"I wanna get my church straight like it has been."
Genora Hamm Biggs
Genora Hamm Biggs
A week ago we joined in on the public outcry against the termination of Genora Hamm Biggs' church membership. The 103 year old had been a member of Union Grove Baptist Church in Elberton, Georgia for an incredible 92 years! The newly hired minister, whom the congregation assumed would follow their Baptist tradition, began to move the church in a 'holiness' direction, primarily through his preaching style.
On August 2, 2015, Reverend Tim Mattox and members and officers of the church sent Genora Biggs this letter (see screen shot below).
When Genora Biggs showed up at church anyway, Rev. Mattox called the police to have her removed. The common sense law enforcement officers saw this for what it was — a church conflict — and refused to get involved. Biggs told Fox News 5 that "nothing can keep her from attending church services at the Union Grove Baptist Church". The church conflict went on to receive national attention.
Nearly two months later the congregation has reconsidered its actions and has voted out Reverend Mattox. According to an article in Christianity Today:
Members of a Baptist church in Elberton, Georgia, have voted to oust their pastor after he fired a 103-year-old member of the church who had expressed disagreement with his practices.
The members of the congregation cast their vote on Sunday removing Rev. Tim Mattox from the Union Grove Baptist Church after he revoked the church membership of Genora Hamm Biggs, who has been attending the church for 92 years.
Genora Biggs, who has previously served as church secretary and who taught Rev. Mattox in school, dared to stand up for what she believed was right. The CT article includes this quote by Biggs:
"He's a holy, sanctified minister – we are Baptist and he has divided the church," she said, adding that Mattox is not following the Baptist Church covenant and is trying to change the denomination.
The Atlanta Journal Constitution is monitoring developments at Union Grove Baptist Church, and has provided this update:
On Sunday [September 20th], members of the church who disagreed with his stewardship voted to fire Mattox as pastor, but he has ignored that vote.
The church members who voted to fire Mattox issued him a “Letter of Termination” and ordered him to remove his property from the church, according to a report in the Athens Banner-Herald.
On Tuesday he obtained restraining orders against the grandson of Biggs and a former church secretary, according to the Banner-Herald.
A hearing is scheduled in court for Oct. 5.
The Athens Banner Herald provides further information on recent developments.
As a Southern Baptist who is deeply concerned about changes taking place in my denomination, I have been inspired by this 103 year old Christian woman. I am angered by Neo-Calvinist pastors who have misrepresented themselves to Non-Calvinist congregations and brought strife and division to the churches they have been called to 'serve'. Their stealth takeovers are inexcusable.
One of the reasons we blog is so that we can alert our brothers and sisters in Christ about these trends within Christendom. After much research and discussions with those who have experienced these takeovers first hand, we know the warning signs. Just like Genora Biggs who was alarmed by her pastor's 'holiness preaching', we are alarmed by pastors who want to:
– Change church constitutions and by-laws
– Adopt membership covenants
– Emphasize 'church discipline'
– Appoint elders
– Sideline women in church leadership roles (e.g. women teaching mixed Sunday school classes)
– Make drastic changes in the theology being taught (Calvinist vs Non-Calvinist).
My prayer is that should any of us ever find ourselves in situations similar to Genora Biggs — where a newly elected pastor attempts to implement changes that our congregations oppose — we will have the courage to stand up and let our voices be heard. One voice can make a HUGE difference, as Biggs has clearly demonstrated. What an incredible legacy she will leave when she steps into eternity, ascending to her heavenly home.
Please pray for the upcoming court proceedings involving Union Grove Baptist Church and its former pastor. We will do our best to keep you updated on this most fascinating church conflict.
Primera?
Can you imagine calling the police on a 103-year-old woman? And this behavior is somehow representative of “holiness”?
It’s interesting that she taught him when he was a child. Who knows what prior history the two had?
Cayuga wrote:
Maybe she will one day tell 'the rest of the story'…
Great post and reminder of the warning signs of a takeover. We went through one, and it went just as you delineated here. Complete opposite of the gospel.
Don’t mess with a 103 year old grandmother!!! She will take you down.
This made my day!
Thank you.
This happened about ten years ago and is probably benign compared to what is described in WWW, but it is also an example.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2339673&page=1
This occurred in an American Baptist (i.e. Northern Baptist) Church ( church probably left this mainline denomination)
Years ago my SBC church got rid of female teachers teaching mixed Sunday School classes. I thought it was more of a political that a Scriptural move. Pastor wanted to be politically correct within changing SBC.
The letter in the screen shot …… I know all of the signatures are probably not shown. But, did anyone else notice that 8 of the 10 legible signatures are female names? Is there anything up with that? The article in the link also said that Matto
Continued ….. I hit the wrong button … Again.
Mattox also has female bodyguards. Isn’t it a bit odd for a pastor to have bodyguards at all, let alone female bodyguards for a calvinista preacher???
Here are a couple of posts I did… the first one deals with a window before the bottom feel out. A 2 month window would be a preview to a 5 year faith crisis.
https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/09/25/growing-doubt-a-foreshadow-of-what-is-to-come-for-5-years-and-james-and-gina-head-to-kenya/
This is an overview of PJ Smyth’s Advance Movement. The Advance Movement is trying to establish in the United States and build its footprint. When PJ Smyth becomes Senior Pastor at Covenant Life Church expect CLC to become a part of Advance.
https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/09/27/what-is-pj-smyths-advance-movement-an-overview-of-its-doctrine-hubs-mission-leadership-and-finances-also-its-global-presence/
http://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/19870672-story
The Pastor is not a Calvinist, sounds more like NAR/Charismania. I love how you expand this incident to attack Biblical doctrine (Oh no church discipline and membership covenants?!) and promote theological liberalism though. Anti-Calvinist Derangement Syndrome (ACDS) at its finest.
I am glad at this turn of fortunes. I am also skeptical that it can be repeated often. All to often when the conflict comes the “pastor” has acquired a good deal of protectors and enforcers. Even with an overbearing pastor, opposition will be seen as divisive. Often the events move swiftly, details are unknown till long afterward, and you do not have a forum. Should you somehow be able to think clearly, speak up and articulate the issue, and others become aware, it will instead be seen as a division regardless whether you win or lose.
If you or I oppose a pastor and six people leave due to conflict we will be labeled divisive. If the pastor drives off half the congregation he is a leader taking a stand.
I applaud Genora Hamm Biggs, she had the tenacity and the standing to pull this one off. To the “pastor”, regardless of his doctrine, he comes off as a total jerk, he is just a noisy gong.
And that is exactly why congregational rule is evil, isn't it? 😉
In a church properly led by a team of elders handpicked by the pastor that could never have happened.
So much for honoring your Elders instead of your elders.
@ Nancy2:
For clarification, the pastor who was voted out is of the 'holiness' persuasion. He is not Neo-Cal, but he attempted to take the church in a different direction, similar to what Calvinista pastors have been known to do.
@ Zizendorf:
Oh, so I'm a theological liberal if I don't support church covenants?
As far as church discipline goes, it has its place in a congregation but is being way overdone by power mongering Neo-Cal pastors.
“Holiness” pastor is far from Calvinist. In fact probably the opposite. Tendency here is to lump all problems under Calvinism. Big mistake. And it wrecks overall credibility of commenters.
@ Godith:
Obviously, Rev. Tim Mattox misrepresented himself to this congregation because they thought they were getting a Baptist, not Holiness pastor.
There have been a number of cases in the SBC where a congregation thought they were hiring a Non-Calvinist pastor who turned out to be a full-fledged Calvinista.
Sorry you didn't like my analogy, but it definitely applies. Too many congregations have been taken over by pastors who have not been forthright with their theology and that must stop.
The only way it will stop is when members take action as this elderly woman did. She is my hero.
And as far as the credibility of our commenters goes, we have the most outstanding commenters in the blogosphere!
@ Zizendorf:
@ Godith:
Sorry, I thought I had read somewhere that Maddox was a Calvinist. I was mistaken.
