was different from mine, but not THAT different. We both had things we could do and not do, and God has brought us both through it to a stronger, more powerful faith.

    Just please don’t be so quick to tell healing people what they need to do and where they will find it. Ideally we’d all like to be in church, but when church has become a place of pain and darkness, it may take time.

  275. @ Jeff S: I still find it difficult to read the Bible, 10+ years on. (Not in SGM, but was in a similar kind of church – one with roots in the 70s shepherding movement.)

    I have the same deep aversion to “quiet time,” since it was such a big thing – and I felt like I failed at it, somehow. (All the time.) There was also a show-offy thing going on at That Church regarding out-loud prayer – that somehow it was more legit if the prayer was eloquent or whatever. (I never could figure it out.) It was as if there was a competition going on to see who was the most spiritual via how they prayed. Gah!!!

  276. Jeff S wrote:

    Just please don’t be so quick to tell healing people what they need to do and where they will find it. Ideally we’d all like to be in church, but when church has become a place of pain and darkness, it may take time.

    You are correct. What I was thinking mostly of is people who may become totally isolated and do not try to seek out sympathetic and nurturing Christians to help. Seems to me that being completely alone is not where they need to be.

    If I seem somewhat dense in all this, it’s not because I reject anything that’s been said, but I simply have no personal frame of reference (although that could change.)

  277. @ Brian Grawburg: Sometimes that *is* what people need, Brian. Church isn’t the answer to everything; neither are church people.

    I know that might sound blunt to the point of rudeness, but I am speaking from my own experience.

  278. It may come as a shock to you all, but I spent a number of years here in North Carolina and in Virginia attending a Word-of-Faith type church. That’s why I am agnostic about the charismata…seen the abuse and obvious fakery. It was my departure from this environment (nothing bad, no problems) that brought me to Reformed theology. And that’s been well over 20 years ago.

  279. @Brian, here’s how you do it:

    “I am sorry for those who have been abused and suffered….”

    Also – I’m one of the ‘nones’. Telling me that I’m an impossible construct of a lone ranger Christian is a rejection than in turn makes me want to reject Christianity.

    Thanks for your wise words Jeff S.

  280. And while I’m at it, HUG, you no longer get a ‘free pass’ from me. Give the Soviets and the Nazis a break. Try Burma, Uganda, Chile or Cambodia instead. Lots of other original material out there. And how about answering Evie’s question directly – ‘have you ever been a member of Opus Dei, or are you now?’

    Sorry, I’m in quite a mood today as am being pressured to attend ‘Landmark Forum’ and I’m tired of being nice and politely refusing all the time… I’ll stop now.

  281. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    and do not try to seek out sympathetic and nurturing Christians to help.

    Oddly, it was all those supposedly “sympathetic and nurturing Christians” who were the ones doing the isolating in my experience.

    Brian Grawburg wrote:

    But I won’t say the fault lies within the Reformed system of theology. It lies within the hearts of the leaders and supporters of abusive and patriarchial gatherings.

    Why does this remind me of that old chestnut that “guns don’t kill people; people kill people”?

    Because again, in my experience, reformed churches steeped in ST have a funny habit of attracting people who create(to paraphrase another TWWer) bastions of soulless eggheadery.

    And I believe the admonition to not be a “Lone Ranger Christian” is right up there with warnings against “bitterness” or “gossip-n-slander.”

    These are Christianese double-speak phrases that are often used as bludgeons to keep people in line.

  282. Rafiki wrote:

    Why does this remind me of that old chestnut that “guns don’t kill people; people kill people”?

    Because again, in my experience, reformed churches steeped in ST have a funny habit of attracting people who create(to paraphrase another TWWer) bastions of soulless eggheadery.

    I’ll just re-iterate that my best experiences have been in Reformed churches. I agree with Brian that Reformed theology is not the problem.

  283. @ Jeff S: While I do understand your concern – and I *think* I understand the differences – I can also see why Rafiki would comment in that way. (Very much so, in fact.)

    Once burned, twice shy.

  284. dee wrote:

    One other point, in your “about” section,there is no real word “fackery” but there is a word “fakery.” (You asked the question.) Figured out you live close to us so one day you might consider joining us for coffee

    Thanks for the correction.
    Yes, coffee would be enjoyable and I am certain I would learn much from you.

    Haitch, a bit sarcastic aren’t you? If what I’ve written doesn’t affirm that I regret deeply what has happened to so many people, then I don’t think simply saying “I’m sorry” would suffice.

    If you reject Christianity because of something I have said, then you have missed the entire message of scripture. Reject me, that’s fine, reject Christ and that puts you in serious jeopardy. You are looking in the wrong place if you are looking at anyone other that Jesus for affirmation.

  285. @ Jeff S: Don’t you think there are many (for lack of a better word) “flavors” of Reformed theology?

    Some are quite good; others… not so much. I think that’s true in any denomination, or in any set of beliefs. After all SGM touts itself as being “Reformed.”

  286. @ Brian Grawburg: Wow, Brian! (Re. your comment addressed to Haitch.)

    Don’t let those stones hit you on the way out. (John 8: 1-11.)

    I know I’m being sarcastic, but I hope you can understand why someone might react that way to the “in serious jeopardy” (etc.) part of your comment.

  287. @ Brian Grawburg: One other thought: there are regular commenters who have been very severely harmed by “Reformed theology,” in some so-called “Reformed” churches. For some of them, the terms you’ve used in some of your recent comments can be quite triggering.

    If you could try to put yourself in their shoes, rather than condemning them, then maybe… Just a thought.

  288. @ Rafiki: That’s more than enough time for you to know exactly what you’re talking about, R!

    on another topic, I watched District 9 last week after reading all the raves here. Thought it was excellent re. the whole connection to District 6, though it seems like every S. African movie I’ve ever watched has an excessive amount of violence (even The Gods Must Be Crazy). That was one thing I wish they’d toned down, but… I think I want to adopt Christopher’s child (son?).

    One thing I loved was how subtle they were about slowly letting viewers start to see the aliens as, well… human. Especially in shots that focus on their eyes and faces. Christopher’s eyes are incredibly expressive.

  289. numo wrote:

    “in serious jeopardy” (

    To reject Christ is serious. There is no way around it.

    I’m not saying you have to be Reformed or anything like that. Quite simply God asks only a single question: “What have you done with my Son?” (figuratively, of course) He will not ask how often I went to church, or which church I went to, or if I was for or against women as pastors, or if I tithed, or if my wife jumped at my every command, or if I homeschooled, or if read John Calvin, or if I was a Republican. EVERYTHING is secondary to who Jesus is and what he accomplished the first Easter morning.

  290. @ numo:

    LOL, numo, I am going to take full credit for bringing up “District 9” in the first place (and I do understand and state up front that it is gory).

    Another poster linked to (and I quoted from) an outstanding South African review of the film, which beautifully laid out exactly why the film resonated so strongly in its depiction of the drudgery of life under the apartheid regime.

    Just watched a new documentary on the History Channel (not sure if its being shown in the U.S.) called “Miracle Rising” about the ’94 elections and the horrible, difficult years from 1990 – 1994.

    It struck me how in the U.S. I don’t believe we really got the full story of how very very close they came to going over the brink into a civil war. It was that close.

  291. @ Brian Grawburg: That is what you believe.

    This place is a refuge for people who have been hurt. If you stick around and just listen (and/or read comments on some of the older posts), you’ll see that.

    I don’t think it’s a place for folks to come and thunder from the pulpit, as it were.

    fwiw, I am still Christian, even after many years trapped in what were basically shepherding cults, and finally getting unequivocally kicked out (and, for a while) shunned by one, a little over 10 years ago. (Not surprisingly, I was in real pain and need when that happened – they would not help and thought I needed to be given a dose of what they termed “tough love.”)

    It’s amazing to me that I still believe in Jesus, after all of that – losing all of my friends, losing (in effect) what had become my family, losing my place in the music ministry – losing SO much.

    it was like being summarily divorced and booted onto the street without even knowing what might be “wrong,” from the pov of the one taking those actions.

    Please don’t heap condemnation on the heads of those who’ve had more than enough of it, Brian.

    I hope you can see what I’m trying to get at…

  292. @ Rafiki: It’s also got nasty mercenary captains with shaved heads, which prompts me to wonder why on earth having a shaved head = tough guy?

    I mean,it used to be associated with Yul Brynner! (During my salad days, at least…)

  293. ” It was my departure from this environment (nothing bad, no problems) that brought me to Reformed theology. And that’s been well over 20 years ago.

    An “overcorrection”. And I can relate. I was attracted to Calvinism after leaving the seeker mega industrial complex. But I am the type that does not take a “preachers” word for anything anymore so did a lot of homework on it and it’s origins. Yikes, is all I can say and pray folks will wake up to it’s fatalism.

    The Reformation was both an “overcorrection and undercorrection” to the problems of the Catholic church structure and practices. From works salvation to NO works at all….Jesus obeys for us because we are totally depraved after salvation. From sacral system center stage to a preacher center stage which is why we have celebrity preachers today. And old dead guys are more celebrated than Christ.

  294. @ Rafiki: Actually… the “contractors” in District 9 had a very uncomfortable resonance here, for me, as a US citizen. But I’m not sure that this is the best place to have that particular discussion.

    As for civil war, I don’t think that was really portrayed in the US media at the time, though I felt like it was lurking right under the surface.

  295. “You are correct. What I was thinking mostly of is people who may become totally isolated and do not try to seek out sympathetic and nurturing Christians to help. Seems to me that being completely alone is not where they need to be.”

    Oh, I totally disagree with this. Many times people who come out of cults or groupthink type of churches NEED to go alone and meet the REAL Savior. We counsel them to read only the Gospels for 3 years. KNOW Jesus. What he said to whom and the occassion he said it. What he did NOT say to whom and the occassion. What he did and did not do. Study him, pray. (only then can we understand Paul in my opinion because Paul is the one who is twisted the most by wolves). When folks do this, they can recognize a Nicolaitan, wolf or hirling a mile away.

    See, Jesus said he would send us the BEST TEACHER: The Holy Spirit. We are also told that all believers are given anointing (1 John). Those with titles in the church are not given special anointing others cannot have. That is a man made construct.

    right now, out there, there are few obviously safe places to go. That is why blogs have been so useful. Most of the institutions are very screwed up and have bought into some form of thought control or church growth movement.

  296. @ Haitch:

    Hey Haitch, just thought I’d let you know that I had a less-than-stellar day today myself. As I’m typing this, if I’m correct about my time zones, I’m hoping you’ll wake up in a few hours to a new blessed day. 🙂

  297. Num, if I sounded condemnatory I apologize. That was not my intention.

    I am hardly in a position to condemn anyone.

    I consider just about everything that has been talked about to be serious. It is serious when wives are abused by their husbands (mentally or physically). It is serious when children are molested. It is serious when people like Doug Phillips and Vision Forum heap new “law” upon families who have fallen victim to their egregious false teachings. It is serious when the likes of Kevin Swanson masquerades as a theologian and is, in fact, a charlatan.

    My desire for you, and others like you, is that you will continue to shed the weight of your past by keeping your focus on Christ…..in spite of guys like me who can sometimes be rather dogmatic.

    Seems to me that we all need to keep each other in check. Extremes from either side serve no constructive purpose. Unfortunately, as I have already been reminded, we aren’t sitting across from each other and can’t hear the tone of our voice or the look in our eyes. That, I’m afraid, is one of the drawbacks to this kind of interchange.

    So perhaps it is best if I cease posting for a while.

    I will conclude with the overarching theme of the Reformation:

    Soli Deo Gloria

  298. numo wrote:

    @ Jeff S: Don’t you think there are many (for lack of a better word) “flavors” of Reformed theology?
    Some are quite good; others… not so much. I think that’s true in any denomination, or in any set of beliefs. After all SGM touts itself as being “Reformed.”

    Yes, I do.

    In fact, my experience with PCA churchs (multiple ones) here in Atlanta has been really really good, but I’ve heard horror stories about PCA churches elsewhere. The Bayly’s are PCA, and they frighten me.

    I think the “flavors” are (for the most part) tacked on, though I can tell you there are some things in the more “core” part of Reformed theology I disagree with too. Like anything that isn’t scripture, it’s a flawed system- but I happen to think it’s a good one overall.

    I think a lot of outsiders looking at this situation with SGM could easily just chalk it up to “those Christian folks” and we’d all be offended that Christianity is blamed for the behaviors of some folks who don’t represent us.

  299. @ Brian Grawburg:

    Matthew 25 suggests he will ask what have you done for the least of God’s children wrt food, clothing, health care, incarceration. That is, how have you lived out the faith in him you claim to have.

  300. Brian Grawburg – “Quite simply God asks only a single question: “What have you done with my Son?” (figuratively, of course)”

    If that is all God asks, I believe God only asks that when we understand and know Jesus.
    Blogs like this are one way that the Holy Spirit draws us to know the true Son of God, which then is knowing the Father. I believe that just as God had mercy on Paul because he had a certain zeal for God but didn’t know Jesus, that God will introduce the true Son to all who desire to know God. There should be no condemnation to those who reject Christ, if they think he is evil. Jesus worked very hard to reveal the true nature of God, showing love and mercy to the lost and hurting but rebuke for those who misrepresented the Father out of their own selfishness.

  301. @Brian – not being sarcastic at all. I have employed much sarcasm in the past and dislike that aspect of myself, it’s one thing I try not to use. Please don’t feel chased off and stick around if you’re happy to repartee sometimes, I much prefer that to sarcasm. Often my gripe is not so much what is said, but how it is said, ie the tone taken.

    @Rafiki, I usually read TWW on arising, I really look forward to the comments from my continental comrades so unfortunately, yeah, I woke up mad! Not proud. I’ve decided to write the word “Landmark” on a piece of paper, stick it on a soccer ball and kick it around the flat. Will feel much better then. It’s 10.20am Wednesday so the day is in full swing.

    @numo, and you rock, as usual

  302. Brian Grawburg wrote:

    If you reject Christianity because of something I have said, then you have missed the entire message of scripture. Reject me, that’s fine, reject Christ and that puts you in serious jeopardy. You are looking in the wrong place if you are looking at anyone other that Jesus for affirmation.

    Brian, this is my thinking at the moment from someone on the outside looking in. I reject fear-mongering. Yes, I judge the movement known as Christianity based on its believers. Absolutely. They are the concrete examples in front of me. If you were an employer getting lots of duds from a certain university, you’d ditch employing people in the future from that university wouldn’t you? They are representatives of that university. Then there’s the next step – you’d start looking closely at the university itself.

  303. Brian, I think a better way to put it is: Clean up your own Reformed arena or go give the Reformed big dogs your advice before you come here giving advice to folks who have been spiritually abused and used by churches.

    Because what they are “doing with the Son in His Name” is evil.

  304. HUG, I might be the only one, but I like your Soviet Union/Nazi remarks. Perhaps it is age? :o)

  305. numo wrote:

    It’s also got nasty mercenary captains with shaved heads, which prompts me to wonder why on earth having a shaved head = tough guy?

    Maybe association with skinheads?

    Or USMC buzz-cuts taken a couple steps further?

  306. @ Eagle: I was in various groups that were – to a greater or lesser extent – affected profoundly by some of the excesses of the charismatic movement as well as by shepherding. I think I’ve told you before that That Church = Christ Our Shepherd Church, on Capitol Hill. google it and you’ll find their site, which all appears fine as far as it goes… it’s what’s *not* said that’s most important, though occasionally they slip up and some of their more hostile ideas come through.

  307. @ Headless Unicorn Guy: otherwise, yes.

    In the mid-80s, there were marines in the D.C. area who affected punk-like mohawks. I’m not sure how they got away with that, given the strictness of regulations re. haircuts and dress, but … I think they might have been white supremacists.

  308. @ Brian Grawburg:
    I realize that you probably didn’t intend to come across as harsh, but you also might not (yet) be seeing how those who’ve been through the mill with actual, serious condemnation from so-called “pastors” (and others) would likely react to the terms you were using.

    I do hope you stick around and join in the convo here – and, bad days and missteps aside, it *is* a conversation.

    Also, I think we all mess up in terms of text-only communication at times, re. not being able to hear tone of voice, see facial expressions, or see gestures. I know that I’ve gotten things wrong more than a few times, and probably will again.

    However… I’ve also been – literally – yelled at for supposedly not following Jesus like I ought to, by certain peoples’ lights. That gets old really fast!

  309. numo wrote:

    In the mid-80s, there were marines in the D.C. area who affected punk-like mohawks. I’m not sure how they got away with that, given the strictness of regulations re. haircuts and dress, but …

    I remember pictures from the Fifties and Sixties of Army paratroopers wearing mohawks. Seems to have been a “tribal marking” of certain elite units for a time.

  310. I don’t know if anyone will see this, nonetheless, it is important to clarify.

    I am a Calvinist. I am not a Neo-Calvinist. There are very big differences between the two. Neo-Calvinism came out of the writings of Abraham Kuyper (although his later followers seem to have pushed his view to the extreme.) Theonomists like Kuyper and Neo-Calvinism.

    Calvinists such as Michael Horton, Meredith Kline, Robert Godfrey, and others at Westminster Seminary California reject theonomy and the extremes of the patriocentric movement.

    I can be an old-school Calvinist, complementarian as regards women holding church office, and still reject theonomy and all that attaches to it.

    So, please be careful when you are posting. Don’t out all Calvinists in the same basket.

  311. Brian

    We have two categories of Calvinists on this blog: Calvinists and Calvinistas. You want to be the former rather than the latter.  We have defined this in our TWW definition page. It is a classification that we invented when we started this blog and believe we hold the rights to said distinction! 🙂