"Farewell T4G."
QUESTION: What do The Gospel Coalition, 9 Marks, Sovereign Grace Ministries, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Desiring God have in common?
ANSWER: They are listed as 'likes' on Together for the Gospel's Facebook page – in fact – they are T4G's only likes.
It's been said that nothing good happens after midnight. Well, that certainly rings true for 'culture warrior' Al Mohler and his two cohorts, Mark Dever and Ligon Duncan, who declared their allegiance to their buddy C.J. Mahaney on their Together for the Gospel Facebook account late last night while most of you were sleeping. Their statement begins with these words:
"We are friends who have been brought together for the gospel. Over the last several months, we have wanted to speak publicly to the issues that have related to our friend C. J. Mahaney…"
Together for the Gospel – Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, Albert Mohler
If you clicked on the hyperlink, you probably saw the following message:
Sorry, this page isn't available
The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed.
Hmmm… The page was there when I did the hyperlink. It's obvious that Dever, Duncan, Mohler, and Mahaney are playing games, and we are not amused!
Some of you were burning the midnight oil and chimed in under this Facebook post by Mahaney's buddies. And a few of you suspected that the whole thing might suddenly disappear (which happened less than 10 hours after the Facebook post first appeared).
You can read what Dever, Duncan, and Mohler communicated on T4G's Facebook account, along with related comments, thanks to Bill Kinnon's Evernote capture.
Let's take a look at an excerpt from that T4G communication. It states:
A Christian leader, charged with any credible, serious, and direct wrongdoing, would usually be well advised to step down from public ministry. No such accusation of direct wrongdoing was ever made against C. J. Mahaney. Instead, he was charged with founding a ministry and for teaching doctrines and principles that are held to be true by vast millions of American evangelicals. For this reason, we, along with many others, refused to step away from C. J. in any way. We do not regret that decision. We are profoundly thankful for C. J. as friend, and we are equally thankful for the vast influence for good he has been among so many Gospel-minded people.
Dever, Duncan, and Mohler end their statement with these words:
Our hope and prayer is that Christ's healing and health will come to all parties involved in this matter and that justice and righteousness will prevail for all. May every true victim of any injustice be vindicated. May every doer of wrong be exposed. And may all of us speak no further than we can responsibly speak.
Those who minister in the name of the Lord Christ bear an inescapable duty to live and to minister in a way that is above reproach. Those who teach, reminds James, will face a stricter judgment. [James 3:1] May everything we do, everything we teach, and all that we are be measured against that standard.
Together for the Gospel,
Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, Albert Mohler
Funny thing, we are praying for the exact same things…
One comment under the statement by Dever, Duncan, and Mohler that caught our attention was posted by Boz Tchividjian, J.D., Executive Director of GRACE. Here is what he had to say:
Why is no mention made that the heart of this lawsuit is about a systematic church effort to discourage and eventually prevent the families of children who were allegedly (and repeatedly) sexually victimized by church officials from speaking out and reporting to law enforcement. This lawsuit is less about the abuse and more about an institution that took steps to protect itself and it's reputation over the victimized souls (and bodies) of little ones. Omitting such a fundamental fact from this statement is a fundamental error.
Why no mention that CJ Mahaney was actually the Senior Pastor at one of these churches where all of this horrific abuse allegedly occurred AND that discouraged these families from bringing this matter to the God ordained civil authorities? Omitting such a fundamentally important fact from this statement is a fundamental error.
This lawsuit was dismissed for one reason and one reason only…expiration of the statute of limitation. Isn't it tragic that the reason why this suit was dismissed – taking too long to file – was the very objective of these church leaders when they discouraged these precious souls from stepping forward.
Many of these men have not hesitated to write (or tweet) on the Penn State horrors, gays in the Boy Scouts, and Universal healthcare, but have been conspicuously quiet on this issue…just doesn't sit right with me (and apparently a lot of others). And when they finally speak, what is omitted speaks more than what is said.
What these men don't realize is that their silence is pushing a large group of precious souls farther and farther from the Church…and our glorious and gracious God. [sigh]
Boz Tchividjian, J.D.
Executive Director, GRACE
Please take the time to read his excellent post on the GRACE website entitled Where Are The Voices? The Continued Culture of Silence and Protection in American Evangelicalism, published earlier today.
The statement by Dever, Duncan, and Mohler that was taken down this morning resurfaced some hours later on the Together for the Gospel website. You have to click on the small circle located at the top of the T4G website to access it. Here it is – minus the comments that accompanied it on Facebook.
One thing we can say affirmatively about C.J. Mahaney is — he sure does have some loyal friends. Unfortunately for C.J., others aren't quite as committed at this stage of the game.
Lydia's Corner: 2 Samuel 17:1-29 John 19:23-42 Psalm 119:129-152 Proverbs 16:12-13
Ugh!! I thought about getting a screen shot of the comments on their facebook post this morning, but I had an appointment so didn’t think I had time! I wish I had made time. Bill Kinnon’s capture is better than nothing but a lot of the comments have been cut off by facebook, you’d have to click on them to expand them and unfortunately that’s not possible now. :/
That’ll teach me. I thought to myself “They might delete this whole thing” but then I thought “No, that would be way too cowardly.”
Well…. Pretty sure they proved themselves cowards today.
@ Searching: Don’t worry…I have them all in a word document. I copied them all before they deleted them.I can’t post them all at once due to the fair use doctrine. But, i am thinking about adding a few at a time to subsequent posts.
So lets just start with a few more right now:
Christine Blackerby Pack It’s so frustrating to me because it appears that the leadership of SGM worked very hard to convince victims NOT to go to the legal authorities over weeks and months and years, but then when the victims eventually did seek legal counsel after exhaustin…See More 9 hours ago · 20
Ken Garrett Shameful and amazing, even a bit surreal. God save us from such leaders who have become so right, so powerful, so sure, so full of their own party convictions, that they would dare to say or write anything that might slight or trample on a victim of s…See More 9 hours ago · 13
Stephen Wolfe If any emergent, progressive, liberal or whatever reads the statement above and thinks that it accurately represents Reformed Christians or conservative evangelicalism in general, please take into consideration the outrage you see in the responses. 9 hours ago · Edited · 9
Deb
Somehow someone must figure out a mix between Stand By Your Man and Gone. Great post. Oh yeah, while I am at it, here are a few more “deleted comments.” I’ve got more where those came from.
Aaron DeVandry “Instead, he was charged with founding a ministry and for teaching doctrines and principles that are held to be true by vast millions of American evangelicals.” Um, no, that’s not what he was charged with. 9 hours ago · 9
Coffee Summerall These leaders “… are hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.” — 1 Tim. 4:2 You guys can’t tell right from wrong anymore. 9 hours ago · 5
Dominic Bonasio It’s Penn State all over again. Trying to handle child sex abuse in-house instead of reporting it to the police. Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, Albert Mohler…why are you defending someone who treid to cover up child sexual abuse?
At the very least, AT THE VERY LEAST, shouldn’t these guys at T4G be saying things like “We are personally extremely convinced that CJ knew nothing of the sexual abuse, and he is greatly grieved to learn of it now” or something? Like, shouldn’t they be emphasizing that CJ is horrified by what happened? Shouldn’t there be some indication that these guys have looked into these horrific matters for themselves?
The possibility of molested children is dire enough that these leaders need to do their utmost to communicate with their friends and partners (CJ and others) and really, truly be sure of the truth in their hearts…not just because a judge threw it out due to a statute of limitations.
I can’t imagine why they’re taking such a hands-off approach when the issue at hand is so terrible.
@Sad Observer: Exactly! Their response is just not normal–for all their christianese in that second to last paragraph, they really seem not to actually care at all. It’s so darned frustrating to think of people whose entire mode of thinking is so WRONG being in the positions they are in. What have they got where their heart is supposed to be?
I still have no idea how they can claim to be Christian leaders and not realize that Christ was about the victims and the oppressed and not the religious institution. His very first recorded sermon was talking about being on the side of the victims, quoting Isaiah saying he will “set the oppressed free” (Luke 4:18). Either they are so delusional in their concept of who Jesus was, and what He was was for, or they are acting out of complete evil in their hearts. Either option is unacceptable and completely vomit worthy for people who claim to be “men of God”.
@ dee:
Dee, Ken Garrett’s comment was cut off in your quote above, but I took a screen shot of it because I liked it so much. Here it is: http://goo.gl/kGIc0
There are fan pages on Facebook for the ESV Bible version and for John Calvin, and they haven’t liked a fan page for either? Hmm.
Unreal. We are witnessing the outworking of putting doctrine above all else. My gripe with the neo-Reformed group was precisely that: that doctrine is valued above Jesus or Holy Spirit. Now I am witnessing the ugly consequences of this unhealthy ideology.
I am basically speechless. Takes a lot, but there we have it. They need to stop playing their gospel games which come at such a high price for the children in their care…
They are politicians making political moves.
Christian News Organizations that haven’t reported on the alleged child sexual abuse since the plaintiffs gave their stories on May 14, 2013–
CHRISTIAN POST
WORLD MAGAZINE
May wrote:
I agree – when men value their doctrines above God himself, those doctrines quickly become idols that first become equated with God, and then replace him as the objects of their worship. The great appeal of a man-made idol is that it never talks back; it does exactly what you want it to do. You can project any personal desire onto it and then pretend – even believe – that it is God. You can interpret the bible however you want to, and then say that you’re acting in obedience to scripture.
To re-state May’s observation in different wording, we are seeing the fruit of a “gospel” that is simply a return to Law. The curtain of the temple may have been torn in two, but we’re still not able to go through it; we need properly qualified, anointed men of God to cover us, protect us, and look through the newly-repaired curtain on our behalf, so they can communicate “the vision” to us.
Normally I wouldn’t link to a snarky tweet like this, but after yesterday’s Together for the Gospel Facebook fiasco and the outpouring of allegiance toward C. J. Mahaney yesterday from DeYoung and others, I’m disgusted by these guys.
https://twitter.com/JC_Superstar77/status/338263370224517120
@ Janey: Wait, is that really true???? If so, how outrageous.
Deebs – I know there are specific reasons you set up this blog, and so the warnings against false shepherds and abusive congregational cultures are valid. How about the flip-side, though, in the form of some stories of congregations who are actually doing the job properly? I know of some, and I can’t be alone there.
@ Janey: Alright, I just looked it up. Keven DeYong, Ray Ortland, and Carl Trueman were the members who declared him fit for ministry.
🙁 How sad this is.
Moxie wrote:
Moxie — I guess that says a lot about their judgment.
Julie Anne blogged about this C.J. Mahaney video clip. He says there is no pastoral privilege. http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/05/24/heres-whats-at-stake-c-j-mahaney/#comments
Yet the (alleged) child sexual abuse victims at the church and Christian school Mahaney headed makes some strong accusations in their document (the numbers refer to the paragraph; these are summaries of the high GRAPHIC paragraphs, not verbatim) —
(All below is “allegedly,” for the lawyers)
#51 Defendant David Adams was convicted and served jail time. He was welcomed back into the church without the church taking any effective steps to prevent him from having continued access to children.
#128
The church provided babysitting services for Home Group members, many of whom homeschooled their children, but failed to advise them that the defendant had raped and assaulted Jane Doe.
#138
Discovery will show that Defendants Mullery, David Hinder and Vince Hinders (sic) spoke with Maryland-based Defendants Mahaney and Loftness, and together conspired to prevent any reporting to the secular authorities.
#150
Defendants conspired to permit the pedophiliac to have unfettered access to children…in a back hallway where children routinely played
#157 –
Rather than report the ongoing abuse to secular authorities or take any steps to stop the abuse, Defendants informed the father that his children had reported the abuse. This led to further abuse by the father. In exchange for the conspiracy of silence, the abusive father paid to send Defendants Mahaney, Ricucci, and Layman and their families on vacation to the Kiawah Islands, South Carolina.”
#109
Defendants Ecelbarger, Mullery and V. Hinders, conspiring together with Mahaney and Loftness, violated the mandatory reporting obligations and conspired together to cover up [name withheld pending court ruling on defense motion]’s molestation of children.
#131
Defendants made a series of misrepresentations to the parents of Jane Doe to prevent them from attending court appearances and to prevent them from filing a victim impact statement…
#132
…Defendants falsely claimed that they were speaking on behalf of the parents of Jane Doe, and falsely claimed that the parents did not wish to participate in the court proceedings regarding the sexual assault…
Nearly every paragraph is horribly graphic, detailing names, locations, and description of sexual abuse. Download it here: http://spiritualsoundingboard.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2nd-amended-lawsuit-filing-may-14-2013.pdf
@ Moxie: If they are wrong, it questions their “discernment.” Therefore, he must be, not only innocent, but one of the great leaders of our time.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
I will share a small story. Not a big thing, and not related to abuse, but it IS related to how we think of leadership in the church.
Last weekend my pastor didn’t preach and we had a guest preacher. Why? He wasn’t at a conference, nor vacation or taking a break. He was taking a turn working in the 3 and 4 year old Sunday School classroom (my son’s class, in fact). They’ve been asking for more volunteers and saying that they need anyone who is able to help out because we just have so many young children in the church. I guess as a pastor he didn’t tho k he was exempt from that call.
You might not agree with everything he preaches or believes, but that IS servant leadership and understanding he is not “above” the congregation, but a part of it.
Dee and Deb,
I borrowed the picture of us on your website! Hope you don’t mind. You two divas are shaking heaven and earth! 🙂 Keep up the good work.
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html
Just imagine: If there were not brave souls on-line willing to share their pain, share their grief and shame, and expose the darkness, so many more victims would be waiting in the wings.
I remember last year, after being exposed for my own sin, some of my close friends tried to minimize my actions. I very respectfully but firmly told them not to do that — that my roommate was the victim, not me — that I was the one in the wrong, not him. Because of my own actions, because I have hurt someone’s emotions and psychological well-being, I can so much more sympathize with those who experience the same.
In my opinion, the Calvinists at T4G, TGC et al. are behaving just like my friends were — minimizing the responsibility and accountability of the one(s) in the wrong.
The arrogance…the rank presumption that these men exude would be staggering if it weren’t so typical at this point.
The amount of self-worship, self-aggrandizement it must take for men like this to so easily and flippantly demand that we abide by their constructs is something that I hope none of us here at TWW will ever get comfortable with. Notice how THEY get to define the boundaries of “appropriate” conviction. THEY get to define how we blog, what be blog, the tone of our blogging. THEY get to define when what we know is enough to warrant a comment on the subject. THEY get to tell us when our feelings, ideas, or opinions on a subject are sufficient enough to warrant an utterance. THEY get to tell us if what we think or say is gossip, or slander, or said in “love”. THEY get to tell us when we can and cannot know this or that, or say this or that to a friend, or an acquaintance; when we get to read this or that and what is and is not the proper source for the information we obtain. THEY get to decide who is guilty of what, and whether something constitutes abuse, and whether or not the victim has the right to feel offended, or hurt, or whether they are “sinning” in their offense. THEY get set the boundaries for what, and who, and how we should forgive, and for what reason. THEY get to set the premises for the assumptions we hold on ANY subject or issue; and of course, THEY get the final say on what is the “truth” of any issue.
Every comment, email, tweet and doctrinal assumption from these men is in service to their position of “authority” and the presumption of their superior, God-ordained status as those who alone are able to opine on any issue affecting anyone or anything. If a bridge falls, or a storm hits, or a building collapses THEY get to declare why (usually, God is “punishing” this group or that, or America, or the world…naturally, YOU are at fault, ultimately). If a child is abused, or a woman assaulted, THEY get to decide what was “God’s will” in that. If you bring an accusation, THEY get to tell you whether it is justified or not. THEY alone will tell you both your questions and your answers.
It’s a sham. A facade. None of these men are more qualified than you to make a decision on what you will or will not do based on what you will or will not believe. We all have the Holy Spirit. He is able and willing to bring the light of discernment to ALL his children. These men have no position which is not wholly a product of their own self-defined business model. There is nothing divine about their position. You do not, and never will, have to concede their ideas or opinions, any more than you have to concede that their is only one brand of lawn service or automobile brand you wish to use. You are free to do so; but, more importantly, you are free to ignore them.
There is no condemnation for you by God for leaving and denying the neo-reformed business model. Which is what all this is.
sad observer wrote:
Because people have assumed they knew who they were. We tend to do this with celebs.
@ Argo:
That is an accurate and intelligent summation of the situation right there!
In the post, “The Death of the New Calvinism,” I wrote: “The New Calvinism, of the Gospel Coalition variety, tends toward discord rather than unity. Who is ‘together for the gospel’? Calvinists are together for the gospel. No other group is brought in to be together for the gospel except Calvinists. They are among the most congenital of all Christian groups — exclusive, inbred, inwardly-focused. By reading the very brief Wikipedia article on the New Calvinism, one would garner another opinion, one that quotes Mark Driscoll identifying it as ‘open to dialog with other Christian positions.’ Please, tell me, where is this open dialogue being held?” http://theepiscopalian.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-death-of-new-calvinism.html
What you present is a Reformation principle. What I see from the neo-Calvies is a return to dominating Rome: we will tell you what to think and what to believe. (Reminds me of the Borg.)
@ Jeff S:
JeffS, I love it! That is what families do….they pitch in where needed.
Argo wrote:
Argo, Thank you. I have been trying to communicate this for years. What is it that people think gives these men the moral right to decide these things for them? When people answer that question it is interesting. It is all based upon some notion of superior spiritual knowledge based upon a title or position.
As if they cannot have the Holy Spirit for themselves.
Amazing really.
William Birch wrote:
William, that is a spot on and concise observation. Exactly. If you are not a neo Cal, you are not “covered”; you are adrift in your depravity. You have no one to “stand in the stead”. And, no, Jesus doesn’t count.
Another great post on SGM and Josh Harris’s recent announcement, from a gracious writer in Chicago: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/pilgrimsroadtrip/2013/05/he-kissed-the-secret-of-his-childhood-sexual-abuse-goodbye/
Cheers,
Tim
@ Argo:
“THEY get to…” They THINK they get to, at any rate.
But who died and made them God? Absolutely no one.
Therefore they are simply ridiculous, like those dwarfs in Narnia, at the end of time:
“Aslan,” said Queen Lucy through her tears, “could you – will you – do something for these poor Dwarfs?”
“Dearest,” said Aslan, “I will show you both what I can, and what I cannot, do.” He came close to the Dwarfs and gave a low growl: low, but it set all the air shaking. But the Dwarfs said to one another, “Hear that? That’s the gang at the other end of the stable. Trying to frighten us. They do it with a machine of some kind. Don’t take any notice. They won’t take us in again!”…
“Well, at any rate there’s no Humbug here.” said the Dwarfs. ”We haven’t let anyone take us in. The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs.”
“You see,” said Aslan. “They will not let us help them. They have chosen cunning instead of belief. Their prison is only in their own minds, yet they are in that prison; and so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out.”
Yes, it is a sham.
Argo wrote:
Oh please read this again and again!
Thing is Argo, what you wrote yesterday to “grieving” needs to be imprinted on the brains of their followers who are questioning. The rabid faithful? Well, perhaps time will change that and they will learn the hard truths.
We are all “valuable” to God. Yes, there is evil. Yes, Satan roams this earth looking to devour. But it is NOT the believers who are consistently and willfully doing the evil! True believers have serious remorse and are public about it and transparent about their repentence. And don’t let them define that for you in any way! God created us to have working brains, ability and the Holy Spirit. For those without such after the fall, we are to protect.
That is what they are doing here…redefining what is evil. Dumbing it down. Satan is the father of lies and loves to deceive and redefine what should be obvious and common sense to us. It does nothing but bring confusion and chaos. Good is evil and evil is good. Even unbelievers understand basic right and wrong. Calvinistas seek to confuse and live in a short of shadowland where they have to define it for us. Do not allow them to do that for you.
Believers are to BE the kingdom here and now. We are seeking to love and protect one another. To look like Jesus Christ to the corrupt world.
But the world is seeing deception, corruption and plan old protection of evil when they are looking at some of our Christian celebrities. And the celebrities are defining Christianity to the world. We must not let them do that.
God expects us to protect one another not throw abused children to the curb inthe Name of Jesus in some form of “winning” in the civil realm. That is insidious! For people who thought the civil realm was “ungodly” they sure are hanging their hat on it now!!!!
You are valuable. You matter. You are NOT a worm!
John Stackhouse isn’t pleased with TGC’s position either: https://twitter.com/jgsphd
Tim wrote:
Tim, thank you for posting this. Bravo to John Stackhouse! Everyone needs to speak out at any level they can. Everything helps, whether it’s a quiet talk with friends or a bold online statement.
What is going on here: Justin Taylor: “When Prevention Fails: A Sexual Abuse Response Policy for Churches” http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2013/05/25/when-prevention-fails-a-sexual-abuse-response-policy-for-churches/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+between2worlds+%28Between+Two+Worlds%29
@ William Birch:
Damage control
@ William Birch:
When I hit the link to the full article, what he’s suggesting is good. He says churches should have prepared plans to deal with child sexual abuse in their midst. This quote stood out to me: “In the absence of a pre-determined plan, fear and self-protection are strong influences upon decision making in this kind of crisis.” Seems like that’s exactly what happened with SGM and many other churches that cover up these crimes. Maybe all this attention on the SGM debacle will have a positive impetus? I hope so.
I do not know why people are so gullible. TGC put up a post about prevention of child abuse and protecting children RIGHT AFTER they put up a statement exonerating and continuing to protect Mahaney where there are tons of victims without any justice and who are being thrown under the bus AGAIN by “Great men of God”.
So children DO matter to them? Please. Empty words.
Except the ones who were on Mahaney’s watch. I get it. Why can’t others?
Dee,
Looking for this link….?
https://www.evernote.com/shard/s2/sh/b8529a4f-3ff0-460b-8dd5-b6f6e2f33e50/6e0bf06f3ef88f390d5ca3e75ca338bc
Or this from Huffington:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/c-j-mahaney-scandal-evangelical-leaders-defend-pastor-accused-of-abuse-cover-up_n_3334500.html?
@ Anon 1:
Yes, exactly!
Dee,
Here is someone that DID capture some of that post along with a second post in support of the disappearing statement!
http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/05/24/just-like-that-t4g-statement-of-support-for-mahaney-is-removed/
@ Anon 1:
Sorry for being so gullible. I’ll leave the comments to you.
Dee,
and just posted
http://www.brentdetwiler.com/
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
Beenthere, just trying to figure out why anyone who take them seriously on this issue. Do you know anything about the leader of the church they linked to and his promotion of Mahaney? It is more of the bait and switch to try and play the damage control card. “Look at how much we want to protect children”! (Except the ones who were under Mahaney’s control, of couse. They are not worthy of our concern as Mahaney is more important)
Seriously, This would be akin to the German Lutheran church leaders in the late 1930’s giving tips to Italian Lutherans about dealing with the wrongs of Mussolini.
It boggles my mind they would have one ounce of credbility on the subject!
“Another story will soon break where C.J. conspired to cover up sex crimes for a friend.”
http://www.brentdetwiler.com/
Tchividjian has it exactly right.
I have no problem with friendship. I have no problem sticking by your friends, even if you think they were unwise in something.
I also understand that T4G is supposed to be about unity around the Gospel, and nothing else. So, there is disagreement among the 4 regarding things like Baptism, the Lord’s Supper and Polity.
The problem here is that one of the areas of disagreement between the 4 is the way SGM churches are run. I know for certain that there is profound disagreement between Mohler, Dever, and Duncan with Mahaney over the way Mahaney’s churches functioned and “shepherded’ people.
Ordinarily, there can be disagreement over these types of issues, but unity in the Gospel, and a group like T4G can move ahead and present the Gospel together.
BUT, when inappropriate shepherding results in failing to prosecute child molesters and it fails to provide the love and support the victims and their families need, that is a defect that cannot be ignored or covered over because of unity around the Gospel.
Like it or not, Mohler, Dever and Duncan put Mahaney forward as an example of a good Christian leader. They may disagree with the way SGM churches are run, but when they put Mahaney forward as they do, they are essentially saying that the disagreements they have with the way SGM churches are run is not that big a deal.
And that is wrong.
Any church that does what these SGM churches did in relation to child molestation and the victims of child molestation is disqualified from being held up in any way as an example of a Gospel preaching church. Sure, the SGM churches believe the Gospel, and that is no small thing in today’s world.
But the defects in SGM church illustrated by this entire scandal are so huge that Mahaney and SGM should not be spotlighted on the national stage.
I hope that T4G and its leaders will hear the concerns of many people who agree with them on so many things, but who disagree that it is appropriate to laud and man and movement that resulted in the abuse of so many children and rather than addressing it appropriately, ended up doing more damage.
Among the Heathen(TM), isn’t that called “a mutual admiration/masturbation society”?
https://twitter.com/renovatuspastor/status/338311079438462976/photo/1
Brill.
“When people want a God who is coercive, violent, manipulative & controlling…they are DESIRING ZOD.”
Anon 1 wrote:
Redefiniton of The Enemy’s words into “Diabolical Meanings”, My Dear Wormwood…
Anonymous wrote:
Uh…anonymous….are you forgetting Mohler’s quote to the Courier Journal early on in this scandal where he said the bloggers just did not like “Mahaney’s strong leadership”?
There is NOTHING public to give us any reason to believe your assertion. If you have something in writing that is specific, please share it here. Otherwise there are comments out there of them praising Mahaney’s leadership and SGM which would make us think otherwise.
Patrice wrote:
Actually, I’ve used Lewis’s imagery as a type example of Conspiracy Theory types, where their Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory has become a completely-closed system pinched off from external reality behind its own event horizon. Where any and all evidence against The Conspiracy is PROOF of The Conspiracy (disinformation planted by The Conspiracy); where lack of evidence for The Conspiracy is PROOF of The Conspiracy (so Vast They Can Silence Anyone); and anyone who doubts the Conspiracy Theory has PROVEN themselves part of The Conspiracy. Lewis pegged the attitude dead on: “THE DWARFS ARE FOR THE DWARFS! WE WON’T BE TAKEN IN!”
Anonymous wrote:
Sorry anonymous, I appreciate what you are trying to say but there is quite a bit of history that does not add up.
If they disagree with the way SGM was run that denotes that they understood the structure. If so, why would Dever allow Mahaney to run to CHBC and be on stage, etc when SGM’s own polity was that pastors have to stay and be disciplined at the church? Why would Dever open up his own church to such dysfunction when he is so strong on discipline? It is his claim to fame.
Again, why would Mohler praise the strong leadership of Mahaney to reporters if he does not agree with shepherding polity? Why would he not say something public if he was not in agreement it since Mahaney announced he was moving to Louisville “to be near the seminary”
Thing are not adding up as you are presenting them.
dee wrote:
Remember: Gods Can Do No Wrong. And that also goes for God’s Predestined Anointed Elect.
Anonymous wrote:
Actually what should happen is that T4G and TGC should not have any more spiritual gravitas at all. This one is too big to give them a pass. They have shown themselves to be spiritual dwarves.
@ Anonymous:
I am so confused by your post. What “gospel” do any if them actually believe? It is a gospel that they alone get to define for the rest of us. The are the authors and the God-appointed vessels of whatever doctrine they hold to. Therefore, any “disagreement” about anything at all wrt how they run things is no one’s business but those who are in charge. The only thing anyone can do is merely assume that they havent been given “grace to percieve”. The CONSISTENT thing to do is to laud CJ and SGM for precisely the kind of heavy handed autocracy which girds it. Disagreeing with CJ about how he runs things is pure doctrinal hypocrisy; and they know this because they know their doctrine.
All they need to concede, ever, is that CJ gets to be in charge because God clearly wants it that way; and that they like him. Since they too are mere “sinners saved by grace”, CJ can never do ANYTHING that can affect their liking him.
CJ, like them, is divinely appointed. They do not get to judge him any more than he can judge them.
Thank you Bill Kinnon for the screen capture:
https://www.evernote.com/shard/s2/sh/e3623beb-3591-4ba2-a332-30f2e94bb79c/48ade443a4715458c112553f82acf8c9
The comments are amazing, and damning.
The fact that they were deleted speaks very loudly.
Why the cover-up?
Why no transparency?
Why the twisting of facts?
Why not let other views be expressed?
More and more, these little emperors with their little empires to protect seem to be going to great lengths to keep everyone from seeing that they have no clothes – but their efforts are backfiring and people are seeing their charade for what it is.
And, did you notice how they kept talking about the Christian’s “duty” to call police?
Since when?
“Our first response must be to call the police…then to proceed to biblical church discipline…”
“Christians have a fundamental duty to inform law enforcement officials. This does not, however, preclude or mitigate the church’s responsibility for biblical church discipline.”
These guys just don’t give up, do they?
It’s all about…DISCIPLINE!!!
And they are the self-appointed “discipliners”.
The original post sounds like a giant C.Y.A. memo/C.J. love-fest.
Thanks for the links to Detweiler’s statement and the Bill Kinnon screen capture.
Anon 1:
I am not aware that any of that criticism is in writing.
@ Anonymous:
Then how do you know they disagreed with the characteristics of SGM polity?
Fendrel wrote:
Oh, this is so very good! How about these lines?
“The trio [Dever, Mohler, Duncan], who said they did not want to comment on the case while it was still in court, posted the letter on the Together for the Gospel Facebook page. Together for the Gospel is a biennial Christian conference the three founded with Mahaney.
Early Friday (May 24) morning, a string of negative comments had been posted on the Facebook wall, and the post was moved to the Together for the Gospel website.”
You can still find 100 of the original 115 Facebook comments here:
https://www.evernote.com/shard/s2/sh/b8529a4f-3ff0-460b-8dd5-b6f6e2f33e50/6e0bf06f3ef88f390d5ca3e75ca338bc
“…over the last several months, we have wanted to speak publicly to the issue..”
BUT, we were way too chicken to do that, until we thought there was the slimmest chance that people would be gullible enough to not research what was really happening with the SOL ruling. We’re hoping that none of you will realize this is just getting underway, as criminally related proceedings will now apply. If/when those allegedly culpable serve time for their alleged criminal behaviors, we will express shock and sorrow. We trust you will not question our statements, as we’re still selling things, but we may have no plans at present to produce a lot more material for your consumption, until we see where the issue actually goes.
We will also cry Christian Persecution and Total Depravity out of both sides of our mouths, at the same time.
Check out who is speaking at SEBTS upcoming 20/20 Conference: Ekklesia, God’s Perspective on the Church.
http://www.sebts.edu/news-resources/conferences/20-20_collegiate_conf/default.aspx
Danny Akin, are you listening?
Mark Dever preaching at SBC Pastors conference in Houston on Monday morning.
http://www.sbcpc.net/
@ Anonymous:
Mohler hasn’t spoken out about the cover ups in the Baptist sector. Why in the world would he speak out about cover ups in SGM? He is continuing to prove what people believe and say about him. He is sticking up for CJ out of friendship or out of doctrinal agreement, plain and simple. If he was REALLY Mahaneys friend, he would tell him to leave all his positions in the church until everything is resolved. Of course, Mohler wouldn’t get anything out of the relationship then, accept maybe distain for not being a real friend sooner.
@ Jeff S:
Great wee story, Jeff. Actually, imho, in stepping out of the pulpit and helping out with the weans he was in fact preaching on humility and service. The real teaching we do is surely the example we set, not the talks we give.
So, given the evidence you’ve presented on what your pastor really believes about service, he can preach what he likes on millennial eschatology *, for my money.
* The correct position is amillennialism, of course.
@ Wade Burleson:
Mr. Burleson,
I was so glad to see you on here. I had a question about what you wrote in a blog and tried to ask it there, but could not figure out how to do so. I had never commented on a blog until a few days ago and very unknowledeable regarding blogs. Anyway, what is the best way for me to ask you my question which has to do with your comments about the Greek culture and sex with a child.
RB wrote:
RB — Good comment.
T4G: “founding a ministry and for teaching doctrines and principles that are held to be true by vast millions of American evangelicals”
Hmmmm. T4G must not really understand the total depravity of man. If so, they would keep in mind CJ is not incapable of sin. Though, in their opinion, he has founded a great ministry and done great things, is it not also possible that he can fall? I’m 47 years old and there is no sin that surprises me anymore, nor any person that I believe to be incapable of falling.
I once found myself in the situation of having to ask a senior pastor to confront an abusive youth pastor. He refused to
do so. In perfect irony, weeks later he suffered a major heart attack and was left disabled and unable to work. A recent poster i saw said: I must admit that I sometimes smile when karma pays back someone who so deserves it.
“#51 Defendant David Adams was convicted and served jail time. He was welcomed back into the church without the church taking any effective steps to prevent him from having continued access to children.”
I am not a christian and even in my days of belief, i never had contact with these types of sects. But from what i/ve learned here, shouldn’t the above situation have required some of that “church discipline”?
“Vast millions”
Anon 1, you might find this one interesting.
It seems that Tom Ascol, head of the SBC Founders Conference, may be defending T4G and SGM in the wake of this scandal: http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html?showComment=1369494129776#c1946367116652934046
I also found this cryptic tweet from Ascol, made today: https://twitter.com/tomascol/status/338263306085220352
I think it aimed at those who have brought charges against SGM, as well as all who have criticized SGM online.
It also appears that the SBC Founders Conference is in bed with Vision Forum: https://twitter.com/tomascol/status/338368031044542464
@ nmgirl:
Some “church” common sense would have gone a long way. Simple things like constraints, warnings, and general policies on how to handle a convicted and released molester. Also guidlines on how to treat and afford restitution to those you abused would go a long way.
nmgirl wrote:
nmgirl — It is sad to say, but the entire Sovereign Grace Ministries child sexual abuse lawsuit and ongoing criminal investigations focus on your question — How could anyone allow a known sex offender to have access to children? Three of the 10 individual defendants have already gone to jail for child sex crimes (or through the juvenile system). One case in Maryland is ongoing now.
This has been called “America’s Biggest Evangelical Sex Scandal to Date.” It is horrific.
If you are interested, here is document with more than 200 paragraphs giving names, locations, and descriptions of the alleged child sexual abuse and cover up. http://spiritualsoundingboard.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2nd-amended-lawsuit-filing-may-14-2013.pdf
Here’s the Huffington Post article on it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/24/c-j-mahaney-scandal-evangelical-leaders-defend-pastor-accused-of-abuse-cover-up_n_3334500.html
For your consideration, in the TWW Title Zone…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAGyENr3_44
nmgirl wrote:
“All Animals Are Equal
BUT SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS!”
— G.Orwell, “Animal Farm”
Anon 1 wrote:
Anon 1 — I read the PDF that was linked to the article. Although a lot was said about how the document had been vetted by qualified people, it did not define child sexual abuse. If a church leader said, “I don’t think fondling is sexual abuse,” then — according to this document — they don’t have to report it.
Look at paragraph inside the box at the bottom of page 2! Look at the way the church staff is supposed to REPLY to someone who reports an allegation of sexual abuse against a minor. Does anyone else have problems with this? http://www.bradhambrick.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Response-Plan-for-Sexual-Abuse-Against-a-Minor-at-XYZ-Church.pdf
Anon 1 wrote:
The Dwarves are for The Dwarves and Won’t Be Taken In?
nmgirl wrote:
That is the problem with an ill-defined term. Abusive people can define it anyway they want.
RB wrote:
There are some who are already doing this. Just because you are being persecuted doesn’t mean that you don’t deserve it. Some Christians deserve to have their pants kicked.
Bridget wrote:
Good comment.
Janey, Here it is for everyone to weigh in if they want:
Reply: “Thank you for having the courage and integrity to come forward with this information. We have a policy and protocol in place to allow us to care for these kinds of situations. What you have said will be reported to our Pastor of
Children and Pastor of Counseling. We also have a response team comprised of non-church staff professionals who will ensure that the appropriate legal authorities will be notified. This team will contact you and ask that you put what you
have seen and/or heard in writing so that it can be a part of their report file. We ask that until they notify you of the legal steps that need to be taken, that you not share this information with anyone other than legal authorities who may
inquire about the case. You have done a good thing that allows us to ensure that the children in our care are safe and protected. Thank you.”
Action Step: Record the name, phone number, mailing address, and e-mail address of the person giving the report. Send this information directly to the Pastor of Children (e-mail address) and Pastor of Counseling (e-mail address). It is
the responsibility of these pastors to inform the response team and initiate the response protocols of the church.”
Here is my thought: You can call CPS anonymously. Have they learned nothing? They still want to control the response. I would be making sure the authorities are contacted and not go through all those layers and trust it happens. I don’t want THEM deciding whether there was abuse or not.
TedS. wrote:
Even gazillions!
@ Headless Unicorn Guy: I forgot about that song. Wow-does it ever speak to this situation.
Janey wrote:
This is very true.
Church discipline?
I read somewhere a while back that Dever at CHBC “disciplined” over 200 people for not attending church. Not sure how but I think by excommunicating them. (I wonder if he warned area churches about them?)
A huge crime, I suppose. Worse than protecting molesters in his world.
Justin Taylor, Gospel Coalition blogger and Vice President at Crossway, publisher of four C. J. Mahaney books, announced yesterday his good friendship with Mahaney, who has been accused of years of allegedly covering up child sexual abuse at 2 churches and a Christian school.
Justin Taylor’s next blog post was on child sexual abuse policies for churches. But there’s something strange about the plan he endorses (link below). I wonder what Boz Tchividjian would say about it?
1. Notice there is no definition of sexual abuse in Taylor’s recommended plan. (There is one in most plans.)
2. Notice that document says it is important to minimize the affects (sic) upon the minor from telling his/her story again. Page 3. (In my opinion, this says to parents that telling the story to the authorities will be traumatizing, and is therefore discouraged.)
3. It says specifically that “if is definitely difficult for children who can’t understand what happened to them.” — (Really? Kids **can’t** understand what happened? I’ll bet they can.)
4. You are to “REPORT IF: The accusation is potentially viable, meaning the accusation is of an action that qualities as sexual abuse and it could be true.” p. 4 (Now look at the next paragraph — it contradicts the first. It’s an example of confusing contortions in this document.)
5. This plan encourages church leaders to tell the person who reports to let the church handle it. They claim they will inform legal authorities. This discourages the people who report to the church to contact the authorities themselves. (A child’s parents are most likely to find out first about their child being abused.) See box at bottom of page 2.
Remember, there’s no definition of sexual abuse in the plan that Justin Taylor endorses, so if a church leader said, “I don’t think fondling is sexual abuse,” then they don’t have to report it. They also don’t have to report it (according to p. 4) if it’s not “potentially viable.” (Strange … what does *THAT* mean?)
LINKS
1. Plan recommended by Gospel Coalition’s Justin Taylor (supporter of C.J. Mahaney)
http://www.bradhambrick.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Response-Plan-for-Sexual-Abuse-Against-a-Minor-at-XYZ-Church.pdf
I wonder what Boz Tchividjian would say about this?
Anon 1 wrote:
Yes — Justin Taylor’s recommended church plan is ridiculous!
Janey, I think it was for Summit Church which is JD Greear. Correct me if I am wrong!
Anon 1 wrote:
Yes, it is, but it’s the one that Justin Taylor thinks so highly of. And Summit makes a huge deal about the number and qualifications of the people who wrote it.
Correction of a spelling error in point #3:
3. It says specifically that “it is definitely difficult for children who can’t understand what happened to them.” p. 3 — (Really? Kids **can’t** understand what happened? I’ll bet they can.)
“2. Notice that document says it is important to minimize the affects (sic) upon the minor from telling his/her story again. Page 3. (In my opinion, this says to parents that telling the story to the authorities will be traumatizing, and is therefore discouraged.)”
Ok, so why do so many pastoral types at Summit have to be told first and then decide? This is exactly the point of calling the Authorities. Let the experts investigate whether it is credible or not.
I know many Christians think CPS is full of hateful liberals who would love to stick it to a church. But I can say that here quite a few investigators and even administrators are evangelicals. One of them who went to a mega contacted the mega about Growing Kids God’s Way (Ezzo) to warn of problems with it. She made her case and the church decided to scrap the program.
It appears that Ascol’s defenses of Mahaney were posted on Facebook, but have now been deleted: http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html?showComment=1369525243908#c6268955793600450474
@ Nicholas:
Such manly comp men!
@ Anon 1:
This is crazy! This makes the church (whoevers) the arbitrators of who, what, when, and how abuse is reported! Any person who suspects abuse can report to the CPS anonymously. No one needs to go throught their church or pastors – ARGH!!
Anon 1, you mentioned on a previous thread how Christian apologist James R. White has been very vocal about the Ergun Caner scandal and the attempts to ignore and cover it up, but White has been silent on the SGM scandal. Caner’s sins are not even comparable to rape, child abuse, or the coverup of such crimes.
On Thursday’s episode of White’s internet radio broadcast, The Dividing Line, White responded to Rachel Evans’ article about John Piper and the SGM scandal: http://aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=5455
Except that White only responded to Evans’ comments on Piper. White did not mention the other topic of her blog post, which was the SGM scandal. If you had only listened to White’s comments, but had not visited Evans’ blog, you would think that her post was only about Piper. White’s avoidance of the topic was intentional.
The only time I have heard James White mention SGM at all on the Dividing Line was a comment he made in passing over a year or more ago about the SGM leadership having someone “calls himself an apostle.” No mention of Mahaney or SGM is on White’s blog.
I cannot currently attribute a motive to White’s avoidance of the issue. Unlike his friend Tom Ascol, White has not defended SGM. But people with whom White has much in common have spoken or written on the SGM scandal, including Ken Silva, Christine Pack, and Janet Mefferd (on whose radio show White has appeared multiple times). Why is White silent on SGM when he has been so vocal about a man whose sins are nothing by comparison?
What I do know is that White is, if not a fan, at least as great respecter of Al Mohler, and has recommended Mohler’s “The Briefing” podcast several times.
Bridget wrote:
Bridget, I am really seeing a pattern in this stuff. It is: “Look at us! We have a serious policy!” but the truth is that the policy is one where they want to totally manage the process inhouse. And I understand why: Image management. To me, this is nothing but a bait and switch policy to make them look good. It still sounds a lot like what SGM did. Tell the pastors first and let them handle it.
There are several problems with this that are usually not brought up:
1. It is NOT their (pastors) “church”. Yet that is how all this reads. The policy reads like they are the only ones who can handle this and are “in charge” over the process. This is a recurring problem in churches especially Calvinist. The “Body of Christ” is hierarchical and “belongs to the leaders” so people become lulled into thinking they need other humans in charge of them to make such important decisions. It encourages spiritual immaturity. When are people going to wake up that their pastor is a paid employees of them!
If there is one thing I learned in the mega industrial complex it is this: The leaders do not trust the attendees at all. And that is because they do not know them. How could they?
2. If anyone who works with children has to sign off on this policy they could be actually encouraging a real problem. They are agreeing to hand off their concerns to someone else to make a decision on whether to call the authorities or not. I would be uncomfortable with this because i would want an expert to investigate who would know how to approach the child. Child molestation is more common than folks think.
3. Where is the guarantee that the leaders, who are to be informed right away to take charge and decide whether it warrants calling the authorities, properly trained in such things? Where did they receive their training? I would want to know this before I signed anything about reporting to them any concerns.
Let’s face it. The day has come we simply cannot trust a leader because he has the word pastor as a title. Too many churches have become unsafe places with leaders who think they own the place….and you.
Nicholas, Some neighbors have a designer albino pit bull who barks his head off every time we walk by his electronic fence. I have nicknamed him: James White. :o)
Anon 1 wrote:
Agreed. It has become increasingly obvious to me as I’ve become more informed on this issue that this is the ONLY approach to take. “The Authorities” are very far from perfect, but our justice system is the best shot we have for any kind of objectivity in this kind of situation. Wasn’t abuse at Penn State reported to people within the institution rather than to the authorities? How did that work out? The awful truth is that an absolutely depressing number of people will choose personal loyalties and their own pathetic careers over justice.
Anon 1 wrote:
THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!
Nicholas wrote:
UGH!
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I was singing this song in my head while writing the post. Thanks for the link! I heard it a lot on the radio when I was young.
“While they wile away the hours in their ivory towers…”
Joe South was prophetic!
Dee & Deb: If either of you captured Tom Ascol’s (with his wife) comment left on the T4G facebook post (deleted now), could you post it here? Thanks.
Deb wrote:
Don’t forget —
“And they’ll try to sock it to ya
In the name of the LOORD…”
Real Christian persecution is people who identify with Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, knowing that it may mean, and often has, the loss of job, the loss of family and friends, the loss of life. I think the alleged victims and plaintiffs are suffering real Christian persecution, whether or not they now identify with the name of Christ, because what they allegedly suffered was done in the context of Christ’s name/within a Christian church setting. The loss of book sales or a jail sentence served for a few? years for something proven in a court of law, hardly compares.
Doug Phillips is covering up his own scandal involving a woman who has been improper with boys in the church and quite a few families have come forward…yet nothing has been done. Nicholas wrote:
Deb: Thanks for the reminder.
http://youtu.be/ejIS2bf0ETs
Anon 1 wrote:
Wow, I had a lot of respect for Matt Carter despite his affiliation with Acts 29. It is really disheartening to see him to share the stage with CJ. I went to his church for a number of years, only leaving because of doctrinal issues and an abundance of pride/arrogance of the members. But I still respected him, until now that is. It really hurts to see someone you trusted and respected choose to affiliate with these people at the loss of children’s well beings.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Your analogy of conspiracy theorists to those Narnian dwarfs is inspired. I laughed when you first brought it up and tracked down the book to read again. Finished it a couple of days ago, and it occurred to me that supporters of Mahaney (not SGM fiasco itself) are doing the same thing.
To wit: “…their Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory has become a completely-closed system pinched off from external reality behind its own event horizon. Where any and all evidence against The Conspiracy is PROOF of The Conspiracy…”
Nicholas wrote:
I remember James White saying on The Dividing Line that the reason he pursued the story on Caner was because Caner claimed to do what White does – debate on the topic of apologetics. White has done 100+ documented debates and Caner was claiming to have done debates he never did. Plus, White has done extensive study and published a book on Islam, so he could tell Caner was not an expert in Islam.
I have listened to the Dividing Line off and on over the years and it seems White sticks to areas of apologetics and topics he’s written about (Islam, Catholicism, apologetics, Mormanism) and will even say when he takes calls to stick to the topic that his show is not The Bible Answer Man. Whereas, someone like Chris Roseborough of Pirate Christian Radio is all over the place and he talks about a variety of current topics in Christianity.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Also….
“Cause you’ve given up your sanity
For your pride and your vanity
Turns you sad on humanity
And you don’t give a da da da da da….”
@ M. Joy:
I also listen to Chris Rosebrough’s show, and Rosebrough is even a member of the same denomination as I (the LCMS). His show has been very informative on the cult-like nature of seeker-driven churches, and the reason for it (vision casting, pastor-fuhrers, et al).
Rosebrough also played part of the ABC 20/20 documentary on abuse in the IFB on his show, and discussed how they are a law-based system with no gospel.
But I have been disappointed that Rosebrough has not discussed similar abuse in wider evangelicalism. Last year I sent him information from multiple sources documenting this story: http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/11/07/phillip-gunn-sbts-al-mohler-legal-rightmoral-right/
Although he has responded to emails I have sent him on other topics, he did not respond to the email on this subject. Then he continued to play “good” sermons by Al Mohler and Russell Moore on his show. I was disappointed in him for sure, but I cannot judge his heart.
To my knowledge, Rosebrough has also not mentioned SGM at all on his show.
Nicholas wrote:
That should be “emails” plural. I sent him multiple emails on the Mohler-Gunn Langworthy coverup scandal, but he didn’t respond to a single one of them. I know he must have read them, because he has responded to emails I have sent him on unrelated subjects.
And it was *after* I sent him these emails that he continued to play “good” sermons by Russell Moore and Al Mohler. That is why I was so frustrated and disappointed. Does he not realize that someone can preach a “good” sermon and not be a good Christian or even a good person?
As the pastor of a very small church (55 people) for the past 20 years our here on the edge of the world at the Oregon coast, I wonder just how long I would be allowed to continue in my position if I were 1) charged with coverup of sexual abuse, 2) the charges came from, let’s see, 11 people is it? 3) numbers of the abuse perpetrators were or had been in my church, 4) a lawsuit was filed against me alleging coverup of horrific and shocking abuse….??? Would it be good enough for my congregation to continue to trust me if the case was dismissed only because the statute of limitations had run out?
So what is the difference? Why would I be packing up my books on a Monday morning and people like Mahaney not only continue in ministry but are even invited to come and speak at conferences, and to have their books published? Sorry, but I have to conclude that the reasons come down to money and power and hanging with cohorts who have money and power.
Even if I had ever known people like Dever and Piper and company, does anyone really think that they would keep standing with me like they have with Mahaney? Why not? Why would they distance themselves right quick from me? It is because I would be no loss to them.
It is long past time for genuine followers of Jesus Christ to heed His words about “it shall not be so with you” in regard to power and position in His kingdom. If the least are the greatest, then WHY do we keep oohing and aahing over the great ones of our day? There is only one best-selling Author we must look to, and in fact His Book is the all-time best seller in history anyway.
I wonder if we can get His autograph when we see Him?
It is hard to imagine the actual conversations that Mahaney has had with the men of T4G and TGC regarding this issue. It is also difficult to imagine what Mahaney’s internal dialogue, justification, and delusion is concerning all of this. I wonder if he recalls the very first incident he became aware of and his choice to cover it up rather than report. From that moment, he began building this house of cards.
@ Jeff Crippen:
I love every word of this. So true!
Nicholas wrote:
“ONE OF US! ONE OF US!
GOOBLE! GOBBLE!
ONE OF US!”
— Tood Browning, Freaks
Jeff Crippen wrote:
You raised good points, but I think it goes beyond power and money with some churches.
I’ve been to sites which discuss sexual and domestic abuse taking place among Independent Fundamentalist Baptist churches (and other denominations), and some of these churches are smallish too, maybe only 100 – 200 people per church, yet a lot of abuse goes on for years and years, it gets covered up, excused, and the victims get blamed.
In some churches, money may play a big role in this, but I suspect it also gets down to their (faulty) theological beliefs.
Some of these churches really focus on the verses that talk about women submitting to their husbands, (they ignore verses that talk about mutual submission; they ignore examples where God put women in charge over men, or alongside men, etc), so they have this theology about men should be in control of women.
These sorts of churches also have similar views of children. They ignore teachings where Christ was very outspoken about child abuse, and they instead like to focus on verses about ‘sparing the rod,’ etc.
I really think it’s their selfish natures combined with a faulty, very narrow understanding, or applications of, cherry picked Bible verses that causes a lot of abuse, and placing the importance of sound doctrine over and above people, or at the expense of qualities Christ said He cares about too, such as mercy, grace, and compassion.
rubytuesday, i think that’s “turned your back on humanity”. Wouldn’t have mentioned it, but it’s just so da da da appropriate, because women, children and people in low places have had backs turned on them for money and power in the name of Christ and what they claim as purity of doctrine. Women and children make up a big segment of humanity.
Just for the record, here are the major Christian news outlets that have not reported on the child sexual abuse and cover up allegations against C. J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries since May 14, 2013, when the detailed list of alleged names, locations, and description of the sexual acts was released.
CHRISTIAN POST
CHRISTIANITY TODAY
WORLD MAGAZINE
(Christianity Today’s Gleanings blog mentioned the lawsuit in 2 articles since May 14, 2013, but it has not been mentioned in the main Christianity Today blog.)
@ Janey:
“Justin Taylor’s next blog post was on child sexual abuse policies for churches.”
from the “initial stages” of response:
“The church elders have the information necessary to oversee the care for the victim and the victim’s family, as well as discipline and care for the perpetrator, and the general care of the congregation.”
++++++++++++++++++++
the notion of the elders “having information necessary to oversee the care” for me makes want to run as hard as I can for the rest of the afternoon.
@ elastigirl:
Crazy. Right, Elastigirl?!
Just keep trusting those elders, especially when you see how well it played out for the victims of abuse at SGM. I want to know why Elders think it’s appropriate to usurp the role of the government. The government is much more versed at how to prosecute abusers than Elders are. If they want to usurp the government’s authority regarding investigating and prosecuting abuse, I wonder what’s next? Will they collect taxes, write new laws, declare war . . . hmm, maybe their already dabling in those endeavors.
elastigirl wrote:
Elastigirl — Move over a bit and I’ll run with you… It’s frightening. Justin Taylor’s post on the proper way to handle child sexual abuse proves that he doesn’t get it, and apparently neither does Brad Hambrick (the guy Justin links to). I seriously wonder if the professionals Brad lists as contributors to his Summit Church action plan actually saw the final resulting policy. Maybe someone should alert them.
elastigirl wrote:
I know, Frightening isn’t it. Thing is, this is EXACTLY what SGM did without writing it down.
Trust us. We know best.
Right. After that statement defending Mahaney? I think not.
@ Bridget:
It’s the elders’ job to “care for”, and it’s our job to be still and “be cared for”. Like dolls, in a way.
Like dolls, that they dress up, play doctor and put bandaids on booboos, position them like this and like that, make them sit over here in this chair with this other doll in that chair at this little table, put hats on their heads, a pretend tea party, have them make polite chitchat, then pick them up, take off the hats, walk their legs around to talk to this other doll they leaned up against a potted plant…
Bridget here is what makes me angry about it: Let’s say they believe there really is not enough evidence to warrant calling in authorities. Time goes on and then there is another incident. This time they do call… but here is the problem….. CPS would have at least documented the first call and written a non intervention report. The second time, they have some sort of a pattern from the accounts for investigation. This is important in dealing with molestation investigations. Most molesters have many victims, as you know.
I want the folks who do this all the time to say there is nothing here to investigate further. Not some elder with a church image to protect.
The “elders” should not be deciding this. They could be enabling further molestation without even realizing it and once they do there is no “pattern” to investigate. Predators LOVE this. It buys them tons of time.
CPS takes anonymous calls….so sign nothing and IGNORE the ELDERS and do your civic duty if you suspect something is going on. Of course, they won’t allow you to work with kids either without signing.
But I see nothing really different from what SGM did except write it down.
@ elastigirl:
….like Sid, from Toy Story????? but smilier.
http://www.the-leaping-lamp.com/toy-story-favorite-moments.html
If doctors and hospitals can have good relations with CPS investigators, so can pastors. In fact, I would think that would be part of a good witness.
@ Nicholas:
I’m also LCMS and I fear that there is a contingent in the denomination that is starting to listen to the Neo-Calvinists. Worrying stuff here and there. For instance, the fact that an LCMS theology book on gender added a chapter on the Trinity in its latest edition. I wish I could remember the name. My spidey sense keeps going off.
@ Hester:
Here is a website I found linked on the Steadfast Lutherans blog: http://www.hausvater.org/
It looks pretty innocuous, but it also looks like it could be influenced by CBMW and like sources. There is no mention of CBMW or any non-Lutheran source on this site, but Confessional Lutherans would typically not be willing to admit to being influenced by non-Lutherans.
In regards to the book you mentioned, attempts to relate the Trinity to marriage relations are definitely CMBW-influenced. Scripture does not make any such comparison. Rather, the Scriptures relate marriage to the relationship between Christ and the Church.
Hester, same here. Went to a classically Arminian church as a visitor today, and noticed something up on the big screen, “Chapter 29”. There wasn’t anything else shown or said there to give me context, so I wondered if this was a reference to Acts 29 churches. The church was one of those turned-Willowcreek subsidiaries. I keep hearing lots of references to the sovereignty of God now in our regular church, too. I know God is sovereign, but in the sovereignty, I believe it is a much more open system than how Calvinists think of it. I think God gives us free will since we are made in the image of God. Maybe the sovereignty word is getting my attention more now, because I’m on hyper alert for those catch phrases after SGM. But I know what you mean, “spidey senses”.
UPDATE
Tom Ascol has said that he has not commented on the SGM scandal or T4G’s statement:
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html?showComment=1369592229634#c4937088217150921496
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html?showComment=1369616054732#c1289763834407087570
Nicholas wrote:
This was wrong. I had forgotten that Rosebrough did mention it in a segment called “Al Mohler is not Joe Paterno”: http://www.fightingforthefaith.com/2012/10/holy-moses.html
This defense of Mohler was made in October. In it, Rosebrough claims that Mohler’s complementarianism is the real reason that people are criticizing Mohler’s defenses of C.J. Mahaney.
Perhaps Rosebrough has fallen into the error of thinking that doctrine outweighs everything else.
“I keep hearing lots of references to the sovereignty of God now in our regular church, too. I know God is sovereign, but in the sovereignty, I believe it is a much more open system than how Calvinists think of it.”
This is usually how it starts. Problem is it is constantly repeated and people totally agree with the words without realizing it is being used in the context of God controlling every molecule 24/7. This is happening paricularly with new youth pastors from SBTS here. It can take parents quite a while to catch on and when they do, there is usually a big problem because by then, the youth are attached to the youth pastor.
Have a question for you translation buffs out there. Why is the ESV so touted by the Calvinistas? We use different translations and an interlinear.
RB wrote:
Check out ESV publishers website and take note of authors they publish.
RB wrote:
I’ve noticed that too. Sovereignty is a very big deal to Calvinists and Neo Calvinists and they mention it frequently, although it apparently isn’t as big a deal to God Himself, since God the Holy Spirit chose to summarize Himself in the Bible as… Love (“God is Love.”)
Another word a lot of Calvinists/ Neo Calvinists/ Reformed have been using a lot lately is “repent.” “Sin” is also pretty popular.
I do see the necessity of un saved people needing to hear the Gospel (they are sinners, are called to repentance), but they seem to over emphasize these concepts, and even seem to want to shout them at people who are already Christian, as though the Christians are pagans.
They don’t seem to stress words / concepts such as “mercy,” “grace,” “love” and “forgiveness” nearly as much.
Pingback: SGM Founder C. J. Mahaney and the Men Who Love to Love Him | The Reformed Traveler's Research
@ RB:
That is SO true!
@ Nicholas:
I’d not heard of James White so listened to his podcast regarding Rachel Held Evans’ post on Piper. He makes foolish and ignorant statements and is contemptuous and divisive.
He is not wise or trustworthy.
@ Patrice:
Ditto Chris Roseborough. Who gives these guys voice?
@ Daisy: Theologian Scot McKnight has a very good eBook/essay on the particular form of sovereignty the NeoReformed are caught up in — “called “meticulous” (or “exhaustive)” sovereignty“ — released last week.
@ Nicholas:
RED ALERT!!!!!!! Did you look at the recommended reading list from the “hausmutter”?
Created to Be His Helpmeet by Debi Pearl (co-author of the spanking book that has contributed to the deaths of three children)
Passionate Housewives Desperate for God by Jennie Chancey and Stacie McDonald
Managers of Their Homes by Teri Maxwell (Maxwells had a conference once in my area are they are supreme legalists – called television “The Beast”)
Not all of these are overtly Neo-Calvinist, but it seems Hausvater has a different set of problems. Also, this lady lives in the small city only 50 mi or so away from my grandma’s house…sigh. Numo, I think you may be right about Upper Midwest LCMS if this is the kind of stuff it’s producing.
http://www.hausvater.org/book-reviews/268-a-hausmutter-reading-list.html
Addendum @ Nicholas:
Also look up The Concordian Sisters of Perpetual Parturition. They’re basically Quiverfull LCMS.
2nd addendum @ Nicholas:
Vision Forum sells stuff by Jennie Chancey so she’s hooked into patriarchal circles.
@ RB:
Thankfully it’s not in my local congregation. It’s stuff I’ve seen in national-level articles, etc. – for instance the fact that the denomination’s president used the word “winsome” twice in a single video. To those not exposed to Neo-Calvinism, that word wouldn’t mean anything but I can’t help asking where he heard it.
But according to other Lutherans here I live in a freakishly liberal district of the LCMS so…
Hester and Nicolas,
I just stumbled across Deb/Dee’s hysterical analysis of the 83 Biblical Rules for Gospel women. You’ve probably already seen it. http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/12/03/wayne-grudem-83-biblical-rules-for-gospel-women/
I remember when I got an email from my (old) church saying women could now pass the offering plate. Oh, happy day! /sarcasm
I’ve met Wayne Grudem. That man could definitely use some winsomeness.
Hester wrote:
I choked on my bacon. You cannot make this stuff up.
RB wrote:
This is most important. Do not let people get away with throwing terms around. Ask them precisely what they mean. I will be talking a bit more about church discipline in that context later today. Ask questions, always!
RB wrote:
The translation and the notes were meant to reflect Reformed theology. The majority of those who participated are Calvinists.
@ Nicholas: I am confused. Who claimed the Ascol commented? i saw this over at Wade’ site and linked then to all the T$G comments. I knew he did a tweet but decided not to comment on it because of the Piper debacle since I did not know the background.
@ Hester:
Looks like I missed that. In any case, this “hausvater” website is not any kind of official LCMS site. I wouldn’t have known about it if it wasn’t linked to at BJS.
What kind of “Lutherans” would recommend Debi or Michael Pearl?
Janey wrote:
Too funny.
@dee
Debbie Kaufman initially said that Tom Ascol had commented on the SGM scandal: http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html?showComment=1369494129776#c1946367116652934046
But she now says that she was mistaken: http://www.wadeburleson.org/2013/05/grace-non-profit-that-speaks-truth.html?showComment=1369596691756#c151684858271272924
@ dee:
Even the translation itself is made to reflect Reformed theology?
@ Nicholas:It depends on which side of the fence you are on. Those who are Reformed will say it is the best translation of the words. Others might disagree. The question to ask is “Why is this translation being pushed by the Reformed community and not by those who are not Reformed?”
Daisy wrote:
In fact- the God of Love is AWOL in the official T4G statement of beliefs. This caused me to go ballistic last year: http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/04/23/t4g-cooks-up-gospel-ratatouille-and-serves-up-a-lukewarm-gender-gospel/
‘Dave A A on Tue Apr 24, 2012 at 09:52 AM said:
“All this just detracts from the Gospel”
Everybody! Take some time and look through the 18-point gospel affirmation of t4g and look for some of the missing PRIMARY matters!
The Love of God
The Kingdom of God
Eternal life
The virgin birth
The miracles
The blood of Jesus
The ascension
Pentecost
Life, fruit, gifts, fullness, power, counsel, conviction, and instruction of the Holy Ghost
Election, Call, Sanctification
Goodness and mercy
Repentance (we see “Sinners are commanded to believe the Gospel” rather than “sinners are commanded to repent and believe the Gospel.”)
The ongoing total authority of the risen, living Christ over all things FOR the church (real headship)
Forgiveness of sins
The second coming
Resurrection of the dead, New heavens and earth, no more sorrow no more tears, the pearly gates, the streets of gold, the river of LIFE, the tree of LIFE
Love one another forgive one another
The love of God constrains us
Repent! For the kingdom of God is near!
For God sooooo loved the world….
Love’
And later:
‘Where’s baptism in the 18 t4 gospel a&d’s? All these folks for 2000 years getting sprinkled, poured on, or dunked, and it’s not even important enough to include in the t4 gospel? And the Lord’s supper only mentioned by the t4 gospel in the context of getting ex’d out through church discipline…
Someone with more creativity and time than I have today— it would be interesting to see the 2nd chapter of Acts rewritten as t4g would have done– leaving out all they leave out and adding what they add….
What if it had been Dever with the 9 instead of Peter with the 11?’
(a week or two later I wrote Acts 32– the English Slandered Version of Acts 2)
@ Dave A A:
Trying links again
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/04/23/t4g-cooks-up-gospel-ratatouille-and-serves-up-a-lukewarm-gender-gospel/
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/05/04/combatting-muscular-christianity/
dee wrote:
To RB’s question– there’s a good discussion by modern-day Puritans here: http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/esv-calvinists-67062/ The best answer: Marketing Marketing Marketing
Note meant to reflect Reformed theology– for sure. But I’ve never seen or noticed any examples of the translation itself doing so, and it’s the version I’ve used the most, recently. The verses which most support Calvnism will do so in just about any version!
Daisy, thanks for that beautiful reminder! And THAT LOVE has and will overcome. The Reformed folks I’ve come in contact with in the last 10 years, were so caught up with election-taken-to-the-extreme, that they rarely spoke of the need for repentance, except to keep it in the context of God having granted it to the particular sinner who was predestined for salvation. Not surprisingly, they had a real disdain for evangelism.
Hester, that’s good to hear, and thanks for your comment. Hope it doesn’t show up.
Anon 1, Dee and Dave A A, thanks. That’s what I thought. If they all spend $ on an ESV study Bible, it strengthens their cause. The RCC, JW, LDS and SDA’s all have their own, why not the Calvinistas? I will sell ours for as much $ as possible and donate the proceeds to the alleged victims in the lawsuit via Susan Burke.
As far as Acts being re-translated, one thing I doubt they’d reveal, that such a large percentage of Jews came to faith in Jerusalem during and after Pentecost. Have heard estimates of 20-30,000, have also heard an estimate of 1/3 of Jerusalem.
@ Dee:
I know. Others have said here before that they sound like something straight out of a Monty Python sketch.
The best part about their blog is that they have a little disclaimer right on the front page that basically says “If you don’t like what we say, you don’t have to read it” (code: disagreement in the comments not wanted so don’t).
@ Nicholas:
I’m starting to wonder about this BJS site and some associated blogs within a click or two. They seem to be pushing CBMW-esque and anti-contraception views very hard. I’m all for Lutheran theology and Lutheran liturgy, but they shouldn’t be tying them to gender roles and condoms as if you can’t have one without the other.
Then again, maybe that’s why the number of deaconesses in the LCMS is so small…
Hester wrote:
It’s quite straightforward, if you only want to hang out with your buddies who agree with you (as Fiscal both does, and mocks others for doing), to set your blog up as invite-only. Then you don’t have to worry about any negative comments.
But someone might say: Ah, but we’re so anointed and blessed of God that our audience is too big. That, too, is easy: just set up an online hierarchy, with multiple layers of cell-blog leadership. It’s not rocket-science.
Sorry – missing forward-slash after the phrase “our audience is too big”, which unfortunately made rather a mess of what I was saying…
I’m also aware of a well known non profit which is supposedly non denom, now using ESV primarily. And this involves purchases. I’m tempted to assume that someone high up in the org. has wheeled and dealed to make this happen. I called them on it, and got no specific response, although they said they’d find out and get back to me. That was over a month ago, still no response. The vague guess they answered me with was that ESV is possibly cheaper to produce. hmmm, perhaps, but other versions have been out there a lot longer, so I tend to think otherwise.
@ Hester:
I had to look up the word “parturition”. Perpetual parturition???
It looks like the Hausvater project endorses their blog: http://www.hausvater.org/web-links/167-concordian-sisters-of-perpetual-parturition.html
The Hausvater project is run by Ryan C. MacPherson, a professor at Bethany Lutheran College in Mankato, MN. Bethany Lutheran College is affiliated with the Evangelical Lutheran Synod.
http://www.hausvater.org/about/52-board.html
http://gelc-wels.org/ministries/christian-parenting/106-hausvater-project
The ELS is a microsynod that broke off relations with LCMS but retains them with WELS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Synod
MacPherson has been interviewed by Todd Wilken on Issues, Etc: http://issuesetc.org/tag/hausvater-project/
It angers me that men posing as “Confessional” Lutherans are trying to sell us poison from Rushdoonyite Reconstructionism and IFB Fundamentalism with the name “Lutheran” stamped on it.
Maybe Deb or Dee could do a post about how Gothardism/Quiverfull/Vision Forum is bleeding into other branches of Christianity.
Eagle mentioned a while back that the EFCA was being influenced by neocalvinism.
Let’s hope it’s a passing fad, like Christian Astrology was in the 60’s. Makes about as much spiritual sense to me. “This will be a good day to converse with soul mates, as the cusp of Pisces aligns with Jupiter’s 2nd moon”. See? It was all predestined!
Dave A A wrote:
Yes Dave. So glad someone else is seeing this specifically. Your entire comment was spot on. they sound a lot like their dead heros.
RB
Ah, it reminds me of Hair-When the moon is in the 7th house and Jupiter aligns with Mars…. You know, that is an interesting observation. Astrology as predestination…totally freak them out.
Hester wrote:
And here it is from MacPherson: http://www.hausvater.org/articles/227-trinitarian-foundation-for-genuine-marriage-equality.html
@ Hester: You might want to consider transferring your letter to an ELCA church (not joking; it sounds like the LCMS is going to be dealing with this garbage for a long time).
@ Nicholas: I’m not surprised – there have been fundy Lutherans in the Midwest for a long, long time now.
Sometimes it’s best to transfer from one synod to another. I know you disagree with some of the ELCA’s (optional) stances, but if the LCMS gets overrun by these people, I suspect that a lot of folks might make a switch.
As for the WELS being involved, it stands to reason…
Thanks, Dee, and since the thread is, the Games People Play, don’t think for one minute, that I, as a mixed up silly teenager who didn’t understand the gospel, didn’t try and make those horoscopes “line up” as in delineation, lol, with what I wanted to have happen that day, even though in my pubescent zombiness, I still thought they might have some indirect influence on my person/on my future. My mother always had several different ones laying around, none of which matched each other, and that was what finally made me realize the foolishness and greed behind the movement. Talk about isogesis! I think the Plato/Augustine influence on modern theology is closer to star worship than we want to acknowledge. But, then, we still worship the Christian celeb “stars”, at least in the West, to a large extent. We still have our Greek and Roman gods, so to speak. What’s worse, though, is that we are in essence, sacrificing our children to Molech, the star-god, with the hyper-patriarchal/hyper-authoritarianism/disregard for women and children, inherent in Plato/Augustinian thought. At least, that’s what I’ve come to believe in the last 2 years or so.
@ Numo:
I grew up in the local ELCA church here so I know that congregation very well. The “optional” stance on gay marriage/clergy is not “optional” there. They currently have a practicing lesbian interim. I can’t yet tell how deep this goes in the LCMS but I’ve never seen it in my local district. Somebody has to stand against this stuff on the grassroots level which is what I’m prepared to do (loudly and bluntly) if it does make an appearance.
Maybe there’s a reason God put me in a Neo-Calvinist PCA church for three years…I now know what to look for in the early stages.
@ Nicholas:
Bethany used to be a WELS school. I know this because my mom graduated from the MN state university across town. She has friends who went to Bethany and it used to be even smaller than it is now. I don’t know when the denominational switch was made, but if MacPherson was on the faculty before the switch he might actually be an “incognito” WELS.
Nicholas wrote:
Pretty much. All translations have bias, and the ESV was definitely done with a Reformed bias in mind. I don’t see any issue with that. If you think that Reformed theology is the best framework for understanding the Bible, choosing when there are uncertainties then choosing translations which reflect that understanding makes sense. It was based on the RSV, which a lot of Reformed folks used before the ESV came out.
And at least it had a note for Phoebe indicating that the word “servant” can be translated as “deaconess”. That’s more than you get in a lot of translations. In fact, which not as gender inclusive as TNIV, I understand the ESV did draw some criticism for being new gender inclusive than its predecessor.
So far, I’ve enjoyed it more than the NASB and NIV which were the primary versions I’ve used in the past.
Arg- sorry for more typos 🙁 silly phone posting . . .
Another problem I have with the ESV is that those who were really promoting it as the most literal translation were at the same time totally trashing the TNIV. The TNIV is not sold in Lifeway stores and quite frankly, getting harder and harder to find. They did a good job of making it out to be the feminazi translation with gender bias. They had a lot of people despising something they had not really checked out. And all because it used “brothers and sisters” instead of brothers.
Ridiculous.
Anon 1 wrote:
And the original NIV is getting even harder, thanks to Zondervan, who is scrubbing the internet of all original NIVs. Bible Gateway has a lot of translations on it – but the original NIV is no more. Book burning is alive and well.
Anon, if there’s no male or female (as in greater vs. lesser) in Christ (I know, I know, that’s supposedly reserved for our spiritual standing, not our earthly one, by some) then, to me, it is not extrapolating to think that Paul was speaking to all in the churches he was addressing. I disagree with those who think Paul was this big woman-hater. I know there are folks who could pull out verses in support of that, but I’ve heard a different take on the issue, that Paul needed to address temple prostitution and other sexually related issues which were rampant in the culture of the day. That may be taking it too far, and if I’m wrong, I trust God will show me, but for now, even though I certainly don’t consider myself a feminist, I do know my standing in Christ, and I don’t believe a male Christian is better than a female one.
Sorry, I meant Anon 1.
Yes, my first exposure to TNIV was a guy trashing it for being driven by and “agenda pure and simple”. Although his preference was for the NIV (but is Reformed).
http://betterbibles.com/2007/04/01/grudem-joins-tniv-team/
Jeff, You will get a kick out of this. Don’t skip the comments.
@ Hester: OK, some thoughts –
– she is an interim
– what do you mean by “practicing”? is she in a committed relationship? Or is it simply that she’s open about her orientation?
– is there another ELCA church nearby? Really, there’s a wide variety in the synod.
– As an (optional) comment, I would encourage you to be open-minded about the LGBT ordination issue. I used to be on the other side of the fence myself, fwiw…
@ Jeff S: It actually seems fairly close to the old RSV, in many ways – to me, at least. (Not NRSV – the original RSV.)
@ Anon 1:
I just know he’s going to find a verse that reads that a woman’s only calling is to wash dirty dishes. Galatians 3:28 will be re-worded, or perhaps omitted altogether. 🙂
@ Numo:
If I’m not mistaken I had heard she had a partner. Also this was (one of) the issues we left that church over before and as I said, culturally it’s not a debatable issue in that congregation. You must either fully support gay marriage/ordination or you are a close-minded backwards bigot (which we found out the hard way).
There are one or two other ELCA churches in the area (smaller than the one above) but as I’ve said before, we’re pretty happy in our LCMS church. Honestly, if you told the folks at our current church about the stuff discussed in this thread, their eyes would bug out of their heads in horror. Unless something changes drastically, it’s a good in-between for us as we’re way too liberal for the crazy sectors of the LCMS in other parts of the country, and way too conservative for the local ELCA culture.
@ Hester:
The quiverfull “Lutherans” that we have discussed in this thread are, I believe, a tiny minority with no real voice in the LCMS or the other synods (anyone can set up a website or a blog). You are correct that we need to combat any such thing at the local level if and when we encounter it, so as to prevent its spread. We should treat all false and dangerous teaching in the same way.
As for the BJS blog, I believe that they have gotten themselves on the bad side of the current conservative LCMS leadership. And one of their former bloggers, Todd Wilken, even left the blog and deleted all of his postings from the site, which suggests that he didn’t want to be associated with BJS anymore.
@ Nicholas:
“The quiverfull ‘Lutherans’ that we have discussed in this thread are, I believe, a tiny minority with no real voice in the LCMS or the other synods…”
I hope so. I’ll keep monitoring this situation and go listen to that Issues Etc. episode you linked to. Hopefully it’s a good sign that I’d never heard of them until about a month ago.
numo wrote:
As I understand it, they left a very high percentage of the RSV intact without any change at all.
@ Anon 1:
That made my head spin- lol
Hester wrote:
Your struggle with the liberal/conservative sides of the Lutheran church makes me think of this quote by Tim Keller (if you will allow for a source that is both TGC and PCA!):
“The moralistic grid divides the world into the good people and the bad people. The good are in and the bad are out. And the relativistic grid divides the world into the open-minded people and the bigots. The open-minded people are in and the bigots are out. But the Gospel divides the world into the humble and the proud. It says the humble are in and the proud are out.”
Finding a church that really believes the last statement is hard 🙁
@ Jeff S: From my admittedly brief reading, it sure looks that way!
@ Hester: I understand what you’re saying about the other congregation, but at the same time, I think that it’s wise to look at a person’s character above all else. (In this case, and in any other.)
Not meaning to be argumentative, as church politics are what they are, but as to the interim, well…
@ Hester: it might be more nuanced than you think (local ELCA culture), too.
@ RB:
What is a feminist?
@ Jeff S: I misread your comment earlier – I meant to say that the ESV looks like a cut-and-paste of the old RSV.
The NRSV: reads a lot more smoothly (is in contemporary English, not slightly updated KJV English). Not sure about other differences, per whether there’s any portion of new translation. Will have to check that out.
@ Daisy:
Daisy, In case you did not see it full in, the post was an April fools day joke precisely because Grudem was one of the biggies on trashing the TNIV. And has you know, Grudem is the last word on ST for many folks.
Jeff S wrote:
Now this’ll set the cat among the hitting the fan.
What if an honestly and demonstrably humble person gives a fair hearing to a person who once favourably reviewed a book by a person who shared a platform with a speaker who questioned the traditional understanding of penal substitutionary atonement?
Jeff – I fear you’re right. It’s hard to find a church that truly believes in humility, and would not inevitably conclude that said person could not be humble after all since humility is evidenced by conformity to their preferred interpretations of the BibleScriptures™.
elastigirl, by feminist, I’m thinking of the militant man-hater, who wants to make all issues gender based in order to win a perceived battle. That is not to say that many men don’t fit this description against women, especially the Floyd R. Turbo types in the Calvinista good ol boys’ club. They are reducing women to sex objects who can birth babies and do dishes for their egos’ sakes. Women should be treated with the same respect as men, paid the same as men if they are able to do the same job, etc. For me, it boils down to what Nick Bulbeck said above, that it should be about humility, serving and submitting to one another in agape love.
@ RB: I think the “militant man-hater” is a 70s stereotype, actually – no offense, but “feminist” does not equal bra burning and “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” t-shirts.
[/puts “militant” 70s self to bed]
@ numo: Actually… bra-burning was kinda silly (I think).
Yes, guess I’m just dating myself, numo, pun not intended. Glad I’m not young anymore.
Twittering with Jared Moore right now about SGM case. Let’s see if this gets anywhere. https://twitter.com/jaredhmoore/status/339553098320207872
Julie Anne wrote:
Julie Anne — Hang in there. I cannot believe he hasn’t read the lawsuit. Absolutely amazing.
Everything from this point on is alleged for the lawyers…
Nearly every paragraph is horribly graphic, detailing names, locations, and description of sexual abuse.
Summary of some key paragraphs, which are abridged and not quoted verbatim:
Paragraph
#1
Describes this as a lawsuit seeking damages for all person harmed by an ongoing conspiracy that permitted sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.
#2
Abuse of children occurred at church buildings, school buildings, during church retreats, and other events.
#29
From 1982 to present conspiracy of defendants to permit sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.
#34
8-year-old child had to meet with the defendant who molested her and another defendant and was told to “forgive” the molester. The defendant did not report the molestation.
#36-37
Youth ministry leader Morales molested several boys. These boys admitted it to youth leader Chris Glass during a youth group purity talk, but were cautioned against talking about the facts.
#51 Defendant David Adams was convicted and served jail time. He was welcomed back into the church without the church taking any effective steps to prevent him from having continued access to children.
#75-77
Second-grade girl pushed down and gang-raped by defendants and by other adults who were wearing masks.
#109
Defendants Ecelbarger, Mullery and V. Hinders, conspiring together with Mahaney and Loftness, violated the mandatory reporting obligations and conspired together to cover up [name withheld pending court ruling on defense motion]’s molestation of children.
#173
…they permitted Griney to teach and have unfettered access to children, and conspired to cover up the facts.
#128
The church provided babysitting services for Home Group members, many of whom homeschooled their children, but failed to advise them that the defendant had raped and assaulted Jane Doe.
#150
Defendants conspired to permit the pedophiliac to have unfettered access to children…in a back hallway where children routinely played
#131
Defendants made a series of misrepresentations to the parents of Jane Doe to prevent them from attending court appearances and to prevent them from filing a victim impact statement…
#132
…Defendants falsely claimed that they were speaking on behalf of the parents of Jane Doe, and falsely claimed that the parents did not wish to participate in the court proceedings regarding the sexual assault…
#138
Discovery will show that Defendants Mullery, David Hinder and Vince Hinders (sic) spoke with Maryland-based Defendants Mahaney and Loftness, and together conspired to prevent any reporting to the secular authorities.
#157
Rather than report the ongoing abuse to secular authorities or take any steps to stop the abuse, Defendants informed the father that his children had reported the abuse. This led to further abuse by the father. In exchange for the conspiracy of silence, the abusive father paid to send Defendants Mahaney, Ricucci, and Layman and their families on vacation to the Kiawah Islands, South Carolina.”
#177
On or about August 17, 2011, Defendants admitted during a meeting that they placed protecting the churches from lawsuits over and above the safety of children. This admission revealed ….[they were] acting for financially motivated reasons, had designed and agreed upon a plan to obstruct justice, yet permit predators to continue to have unfettered access to children in church and school settings.
http://spiritualsoundingboard.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2nd-amended-lawsuit-filing-may-14-2013.pdf
Julie Anne — Bill O’Neil, co-counsel for the (alleged) victims says that about 1/3rd of the defendants have already been convicted of child sex crimes.
Wow, Janey, I didn’t listen to that last interview. I’ll have to do that.
Julie Anne — You might want to transcribe the audio. It’s several minutes long and starts at minute 26:00. Do a search for “Janet Mefferd Show-5/20/2013”
Bill O’Neil says 3 defendants have been brought to the attention of the authorities. Two have already been convicted and 1 proceeded in the juvenile system. One trial is pending in Montgomery Co., MD. Roughly 1/3 of the defendants have been convicted.
Another horrible statement he makes:
The alleged conspiracy was not uncovered until 2011. It was discovered that “there was a policy in place in the church to refuse to report…to keep people from telling — each other even within the church — about the incidents.”
I feel sorry for my Twitter followers. They just got tweet-bombed for an hour or so. He’s upset about TWW’s treatment of Challies. I didn’t want to go there with him because I really don’t know all the details of that, but encouraged him to send Dee and Deb an e-mail if he found problems with stuff. I mentioned something to the effect that he’s defending Challies about something that was said online (big whoop – I have a whole freakin blog after me and 5,000 “slander blogger” business cards being distributed in my hometown by my former pastor). I asked him where is his concern for the victims of the lawsuit who have suffered – some for decades. Give me a break.
Julie Anne — Hang in there, JA. I’m praying for you right now. People don’t want the truth known about these horrific allegations.
Quick Synopsis of the Sovereign Grace Ministries Child Sexual Abuse Lawsuit
What is the Sovereign Grace Ministries child sex abuse lawsuit?
(For the attorneys: Everything from this point forward is “alleged.”)
There are 11 Plaintiffs, of whom five have revealed their real names, who are accusing certain pastors, staff, and teachers at 2 churches and 1 Christian school of child sexual abuse, failing to report child sex abuse to the authorities, and covering up the crimes for decades.
• Many of the alleged victims have just passed their 21st birthdays, which put them outside the statute of limitations for this type of lawsuit in the State of Maryland (not all states have this age limit).
• However, criminal cases in MD don’t have a statute of limitations.
There are 14 Defendants: 4 are organizations (2 churches, 1 school, 1 ministry) and 10 individuals.
• About 1/3rd of the perpetrators have already been convicted. Three have been brought to the attention of the authorities: 2 were convicted and 1 proceeded in the juvenile system. One trial is pending in Montgomery Co., Maryland.
The Sovereign Grace Ministries child sexual abuse lawsuit is a public document and is available online. Do an internet search for:
SGMsuit – SGM Survivors pdf
+ + + + + + +
The vast majority of the 218 paragraphs are horribly graphic, detailing names, locations, and description of sexual abuse. Summary of some paragraphs, which are abridged and not quoted verbatim, are below:
Paragraph #:
#1
Describes this as a lawsuit seeking damages for all person harmed by an ongoing conspiracy that permitted sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.
#2
Abuse of children occurred at church buildings, school buildings, during church retreats, and other events.
#29
From 1982 to present conspiracy of defendants to permit sexual deviants to have access to children for purposes of predation.
#34
8-year-old child had to meet with the defendant who molested her and another defendant and was told to “forgive” the molester. The defendant did not report the molestation.
#36-37
Youth ministry leader Morales molested several boys who admitted it to Chris Glass but were cautioned against talking about the facts.
#51
Defendant David Adams was convicted and served jail time. He was welcomed back into the church without the church taking any effective steps to prevent him from having continued access to children.
#75-77
Second-grade girl pushed down and gang-raped by defendants and by other adults who were wearing masks.
#109
Defendants Ecelbarger, Mullery and V. Hinders, conspiring together with Mahaney and Loftness, violated the mandatory reporting obligations and conspired together to cover up [name withheld pending court ruling on defense motion]’s molestation of children.
#128
The church provided babysitting services for Home Group members, many of whom homeschooled their children, but failed to advise them that the defendant had raped and assaulted Jane Doe.
#131
Defendants made a series of misrepresentations to the parents of Jane Doe to prevent them from attending court appearances and to prevent them from filing a victim impact statement…
#132
…Defendants falsely claimed that they were speaking on behalf of the parents of Jane Doe, and falsely claimed that the parents did not wish to participate in the court proceedings regarding the sexual assault…
#178
Defendants permitted David Adams, a known pedophile, to attend church-sponsored sleepovers without advising parents about his sexual deviance.
#138
Discovery will show that Defendants Mullery, David Hinder and Vince Hinders (sic) spoke with Maryland-based Defendants Mahaney and Loftness, and together conspired to prevent any reporting to the secular authorities.
#150
Defendants conspired to permit the pedophiliac to have unfettered access to children…in a back hallway where children routinely played
#157
Rather than report the ongoing abuse to secular authorities or take any steps to stop the abuse, Defendants informed the father that his children had reported the abuse. This led to further abuse by the father. In exchange for the conspiracy of silence, the abusive father paid to send Defendants Mahaney, Ricucci, and Layman and their families on vacation to the Kiawah Islands, South Carolina.”
#173
…they permitted Griney to teach and have unfettered access to children, and conspired to cover up the facts.
#177
On or about August 17, 2011, Defendants admitted during a meeting that they placed protecting the churches from lawsuits over and above the safety of children. This admission revealed ….[they were] acting for financially motivated reasons, had designed and agreed upon a plan to obstruct justice, yet permit predators to continue to have unfettered access to children in church and school settings.
For the entire lawsuit, do an internet search for: SGMsuit – SGM Survivors pdf
+ + + + + + +
Why did the plaintiffs (the alleged victims) wait so long to file?
Bill O’Neil, co-counsel for the plaintiffs, was interviewed on the Janet Mefferd Show on 5/20/2013 –
• Bill O’Neil says 3 defendants have been brought to the attention of the authorities. Two have already been convicted and 1 proceeded in the juvenile system. One trial is pending in Montgomery Co., MD.
Roughly 1/3 of the defendants have been convicted. (starts at minute 31:00)
• At minute 29:15, Bill says the alleged conspiracy was not uncovered until 2011. It was discovered that “there was a policy in place in the church to refuse to report…to keep people from telling — each other even within the church — about incidents.”
• To listen to the Janet Mefferd Show and Bill O’Neil interview: Do an internet search for: Janet Mefferd Show Premium. Then Enter the date 5/20/2013 in the search field. Look for Hour 1 “Janet talks with attorney Bill O’Neil”) The interview starts at minute 26:00 and runs for through 33:30.)
+ + + + + + +
Who has already run this news story?
Huffington Post – “C. J. Mahaney Scandal: Evangelical Leaders Defend Pastor Accused Of Abuse Cover-Up”
Washington Post – “Evangelical leaders stand by pastor accused of abuse cover-up”
Boz Tchividjian – grandson of Billy Graham – “Where are the Voices? The Continued Culture of Silence and Protection in American Evangelicalism”
WJLA TV (ABC TV) – “Church Sex Abuse Allegations” Search for: My World News|WJLA|Church sex abuse allegations| 5-17-2013
+ + + + + + +
JA,
The question I’d have for him when he’s saying to wait until the courts decide is what if the courts choose not to decide? Does that mean the victims must be forgotten and overlooked? Does that mean that CJ, if guilty, is free and clear? Since when is God’s command to his people to do justice limited by the statute of limitations determined by a secular government?
Silence sides with the abuser. It is impossible not to take sides when someone has claimed to be a victim and is appealing for help.
@ Julie Anne:Moore pastors a tiny church which does not have a telephone number or a website. I bet he did not tell you that I offered to buy him a phone, loaded with minutes to use for his church. I even offered to help him develop a website for the church by showing him how to use his website to support the church website.
Jared is a nice young man who is a bit naive about the pressures inherent in running a business. Doctors cannot accept a $0.25 pen from a drug rep because it might influence them. Doctors cannot have labs as part of their practice because there is the perception of bias in ordering of lab tests. Scripture tells us the walk in a manner that puts us above reproach. We are not to give the appearance of doing something that raises questions.
Challies, at the minimum does not appear objective . Yet that is what he said he was.
@ dee:
He’s naive (maybe)? Maybe he wants to impress all the right people? Challies doesn’t need defending and Moore’s last rise into the limelight was putting out a ranking of blog sites which landed him lot’s of thanks and blog hits. It’s interesting to see who pastors people to defend and stick up for, isn’t it.
Thanks, Jeff S. I started Retweeting my favorite tweets from Jared and he started engaging me again. I just asked him your question, Jeff. It’s a great one.
Dee, did you talk to Jared by phone or by e-mail?
@ Julie Anne: Email.
@ Bridget:
last sentance should read . . . “It’s interesting to see who pastors defend and stick up for, isn’t it?”
Too early for the brain and fingers!
@ Julie Anne:
He’s missing the point with his “waiting for the courts” stance. Spiritual leaders form and express opinions all the time with no court involvement. Is Mahaney qualified to be a spiritual leader on the worldwide stage? For a small-scale example, the lawsuit against JA being dismissed does nothing, in itself, to disqualify former Pastor from ministry. Likewise, if she’d lost, it wouldn’t necessarily mean he’s a good pastor. In Mahaney’s case, we already had ample proof of disqualification long before the suit was filed!
@ Dave A A:
In his case, he’s taking a slightly different view that what I’d initially thought, and I see that now. He’s taking an “I’m not interested in this particular issue, so I’m waiting on the courts”, which is different from “I cannot come to a conclusion without the courts”.
So the issue really isn’t with how justice is done, but how we decide what issues are important to us.
Dave A A wrote:
Exactly! There were convictions and even time served, but that doesn’t matter to him. Neither do multitudes of witnesses. But if one celebrity pastor says another celebrity pastor is innocent, that works for him.
And Jeff S, you’re right – you notice how he said nada about Penn State/Sandusky. I’m too lazy to go back and look at his tweets during that timeframe, but who WASN’T following that case? And how is that case any different from SGM as far as crimes are concerned? Actually, SGM is far worse with multiple perpetrators.
Julie Anne wrote:
Someone needs to put together a comparison chart between the Sandusky case and the SGM/Mahaney case. SGM has more already-convicted perpetrators, more alleged victims, and more years of alleged cover-up, if I recall correctly.
@ Julie Anne:
There are multiple perpetrators, multiple alleged perpetrators, and multiple alleged cover-ups. I don’t see how this isn’t in the same/worse category as Sandusky/Penn State.
@ Janey:
You and I were on the same track . . .
@ Dave A A:
You’re right, Dave. Mahaney should have been dq’d long before the suit was filed.
Why should anyone bring an offense, or witnesses with them, to elders when elders turn a blind eye? This crowd is making a mockery of Paul’s words to the Church. You’d think T4G and TGC could “see” all the witnesses. There are enough blogs and people writing about it, and most of those people already went to elders, to no avail.
JeffS
I wonder if he really respects the courts on other issues such as abortion.
@ Jeff S:
You’re right– SGM just isn’t an area of interest to him. Since he’s in the SBC, one might think Mohler’s support of Mahaney WOULD be of interest.
Bridget wrote:
How do T4G and TGC “see” all the witnesses?
A. They see them, but from 10,000 feet above (God’s perspective, which they share) all the witnesses only appear as inconsequential specks on the ground.
B. They see them, but consider all of them, ipso facto, to be “Alexander the coppersmiths,” who mean great harm to the cause of “the gospel.”
C. They see them, but consider all of them, ipso facto, to be mentally unstable and hysterical, not believable.
D. They see them, but consider all of them, ipso facto, to be non-Christians, unbelievers, apostates, (or worse, Arminians), or those who need to be helped along the way towards those destinations as quickly as possible.
E. They do not see them, just as Narcissus could not see anything except that which was in his mirror.
F. One or more of the above.
G. All of the above.
H. None of the above.
Jeff S wrote:
And this is a strange view for the T4G defender Jared Moore to take considering that PDI/SGM not reporting crimes was because they saw the government as “ungodly”.
So, which is it Jared? Now the government is not ungodly but it was when Mahaney/PDI/SGM decided not to report crimes but deal with them “in house”.
I mean for a guy who tweets about ‘logical argumentation’, he is stiking out on this one.
@ Bridget:
Bridget, sadly, I think you have nailed it.
@ pcapastor: Too funny and too true.
Anon 1 wrote:
One thing that really bothered me about that TNIV gender inclusive debate is that (according to articles I read), is that even where the Greek or Hebrew indicates a mixed gender group, and the TNIV translators wanted to convey that by saying “them” or “men and women” or “he and she,” (which would have been an accurate translation), the gender complementarians still threw a hissy fit, they insisted that even mixed gender references be depicted in terms of male only.
They consider wording gender type terms accurately in a translation that are there in the source language wrong.
That they would not even grant inclusive language to appear in a translation where it existed based in the original languages was a big clue to me that these people care more about keeping women down, holding an agenda, than they truly care about translation accuracy or about respecting women.
Julie Anne wrote:
I read through that exchange the other day. The guy will not let the Challies thing go.
I also don’t see this blog as being “vitriolic.”
I’ve seen people here get pretty grouchy with each other on occasion, but so far, not full on vitriolic.
If that guy finds this blog “vitriolic,” he’s not been around the web as long, or as much, as I have.
Daisy wrote:
Neither do I. Last night I looked through a number of pages on the TWW blog and I couldn’t find anything nasty about Challies. Disagreements with Challies, yes, but not vitriole. It just like the lawsuit, these guys have never read it but they are sure they know what’s in it (and not in it).
If TWW has said anything vitriolic about Challies, let’s see the link! Otherwise I can only say, What thin skin these guys have. They can dish it out but they can’t take it.
Daisy
You should see his dustup with Peter Lumpkins. That did not go well from his end of things.
As for vitriolic, I wonder if Jared has told you how I offered ( a couple of months ago) to buy him a cell phone with minutes on it so that his church would have a phone number. They do not have one. Also, how many vitriolic folks do you know that would offer to help him set up a website for his church. His church doesn’t have one of those either.
I may disagree with him but I also am occasionally pleasant.
Daisy wrote:
Daisy, You gotta learn YRR speak. Any negative truths about one of their hero’s or peers is hateful and vitriolic or attacking. It is one of the most thin skinned movements I have ever seen. Thousands of young guys who have been taught nothing but ad homenim. We are talking major mass insecurity. We are talking about a mass movement in religion of authoritarian 20somethings who have few critical thinking skills but are absolutely convinced they are smart. It is chilling.
At some point, some of the blind faithful are going to be very disappointed or even ruined. They have no idea the leaders they revere are using them. That is why it is so disasterous to follow man instead of Christ. All they know is they want to be the next Matt Chandler or John Piper.
dee wrote:
(And also at Anon1 and others who replied).
I’ve been in some pointed exchanges here on this blog, I’ve had a few people bit my head off real good, and I got short with one guy in one thread (he got a bit tiffy with me as well), but nothing I’d classify as deep-seated, boiling, hate-filled.
Anon1, I bet you’re right. I just find it humorous he would use that word for this blog.
In the over ten years I’ve been on the internet, I’ve posted to, or lurked at, religious and political blogs, and although I try to be respectful and polite with debate opponents, I’ve had people use profanity laced tirades at me, I’ve had people wish cancer on me, wish bodily harm on me, etc (I have never started that with people or retaliated in kind like that).
This blog vitriolic? I don’t think so.
A blog’s culture can change, but so far, I’ve not seen vitriol on here.
@ Anon 1:
“Thousands of young guys who have been taught nothing but ad homenim. We are talking major mass insecurity. We are talking about a mass movement in religion of authoritarian 20somethings who have few critical thinking skills but are absolutely convinced they are smart.”
I’m a 20-something and…that is scary.
@ Daisy:
“This blog vitriolic?”
He must have mistaken the Wartburgians for YouTube commenters.
@ Janey:
can’t say it’s vitriol, but it IS unvarnished.
And I’m quite sure “vitriol” in the world of Jared Moore & Co. is alive and well, just covered in sugar and flowers and hidden in manipulation, passive aggression, and covert scheming. BIBICAL covert scheming, mind you.
So the unvarnished and honest variety must be quite a shock.
elastigirl wrote:
Yes, I imagine they are shocked that we don’t take them seriously…that we see right through the self-importance and the contorted theology. Sometimes I wonder if their theology is just a way of trying to convince us NOT to follow the simple words and actions of Jesus.
Anon 1 wrote:
Your descriptions makes me think of Pakleds . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7FNCdQ_ar0
@ Janey:
“Sometimes I wonder if their theology is just a way of trying to convince us NOT to follow the simple words and actions of Jesus.”
++++++++++++++
…which takes away from quite a foodchain of salaried jobs.