But, regardless of the man’s religious persuasion, what did Mrs. Biggs do to warrant the “church disciplinary” measure of being kicked out???
Mr. Maddox came into that church under false pretenses and tried to take complete personal control of the people and the church property. IMHO, he is the one who deserves to be disciplined!
I agree with Deb. Mrs. Biggs is a hero!
Zizendorf wrote:
You did not read the OP carefully and rushed to judgment. Deb wrote: “Just like Genora Biggs who was alarmed by her pastor’s ‘holiness preaching’, we are alarmed by pastors who want to…”
But jumping to judgment is what you are complaining that we do.
That’s a tres cute label: Anti-Calvinist Derangement Syndrome. But the response behind your label is completely predictable when any group turns aggressive and tries to take over another group. Which is part of the point that Deb made, and you missed.
Also, using “theological liberalism” as a pejorative in this case reveals a narrowness that borders on delusional. Why? Because you apparently believe that the only way to understand membership and discipline is the way you do.
@ Patrice:
Agreed. Zizendorf's comment demonstrates on several levels what some congregations are up against.
@ Godith:
So it turns out he is a Holiness guy acting like a Calvinista. Not sure that particular movements reputation is going to go away that easy. Although there was a recent conference on how to be less evil as an authoritarian. :o)
Their particular tactics worked to gain power and free resources in ways that make big time con men jealous . My guess is all types will be using the tactics. Some more subtle than others.
@ Zizendorf:
I cannot begin to stress how wonderful it is to be away from this thinking.
And just for grins I am a Pelagian mutualist. But not a “hedonist”. :o)
Zizendorf wrote:
I went through this in the 80s. Anyone who disagrees with you, you call a liberal. I call bull-hockey.
I saw the SBC kick people out just because they disagreed on minor, minor points that had NOTHING to do with salvation…..and they did so, by calling people ” liberals.”
Zizendorf wrote:
If you follow this blog for any amount of time, you’ll find that there are a *great many* people here who have been deeply hurt by the heartless application of the types of theology you defend. It’s unhelpful *in extremis* to shove their faces in it – if you’re here for any other reason than to be a troll, that is.
As someone who was in the Reformed camp for many years, I’ll give you some free advice, which you can take or reject at your leisure – specific theological systems are not as important as devotion to Christ (Christ as defined by the Catholic creeds is quite sufficient), and conforming our character to His. I had to make many painful mistakes and damage a lot of relationships to learn that lesson. I hope your path is easier.
Patrice wrote:
It’s called gas lighting. Insist there has been no problem then accuse the person who brings up the problem of being unstable or mentally unbalanced. Standard fare in that world.
Bill M wrote:
Great observation! I will be quoting you in a future blog.
Holiness churches have their own set of problems.
Like defining “Holiness” entirely in terms of “Thou Shalt Not” and the resulting Excessive Scrupulosity and OCD and attitude towards the Apostates and Lukewarms outside of their little clique.
Zizendorf wrote:
Z,
Please explain to me how you arrive at the conclusion that a signed membership covenant is a Biblical doctrine.
@ Todd Wilhelm:
I'm fairly sure membership covenants are found in the book of Marx (Chapter 9) and Acts 29. 🙂
IOW, they've done gone and added to God's Word. 😉
Deb wrote:
I feel sorry for members because they haven’t been taught critical thinking, which is needed on several levels to beat back this BS. Neither do they read outside their circles, so where will they find other thoughts to consider? Plus they are busy trying to get by, the economy being what it is.
And their leaders do as Zizendorf did here—insist that they are God’s mouthpiece and that the Bible is God’s complete/exact voice which they alone can read accurately. Accepting that, the extreme narcissism doesn’t occur to members. And it is extreme, you know? To insist that what you think comes from God’s own mind—–that’s about as extreme as it gets.
That’s why I’m so glad you two are there for them, Deb. It is vital.
Praise God for congregational polity when it comes to matters like this! Sometimes, congregations have more sense than the pulpit and need to have a mechanism to correct a church’s course. If Rev. Mattox had proceeded to establish complete authoritarian rule, he was positioned to altar the majority belief and practice of a church that had been in existence before he was born. I don’t necessarily have a problem with his “holiness” leaning, but to force his theology upon a church not practicing such belief is wrong. Let’s hope and pray that the Oct. 5 hearing delivers justice to the good people at Union Grove Baptist Church.
As Deb points out, there are indeed similarities with this situation and what is happening within SBC ranks with the New Calvinist movement. Young, restless and reformed pastors have deceived their way into traditional non-Calvinist churches and began to change both church polity and teaching. These young bulls have upset the China shop and split churches across the SBC landscape. They don’t really give a big whoop about the resident members and their theology – they are passionate about this new reformation and defend their actions for the good of the cause. To make it worse, they are spurred forward in this revolution by prominent SBC leaders who have gained control of the denomination’s entities. Calvinization is moving forward at break-neck speed within SBC, with hardly a whimper from millions of non-Calvinists. May God give us a Genora Hamm Biggs in every one of SBC 40,000+ non-Calvinist churches who will stand and defend the theological traditions they have known. Let me be clear, I’m not as much anti-Calvinist as I am anti-Calvinization of the largest non-Calvinist denomination in America. Who will stand? I’m doing all I can in my neck of the woods to get the word out.
Bill M wrote:
Brilliant! This is a bang-on statement of the bullying used by petty tyrant ‘pastors’ to turn congregants into his personal money-giving puppets.
I am more curious about “Zizendorf”‘s chosen moniker. Was he attempting to spell Zinzendorf? If so, then it is ironic at best. Count Zinzendorf was a leader in the Moravian church, a denomination not known for any Reformed tendencies but fairly amicable with the Holiness-style teachings. Additionally, Moravians ordain women and even have women bishops.
“The Athens Banner Herald provides further information on recent developments”
Would you happen to have a direct link to the story? This link took me to a flood of stories and I couldn’t find the right one.
@ Burwell Stark:
I thought it strange, too. As I understand it, he actually provided land to fleeing “radicals” for protection from the Reformed hunting them down.
Patrice wrote:
This is a tough one. I’m much more critical than most and I was sucked in. I think a pastor could preach critical thinking every Sunday for a year and yet people would still not question their actions or those of the pastor. Instead they would pride themselves on being critical thinkers.
Church members would be satisfied that all is well because the pastor teaches critical thinking so therefore there is no need for it within the church, he has effectively allayed suspicion. It would be similar to the narcissist pastor who preaches his first messages on humility and everyone starts talking about how humble their pastor is, been there, seen it.
From A to Z we are tribal and whether by nature or training, we don’t question our own tribe, only the other tribe.
lydia wrote:
Christ came to set the captives free..
@ Patrice:
To be fair, I can see how someone who didn’t carefully read the OP could honestly come to the conclusion that the Deebs just assumed the guy was a Neo-Calvinist. I also thought that was a weakness in the OP. The comparison between Neo-Calvinist stealth takeovers and Mattox’s actions is accurate, but I think it could have been stated more clearly that the analogy was about actions rather than doctrine.
@ Patrice:
And yes, the accusation of “liberalism” solely because they are reject the Neo-Calvinist conception of church membership and/or are egalitarian – which I read an implied subtext, maybe I’m wrong but the Neo-Calvinist folks I’ve encountered would have intended that if they had written Zizendorf’s comment – is just plain theologically wrong.
Hester wrote:
That is the point I was trying to make. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Zizendorf wrote:
Yet what you say is merely an assertion. Where is your evidence that anyone has attacked a Biblical doctrine? Where are membership covenants and 9Marks-style excommunication and shunning in the actual text of the Bible? Where is the Gospel Glitterati Authoritarianism in the text of the Bible? Where are Gender Roles in the actual text of the Bible? Where is the Systematic Theology Calvin espoused in the Bible? Or any Systematic Theology? You have used the word “Biblical” as a thought-stopper. Are you just being a liberal and making the Bible say what you want it to say? Are you just making stuff up like the Pipers and Grudems and slapping the “Bibilical” label on it?
Bill M wrote:
Perfect description of the “divisive” accusation and definition. That is exactly what happened to us, even though the pastor had caused the departure of lots of people, including long-time staff who were beloved by the congregation because they differed with him on his non-negotiables.
Sometimes when I read a comment like Zizendorf’s, I wonder if Ick Bulbneck is pulling our leg.
Zizendorf wrote:
Zizzy, take it from the village Calvinist here (real historic Calvinist/Reformed/Presbyterian) the shennanigans that the New-Calvinists are pulling in the SBC are more often than not breaking the peace and unity in the church, which is something that Christ prizes over foisting TULIP on unwilling congregations.
If you are at all attuned to church history and the historical development of doctrine, you would quickly see these SBC leaders claim to “Calvinism” as the thinly veiled sham it is. By their definition of “Calvinism”, Calvin himself would not be a Calvinist. One cannot simply hold to TULIP (a 19th century anachronistic acronym which reduces all of Calvinistic/Reformed theology into soteriological categories) and be a Calvinist – one must hold to Calvin’s ecclesiology (presbyterian) and sacrementology to be Calvinist in any meaningful sense.
This means Baptists cannot be Calvinists, they would have been asked to move along in Calvin or Beza’s Geneva (meaning Piper, Grudem, Carson, Mohler would’ve failed to gain ordination licenses there). Some Baptists hold to aspects of doctrine influenced by Calvin and other Reformed theologians, and historically these were the Particular Baptists who had the good sense to not call themselves either Reformed or Calvinist (these hold to the London Baptist Confession or similar confessional statements). Today there are many non-SBC Reformed Baptists who hold to these confessions that are not making war in an entire denomination or pirating denominational congregations and resources for their own purposes.
Baptist polity allows for congregations to decide their own confessional moorings, which means if SBC New-Calvinists want to insert their influence in the SBC they can either plant their own “Calvinist” congregations, or minister in churches already amenable to their program. This would be far better than stealthily coming in and taking over congregations and denominational institutions. Right now the New-Calvinists are employing the same dirty tricks that Liberals did in Presbyterian denominations in the 1920-30’s, it would be funny how comfortable they are in those shoes if it wasn’t so sad and despicable.
As a general rule 103 year old grandmothers who have weathered the Great Depression and WWII are of a lot tougher stock than the tantrum-prone narcissistic ministers of today’s modern church. It’s no surprise she came out on top on this one.
Moral of the story, don’t mess with Grandma, she’s been here for 92 years, she’s a lot tougher than you and she knows where the bodies are buried. If you cross her, you certainly won’t outlast her.
Jed Paschall wrote:
Excellent observation. One quibble is that the Founders are 1689ers and “Reformed” Baptists, and they are behind this pseudo-Calvinizing of the SBC. And let’s not forget our own tiny band of Baptistic hyper-calvinists, the Primitive Baptists. 🙂
Gram3 wrote:
Noted, and sorry to hear that – they should just align with like minded Baptists in ARBCA. If greed and institutional vampirism wasn’t such a motivation this would be oh so easy.
By their definition of “Calvinism”, Calvin himself would not be a Calvinist. One cannot simply hold to TULIP (a 19th century anachronistic acronym which reduces all of Calvinistic/Reformed theology into soteriological categories) and be a Calvinist – one must hold to Calvin’s ecclesiology (presbyterian) and sacrementology to be Calvinist in any meaningful sense.
Great thought and I agree 100 %!!! I have said that for years.
“Some Baptists hold to aspects of doctrine influenced by Calvin and other Reformed theologians, and historically these were the Particular Baptists who had the good sense to not call themselves either Reformed or Calvinist…..”
So true, just because you can spell the acrostic doesn’t mean you sprinkle.
lydia wrote:
In some circles that can mean you’re probably not ‘saved’ either. Relax Lyds, you’re a light-weight. In addition to being a Pelagian, I’m also an open theist, a disbeliever in Augustine’s doctrine of original sin, Anselm’s doctrine of penal substitution, and …, and …
Hester wrote:
Yeah, it might have been better to make two sentences because it was a fast switch, but she did state it clearly, at least IMO clear enough not to jump in with criticism without a second read.
But either way, it seems that Zizendorf was just looking for an excuse to call us the modern version of heretic: “Libuuuraalllll”
🙂
I can’t stand the neo-Calvinist preachers, but as a matter of truth, which all Christians should value, a Holiness preacher is not Reformed in any way. We need to admit that while Neo-Cals do a lot of harm, not all harm is done by the Neo-Cals. Baptists are not Reformed. Reformed is a bigger picture than soteriology. John Piper has been masquerading as Reformed but he is a fundamentalist who has latched on to an extreme version of Reformed soteriology. I wish he’d take a cue from Dee and go retire to Sanibel Island. But that might spoil it for others.
__
“Look what they are doing to My church!” -God Almighty said…
What?
hmmm…
Illustrious Jed Paschall,
hey,
I am glad to sêê you in this fight to possibly prevent or, at the very least, bring awareness to the 501(c)3 religious abuse taking place in our christian churches today.
I am very pleased ‘your kind’ of Calvinist is civilized and does o throw ‘bricks’ or sneak around planting dis ‘T.U.L.I.P.’ ™ stuff.
However, this does not stop some of us from the ‘Berean Call’, Apostle Paul calls for, abet some five hundred years too late.
No matter, ‘Truth’ ™ does not care who has it. One must understand that the great IAM, will cause it (‘Truth’ ™ ) to ultimately triumph and prevail. Our glorious hope. (one of them, at least, grin.)
(Please pray for it!)
Please understand , this is no longer a theological debate between nimble minds. Far greater ‘Minds’ are at work here.
The gates of Hell shall certainly not prevail. The Father of the Lord Jesus, who see into all of the hearts and ‘plans’ of both man and angels will see to that. Please do not loose sight to the fact that there greater fish to fry than the ‘likes’ of Dr. Albert Mohler, or Dr. Mark Dever. They too will have their day in the sun,
My gracious Lord, whom I serve ever so imperfectly, is waiting for His Father to make His enemies a footstool for Jesus’ feet. They can not hide. ‘He’ will have ‘His’ day!
—> Wait for it!
(grin)
hahahahahahahaha
ATB
The flower may fail, the flower may fall off, but the ‘Word’ of Our God will abide forever!
In God’s Truth?
“I want to spend my lifetime loving you, Jesus! ‘ [1]
Lord! Dance with me…
(tears)
Sopy
__
[1] Music from the cinema releace’The Mask of Zorro’ composed by James Horner, End Credits Song :
“I want to spend my lifetime loving you… ”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eifLMqKzFMI
;~)
—
Godith wrote:
It is true that not all authoritarian “pastors” are Calvinistic, and I think the reason that we end up talking so much about the YRR or Gospel Glitterati right now is that they claim to be Reformed and to be bringing reformation to their churches. Control freaks or those who desire to profit from the Gospel will take whatever form or system works for them, IMO. Right now, certain of the young are taken with YRR. Some were taken with Emergence. Some were taken with crazy Charismaticism. This creep in Georgia was pushing the Holiness movement. At heart, they are pragmatists above all.
@ Godith:
On the Sanibel thing, Piper wouldn’t spoil it for others because he wouldn’t be scooping up the best shells at dawn. 🙂
@ Bill M:
You have totally nailed it. Groupthink is a huge problem. Everywhere.
@ Jed Paschall:
Baptist have been arguing over their origins since Roger Williams founded Providence. :o)
Muff Potter wrote:
Me too. The thing about Open Theism is that I really have a hard time wrapping my head around it when it comes to all the wrangling over foreknowledge, possibilities, etc.
Jed Paschall wrote:
Exactly Jed. SBC’s New Calvinists want the stuff … although, they didn’t pay for the stuff. Joining a Reformed Baptist group or Presbyterian ranks would be an easier row to hoe, but they need seminaries, church buildings, publishing house, mission agencies, and assorted other assets financed by SBC’s non-Calvinist majority over the years. There is nothing Christian about this behavior.
@ Jed Paschall:
Jed, In my experience, mainline Calvinists have not been trying to “convert” other believers to Calvinism or convert entire churches without them realizing it. They tended to respect the differences. They were not going around saying only they had the true Gospel. And, there was much more ecumenism when it came to community action and even in worship. The Presbyterian Seminary here were my clients years ago and they were wonderful. They were always looking to join up with other Christian groups to do things in the community. They were not what I would call ideologues for determinism. Of course, to SBC Calvinistas, they are all liberals.
There is very little I agree with in Calvin’s Institutes. I do not view him as a good and decent man, either. But frankly, the Calvinistic and even Lutheran mainlines have always seemed to me to be very tolerant and welcoming.
Zizendorf wrote:
Welcome. One of the really helpful things about this blog is that the two women who run it do not delete critical comments, as do many others. Allowing for open criticism allows for fresh light to shine in.
As others have pointed out, you’ve made some jumps in logic, but if you are open-minded and Berean, you might even find that you have something to gain as well as to give.
Gram3 wrote:
I would add that to Dee’s list of warning signs: long-time staff (or other leaders) leave quietly. If there is no explanation, it’s wise to at least entertain the possiblity of a stealth takeover.
To the OP’s “Appoints elders” I would expand that to say more broadly, uses his influence to make sure that the elder board is stacked with yes-men. Appointment might not be possible under every church constitution. But if a congregant notices that people who used to be treasured leaders (elders, deacons, what have you) are no longer being invited into leadership, and only newbies are, that’s another sign of a stealth takeover. Of course some newbies should always be being invited. It’s the “cleaning house” of leaders who were formerly held in high esteem by the congregation that should raise some concerns.
@ Sopwith:
I appreciate the comment, but speaking only for myself, I came to my convictions over slow deliberation and prayer, and I’m very comfortable a) wholeheartedly beleiving them, and b) when appropriate defending them. I am active on other blogs where finer points of theology are debated, but I don’t see TWW as the place for me to do that.
Here I can join with self-identified Pelagian non-conformists sympathetic with anabaptists (like Lydia), which is about as far as I can immagine from my own understanding of the Christian faith, and others who differ greatly from me in saying abuse has no place in any Church that names the Name of Christ. That’s good enough for me, and TWW does a fantastic job at cultivating a broad coalition of Christians in this necessary cause.
JeffT wrote:
Furtick Man$ion$ and Private Jet$ are expen$ive.
Take$ a lot of tithed $ocial $ecurity check$ to pay for them.
Abi Miah wrote:
Yes, we can take criticism openly, unlike certain Calvinista blogs that have to control the dialog. Guess God in His sovereignty needs their help.
Abi Miah wrote:
It’s called a Purge, Comrades.
Gram3 wrote:
Yeah, it makes me wonder how many of these YRR are taking lessons fron United Pentecostals?
Bill M wrote:
Yet, people aren’t thinking critically when they let another do it for them, right? So how do we help them? Is there anything you can think of that might have helped the younger you?
I was “put out” very young because my pastor-father was my abuser, so I never had to face this particular problem. I had to work backwards——discern what, among it all, wasn’t BS (and that took quite a long time). 🙂
We all belong to a tribe (or two), but does membership inevitably preclude thinking on one’s own? ISTM, tribes work best when all members think, and each offers his/her strength to the group.
IMO, obedience to tribal elder is only useful during an emergency. Then, it works most efficiently when people already know/respect themselves and their fellow tribal member, so that, as the crisis hits, what/where/when/who is automatic understanding. Makes a nimble and pliable response, since the strengths are spread along the width/depth, even if one among them is calling the shots (so to speak).
Jed Paschall wrote:
Jed, this is the sort of comment I wish I could stamp my name to and agree with. I lurk here not because I agree on all theological points of everyone who comments [sometimes I get downright irritated at what I’m reading!] but because I love justice. Well really, I love Jesus, and Jesus loves justice.
Abi Miah wrote:
I was involved in a church re-plant some years ago, and this is exactly what happened. The deacons were dismissed when we voted to dissolve the church. The pastor worked with some of the former deacons to draw up the *new and improved* church constitution and by-laws. Then when the church was about to be relaunched, the pastor chose his close friend to serve as co-elder. We chose to walk away and did not join.
I assume any elders who were added after than were hand-picked. I have seen this process up close and personal. At the beginning, I was totally on board. Then a couple of months before the church was to be replanted, Dee and I started doing our internet research and our eyes were suddenly opened!
Jed Paschall wrote:
Thanks, Jed. Exactly.
That’s why I prefer calling these guys Neo-Puritans, a group that far too heavily emphasized what these guys also emphasize (even though, again, they were thorough, unlike our contemporaries’s shallow applications).
Jonathan Edwards: “The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire; he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times more abominable in his eyes, than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours.
“You have offended him infinitely more than ever a stubborn rebel did his prince; and yet it is nothing but his hand that holds you from falling into the fire every moment. It is to be ascribed to nothing else, that you did not go to hell the last night; that you was suffered to awake again in this world, after you closed your eyes to sleep. And there is no other reason to be given, why you have not dropped into hell since you arose in the morning, but that God’s hand has held you up….”
Not all that much difference between this sermon and some of Piper’s. Their imaginations go down dark alleys, and that includes their impractical ideas of discipline and covenants. Plus being even nastier about divorce than Jesus himself. Etc.
Zizendorf wrote:
Sorry Zizendorf, I’m late to this party. If this offer is still open I’d like to apply to be a Deranged Anti-Calvinist, or a Straw Woman, whichever one you feel is most appallingly liberal.
Yours most derangedly,
Beakerj
Deb wrote:
Some don’t even have to have a reformed bent. Some blog owners will brook no dissent whatsoever. You have two on your blog-roll who $hit-can my comments on sight.
Sarah wrote:
Totally agree.
Patrice wrote:
Piper studied Edwards intensely. That is why they sound alike.
Lydia wrote:
Ah, makes sense. He isn’t very original, is he? Well, maybe a little—-he preaches hell for glory with finger-fluttering floweriness rather than pounding on and on about God’s wwwraaaaattththththth.
Oh no, maybe Piper’s gone liberal too 😉
Patrice wrote:
That will take some thought. I’d say experience but that won’t help answer your question. This blog certainly is a big help if someone stumbles across it. I have told my story to a number of people and they can’t make the leap to skepticism of their own authoritarian pastor or church. If I make a direct statement their pastor is authoritarian they get offended and shut down. It takes a lot of time, trust, and relationship breaking through their wall. It is something I continue to ponder.
Jed Paschall wrote:
I appreciate you saying this. Christians treating each other the way we sometimes do, destroys unity and makes us look horrible to the world. Baptists are sometimes the worst, all brands. Thanks for the words.
Patrice wrote:
Jonathan Edwards’ writings are books in the New Testament of the YRR crowd, hence all the “Jonathan Edwards is my Homeboy” T-Shirts in the early years of the movement.
Muff Potter wrote:
I am glad you all are here. I wouldn’t describe myself as Pelagian, although others probably would. I cannot for the life of me find support for Augustine’s views on original sin in the Bible (I think it probably came, more from his Manichean background). Anselm was actually had the atonement doctrine of satisfaction, our buddy Calvin laid the groundwork for PSA. While there are elements of PSA in the Bible, it certainly does not seem to be the driving thought with regards to atonement. I have been called a liberal, but a lot of people think I am a raving conservative evangelical. So, I am glad to find company!
JeffT wrote:
Jonathan Edwards who founded a university in the colonies and wrote some of the first zoological treatises of New World insects? Who died of side effects from a smallpox inoculation? (He was trying to encourage others by example as a public health measure; the much safer Vaccination didn’t start until decades later.) The probable manic-depressive whose sermons during his depresso phases led to suicides among his congregation?
Jonathan Edwards who nowadays is only known for ONE Hellfire-and-Damnation sermon? Probably written when he was in a depresso phase?
(Eagle: As for Edwards owning slaves, that was normal in his time and place for men of means. Slavery had a LONG historical trace back to ancient times and a fish doesn’t know it’s wet.)
Lydia wrote:
All I know of how Edwards sounded was that written accounts said he did not pound the pulpit, shout, or flutter his hands. He prepared his sermons (including his most famous one) in advance, polishing every word and phrase, and read them from the pulpit, preferring to let the words speak for themselves without added hype.
And the guy was good with words; “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” was in my high school lit textbooks because it is one of the most perfect type examples of an essay building to a point.
Patrice wrote:
Again, there’s speculation Edwards was manic-depressive and might have written that sermon (his most famous) during a depresso phase. A few years ago, I had to write my way out of a depression (fiction instead of sermon) and I can attest when you’re in that state of mind, what comes out on the paper can get DARK.
And New England Puritans had a reputation of being somber to start with. Factor that in and things can get real Dark.
Bill M wrote:
Exactly. It is almost as if something big and bad has to happen to them first in that venue before they even question.
I think Z’s point here is valid. Why the need to lump in the YRR? It does seem a bit obsessive. There really is no direct comparison. A pastor tried to remove someone from the church. Happens in all kinds of denominations and all kinds of theologies (and by all sorts of different methods) as this story proves. Why not let the story stand on its own unless you have a particular axe to grind against the YRR?
Zizendorf wrote:
I’m waiting for where Jesus said to sign a covenant. (Hint: He didn’t.) Nowhere in the New Testament can you tell me that the called-out ones (the ekklesia) were asked to sign a covenant.
js wrote:
They are the ones with the reach right now making the most waves with their OTT church discipline and membership contracts…er covenants. So, naturally they are discussed and have become the standard for comparison. 20 years ago it was the seeker mega types but we did not have social media on the scale we have it today.
The YRR have been yelling “look at us” for the last 10 years! So we are. :o)
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
In Marsden’s bio of Edwards he talks about the devastation that came from being ousted from his grandfather’s church. His maternal grandfather was a wealthy landowner, magistrate type who was also the main preacher in that area. He was feared and obeyed. Edwards went to work for him in the church and when the grandfather died, he was only 28 and did not have the same gravitas– so he was ousted.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Another favorite is AW Pink who is now thought to have been manic depressive. He died in mysterious circumstances. I thought his books were extremely manic. Yikes.
Lydia wrote:
And now this blog is spending all its time saying “look at us yell about the YRR yelling ‘look at us’.”
js wrote:
We spend all our time discussing YRR? Don't flatter yourself. We cover a wide range of topics here at TWW in case you haven't noticed.
@ js:
Jed covered this a bit and I don't think I can improve on his synopsis. I'm one of the other Presbyterians who show up at times at Wartburg. The YRR guys and their fans literally can't imagine the possibility, let alone reality, that there are people in the Reformed tradition who think Edwards ideas and sympathy for revivalist methods was a BAD innovation in the history of American Christianity.
@ Bill M:
“Should you somehow be able to think clearly, speak up and articulate the issue, and others become aware, it will instead be seen as a division regardless whether you win or lose.
If you or I oppose a pastor and six people leave due to conflict we will be labeled divisive.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
but you have your integrity intact. reason to stand tall, & helps one sleep at night.
elastigirl wrote:
this is so true. sometimes it’s *the* thing that keeps me sane. after all, the only person I can control is me.
Will M wrote:
Have you ever checked out Eastern Orthodox doctrine? They believe in ancestral sin, not original sin, and their understanding of Christ’s work on the cross is more about Christ conquering death than PSA.
I had a friend who was raised Mennonite. She told me that churches had split over whether buggies should/or not have bumpers. She continued that the truth of the matter was not about buggy bumpers but about control. I think the Rats in the woodwork aren’t about theology but about jumping on a bandwagon they can get on in their quest to control and plunder and will sing whatever song or game you will buy into. These cameleons will change their tune 10 times a day if need be and are slick and hard to pin down.
How about the churches that push a pastor who is TROUBLE with a false good recommendation just to get rid of him and dump him on a gullible congregation?
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Charismatics made up lots of the things about J. Edwards which is why I bought every book I could get my hands on about what he actually wrote and his history. Completely different story than the made up stories used to justify the modern madness. I would recommend that you do the same and and I think you will find that rather than being Manic/depressive he was a remarkable intelligent educated and gifted man that I could only wish we had many more in the pulpits today. There have also been studies on the descendants of him and his family and the Lord continued to bless the generations following.
Lydia wrote:
The original Internet Monk used to use A.W.Pink as an example. Pink apparently reached the theoretical ultimate end state of Protestantism: The One True Church of One. Parsed his theology so exactly that nobody else in the entire world had the True Faith, only Heresy and Apostasy. Ended up worshipping alone at home because every church had something theologically wrong with it.
elastigirl wrote:
Agreed on the integrity, but I recall several of my peers at the former church all complained of the same sleepless nights during and long after the confrontations.
I would not advocate putting up with authoritarian nonsense. Sneaking out the back door may be advisable for some as it could become horribly abusive and threatening. In my case I had clearly spelled out an indictment of how things were badly run to them in their own “leadership” meetings over a period of months. I then weighed the possible routes and outcomes, figured that a further organized effort would not change the outcome. Those who were similarly troubled left about the same time as I.
I recall thinking at the time of the phrase that if you aim at the king, you best not miss.
Lydia wrote:
I resemble that remark.
Dee/Deb,
Driscoll sighting. Apparently, Mark Driscoll is meeting regularly with Wayne Grudem and another pastor from Scottsdale Bible Church as part of his “restoration” process. Driscoll even spoke at a men’s event. I am so confused how can he be getting restoration if he has not ever acknowledged any wrongdoing on his part. How long will the ungodly prosper?
js wrote:
That depends on your point of view. This kind of heavy-handed top-down hair-trigger church discipline has been loudly advocated for and publically defended by the 9 Marks crowd for almost 20 years now. While it may be just a coincidence, the pattern is too similar to be just passed over without comment.
BC wrote:
I am sure he would be proud of his grand+ daugher, The Rev. Janet Edwards
https://twitter.com/RevJanetEdwards?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
js wrote:
If you don’t think Driscoll, Mahaney, 9 Marks Dever and Chandler are worth writing/warning about then there probably is not much we would agree on. Basically, you are saying, “nothing to see here” which is what they say, too.
Lydia wrote:
Not at all. The issue here is that as regards the 103 year old, there IS nothing to see here related to the YRR. If one sees problems by all means they should point them out, SGM and the Hinckley debacle being two good examples. I would never say “nothing to see here.” But when a story has no connection to the YRR, they should not be linked in with the story. I am not nearly so much an advocate for the YRR (I think a lot of their stuff is self-important and about marketing) but I am an advocate for fairness. And whenever I come out from under my rock to comment here is usually about that issue. The YRR are like the Kevin Bacon game of this blog. It is uncharitable and dishonest to link them with every problem that comes down the pike.
@ Deb:
Deb, you are technically right but actually wrong. Here's why. It is true that not all your stories are about the YRR crowd. But the majority of your stories are. That is a fact. Fact number two is that no matter the story, the comment thread will inevitably include either SGM, TGC, 9Marks, Piper, etc. Even if the topic at hand has nothing to do with any of them. Third, often posts themselves make this dissociative leap from an original story to an attack on the YRR. This is the most problematic issue to me because it is fundamentally unfair. Honestly, you do this more commonly than Dee does (three articles come to mind immediately — the present article, John Piper and duck dynasty and the another day, another SGM scandal article) but it is not helpful regardless. When everything becomes about the YRR the legitimate criticisms tends to fade to the background, there is more heat than light, and the apparent bias against this group might cause lurkers to rethink your legitimate stories while also giving YRR leaders a reason to dismiss your posts with their supporters.
@ Js:
Does this sort of thing actually work in your life? Do people censor themselves based on your views of how they should communicate in making connections and comparisons?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
HUG, there’s a comment coming over at Open Discussion
Js wrote:
Because those articles were baseless criticisms via dissociative leaps? 0_o
Lot’s of mansplaining going on there, Js. At the three-pointer sermon level.
This from a tweet this morning:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/scandal-in-moscow/?utm_content=buffer4eedc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Bill M wrote:
Thanks Bill. I’m just shooting in the dark here, but I wonder if it would help if new adults had an emancipation ceremony from their parents. In many Christian circles, parents maintain fairly strong authority over their children even through college (rather than a graduated independence), and this might cause many young adults to transfer parental authority to a spiritual leader.
An emancipation ceremony could include formal acceptance of taking on one’s own search, discovery, decisions. Maybe some kind of independence test, or something.
I don’t know, just thinking…
@ Js:
Thanks for sharing your interesting perspective about our blog. Sounds like you spend a lot of time reading the posts and comments.
Could I ask a favor? Would you once in a while try to look at the YRR gurus through the eyes of those who have been hurt by them? We have had direct contact with quite a few of these individuals, and we know first hand what they have endured.
theologian wrote:
Grudem should be taking part in a restoration process himself. As you may recall I wrote him a letter a few years ago urging him to not speak at C.J. Mahaney’s run-away church plant. Here is a quote from the email I received:
“Dr. Grudem is speaking at CJ’s church specifically so that he can signal support for CJ in the face of unjust accusations. No further communication on this subject will be responded to.
May God bless your continued work for His kingdom.
Sincerely,
John Paul Stepanian
MA to Dr. Grudem
Phoenix Seminary
On behalf of:
Wayne Grudem, Ph.D.
Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies
Phoenix Seminary”
As far as I know Grudem still believes the charges of blackmail and cover-up of the sexual abuse of children by Mahaney are unjust accusations. To actually believe that you would have to be a fool. To know the accusations are justified but continue to claim they are unjust is to live a lie and purposefully mislead many who look to Grudem as an honest leader. Either way Grudem demonstrates he is not fit to be a leader.
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Or a True Believer.
“If the Fuehrer wills it, Two Plus Two Equals Five.”
— attr to Reichsmarshall Goering or Reichsminister Goebbels
Deb wrote:
Speaking of True Believers…
@ Todd Wilhelm:
Thanks for this post!
https://thouarttheman.org/2015/09/30/for-freedom-christ-has-set-us-free/
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Yes, providing that one believes that a Christian leader should be upholding Christian or even decent human standards. Included in those would be advocating for victims and insisting that the responsible adults–the pastors and elders–protect the victims and potential victims more than the institution. Grudem has demonstrated time and time again that his most pressing concern is pushing his own theological viewpoint.
He is an elitist who appeals to elitists who think they are “in the know.” It is the same attitude we see from Doug Wilson. Since they are against the “world” then they are above criticism and must be protected from the assaults against them by the “world.” What Grudem’s assistant said in your letter could have been written on behalf of Wilson by any number of flunkies in Moscow. Same groupthink and reflexive response.
One can be forgiven of any sin other than disagreeing with The Leaders. Because the religion is Authoritarianism, not the Christian faith.
BC wrote:
Very remarkable, intelligent, educated, and gifted people can also be manic depressives. If you think about it, the combination can be quite explosive and harmful to the person and those around the person. Having such a person in a position to explain who and what God is like to thousands of listeners may not be a good or wise happening, especially if said person is the lead elder, top elder, controlling elder of a church.
lydia wrote:
I doubt that anyone censors themselves based on my views and I wouldn’t want them to. I would want them to try to align themselves with what is true, no matter the source. I leave it to the moderators and commenters of this blog to determine whether they think my points have any merit. I don’t insist that I must be right about this I am just giving my perspective.
Bridget wrote:
Because . . . who will refute him if he is wrong? Who will he listen to? Who will call him to account or ask him to rethink what he is saying? People are/were in awe of “preachers” as it is/was. Most of them don’t need unswerving allegiance because of their education, intelligence, and giftedness. Most of them need balance to be brought, especially if they are manic or depressed or both.
Deb wrote:
I have been deeply saddened by the true sins and failures of those in the YRR movement. I don’t think their failures justify their being associated unfairly with the failures of others outside their camp.
A simple example . . . Televangelist Creflo Dollar asks his followers for $65 million to buy a jet for ministry. Hypothetical article posted on TWW . . . “Creflo Dollar, Another of the Gospel Glitterati?” Story opens with factual account of Creflo’s shenanigans followed by a leap to how the YRR are the same with their book marketing, conferences, etc. The problem is no one in the YRR would advocate what Creflo did and most would openly criticize such actions. But because of the way the story is often presented here, the YRR get guilt by association. Is it not enough to just report on the sorry state of televangelism (and they have certainly done a lot of abusing in the name of Jesus) without dragging the YRR into the story?
I am not here to say we should believe the YRR are sinless or have never failed. I am not here to say we shouldn’t care about the victims. I am here to say we should not lump in the YRR with the mistakes everyone else is making. Sounds like a minor point and in the big picture maybe it is, but I think it has a lot to do with integrity and honesty and fairness. It keeps TWW on the better path of dissecting Christian trends rather than dissecting Calvinist troublemakers.
Js wrote:
I think I’ve commented to you before about this. It’s their blog.
Even if they wish to make 100% of their blog posts about criticizing the YRR, so what?
I am personally not thrilled with their position on being anti-YEC, and the habit of many commentators on here to insist YEC has been supposedly made into a first tier issue by churches (I don’t see that it has, overall), but I usually just scroll past those posts without commenting.
Why can’t you do the same with their anti YRR (ed.) posts or commentary?
It’s their blog. They can start writing about chimps wearing hula skirts every day, if they want.
Daisy wrote:
I meant, their anti YRR / Neo Calvinist posts, not YEC.
js wrote:
Calvinist troublemakers are part of the Christian trends.
And if you don’t mind, why is dissecting Christian trends a better path than dissecting Calvinist troublemakers? The Deebs actually dissect all kinds of troublemakers.
@ Daisy: Fixed it. 🙂
@ lydia:
Some blogs and their particular focus make me ill, so I usually just do not visit, or only visit rarely, like the extreme patriarchal or complementarian blogs, like Bayly guys or Doug Wilson.
I don’t even visit CBMW too much, because they make me want to barf, and they’re not as extreme as the Wilsons.
Sometimes I will visit blogs or sites by my ideological opponents, though, to see what they are saying, and how they think. It can help you sharpen your own positions, or you may find yourself being persuaded by the other side.
But if a blog really, really gets me steamed, I normally just stay away. At least for a good long while.
I can maybe see informing a blog proprietor that some aspect of their blog is offensive or troublesome to me, but if they don’t seem open to changing whatever it is, I usually back off and don’t bring whatever it is up that often.
Maybe JS should take a page out of my playbook on some of this?
js wrote:
Yes in the big picture, it is similar. There is a huge underlying problem that shows up in different ways.
But Js, the Deebs love their denom and the YRRers have focused aggression on the SBC. Their aggression is causing one after another church building, local organization, and seminary to fall into their hands. In other contexts these kinds of action are understood to happen in a war.
As has been said earlier in this combox, Baptist theology doesn’t combine into the doctrinal set espoused by neo-puritans, so their identity is swallowed up. Particularly unfortunate for the SBC is that the neo-puritan doctrinal package is power-hungry and shallow, and causes chronic damage to the members, who are the Body.
Given all that, if the Deebs wished to devote all their articles to the shenanigans of the YRR (which they don’t), it would be completely understandable and a very good work.
Daisy wrote:
JS,
I’m with Daisy. Start your own blog JS and when you do let me know. I will be sure to track your writings to make sure every subject in Christianity receives equal attention from you.
TWW happens to be widely read and highly respected. They don’t need your input on what subjects they should or shouldn’t be blogging about. But since you seem to be tracking their trends I will return the favor. It seems 99% of your comments have to do with the subjects Dee and Deb choose to write on. You would garner much more respect if you actually interacted with the subject being discussed. If you can't do that I suggest you run along to Tim Challies’ blog.
js wrote:
I was the one who made the first comment about Tim Maddox being a Calvinist. I admitted and aplogized for my misunderstanding.
There was a Timothy Maddox at a reformed theology church in Hamilton, GA. Apparently, this a different Maddox, and I had the two confused.
@ Deb:
Thank you! 🙂
Max wrote:
It’s not just in SBC churches, but in other churches vulnerable because they are not tied to a denomination such as independent evangelical churches. And yes, “The ends justify the means” big time. There is so much deception. In the church with which I am most familiar, there was a willingness not just to be silent or evasive, but there was outright lying. I hear the same story of deception over and over again. Why would sin be necessary to accomplish changes that God wanted?
@ Nancy2:
I'm fairly sure your misunderstand about the Georgia pastor had nothing to do with the criticism js has leveled at us. 🙂
Abi Miah wrote:
Why indeed!
@ js:
You wrote earlier that the YRR should not be mentioned at all in relation to the OP.
@ Daisy:
I love a good debate/argument, etc and realize many don’t. But when it becomes about censoring or shaming commenters to change cos one does not like the responses, I cannot wrap my head around that.
Perhaps if I had not heard js’ views so many times from the charlatans….as when certain uncomfortable issues can be brought up, your credibility in bringing them up….then they bring in tone and proper words…..
If one agrees with any of them, they have agreed to being censored
js wrote:
I don’t see that comparison happening at TWW, but I suppose anything is possible. The question I would ask you is whether you think the distinction between Cashflow Dollar merchandising the Christian faith is different in kind or merely different in degree from the merchandising of the Gospel carried on by the Gospel Glitterati? Isn’t any kind of merchandising of the Gospel wrong regardless of the nametag?
Viewed from another perspective, is flying first class and staying in luxury hotels or luxurious accommodations or traveling all over the world on the ministry dime different from what Cashflow does in kind or merely in degree? Are they doing different things or has Cashflow been more successful in doing the same thing?
Gram3 wrote:
That’s a good point.
A lot of these YRR / Neo Calvinist guys are making big bucks by selling books, getting paid to appear at conferences, etc.
YRR preachers are making profit off Jesus too, not just the Prosperity Gospel charlatans.
@ Gram3:
EVen that principle on a small scale is a problem. The YRR who took over my former church travels all the time. He is gone constantly to conferences, meetings in India about church planting, mission to Haiti (alone) etc. There is at least one trip per month. And he has only been pastor for one year. All paid for by the church. This last few trips he took the new YRR youth pastor hired without a vote! (A first for that church)
He has missed almost half the Sundays. So why do the pew sitters not see it? Charisma and buying into his declarations. The truth is that most of them are networking, building their personal brand and seeing the world on someone elses dime with Jesus lipstick.
js wrote:
I don’t follow YRR, it doesn’t operate in my locale so I don’t know. Did they “openly” criticize what Creflo did? If they policed themselves a lot would change. One of the repeating patterns with these celebrities, YRR or otherwise, is they do a great deal wrong without criticism or censure from others in their own camp.
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Bingo.
Abi Miah wrote:
I have paraphrased James 4:17 as it applies to the YRR / New Calvinist silence and evasiveness in takeovers: “If anyone, then, knows the truth they ought to tell and doesn’t tell it, it is sin for them.”
Anyhoo, to get back to the main gist of this thread, how is it that there are ‘unsaved heathen’ who would not eject an elderly woman from their enclaves for financial reasons, and yet here we have an ixtian ‘pastor’ who has no qualms about doing it?
Thoughts anyone?
Zizendorf wrote:
Bless your heart, Zizendorf. Derangement syndrome? Where have I heard that before? Could it be? Nah….I’ll take you at face value.
In case you actually do not believe that there are connections in what would seem to be widely disparate denominations and theology, I need to tell you that the Deebs actually see those connections.Take a look at the neo-calvinists and see their devotion to obedience. Now compare that with the fundamentalists. Not so far apart. Charismatics and Reformed are not the same. Well…there is the issue of Sovereign Grace Ministries and their loyal BFFs in the Neo-Reformed movement. Now, Mahaney’s SGC church is SBC. He is charismatic, Reformed and Baptist.
I am a lover of history and I enjoy tracing links throughout history and denominations. We are not so far apart as you might imagine and we sure keep borrowing theology and doctrine from one another.
Bill M wrote:
And if the contributions slip off, it is due to the economy or Stan (sic(.
Gus wrote:
Yep. Actually, I always laugh when people discuss the plurality of elders. They like to pretend that elders are checks and balances when they have evolved into the Gospel™ rubber stamp brigade. All plurality really means in many churches is that there is more than one.
Mark wrote:
Love it.
@ Deb:
I totally got that when I read this post. Unfortunately, a couple of people do not see the connections like many of our readers see them. Keep at this game for 6 years and it become glaringly apparent. Great post and I soon agree with you.
Deb wrote:
This is precisely what started the wars back in the 90s in the SBC. Stupid me. I thought that everyone Mohler and BFFs fired were those who denied things like the Virgin Birth or the Resurrection. Instead, it was a witch hunt claiming that if certain people didn’t see things exactly like Mohler, et al saw it, then they were liberals. And many of them were not.
Church covenants have been used by some NeoCalvinists leaders as a means of abuse. Need I say “The Village Church or UCC Dubai/9 Marx?” If being al liberal means standing up for Karen Hinkley or Todd Wilhelm, then so be it. I gladly take on the advocacy for those who have been abused by the church.
Never forget the so-called conservative Pharisees who went after Jesus who also cared for the abused.
Godith wrote:
I believe that the tendency here is to lump all problems under the abuse of authority. The reason Calvinism gets mentioned more is that they are the ones who are in, and who claim, the spotlight these days.
Deb wrote:
I got it when I read it as well. I think a few readers need for us to spell it out in detail. You and I often see the links before those within the critiqued circles do. Many believe they are a whole new movement, doing something different than has been done before.
Wasn’t it Solomon who wisely said “There is nothing new under the sun.” Remember when we got into trouble with comparing Driscoll, Mahaney and others to seemingly unrelated groups? But, in the end, we were correct.
Remember when that professor from University of New York, Binghamton, wrote us and said he would be including some portions of our posts in the book he was writing on the history of evangelicalism in the 1990s though the mid 2000s? He told us that our posts helped him to connect the dots between seemingly disparate groups when it came to doctrine and behavior.
Finally, as I always like to point out, Wade Burleson is Reformed in his thinking.
Eeyore wrote:
Thank you for saying this. I think Wade Burleson said “Don’t let your theology trump your love.” Follow Christ and share his love-not a bad goal.
@ Todd Wilhelm:
Listen, if current gospel™ celebrity leader says it is, it is! Why are you trying to cause trouble? 🙂
Max wrote:
If the good Lord will let me live until Genora’s awesome age, I intend to join her in kicking butt!
Burwell Stark wrote:
One of my favorite people is a Moravian. And, when I was confronted by the leader of a board that I sit on about my horrible blog, he was one of the ones who leapt to my defense. He is a wonderful person who is fun, thoughtful and kind.
The Moravians have a great historical village a couple of hours from Raleigh. I always make their sugar cake at Christmas time. Their museum is great. I am a fan of Jan Hus. The curator was there when I visited and he showed me a number of items dating back to Hus.
http://www.oldsalem.org
@ Muff Potter:
When I was away, I read a comment by you in which you said you were blocked from a couple of blogs to which we link. If you wouldn’t mind, would you let me know which ones and what the subject was?
I am sorry that happened to you.
@ dee:
My husband and I had annual passes to Old Salem last year. A fun fact we discovered during one of our visits is that Krispy Kreme got its start right in the heart of Old Salem. 🙂 The Moravian Sugar Cookies are tasty as well.
Abi Miah wrote:
I’m not sure whether deception was involved with the Union Grove Baptist Church. As Deb wrote, “The newly hired minister, whom the congregation assumed (emphasis added) would follow their Baptist tradition, began to move the church in a ‘holiness’ direction, primarily through his preaching style.
The churches I’ve attended have an interview process which includes sample preaching before calling a pastor. It seems that Union Grove may not have done their due diligence and being a trusting congregation just accepted their new pastor. On the other hand, it’s possible that the members and officers of the church were aware of the new direction (notice all the signatures on the letter), except for Genora Hamm Biggs.
dee wrote:
Why wait???? (Grin)
Muff Potter wrote:
It seems pretty clear that he is not a pastor in any true sense of that word, and his actions do not look like what Jesus would do, so that raises some questions about the Christian part. Or maybe he is a deceived Christian who thinks that people who do not think like he thinks are leaven that needs to be cleansed from the church. FWIW, I think that the goodness seen in people, regardless of their faith profession, is evidence of the divine image. I don’t believe in utter depravity, so it is possible for someone who does not believe in Christ to do things that are actually quite Christ-like because those things are good. And it is likewise possible for real Christians to do bad things because we are sinful humans still.
Daisy wrote:
I certainly hope that pictures will be included
For those who are interested, there's a blog that features chimps wearing clothes – check out the tutu. 🙂
http://www.chimpsanctuarynw.org/blog/2008/11/chimpanzees-wearing-clothes/
dee wrote:
I often think of Horowitz’s “Discover the Networks”. Same kind of thing. About a year ago, a friend who attends an AME that is charismatic was complaining about the Neo Calvinism creeping in!
dee wrote:
You aren't alone. Had there been social media not sure it could have been so broadsweeping. Funny how all the liberal heretics denying the virgin birth were not named.
dee wrote:
One of the minor disagreements when I left my former church was over budget, spending and raiding designated funds, yes this was a minor issue compared to the way people were badly treated. I reported to the “leadership” that many had significantly cut back on giving because they lost faith in how the money was spent. I thought the reaction would be “oh my, what have we done that we lost their confidence”. Dumb me, what I received instead was, and this is an exact quote, “you need to go to them and tell them they should not withhold the tithe”. They were clueless.
Godith wrote:
As opposed to lumping all problems in a camouflaged dumpster.
@ Todd Wilhelm:
It dawned on me that Grudem's son was very involved with Driscoll at one time. Either at Mars Hill or Acts 29.
I am likewise a “a Southern Baptist who is deeply concerned about changes taking place in my denomination…angered by Neo-Calvinist pastors who have misrepresented themselves to Non-Calvinist congregations and brought strife and division to the churches they have been called to ‘serve’.
You might find this sbctoday article interesting reading; it’s from March of this year:
http://sbctoday.com/suggestions-for-determining-whether-a-pastoral-candidate-is-a-calvinist/
Key quotes: “The Director told me of two churches in his association that, despite their desire and best effort to call men who were not Calvinists, ended up calling men who were Calvinists. The search committees attributed this unfortunate eventuality to the fact that the pastoral candidates were, shall we say, less than forthright about being Calvinists. In each case, this cast the respective churches into turmoil, and a number of people were hurt.
I have received calls from people who served on their church’s pastoral search committee regarding this very problem—one church in my own city and one as far away as California. In both cases the church was seeking to call a non-Calvinist pastor. In each case, the committee asked specific questions such as, “Are you a Calvinist?” Being convinced the man was not a Calvinist, they extended a call to him only to find out later that he was in fact a five-point Calvinist. One even went so far as to say that he agreed with John Piper on everything, but he was not a Calvinist.
By the time I spoke with them, the man had already been called and was serving as pastor. Of course, the churches were in turmoil. All of this could have be avoided if pastoral candidates practiced speaking truthfully about their beliefs so that the members of the committee, usually laymen, could understand precisely the candidate’s position regarding Calvinism.”
It is clear that throughout the SBC attempts by Calvinist pastors to infiltrate pulpits by stealth is leading to the destruction of churches. By fruit alone, it is clear that this “movement” is not of God.
Unfortunately I can’t find a way to ready the 256 comments that were apparently left on the article…that’s a comment thread I’d like to see! Perhaps someone else can sort it out.
@ lydia: FYI
http://vintagenc.com/person/elliot-grudem/
"Prior to joining Vintage21 staff, Elliot served as director of the Acts 29 Network and a pastor at Mars Hill Church (Seattle). He also served as senior minister at Christ the King Presbyterian Church, a church he replanted in Raleigh. In addition, Elliot has experience in urban ministry and a Fortune 100 business. He is the editor of Christian Beliefs, a book he completed with his father Wayne Grudem…"
One of my daughter's former roommates attends Vintage and several months ago had dinner with a group that included Wayne Grudem. Small world…
Lydia wrote:
🙂
Muff Potter wrote:
As I see it, many believers and unbelievers have hearts of integrity and consistent ethical behavior. Some of both sides are complete a**es. I suspect that when the time comes, God will evaluate differently that we do. Jesus did say that, after all. “Only those who actually do the will of the Father in heaven will enter.”
I am looking forward to being surprised because I know He’s totally reliable. 🙂
Bill M wrote:
Sheesh. They sound like Vito Corleone.
@ Deb:
Oh my, Grudem's son was with both a pastor at Mars Hill and director of Acts 29! Nothing like empire building. Their kids always find high paying ministry positions.
@ dee:
Thanks dee, and I appreciate your concern. But if it’s all the same to you, let’s just keep it under wraps, if for no other reason than the blogs are theirs and they have the right to admit or not admit whomever they see fit.
@ rike:
The problem has been they have had every “Rahab” type lie in the arsenal that is not “really a lie”.
The word on the street was if they can claim a 4pt or less they can say no. Or, since they identify Reformed, they can say no. It is whatever they want to call themselves. It took churches a long time to even catch on enough to ask. Then when they did, they got a lot of equivocation. And it takes a long time to figure it out and by then the pastor has had a honeymoon period and consolidated his power.
But those are horrible measurements as they can argue you to death on those. The best measure is: what Christian books are on your shelf. What is the last conference you attended and why. Your favorite ST? (trick question) Another obvious one is: So, you went to SBTS (that is a no brainer)
Patrice wrote:
Yes, He said that and yes He is reliable!
@ Gram3 & Patrice,
Good answers. I’ve also seen that once people (of any belief system) can no longer see themselves in others it becomes easier and easier to do that which they would not do to themselves. In the end (to use an allegory), Jiminy Cricket gets sprayed with DDT and one’s moral compass gets demagnetized and points nowhere.
dee wrote:
I have often thought that the real issue is authoritarianism, and not Calvinism, or even Neocalvinism. I am not a Calvinist, but I have dear friends and mentors who are. And they are warm, loving people, and humble leaders. And when people start to disparage all Calvinists, I often think, “But… Burleson.”
I do enjoy the philosophical discussions about Augustine, and his battle of words with St. Morgan of Wales, AKA Pelagius.
Lydia wrote:
I know you were shocked, shocked. Loyalty is rewarded.
@ Lydia:
How about this line: “I don’t call myself a Calvinist because that has so many meanings.” Followed by: “Why are you concerned about that?”
GSD wrote:
Exactly. Authoritarians are going to be authoritarians with plausible deniability for being authoritarians like “God established authority for our good and his glory.” Or, “God blesses those who bless his man.”
Abi Miah wrote:
Exactly AM. Control, manipulation, intimidation, and deception are not gifts of the Holy Spirit. Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft (1 Samuel 15:23).
@ Gram3:
You must know I cannot read his name without doing your Grudem cheer in my head.
Gram3 wrote:
Yes. Heard that one all the time on blogs while they were defending Institutes.
Muff Potter wrote:
The golden rule is essential, isn’t it?
To say it one long way around: when people find their theology/ideology more comforting (because less chaotic/messy) than humans/world, they will spend more and more time inside their ideas/principles. This removes them further and further from reality until, eventually, they become unable to observe what’s actually happening in front of them. Normal healthy human responses to bad situations don’t occur. Instead, they extrapolate ