"This is the best book I have read on this topic of critical importance."
—C. J. Mahaney, Senior Pastor, Sovereign Grace Church of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky
Nine Marks of a Healthy Church
Recently, someone mentioned in a comment the long-term friendship between Mark Dever and C.J. Mahaney. For the first time it struck me — I wondered, whether Mahaney and the church he co-founded, Covenant Life Church (CLC), had any influence on the formulation of the 9Marks as described in Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. I knew from his bio on the 9Marks website that Mark Dever became senior pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in 1994. It is certainly worth noting that it was Carl Henry, a long-time member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, who wrote Dever a letter suggesting he consider pastoring what was then called Capitol Hill Metropolitan Baptist Church. D.A. Carson hand-delivered Henry's letter to Dever, who was living in England at the time. We know this because Andy Naselli documented this bit of trivia after hearing C.J. Mahaney and Matt Schmucker interview Mark Dever back in 2007. I heard that conversation several times, but now the audio has mysteriously vanished from the 9Marks website.
But that's not the only thing that has disappeared from the 9Marks website. Getting back to my curiosity about Mahaney's influence on Dever, I wondered when Mark Dever first formulated his Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. I knew I had written about it some time ago, so I pulled up that post which was titled 9Marks and 'Biblical' Church Membership? That post (published May 29, 2013) begins as follows (see screenshot):
When I clicked on the link to the the 9Marks website in this post, here is the message that popped up.
Why would this information, which I quoted word for word in 2013, go missing from the 9Marks website? Was it because of the descriptor 'self-published'? According to the screen shot below which shows the copyright information of Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, it was first published by Founders Press in 1997.
Founders Press still has the following information on its listing of publications.
So the Nine Marks started out as a 32 page booklet and has grown to an almost 300 page book!
Now let's get back to the original question — was Mark Dever influenced in any way by Mahaney and his then church when he formulated the Nine Marks? It is rather curious that Dever sought out Mahaney not long after he arrived in Washington, D.C. Perhaps that story is now missing, too? Anyway, Dever and a colleague happened to be driving by Covenant Life Church and the colleague wanted to purchase a book sold there. They went inside and while there asked to meet C.J. Mahaney. Mahaney was not available, but Dever left his contact information and not long after Mahaney showed up at Capitol Hill Baptist Church to meet Dever.
We know approximately WHEN Mahaney and Dever first met because Mahaney discussed it in a sermon he delivered at CHBC in early 2011. At the time Mahaney stated they has been friends for 15 years. By doing the math, we can conclude that Mahaney and Dever first met sometime in 1996. That information has been included in a post we wrote entitled Mark Dever – C.J. Mahaney's BFF.
Interestingly, Dever's booklet came out the very next year. There is no question that the Dever / Mahaney friendship was strong, especially during the early years, so we are left wondering how much Mahaney and his church influenced the Nine Marks. And let's not forget that Al Mohler was tremendously impressed with Mahaney's strong leadership. Of course, Mohler's remarks that appeared in the secular press have since disappeared… What is it with these Neo-Cals? Do they truly believe God controls EVERYTHING? Then why are they exerting their own control?
Perhaps we will never know for certain how Mahaney may have influenced Dever, but we would like to point out some things that we do know.
When 9Marks planned its first conference at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dever chose C.J. Mahaney to accompany him. The conference, held on October 1, 2009, was called "God Exposed" and Mahaney spoke on "Expository Faithfulness". Then Dever sheltered the Mahaneys when they ran into trouble at CLC a few years later.
When Mahaney was succeeded by Joshua Harris in 2004, Mark Dever delivered a glowing pre-recorded message about his BFF, as did Al Mohler.
When Together for the Gospel (T4G) was established in 2006, the foursome included Mark Dever, Al Mohler, Ligon Duncan, and C.J. Mahaney. There does appear to be a special bond between these fellows. Dever had been friends with Mohler and Duncan for decades, and he's the one who introduced them to Mahaney. How do we know? Because Ligon Duncan said so on the T4G website several years ago when there was a blog tied to the website. Now that's g-o-n-e, too.
And lest we forget, Dever spoke at Mahaney's church in Louisville a couple years ago, providing these glowing remarks.
Is there any doubt that Sovereign Grace churches have made a strong impression on Mark Dever?
Getting back to the book, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church was first published by Crossway in 2000. Four years later it was re-published with Joshua Harris writing the Foreward. Of course, 2004 was the year that Mahaney stepped down as senior pastor of CLC and began working full-time as president of Sovereign Grace Ministries.
The book was once again re-published by Crossway in 2013, with David Platt writing the Foreward. You will remember that Covenant Life Church and Sovereign Grace Ministries parted ways so Joshua Harris was out of favor, and of course, C.J. Mahaney's endorsement of the book now shows him as Senior Pastor of Covenant Life Church Louisville. It is amazing how things keep changing within this group.
If you're not familiar with the 9Marks, here is Mark Dever explaining them.
And as a summary, this is the listing of them.
Given the fact that C.J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries gave a combined $200,000 (or more) to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, we can't help but wonder whether any monies were funneled in the direction of 9Marks as it was getting established. Nevertheless, here is information from the website on how it currently receives funding.
Dever first came up with the 9Marks going on two decades ago, and it has been interesting to see the underbelly of some of the churches that put them into practice. Todd Wilhelm's story reveals so much about how 9Marks churches really operate. The 'mark of discipline' seems especially out of whack. Of course, discipline is one of those things that Mahaney / CLC / SGM emphasized before things started to implode.
What are you thoughts on Mahaney's influence on Mark Dever, if any? From the T4G statement published several years ago in support of Mahaney to Dever's 2013 church appearance in Louisville, there are obviously some extremely strong ties between these two men.
Hot off the press– Don’t launch churches– covenant together!
http://9marks.org/article/launch-v-covenant/
In this passage we see that signing church covenants is like marriage!
““Covenanting” is more than just trading one word for another word. It communicates the idea that certain actions must take place in order to establish a church, just like a wedding ceremony demands certain actions take place in order for a man and a woman to come together under the covenant of marriage.
First, covenanting demands that a particular set of expectations bind a group of Christians together, like biblical vows place a set of expectations on husband and wife. They are responsible to affirm one another’s gospel professions. And they are responsible to oversee one another’s discipleship.”
So– y’all sign those covenants– so you can affirm those gospel professions!
—- second?
Marriage is optional, but church (I assume) is held to be obligatory, and defined in terms of covenants So there seems to be no legitimate way out of joining q coveant, at least not according to this theology. This is odd, since the term “covenant” implies a mutual agreement. (There is some debate within Judaism as to how a covenant reached between God and Abraham, can be held to apply to modern Jews who were presumably not present at Sinai.)
It next occurs to me to wonder what a group must agree to in order to be considered “covemnanted.” A liberal church would surely fall afoul of one of the 9 Marks, such as Discipline.
(D’oh! Moses…Abraham…one of those guys.)
Personally, I like Dever's preaching…or at least a portion of that which has interested me. The connection as noted in this article can be of concern. In 1976, I served a summer at Capital Hills Metropolitan Church as a volunteer from a southern state for a missions project for the SBC. (18 yrs old at time) Capital Hills was a dying church. Small, clustered, 5 blocks from the capital, the church owned property on East Capital Street where I had a room along with over 10 male pages that served the Senate. (The church also had a female building). Here's the point: church dying. W.A. Criswell noted SBC past president even visited in 1976 to generate a buzz. Nothing helped. Went back right before Dever came…church had completely reformatted into an extreme church with what I would considered connections that spoke of a "dead" church from Revelation. Dever? He did come and brought the church back to a place that is highly respected in the Evangelical sphere. And…with a church that is far from mega…probably sitting no more than 500 people at most….tightly hemmed in within this small property with parking for possibly no more than 50 cars. It is refreshing to see how Dever has used this church as a outreach to Washington. Whereas, many of the posts here would cause grave concern relating to the "management" of a 9Marks Church and some of the extremes that we "wartburg's" label covenant churches, etc…I still must say that this is a church that has an important location and to date, I find their teaching/preaching such that it is undeniably scriptural and authentic. So…would I become a member there? Not based on the "member covenant". Has this church harmed past members via behavior that borders on "cultish"? Seems that way. But…based on what I saw in 1976 and years latter….Capital Hills has revived a "deadness" and brought back "life" to an area that needs "light". Just my take…I can't always bash everything I don't like…even though there are comments and posts that make me pause and be more cautious.
@ prodinov:
Thanks for that interesting history of Capitol Hill Baptist Church. I seem to remember reading that there was some sort of pastoral infidelity that contributed to the decline, but I can't seem to find that any more either.
All roads lead back to Founders eventually. It’s the Founders Movement which started all the reformed church conferences. This all goes back to the late 70’s when the Calvinists got together and decided the SBC needed to be reformed. That’s when all these “books” started being passed around. John Piper wouldn’t be anything today if not for Founders and their original conferences. Then Founders gets Al Mohler elected at Southern and the rest as they say is history.
I think discipline is a mark of a healthy church and needs to be included. 9Marks got that right.
Here’s how it should work:
When a body of believers notices people like Dever, Mahaney and Mohler attempting to set up their heirarchy with them at the peak and usurping the unique position of Jesus as the one mediator between God and man, a healthy body of believers will discipline such people and correct them, just like Paul exhorted the church at Corinth with regard to the superapostles, and if people like Mohler, Dever, Mahaney are unwilling to listen to the truth, then a healthy church will throw them out and treat them as pagans.
Zla’od wrote:
It works for both, as well as Jacob.
prodinov wrote:
The only organization that is relevant at the end of the day is the Bride of Christ, defined as all believers. That is an organization both visible and invisible. Its growth and health is most decidedly not always evidenced by a particular building having more people pile into into it on Sunday morning and Wednesday night.
If someone is a charismatic speaker, good marketer or organizer, they might be capable of drawing people to them. Some of these people might be curiosity seekers, some might be transplants from other churches, some might be those truly drawn to the Gospel by the person with charisma. That does not mean that anything good has happened for anyone other than the charismatic one who now has a following, a substantial income and some measure of second-rate fame.
You can continue to chase what you define as “scriptural” and “authentic” teaching and preaching, but what you are chasing is a world in which the teacher is exalted and the ones in the pews are subtly–or brutally–trained to know their places, which are anything but being a functioning, co-equal member of the Body of Christ. Anyone who exalts themselves such that you know their names for anything other than their great suffering for Christ is by very definition not following a New Testament model, because they are following the examples of exactly none of the disciples and certainly not Jesus.
Go ahead, follow away, will bring you nothing but heartache in the end.
Law Prof wrote:
Now there is a mark of a healthy church. Am I the only one who kinda cringes at the fact that Mark Dever basically named his book/organization after himself or am I the only one who thinks that he used a cute little play on his name?
prodinov wrote:
Not even debatable? Every thing CHBC teach and practice is “scriptural”? How can it be “authentic” when he sheltered Mahaney who fled so he would not be ‘disciplined’ by his own church? How is that authenticity according to what CHBC teaches about church discipline? I don’t get it.
@ Celia:
http://founders.org/misc/chlist/
People can check their state for “Founders” type churches.
Mitch wrote:
I think it's creepy.
Lydia wrote:
This is a prime example of why the 9 marks as practiced are unhealthy rather than leading to health. In this scheme the first this that happens is that the "leaders" get elevated and the "members" get subordinated. Are you telling me that no member.at CHBC was moved by the Holly Spirit to speak out about the fact that their church was giving CJ cover? Well that would indicate that
a. The Holly Spirit is not the controlling force in the people of CHBC
b. They spoke out and received what we all would expect and the story has not been told but still indicated.an unhealthy church culture or c. Everyone there thought it was OK, again not a healthy church. Writing this I had a different thought, I guess it depends.how you define the words healthy and church. If what you mean is controlling a large group of people by a small group of people then yes it might be the 9/ways to accomplish that.
One more observation and not sure if it matters or if See listed them in the order they appear in Severe talk or the book, ISTM that the order of the marks is a big part of the problem in this system how is The Gospel and conversion under preaching and theology. One iis just a mans talking and the other is a man made system to attempt to explain an unexplainable God. The Gospel is all that the apostles had and look what they were able to do. As for their preaching it is hardly expository and consists of eisogesis to make what ever.point they want to reinforce. And as far as understanding theology it doesn't even seem to be a thought to them past the Shema, the Lord Your God is One. So no wonder we keep seeing so many fiascos in these systems, as is always noted their priorities are messed up.
I am just not over this discipline business. I grew up SBC, pretty hard-core and this discipline business was never mentioned. It’s like these churches are hoping someone messes up so they can come down on folks….there is no ” grace” anymore.
Somehow I don’t think this is what Jesus intended.
@ Mitch:
Everything in Dever's system of "Marks" is geared toward his own power. He gets to "interpret" and because people have handed over that power he also gets to "discipline". And that is the system he markets.
Someone help me out here. I am having a hard time seeing “doctrine” as the catalyst for Dever/Mahaney early bromance. Wasn’t Mahaney’s “People of Destiny” charismatic with prophecy mics and so on in the late 90’s?
Or was it the shepherding cult format of growing a ‘family of churches’ that attracted Dever? Control?
@ prodinov: I know lots and lots of pastors and politicians who are great speakers. (Are there many differences between those two professions…but I digress.) Sometimes they even inspire me. However, their actions are what interest me. When I see them go after a great guy like Todd, there is a problem. I can assure you that John Folmar and Mark Dever have discussed this at length. Yet, they have not backed down or even apologized to Todd which would show how much they have brought the love of Christ into their ministry.
Also, Dever was willing to give up his belief in local church polity by sheltering CJ Mahaney. Why would he do that? It seems his words do not hold as much value as he claims.
TWW has received a number of complaints about alleged abuse in churches which implement the 9 Marks church model. So, what is it in those words that cause such pain?
Lydia wrote:
Bingo: control, power, money, fame, avarice.
The so-called leaders have set up their networks of fellow so-called leaders who think themselves more important than the mere proletariat in the pew. The doctrine which they uphold as so central is more of a carrot or stick for the imbeciles in the pews. The real deal for these superapostles is their own glory, there is no doctrinal belief that can compare with the central importance of that. This is why Driscoll can now so seamlessly transition to the Pentecostal crowd.
I first noticed this phenomenon of the luminary society back slap big time in the mid-90s, going to a march “for Jesus” in downtown Minneapolis sponsored by three churches, one of which was Bethlehem Baptist, and, after marching, sitting with thousands in the folding chairs that had been provided in a huge church parking lot and witnessing the real reason for the march: John Piper and a couple other mega pastors touting in a pseudo-humble manner their own greatness and taking turns at the podium praising each other’s greatness and just very obviously basking in that glow. My wife and I were absolutely sickened and never went to another one of Piper’s marches.
Lydia wrote:
I, too have trouble with this. The only thing that I can concretely point to is the money that CJ Mahaney gave SBTS when SGM was not Baptist. SBTS records were open for us to discover those donations. Unfortunately, there is no way to see if this occurred with other ministries.
Please be sure that you understand that I am NOT saying that Mahaney gave Dever money (lawyers take note.) I am saying that i cannot say that he didn’t either. If Mahaney did not give Dever and BFFs money and support, then we would have to look at other issues. At that point, I would say control/authority is the most likely cause.
Took some blows there I see…yet I have encountered abusive churches and remain outside the fold. Whereas I share much of the response on Wartburg, it is so so too easy to pick and narrow our complaints to be defined as “nickpicky”. The hurt of people against what they allege is the system can be read from the outside as extremism, exactly, what many allude to as the problem of the church. Mark Dever is not just a speaker. I stated I have issues with many prongs of his positions, but never have I heard Dever preach anything outside of scripture. Regarding Todd and the multitudes of people claiming hurts, most probably genuine…I clearly said I proceed with caution. It is difficult for me, like most here to go to any church due to how it has become one that embraces and elevates celebrities versus what we might define as the early church. I am walking on a balance beam. I was damaged multiple times…and yet when I am back in God’s Word, I am encouraged and refreshed. When I spend too much time complaining to God and looking at the sad state of affairs, I too can be jaded. But…Capital Hills may have issues…I only stated that based on what I encountered in 1976, and in 1989 before Dever, there is a difference, and whether we like it or not because of Dever/Mahoney/etc…this little tiny church has served (in my opinion) as a beacon of light. And yes, Dever is somewhat elevated, but no man with a huge ego would have ever considered a pulpit where you are teaching less than 500 and no room to grow your facility. The church building is old and there are no entertaining side venues. So…I will take a few hits…have been around Wartburg for a while. Please remind yourselves that we too often become on the attack because of what we have experienced and it can make us TOO a troll on the attack. Dever, if you read this or have someone noting this board, we would love to hear your take….
From the description of the book on Amazon:
“Now in its third edition and featuring a new foreword by New York Times best-selling author David Platt,”
Celebrity Christianity – it sells books. Additionally I am skeptical of the NYT best-selling list. We saw how Driscoll manipulated it. Who is to say Platt, or his groupies didn’t do the same? He has shown he is not above lies, half-truths and manipulation when he was promoting a newly released book a few years ago via a “live simulcast” in an “undisclosed location in the Middle East where one could be killed because of their Christian faith.” My daughter responded to a very public announcement by Redeemer Church of Dubai to attend the taping of the event at the Hilton in Dubai. I am relieved to say she managed to survive the event without any life threatening incidents.
This from Platt’s foreword to the book:
“In addition, this book is a testimony to a pastor and a people at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC. As they would humbly admit, they are not the perfect church. But after any hours in front of crowds and many days behind the scenes with this pastor, and after worshipping, praying, and serving alongside this people, I can confidently commend to you not only this book, but also this pastor and this people. Simply put, together they are a clear, compassionate, poignant, powerful, beautiful, and most of all biblical portrayal of the bride of Christ.”
This sounds quite similar to the confident commendation Dever, Mohler, Piper, Grudem, Schreiner, Ware, Anyabwile, DeYoung and others proclaimed to the unwashed masses concerning their pal C.J. Mahaney. These men have demonstrated that truth will be sacrificed for continual praise and promotion of a fellow celebrity. In my opinion all of them have failed the basic test of integrity which should be a minimal qualification for a christian leader, thus anything they say is tainted. I am not looking for perfect leaders. We all know there was only one of those, but I am looking for honesty and the willingness to admit publicly they have erred. We have yet to hear any such public confession regarding their support of C.J. Mahaney.
Acts 14:11 “And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.”
Paul wasn’t then, these celebrities aren’t now. People need to quit worshipping them, and these leaders should discourage the people from idolizing them, as Paul did in verses 14 and 15.
Matthew 23:5-12 “Everything they do is for show. On their arms they wear extra wide prayer boxes with Scripture verses inside, and they wear robes with extra long tassels. And they love to sit at the head table at banquets and in the seats of honor in the synagogues.They love to receive respectful greetings as they walk in the marketplaces, and to be called jRabbi.
“Don’t let anyone call you Rabbi, for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters. And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah. The greatest among you must be a servant. But those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
Another quote from Dever’s book, this from the section of recommendations by various Christian celebrities, happens to be from C.J. Mahaney:
“…Mark Dever has given us just such a book. Written by a pastor and theologian who has built a strong local church in Washington, D.C., this is the best book I have read not this topic of critical importance.”
Oh really – Mark Dever has built a strong church? This speaks volumes about how the celebrities think of themselves, does it not?
Matthew 16:18 “Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means ‘rock’), and upon this rock I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it.”
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
I find it interesting that Capitol Hill Baptist Church has just one service on Sunday morning. So many in our area have multiple services, with some scheduled for Saturday afternoon.
prodinov wrote:
I don’t know that’d I’d define what you took as an “attack” or “blows”. Perhaps you’ve spent a bit too much time around those abusive churches.
I’ll explain what I’ve seen in abusive SGM-type churches, and though I am not attending an SGM, I did serve as an elder under two leaders who’d come directly from SGM before they came to form our plant of sorts and then attempted to become part of SGM but were rejected (why, I know not, was never divulged to either the elder team as a whole or the proletariat in the pews). In any event, I’ve experienced the mindset. What happens is you seldom are treated with honesty, when you are correcting, it is NEVER done as Jesus did it, it is done subtly, passive-aggressively, back-handedly, in a Machiavellian manner and altogether in a way that does as great an amount of damage to you as possible–because that’s the point. Your “sinful” behavior will be brought up indirectly before the congregation during a sermon or care group or elder’s meeting and corrected by the righteous leader, who’s speaking with a very humble, “I love ya bro” voice. They will not mention you by name, but everyone–or everyone who counts–will know exactly what they mean and to whom they are referring. It will have the effect of poisoning the well for you and destroying your reputation; you will be prevented from ever countering the righteous one’s position, even if they have given a parody of what you’d said or done or the positions you held, even if what they said was a disingenuous lie. If you question your treatment, all people will remember is the humble, “loving” voice of the leader and your disgust with them and know in their hearts that you’re in the wrong.
That’s the way it works in cults. The only time you get the narcissistic rage is in private or when trusted inner circle members are present, then they finally show their true faces. But few people, other than really persistent contrarians like me, ever see that side.
So Prodinov, if you’ve really run with the cults and you saw discipline cult style, you’re used to being killed with “kindness” or watching others suffer the same, perhaps you’ve even come to mistake that squeaky, tender “I love you bro, but…” voice for godliness. Perhaps if someone comes straight at you and tells you what they think and says to you “Hey imbecile!” you think it’s an attack, evil blows, fiery darts from the enemy.
Have you ever read what Jesus said to people, His dearest friends, when He thought they were being idiots? Have you ever wondered why it has nothing in common with the way the Devers, Mohlers, Mahaneys, Pipers, etc treat people?
To me, this is such an important note to highlight. These men are obsessed with their perfect doctrine. They trashed Tullian Tchividjian because he was too into “grace.” But look at their actions. If they truly believed in the Sovereignty of God, they would not be on their damage control/image control tirades of scrubbing the internet. Obviously they do not trust God’s Sovereign plan and must be little gods and interfere. Shameful!
@ Julie Anne:
I don't get it. Do they trust God or not? Why are these guys such CONTROL FREAKS?
Lydia wrote:
I think we only have to look at John MacArthur. Remember he, too, had CJ Mahaney speak at the Shepherd’s Conferences. For some very odd reason, JMac turned a blind eye about the charismatic issue. Funny thing, because then a few years later JMac went on his anti-charismatic frenzy, Strange Fire, and went all out ballistic on anything charismatic. So, this is confusing – -there is something that these men like about CJ – something in his doctrine – or perhaps his speaking style that gives him a free pass. I think it is a couple of things: his staunch complementarian stance and also his strong authoritarian church structure. SGM had a robust membership covenants; in it, members had to sign and say they were complementarian. Also, people liked the way the pastors/care group leaders had oversight of the members. These men are all about authority which is certainly up Dever’s alley.
Deb wrote:
I think they interfere with God if it makes them look weak. Yes, control freaks!
I wrote this a while back. It deals with how Mark Dever made 9 Marks worthless when he let CJ Mahaney flee to CHBC.
https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/9-marks-what-is-it-how-mark-dever-undermined-it-and-made-it-worthless/
Got it Law Prof…but the majority of your comments surrounding my observations are uncalled for and beyond the scope of what I term that which we are called to be via “scripture”. I read to many of your remarks such as “maybe you…”, or “maybe this…”…dude you need to chill and let your anger be redirected. I am not the enemy nor do I believe Dever is. Your postings are EXACTLY why I would sign off and never return with any type of thought process. I do not defend Dever, nor the book, nor his relationships. I did say…I have never heard one thing Taught/Preached that was outside scriptural context. If his books offend you due to how most of us define the pastoral, then so be it…but dude…I can point to at least 10 remarks of you that would put you lower than Dever…
@ Julie Anne:
What makes me laugh is CJ Mahaney and Sovereign Grace fighting a lawsuit. Does Sovereign Grace believe God is sovereign? If so why fight the lawsuit? Isn’t it God’s will? Isn’t CJ Mahaney sinning in fighting the lawsuit?
@ Julie Anne:
Julie Anne I think in the end we are going to learn that Mark Dever, Al Mohler, John MacArthur and others accepted money. Either they were bribed and corrupted or CJ did something for them and they feel a debt of responsibility. As Deep Throat told Bob Woodward in Watergate…follow the money. My gut tells me the Senior Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist was purchased and bought. My theory…
I wrote this yesterday. Its about how TLC canceled the Duggars yet Mark Driscoll and CJ Mahaney keep preaching. Why does the world have higher standards and more ethics at times than evangelical Christianity.
https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/07/17/tlc-cancels-the-duggars-while-mark-driscoll-and-cj-mahaney-continue-preaching-why-does-the-world-have-more-ethics-than-some-evangelical-christians/
prodinov wrote:
Hey, Prodinov, let me suggest that you truly and profoundly need to get the heck away from whatever cult you’re involved in.
..and would love to hear a recitation of those “10 remarks that put (me) lower than Dever.”
Please, I’m waiting….
prodinov wrote:
As a lifelong DC native, I would suggest that the flourishing of CHBC was due, in a much larger part, to the wholesale gentrification of Capitol Hill which took place in the exact same timeframe. It went from low rent housing (it was immediately adjacent to the poorest parts of NE and SE DC) to an upscale address for Yuppies & DINKs – the perfect target market, IOW,
I would second that, KMD. It reminds me of a meeting I once attended in college of some New Age/Eastern Mysticism-type group, I forget which, and they claimed that members worldwide had the previous year joined in mutual prayer for the world and blessings thereupon, and almost immediately the worldwide economy experienced a marked uptick. Someone asked when: “Late November.” When someone in the crowd pointed out that they’d just happened to choose the time period right around Black Friday and the boom of the upcoming Christmas Season for their “worldwide prayer for economic blessings”, you should’ve seen the guru speaking hem and haw and spin circles trying to get round that. It pretty much turned into a farce after that.
prodinov wrote:
Well, dudebro, I can point to a few of your comments that would put you lower than Law Professor. I need you to up your emotional quotient a bit. There are a number of people who visit this website who have been done wrong by church leaders who have followed Mark Dever’s words and style.
What you said in your initial comment is that Dever is a tremendous preacher and has not once deviated from Scripture. I am sure you do not realize this but Scripture has been both used and abused. Words matter since they are the impetus for actions. Frankly, if I was a leader who wanted to control people, I could *use* Scripture to justify all sorts of things. That is what many churches and denominations have done throughout history.
It is the Scripturally relevant Dever which has pushed the type of membership covenant and church discipline that I believe is Scripturally unjustified. This is the type of church which will not apologize to Todd Wilhelm and gets their jollies by assessing the Scriptural chops of other churches and deciding who is in and who is out.
So, I, too, would love to see you do your top 10 list on Law Prof-someone whom I respect and whose story I hope to be able to publish one of these days. Once you are finished, I plan to do a top 10 list on why this whole thing is so weird and unloving that I can barely contain myself.
@ Eagle:
As of right now, there is no evidence to suggest that there has been a monetary payoff on the part of Mahaney. The only thing we can say with certainty is Mahaney gave lots of money to SBTS and he wasn’t even Baptist!
@ Julie Anne:
So long as you are a committed Neo Calvinist and can prove, without a shadow of a doubt that Calvin had nothing to do with the execution of Servetus and you believe that John Piper is the second coming of the Puritans, you are accepted, no matter how goofy your other activities are.
@ Law Prof:
Sounds like the last SBC Annual meeting I attended. It was nothing but pure adulation of fellow gurus from the stage mic. It was disgusting. A big man centered sales pitch for each other.
It is their normal.
prodinov wrote:
You mean an interpretation of scripture you agree with?
prodinov wrote:
CHBC seems to have been a great launching pad for the speaking circuit and 9 Marx.
Law Prof wrote:
Boy is that ever the truth.
@ Julie Anne:
Watch the early T4G promo videos if you can find them. CJ was downright fawning over their brilliance. He played the giggly uneducated court jester to the kings. It would be foolish to think they did not like that along with the 400,000 he gave SBTS.
What I think is very odd is the idea that CHBC is SO biblical yet it utilizes 9Marks, not really needed, right, as the Apostles did not use it! I’m tired of all the “ministries” everybody has to have. Especially when it is named after the pastor. Note that the church (not specifically named) is mentioned in this article:
http://wamu.org/programs/metro_connection/15/02/06/capitol_hill_restoration_society_celebrates_60_years_of_battles_won_and_lost . It is talking about CHBC. What is kind of funny is the lingo of these associated groups: “season”, “thoughtful”, “robust”. I’m sure there’s more, but that’s what I’ve noticed. Maybe it comes from Cambridge (isn’t that where Dever went?)
dee wrote:
I really think Prodinov is being coy with us, I doubt he’s a disinterested observer who’s just noticed the wonderful goings-on over there at CHBC, the veritable renaissance, and is here to be a middle ground voice of reason. My spidey senses tell me he’s a lot more involved and that is why he’s reacting like one who’s idol had been chipped away at with a chisel.
One thing that indicates that he’s possibly part of the whole scene is he’s quick to make it about the hierarchy: “lower than Dever”.
As if it’s all about who’s higher or lower, from the bottom feeders, such as the widow who does nothing worthwhile except pray and has her few pennies to drop in the collection plate, to the the higher ones, the young, good-looking corporate-management-looking types tapped by the leaders to serve them and climb the ladder, right on up to the highest of the high, the great conference speakers and book writers like Dever who grace us with pure reformed scriptural interpretations and are rewarded for their goodness and righteousness with NYT bestsellers and fat honoraria.
Another indicator: he’s very quick to play the wounded victim and use words like “took some blows”, “took a few hits”, “troll on the attack” (that’s us), “uncalled for”, “your anger”.
And then the coup de gras, the guilt trip: “Your postings are EXACTLY why I would sign off and never return with any type of thought process.” Leaving aside the question of whether he ever posted with a legitimate thought process in the first place, this is the standard operating procedure–it’s all my fault, if only I’d been more godly, he wouldn’t have had to run away, and he might have gotten some help–it’s all on me.
I’d say, just a guess, that he’s been well-trained.
Godith wrote:
I practically blow a tube every time I hear that word except when it’s referring to spring, summer, winter or fall.
Law Prof wrote:
My spidey senses tell me he’s a troll. The oh-so-mellow original come-on – see how reasonable I am? Then snarling weirdness at some rather gentle pushback. He claims to have been lurking for a long time, if so he knows exactly what’s up here, and what kind of reception he was likely to get from his schtick.
Maybe he’s more involved with those guys than I think, but I suspect he’s a troll.
Or maybe it’s Dever himself! Har har har!
roebuck wrote:
Well sure, you could be very well be right. The troll theory’s about as good as any. It seemed to get pretty darned weird pretty darned fast with him.
lydia wrote:
Not sure about that amount. I am only aware of $200,000 combined from Mahaney and SGM. Of course, they could have given more, but SBTS listed those who gave a minimum of $100,000 cumulatively. I don't think there was any other recognition for those giving in excess of $100,000.
Yep, Mahaney fondly calls Mohler "the smartest man on the planet!"
Law Prof wrote:
I wasn’t surprised – I saw him setting it up right in his first post. It’s not an unusual pattern, as you yourself mentioned.
Godith wrote:
Godith, I think they’d say that the Apostles did follow a practice similar to 9 Marks, that the 9 Marks are biblical, and therefore we also should go that route.
prodinov wrote:
For starters, there is their view of church membership and discipline that is nowhere in the NT. Then there is their doctrine of postponed baptism until essentially someone reaches majority, a doctrine and practice which cannot be found by example or by the teaching of the NT. Then there is the example of Mahaney where Dever ignored the qualifications for elders which *are* in the Bible. Oh, and the Mahaney affair was an example of preferring some over others, a practice which violates the explicit teaching of the Bible and the example of Jesus himself. Then there is the doctrine of gender hierarchy and gender “roles” which are nowhere in the entire Bible. Finally for this comment, there is the doctrine of the Eternal Subordination of the Son which is nowhere in the Bible.
So, there are a few things off the top of my head which Dever and the other Gospel Glitterati teach which are extra-biblical or which are in violation of the Bible in doctrine and/or practice. I’m not sure what your standard of “Biblical” is.
@ Law Prof:
The Mark of the Troll will be whether he ignores good and valid questions and sticks to his talking points.
@ Deb:
I don’t think it is just the contributions which are on the record. I think it is that Mahaney knew how to run conferences and produce the whole thing. He had a “package” he could offer them that would ultimately be worth far more than even $400,000. If they combined their gravitas with Mahaney’s production skills, then that synergy could have some spectacular results both monetarily and influence-wise with the younger guys. Likewise, Mahaney got to expand his influence. What trips people up is that we lack the imagination to think that elders could be so driven by such worldly objectives.
@ Gram3:
Yes, I have always believed that Mahaney's expertise in planning conferences was his strength. Thanks for pointing this out.
Gram3 wrote:
The Mark of the Troll is that we will never see him again.
Gram3 wrote:
Have you ever heard of a Troll who can engage on substance?
Muff Potter wrote:
Nope, never. They don’t answer the important questions but always try to divert the focus to something else. They never refute with facts, either.
On the Mahaney/Dever thing, I think that perhaps people are misled by Mahaney’s schtick and think that he is not particularly bright. I think he is a very clever businessman and knew very well how to plant new franchises or “adopt” franchises. That fits very well with the Acts29 and Founders models of planting and taking over existing churches, and Mahaney had demonstrated an ability to do exactly what they wanted to do. Why reinvent the wheel?
Gram3 wrote:
I think Mahaney would call this “serving the church.” 😉
prodinov wrote:
Is there a textbook that outlines this type response? It is a type of misdirection that is often used devalue and silence an opposing point of view. I wonder if the tactic is taught, observed and repeated, or just comes naturally.
Bill M wrote:
Yes. It is what I call a “thought-stopper”. A contemptible little linguistic device. This particular troll has strung together a number of them. Oh well, the trolls will always be with us…
Gram3 wrote:
To underestimate such a one is to not recognize your own peril. I wonder how many pastors found out the hard way when they got their walking papers after the coup?
@ Law Prof:
Transcendental Meditation (TM). The Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. Am I right?
roebuck wrote:
I consulted a reference on debate, in particular intellectually honest and dishonest tactics. The number one dishonest tactic is name calling. We usually think of it as calling someone a jerk, but instead it us usually a cleverly veiled attempt to diminish the opponent by referring to them as bitter or disgruntled or in this case angry.
I should bone up on my old debate stuff from college days. Not to debate, I have little interest in that anymore, but it would be helpful to recognize when someone is not in an honest engagement.
prodinov wrote:
Honestly? Then you aren’t listening.
Zla’od wrote:
It wasn’t MMY himself, but it was one of those groups, perhaps his very group and some emissary of his who spoke at my university, good deductive reasoning.
Mark’s 9 Marks. Not very catchy. How about Devernetics?
prodinov wrote:
I don’t know if you’re still listening, Prodinov, but you confused me somewhat with this remark. Several commenters have pointed out to you teachings in Dever’s “9 Marks” book that they find unscriptural. Are you saying that you disagree with them? If you agree with them, are you saying that unbiblical teachings or concepts in Dever’s books are fine, as long as he doesn’t preach them from the pulpit?
Either way, I would like to point out something that our friend Headless Unicorn Guy has reminded us of many times. A leader can have perfectly orthodox doctrine, and yet treat his peers and congregants abominably. It takes more than doctrine to make a teacher “safe” or “correct”. Even if all of Dever’s teachings are flawlessly in line with the Bible, his behaviour towards others might still be abusive and cultish. And I think that the “9 Marks” treatment of Todd Wilhelm (just as one example) fits that bill.
From the 9Marxist funding page:
“Vital”? Hear that, everyone? Dever’s shtick is “vital” to the growth and health of each and every church. However did we get by without him? /snark
When and where have you accomplished that, Dever? I sure can’t see “the character of God” reflected at UCC Dubai.
__
“Come Unto Me All You that Are Heavy Laden, And I Shall Give You Rest…” -Jesus
hmmm…
Jesus does not ask us to ‘add’ to His redeeming work, He simply asks us to ‘believe’ in Him.
huh?
Is it a ‘works’ program to believe in Jesus?
What?
Then the Calvinist will say that man is dead in sin and therefore can not ‘believe’; but that is actually what Jesus asked the Jewish religious to do in John’s gospel!
Krunch!
This man (Nicodemus) was not saved, he had yet to put his belief in Jesus, and Jesus had yet gone to the cross.
What?
Jesus therefore made God’s offer of Nicodemus not perishing, but receiving God’s offer of eternal life –prior to His (Jesus) dying on the cross.
Isn’t that something.
Jesus was Lord over the whole universe prior to His human birth, prior to Him suffering and dying on the cross. He needs no mark of approvaL by anyone. He has currently sent His servants to the dusty roads to bid all to come,
Will you?
ATB 🙂
Sopy
—
GSD wrote:
Priceless! XD
Two problems with it, though (at least, they’d be problems for Dever):
1) Hubbard’s devotees are so fiercely proprietary over their trademarks, their lawyers would likely sue Dever back to the Stone Age if he used it.
2) Scientology’s brand is so toxic these days, people would likely stay away from “Devernetics” in droves.
@ prodinov:
. You have got the playbook tactics down perfectly. Good thing you get to define “scriptural”. :o)
Deb wrote:
Wasn’t there 200,000 given by Mahaney and another 200,000 given by SGM? SBTS took down the donor listings when all the scandals started making the rounds so I cannot verify.
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
This is such an important point when it comes to the Neo-Cals. Thank you for pointing this out.
__
Who Should We Be Listening To?
hmmm…
Mark Dever teaches a religious doctrine called ‘Limited Atonement’ or ‘Particular Redemption’; that is the belief that Jesus did not die to save all humans. Mark Dever says that Jesus only died for the sake of specific sins of the ‘elect’ — that is Mark Dever believes that only those sinners chosen by God are saved.
huh?
However, Jesus taught that God so loved the world that He gave Her only Son, that whosoever believes in Him, shall not perish but have eternal life.
Is Mark Dever greater than Jesus? Should we be lstening to Mark Dever’s words or to Jesus’ words,
You decide.
ATB
Sopy
—
Bill M wrote:
It is also done so people will defend themselves which only gives the ‘anger’ accusation tactic validity and changes the focus. They get to define ‘anger’. And ‘scriptural’.
This tactic is SOP in the neo cal blogging world. I just agree I am mean and carry on. :o)
Sopwith wrote:
Sopy, are you collecting all this good stuff for a book? Uh, please?
@ lydia:
I believe it was $100,000 and $100,000. However, those numbers are the only ones that we know for sure. This does not mean that more money was given at other times but we cannot confirm that.
GSD wrote:
Too funny!
Bill M wrote:
Almost everyone who has approached a church leader with a suggestion that doesn’t sit well with the leader because he is, after all, the visionary, has experienced this nonsense. And yes, I believe that some of these guys do discuss these tactics.
@ dee:
Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.
Deb wrote:
I forgot about this. SGM handled all the T4G stuff. How would Mohler have done that as an employee of the SBC? Dever and Duncan did not have the infrastructure in place.
Would love to see the money trail on that.
Mitch wrote:
Be thankful that there are only 9 Marks! That way he can’t be everywhere! Unfortunately, he has a lot of willing clones.
Sopwith wrote:
I think I’ll take Jesus’ word for it.
dee wrote:
I beginning to come around to your point of view. Most of the commenters here can likely add examples of their own. Such deflection, the words used, it shuts down the conversation but it leaves a lot of ill will in its wake.
At the time I experienced it I was struck how inappropriate and out of context it was. It was supposed to be a time for the pastor to listen but was instead used to intimidate and shut down.
“What are your thoughts on Mahaney’s influence on Mark Dever, if any?”
Deb, influence is a good word … Mahaney has been a major “influencer” in the New Calvinist movement. There is no doubt that New Calvinists take care of their own … a blood pact to the death, it appears. The Gospel (I mean Calvinist) Coalition has sheltered various of its members when the spotlight has been shown on ministry abuses of one sort or another. To escape the intense heat, Mahaney found a hiding place with his good buddies Devers and Mohler. This weird arrangement of crusty characters is all about protecting the method, mission, and key influencers of the reformed movement at all costs. If one of the big boys fails, they all do … they know that. So, the friends gather around their unrepentant and restore them by providing a platform and resources until the storm passes. We are seeing that happening now with Mark Driscoll and his friends in charismatic ranks … an unrepentant comeback at the hands of the gullible. The Calvinist Coalition bunch are masters at sweeping ugly things under the rug. Sooner or later (hopefully, sooner), the new reformation will run out of steam as its followers begin to discern life behind the veil.
Deb, you provide a very interesting note about “Nine Marks of a Healthy Church” being first published by Founders Press in 1997. That paints a much clearer picture of the behind-the-scenes influence of the Founders – the old guard Calvinists in SBC ranks. The ‘ole boys have attempted for years to Calvinize the SBC via its “quiet revolution.” They have found new energy to accomplish that by helping to mobilize the young, restless and reformed via alliances with non-SBC reformed organizations (SGM, TGC, Acts 29 etc.). The “Old” Calvinists in SBC may not agree with the methodology of this new breed of “New” Calvinists, but they tolerate them as long as the essential mission moves forward … to restore the gospel that the rest of us have lost. After all, Calvinism = Gospel … not!
@ Julie Anne:
Yes, good point. I noticed some left-leaning media outlets making headlines of Tullian Tchividjian’s resignation while pointing out he was Billy Graham’s grandson. Some of the usual suspects were just as thrilled at his failure as the liberal atheists commenting on msnbc.com or the Washington Post.
@ KMD:
Yuppies and DINKs very far from home and desperate for socially conservative friends, that is.
Sopwith wrote:
” God so loved the WORLD..” = gospel. What could be so simple, so precious to grasp? Calvinism misses marks.
Reference Mahaney purchasing the friendship of Mohler – this from the SGM Survivors website from the days when the blog actually engaged in some informative posts:
“Until the cumulative gift levels for the SBTS Roll Call are increased beyond the $100,000 mark, C.J. Mahaney will always be listed under “President’s Council”. In 2007 he gave at the Distinguished Associate level (annual gifts of over $10,000), so we know that C.J. has given a MIMIMUM of $110,000 to Southern Seminary by year end 2007. Here’s the link: http://www.sbts.edu/media/publications/magazine/2008Spring.pdf (C.J. is listed on page 36 for the annual gift and on page 43 for the “President’s Council”.)”
http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/2010/02/08/show-me-the-money/
I looked back at the Southern Seminary magazine, Spring of 2007 edition and in addition to Mahaney’s personal donations Sovereign Grace Ministries was also listed on the President’s Council (cumulative gifts of $100,000 or more). Additionally Covenant Life Church was listed as a Sustaining Member (cumulative gifts of $15,000-$24,999).
Again, all that can be discerned from being a member of the President’s Council is that the member has given a minimum of $100,000. That is the top donor level. I suppose it is possible to ascertain the precise amount Mahaney and SGM have given, but that is more work than I care to undertake. Suffice it to say that Mahaney donated enough money to buy his way into the “good ole boys” celebrity club. Mahaney also seems to have purchased the unwavering loyalty of Mohler, although it should be mentioned that after Morales was convicted SBTS revoked their sweetheart deal for SGM students. Brent Detwiler covered this subject quite well here:
http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/sgm-pastors-college-on-life-support-southern-baptist-theolog.html
I thought everyone decided a long time ago that The Founders were deliberately courting CJ Mahaney because they wanted to take over the Southern Baptist Convention and adopting CJ’s authoritarian methods of squashing dissension would enable them to convert churches to the reformed movement without the tumultuous church splits that were already happening all over the country when a pastor tried to go “reformed”.
Seems like Al Mohler greatly admired CJ and his ability to demand 100% loyalty and obedience or else.
Nobody told him that CJ never told his own congregation they had become reformed.
Also, CJ brought exciting worship to attract young people to a dying denomination.
I think they were willing to accept theology with which they disagreed in order to gain the powerful influential abilities of CJ to keep the next generation.
@ MissionaryNow:
I don’t know and I doubt we will ever know how it all took place early on. I do know that reading the Founders playbook, Quiet Revolution written by Ernest Reisinger, has shepherding cult tactics written all over chapter 4. I think it was written in the early 80’s or even before. Don’t have time to check it right now. In the book, it is considered virtuous to lie to congregations in order to teach then “correct doctrine” of Calvinism.
I came to believe that Mohler and his non-SBC colleagues wanted to build a sort of super Reformed movement/group that would dominate evangelicalism adding up to huge numbers with SGM to Acts 29 and church planting/take overs beyond. The SBC had the infrastructure in place to supply and feed it which is why it was so important for him to control the SBC entities with his appointed loyalists. And he does.
@ Stan:’
I don’t really get the whole TT thing at all. He sure did not reserve any of that radical cheap grace he taught others for his own wife. he threw her under the bus by crafting a special statement just for release to the WaPo. Not sure why people cannot see this. I don’t see the need to take sides on this one when it comes to TGC/liberals/conservatives. TT was his own worst enemy and we all know what a quick trajectory to celebrity does to these guys.
Since he has bragged for years about not being able to do one good thing, you would think he would be proud of his wife for the same?
@ Lydia:
And I don’t like how he seems more focused on his fanbase than his family now. If Matt Chandler can leave the public eye for a summer, he can too. My personal opinion is that his teachings were in the realm of PCA orthodox, that I identify with his story of coming to Christ after a wild and crazy adolescence, and that his gross failure was personal and not directly related to his teachings and church management.
What did aggravate me was after all the articles telling me to pray for Mark Driscoll’s restoration, about how he’s going to return to his entitles role as minister, and about how he couldn’t have been that bad because his doctrine was right, and about all those bad/fake Christians who would “cheer on” the failure of any Christian ministry, the response to Tchividjian are things like this:
http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/when-leaders-fall-all-are-punished
Ministry failure is how God punishes common Christians for having the wrong doctrine. And we all know what the right doctrine is.
I think what 9Marks is all about, and mostly the rest of TGC is, is Christians realizing that the secular world doesn’t care about their judgment anymore so they’ll do it to other Christians because it’s easier. Whether it be by turning small groups into [member]-measuring contests of piety, or all those articles about how your normal human emotions prove you’re not really a Christian. I think what I saw after Tullian’s resignation affirmed that: gospel glitterati hated his wrong doctrine, and the world hates the faith of anyone, so they felt the same way about his failure.
Lydia wrote:
Can you elaborate or provide a link? Or is it just the usual reformed stance that you can’t do anything good because you’re hopelessly sullied by sin, and any good that comes out of you is not really good and doesn’t count?
Yeah I know that’s quite a mouthful, but their whole depravity thing will collapse like Gothic arches unless buttressed by special pleading and circular reasoning.
@ dee:
Dever You Mind!
@ Muff Potter:
Hey Muff, I will take it over to the open discussion.
@ Serving Kids In Japan:
“A leader can have perfectly orthodox doctrine, and yet treat his peers and congregants abominably. It takes more than doctrine to make a teacher “safe” or “correct”.”
+++++++++++++++++++++
corollary: a leader can have a perfectly nice and friendly smile, tone of voice and conversation style, and yet treat his peers and congregants abominably. it takes more than demeanor and niceness to make a teacher “safe” or “correct”.
__
Is God, The Monster Under Your Child’s Bed?
huh?
Does Mark Dever make our Heavenly Father look like the worst of despots, to the children, the monster under the bed?
hmmm…
Jesus taught, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come to Me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
However Mark Dever teaches that some folks are not chosen by God, and that teaching would naturally exclude children as well.
Mark Dever teaches the doctrine that Jesus did not die to save all humans which would naturally include children as well.
Is Mark Dever, by his teaching, preventing the children Jesus spoke of from coming to Him (Jesus)?
Who Should The Children Be Listening To?
Is Mark Dever greater than Jesus? Should children be listening to Mark Dever’s words or to Jesus’ words?
Where would the children find their greatest comfort, Jesus or Mark Dever?
Is Mark Dever preventing children from believing in Jesus?
You decide.
ATB
Sopy
—
@ dee:
See that’s just it, and why sometimes my head is in knots thinking about 9marks stuff.
“It’s all Biblical!”
The bible has been data-mined for all its worth to come up with this system. It’s such an “exalted” view of the bible that they can’t see any common sense or love besides their interpretation of the bible.
Yeah, it’s bible, but so was the Jewish religion at the time of Jesus. It’s forced religion and relationship, and that’s more and more the words that come to mind when I think of my short time at a 9marks facility.
No matter how “good” and “biblical” it might be, it’s doomed to fail and be abused, because it’s a legalistic system. When a tyrant is telling you what to do, it’s still tyranny, even if he’s telling you good things to do. And given the stories of abuse in this system I’ve heard, I have to wonder if it’s even “good”.
GSD wrote:
Apparently Devernetics feels the need to unpack a few verses in the New Testament into a 32 page book (ok, not too bad), and then into a 300 pg book (!!!).
What that tells me is that ultimately, God didn’t use enough words to begin with, and right doctrine means more than people.
Now where have I heard about “the simplicity of the gospel”….
MissionaryNow wrote:
James MacDonald, another Mohler buddy, is the next YRR “influencer” to watch within SBC. Lots of folks expressed concerns about his invitation to speak at the SBC Pastors Conference last month. MacDonald came anyway and essentially stuck his tongue out at the dissenters by enlisting his church as the newest member of SBC! Calvinization of the Southern Baptist Convention appears to be at the no-comeback stage. I expect any day now for SBC to announce that John Piper has joined SBC! And perhaps Tim Keller will come on over, since SBC is becoming more Presbyterian by the day.
Lydia wrote:
I was dismayed by his “she sinned first” statement. Dude; man up.
Lydia wrote:
It should be obvious by now, that TT was never called into the ministry. We don’t talk much about “calling” these days, since anyone with a little charisma and/or gimmick can become a celebrity preacher. Without the “Billy Graham’s Grandson” ticket, no one would have ever paid any attention to him. Sad that he drug the Graham name with him into his mess. He is probably off somewhere now – perhaps the same place where Driscoll went – to plan his “I was a victim” comeback.
Sopwith wrote:
The Calvinist God is! He saves some little children and damns others before they ever draw their first breath. What love is this?!
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Yep, he dragged her reputation through the mud to salvage a bit of his. As far as being Christian behavior – it wasn’t.
Mae wrote:
It all depends on how you define the word “world” — or what you claim the Greek word actually means. It’s a great means for misleading gullible congregants.
@ Lydia:
Does anyone know when Gregg Harris (and his well-known sons Josh and the twins with their Rebelution) became involved with Mahaney?
I remember when Gregg started his first church (I tried to get my spouse to consider switching to the new church, for various reasons, but no go — I think mainly because my spouse hated the CCM, actually), and it seemed like the next time I turned around it had calved into several churches, and then at least one of those churches became a “name” in the SGM cover up scandal narrative.
refugee wrote:
I have to wonder how many people Calvinism has driven away from Jesus.
Lydia wrote:
Though I never heard it said outright (too low in the food chain, I’m sure), this idea fits perfectly with the arrogant attitude I saw from Doug Wilson, Doug Phillips, Kevin Swanson, Scott Brown, and their cohorts.
Gnosticism. “We know better than you do” or “we know what’s best for you” and “we’ll tell you what the scriptures mean because you have to study the original Greek and Hebrew and read Early Church Fathers and Puritan writings to even begin to scratch the surface” — whatever happened to having faith as a little child?
Of course, one must have faith as a little child in the YRR leaders and teachers. Forget faith in Jesus. That goes without saying, just so long as your trust is in your elders.
Forgive the sour tone. I am still shaken at being taken in by prodinov’s reasonable tone.
roebuck wrote:
The majority of my kids, for starters.
@ Sopwith:
You have brought me to tears again. Yes. And not only Mark Dever.
@ Max:
McDonald announced that Harvest is joining the SBC. You think his congregation voted on it? :o) And I have to wonder why McDonald wants this move and why the SBC wants him. Isn’t their credibility damaged enough?
http://sbcvoices.com/breaking-news-james-mcdonald-and-harvest-church-are-southern-baptist/
@ refugee:
I have no idea. I knew little about them except the twin boys books they were always trying to sell to teens. Mega church book stores carried them. I think Julie Anne is pretty familiar with Greg Harris’ ministry career.
refugee wrote:
Don’t be shaken. Consider it a learning curve. He/she used familiar tactics as in first positioning himself/herself as also a “victim” of church abuses then declaring Devers teaching as scriptural and authentic. (Which always cracks me up as in believing correct doctrine would never lead to correct behavior! In their world, the two do not go together. They simply declare their behavior as scriptural)
As you read this persons comments you see it digresses into accusing others of being “angry” and in some sort of attack mode for disagreeing with his/her declarations/assertions. Right out of the playbook. It is meant to be ad homenin. It is what they know.
@ roebuck:
It is becoming a bigger problem here if determinism is taught young enough. Once that view of God is ingrained it is hard to view Him any other way.
refugee wrote:
Yes, their reasoning is bizarre, circular, fallacious, fraudulent.
“Kosmos”, the Greek word used there, which means the entire universe, everything which God created, or literally put in order, very obviously means just the handful of those who are elect. There’s your standard reformed perspective. But wait a minute, “eklektos”, the word for elect, is used all over the New Testament, yet for some reason the Lord inspired John to write “kosmos” in what we now know as the 16th verse of the third chapter of his gospel. Why did the Lord do that? Why not the more accurate eklektos?
I do not know what Lord they follow, perhaps some, perhaps many of them follow the true God, perhaps some just follow their all-important local church leader or dead church father or pet theology or gospel celebrity, but I do know that not everyone who calls on His name will inherit His kingdom.
Lydia wrote:
Is this James McDonald (of James and Stacy McDonald) or James MacDonald (of the Elephant’s Debt, I think)? I admit, I tend to confuse the two very similar names.
Lydia wrote:
Oh, but Lydia, in an elder-ruled church it doesn’t matter what the congregation thinks!
Lydia wrote:
Mohler and SBC’s New Calvinists want him … he is another big-name draw for the YRR crowd. Actually, he has sort of been in the SBC fold for a while – he was on the advisory panel for LifeWay’s controversial “The Gospel Project” literature (controversial because all advisers and writers are Calvinists).
Lest I appear too critical about MacDonald and Harvest Church, I’ll say something nice … they have a great praise & worship team (Vertical Church Band)! Unfortunately, many New Calvinist works use musical talent to draw in the 20s-40s crowd and then unload reformed theology on them.
refugee wrote:
This is James MacDonald, pastor of the six-campus Harvest Bible Chapel. He holds periodic events called ” The Elephant Room”, where invited pastors of various theological persuasions discuss theological beliefs and practices.
Regarding “The Elephant’s Debt”, it is “a website dedicated to exposing some of the underlying reasons why many people have both privately and publicly questioned the character of Pastor James MacDonald and his lack of qualifications for being an elder and pastor at Harvest Bible Chapel of Rolling Meadows, Illinois” (as posted on the website).
refugee wrote:
“It all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”
Lydia wrote:
The same way Baba Saddam and Comrade Dear Leader were unanimously re-elected every time.
lydia wrote:
“Some have said what we do is illegal. Before that can happen, make sure WE are the ones who define what is legal and what is not.”
— L Ron Hubbard
lydia wrote:
200 grand is also enough to juice a book onto the NYT Best Seller list.
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
Never mind “we”; However did GOD get by without Dever?
Deb wrote:
CAPTAIN KREMMEN!
OF THE STAR CORPS!
World’s Most Fabulous Man!
— Kenny Everett Video Show
Law Prof wrote:
Weirder faster than a religion whose sacrament is marijuana?
roebuck wrote:
Too many and more to come I fear.
Law Prof wrote:
It’s said that the most consistent sign of a Sociopath is the ability to instantly flip one-eighty and play the Poor Poor Victim.
lydia wrote:
“With a ruler, you can lay the flattery on with a trowel.”
— Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of England
Law Prof wrote:
“For Satan himself can transform himself to appear as an Angel of Light.”
— some Rabbi from Nazareth
__
“Assurance Of Relief And Comfort?”
hmmm…
refugee wrote:
I’m sitting here eating a specially prepared chicken gumbo, I wish you cold come over and have some, I wish I could dry your eyes as well and bring comfort to your anguished soul.
Know that my prayers go with you friend, The Lord hears me when I pray. 🙂
I can assure you by my Jesus’ words, help is on its way…
The bible talks about ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation,
Cheeeeeeeeeeese!
I asked Our Lord Jesus, whom I serve ever so imperfectly, to bring them your way…
(And you don’t even havta feed um after midnite or anything!)
(grin)
ATB
Sopy
—
Deb wrote:
New Calvinism is a mutual admiration society. From your 2013 post on the Mahaney/Mohler affection:
“I could say to you we’ve not been given Dr. Mohler’s gifts, and it would be useless for me to encourage anyone to imitate Dr. Mohler’s mental ability.” (C.J. Mahaney)
“I’ve seen his stack of books,” Mahaney said. “If you have a stack of books, I’m saying there’s quite a difference, pretty obvious difference, between your stack and his stack of books. So if you are comforting yourself, ‘I have a stack,’ well you might have a stack, but if we consider the nature and content of your stack as opposed to his stack, well, your stack looks pretty sorry and pathetic.”
These guys are falling all over themselves affirming each other … strange behavior. I’m beginning to wonder about some of them and what goes on in those elephant rooms.
@ Max:
That’s one of the biggest things that turned me off to the Hyles-Anderson Fundies once I started waking up. The constant back-patting, 10-minute intros at conferences, the bible signings, the book promos, the way pastors would disappear from the conference line-ups for criticizing this or that….
It’s the same BS here, just more surface emphasis on grace. Same structure, same show, different cast, different lines.
Lydia wrote:
“The future has not been written. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves.”
Attributed to Sarah Connor
__
Folks might find this video helpful:
an Calvinism debate:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QR0lN5aBWdY
ATB
Sopy
—
__
an Calvinism debate (part 2)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6prrlabhGtg
ATB
Sopy
—
Max wrote:
Typical locker room humor translated for dudebros. “My stack is bigger than your stack.”
Muff Potter wrote:
I loved the new Terminator. I have been practicing my Arnold S. robot smile. I am getting pretty good.
dee wrote:
Dee, sometimes you say the darndest things! 🙂 I’ll bet you make the robot smile downright, dare I say, adorable…
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Exactly.
roebuck wrote:
My family is getting annoyed since I keep trying the smile out on them.
dee wrote:
I may have to see this movie just to see what you’re talking about…
dee wrote:
My personal favorite was that dudebro brag session with MacDonald and Driscoll and Dever where they bragged about their “sites” and attendance and numbers and basically basked in the glow of their greatness. My sites are bigger than your sites.
Law Prof wrote:
For those of you who missed it, this is the video Law Prof is talking about … a glimpse inside New Calvinism’s mutual admiration society with its leadership basking in glory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ukvHuwFzBA
Why would anybody in their right mind follow such arrogance? Ahhh … that’s it, New Calvinists are not in their right minds! “For the time is coming when people will not tolerate sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching for something pleasing and gratifying, they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold” (2 Timothy 4:3).
To all this I say, my God is bigger than the Calvinist God!
__
“Terminator Smile?”
roebuck wrote:
hmmm…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vCZigQL9hJ0
🙂
Practice makes perfect?
(grin)
hahahahahaha
Sopy
—
Sopwith wrote:
Thanks, Sopy – now I don’t have to see the movie 🙂
I can just imagine Dee springing that on her poor unsuspecting family at odd moments… 🙂
@ roebuck:
There clearly needs to be a ‘terminator smile’ emoticon/smiley… or not. 😀
dee wrote:
I’ve been an Arnie fan since he first hit the silver screen. Still crazy after all these years.
Max wrote:
This is exactly correct, it’s what I’ve been saying to anyone who would listen.
And to follow up, I do not believe licentiousness or hedonism run wild is the opposite of godliness. In my opinion, well down the road to utter depravity, far beyond anything like drug dealers, prostitutes, thieves, and those given over to absolute perversions lie the true reprobates, those who without a pure miracle of God are perhaps beyond hope: the prideful, the smugly arrogant, those who are so full of themselves and who haughtily look down upon the rest of us commoners.
The original sin of all, so far as we have been told in the Bible, was satanic pride. All those other sins above are just good things twisted round, people looking for God or truth or good feelings but going about it in all the wrong ways. But the arrogant ones? They are pursuing nothing good at all, they are running away from anything good that might save them as fast as they can. I sometimes wonder, at least of some of them, if the reason their fruits seem so bad is not because them don’t know God, but because they do know Him in a manner of speaking–and hate Him so much they’re inevitably drawn to His people so they can hurt them more thoroughly.
Law Prof wrote:
I came to the conclusion that doing wrong/evil to others in the Name of Christ and calling it good is a much worse position to be in. I learned something from a rabbi years ago that stuck with me and made a ton of sense in context. He said the commandment about not taking the Lords name in vain meant much more than most Christians have been taught. He said that it means we should never attribute things/events/words to God that are not from Him. IOW, be very careful. Claiming something is of God when it isn’t is dangerous ground to stand on. Which is another reason not to be a determinist, IMO!
@ roebuck:
I love the idea!
@ Muff Potter:
There is just something about him!
Law Prof wrote:
Darm, that’s good.
Lydia wrote:
Wow-I didn’t know that! So, men like Piper who claim that God destroyed a bridge in Minneapolis in order to get Piper to repent ought to be a bit more careful? That’s got play.
I attended CHB one summer right when Mr. Dever was expanding the 9Marks properties. Although personally I liked Mark, and enjoyed his messages I was unable to dissuade him that Local Membership shouldn’t be a Sacrament. The verses he shared with me defending his idea Membership were all written in the past tense, to the Membership we already have in Christ.
Van wrote:
Yep, the usual Calvinist mumbo-jumbo determinism indicating that a small crowd of eternal members were elected before the foundation of the world, with no choice in the matter. The vast multitude of little babies throughout the ages were damned by the Calvinist God before they ever saw first light. What love is this?!
I’m not sure how much influence C.J. had on the initial 9 Marks pamphlet, as they hadn’t known each other very long at that point. It seems like Mark had already developed those ideas, which he immediately deployed when he was hired by CHBC.
But I do remember Mark Dever remarking somewhere around 2008-2010 that one of his reasons for starting the T4G conferences was to introduce other pastors to Sovereign Grace pastors. He was indeed quite impressed with the SGM approach and wanted its influence to increase. I think he made that comment to a gathering of SGM pastors, perhaps one of SGM’s pre-T4G sessions. I wish I could remember the exact context.
Dave MacKenzie wrote:
Funny thing, that. By that time, I already knew that CJ was a problem. And I am a woman and not seminary trained like Dever. Yet Dever would say that I am not capable of making a judgement on church leadership like he is.
In the other direction, two of C.J.’s sons-in-law (Mike and Brian) did internships with Mark Dever at Capitol Hill Baptist in 2012.
http://www.capitolhillbaptist.org/past-interns/
Dave MacKenzie wrote:
Of course they did. And didn’t they also attend (or still attend) SBTS? Dever, Mohler, etc. the Same old, same old.
dee wrote:
I’ve heard that interpretation before and it really makes more sense to me. If you’re going to say something is of God, you better make darned sure you’re right, and that’s born out in the emphasis placed in the bible on discerning between false prophets and true, false signs and wonders and true.
http://www.sbts.edu/resources/category/journal-of-theology/sbjt-44-winter-2000/
Mark Dever’s article on Biblical Church Discipline written in “The Founders Journal” December 2000.
GovPappy wrote:
As far as I know, that IS the original meaning of the Commandment.
Doing Evil and claiming God’s Sanction for it. (“God Told Me To!” God Saith!”)
It’s like God’s saying “You do your own dirty work! Don’t drag Me or My Name into it!”
Convenient how it has been redefined to mean cussing and ONLY cussing,
Eh, My Dear Wormwood?
Max wrote:
And remember, SINNERS(TM):
CALVIN’s Institutes Has God All Figured Out.
Perfectly-Parsed, word-for-word, letter-by-letter.
— The Elect
dee wrote:
Isn’t That Speshul? Flutterhands is SO Important and SO Speshul that God wrecked that bridge and killed all those people just to Send a Personal Message to him?
I served at CHBC from 2009-2012. I am no longer affiliated with any church but can say from reading these comments that most of you have no idea what you are talking about
Zach wrote:
Most of us here are trying to figure out why Dever has formed such a strong alliance with Mahaney to the point where Dever would totally ignore Dever’s own signature doctrine in order to protect Mahaney. Why would Dever do that? On its face it makes no sense, but that is exactly what happened. From appearances, Dever influenced Manaheny’s Calvinism conversion and Mahaney influenced Dever’s move toward ecclesiastical control-freakery. Do you know how these two formed their unassailable alliance and why?
Also, I think you may be assuming things about some commenters here regarding whether some of us know what we are talking about. Grudem praises Mahaney and SGM for providing financial assistance so that he could write his latest screed against more than half the church. So, from their own mouths we have evidence that Mahaney sought to spread his own particularly nasty view of women and his view of the way a church should operate.
Maybe instead of an ad hominem you could offer some counter-evidence to help us understand what is very difficult to understand if Dever believes what he preaches or if he believes it applies to the Glitterati as well as the pewpeons on whom it is enforced.
A supervisor from work told me that at CHBC, one could not even visit the small groups there without first becoming a member of the church. Since she couldn’t make an evaluation of the small groups there she ended up leaving the church (the other reason she left was the church’s attitude towards women, which freaked her out).
9Marks was founded as The Center for Church Reform. Wayback Machine has archived pages from churchreform dot org. I found this in a FAQ from the early years:
“Financial gifts are gladly welcomed. Because one particular donor pays for the salaries of CCR staff, every additional dollar given goes directly to projects in support of the CCR mission. Checks can made out to CCR and mailed to 525 A St. N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002”
“one particular donor pays for the salaries of CCR staff”? Hmmm…
Jerome wrote:
Very interesting. Would that possibly be Mahaney or the guy in Dubai?
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/ministry-capital-interview-mark-dever
“MD: I first thought of the nine marks in a letter I had written to a church plant I had been involved with in the Boston area. I wrote to them in 1991 laying out nine characteristics that marked their church, that were intentional, and that any pastor coming to work with them should understand before he came. As for 9Marks as an organization, 9Marks began with Matt Schmucker wanting to export to other pastors the lessons he was learning here at CHBC. Matt has always been a builder. He likes, and is able, to start new things. Matt’s vision along with a generous donation from a neighbor allowed us to get started in November 1998. We were originally called the Center for Church Reform, but then we noticed pastors getting into trouble with their congregations for referring to an organization that seemed to suggest that they should change. So we decided to go for the simple positive name of 9Marks, which would represent those issues in the local church we were specifically addressing.”
So…
The 9Marks idea sprang from the church planted by Dever in Topsfield, Mass. after his stint with the United Church of Christ there (New Market Reformed Baptist Church, Topsfield, rarely if ever mentioned by name in the 9Marksist literature as it eventually went belly up)
“along with a generous donation from a neighbor allowed us to get started in November 1998”
“a neighbor”? Hmm…what an oddly vague description.
“We were originally called the Center for Church Reform, but then we noticed pastors getting into trouble with their congregations for referring to an organization that seemed to suggest that they should change. So we decided to go for the simple positive name of 9Marks”
Yes, it was only the organization’s name that caused those pesky congregations to suspect 9Marks Dever wanted to meddle with them!
@ Jerome:
Yes, “neighbor” is an interesting description. One might think that 9Marks would want to recognize the generous donor neighbor for enabling such–ahem–reform to come to churches. I wonder who had that kind of money in the late 1990’s in the D.C. area?
@ Gram3:
…and thought that churches needed to be reformed along Reformed and authoritarian lines. Mahaney/SGM? Wealthy businessman or politician at CHBC?
Jerome wrote:
Fascinating. I wonder if any of the usual suspects were that neighbor?
@ dee:
Likely someone way too humble to have his generosity publicized.
And, FWIW, 9Marks has a book review hot off the press, of Jared Wilson’s Prodigal Church. http://9marks.org/review/book-review-the-prodigal-church-by-jared-c-wilson/
As one might expect, it’s favorable——-except for me glaring shortcoming. Wilson fails to “highlight the necessity of congregations to dutifully reclaim the biblical practices of church membership and discipline”!!
That undisciplined rascal Jared! Calling into question the power of the gospel!
“You can preach until you’re blue in the face, but if your congregation doesn’t feel an obligation to excommunicate that unrepentant adulterer—or even that guy who joined four years ago but you haven’t heard from since (remember: Hebrews 10:25)—then you’ve called into question the life-changing power of the gospel you’ve spent so much time preaching. ”
I’m fine with excommunicating the unrepentant adulterer– but can’t you just remove the other guy from the list? He likely realized he made a mistake “joining” and decided to “assemble together” elsewhere!
@ Dave A A:
That should be “one” glaring shortcoming– not me.
Dave A A wrote:
Probably someone humbly destined to become Reformed in the late 1990’s. How interesting that stuff happened in 1998 that transformed Destiny people into Predestiny people who then formed strategic alliances to push for church reform where the newly reforming churches would look a lot like the Predestiny churches. So we know that a “colleague” introduced Mahaney to Dever (or vice versa) and Dever tells us a “neighbor” was the 9Marks angel. Why the secrecy about who has been so helpful in furthering this partnership?
We really need to have some folks edit this page to included that Dever believes and supports excommunication/shunnings, those who support sexual predators, etc. This website has been, unfairly, too nice to Mark Dever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Dever
For a guy that has damaged as many conservative believers lives and reputations as he has, destroyed friendships and families and reputations, it’s time he gave a far greater account on this earth for his DESPICABLE and un-Biblical conduct.
Zach wrote:
Oh, I have some idea of what I’m talking about. Mark Dever has destroyed the lives and reputations of countless conservative Christians. He has done enormous damage. He is an arrogant, self-centered bully who teaches a different Gospel.
The man lacks love and common decency. He is responsible for the countless shunnings and exoommunications of countless decent Christians and he has led a modern-day Salem Witch Trial. He is without conscience. He is arrogant.
Hotel California/9Marxist is right!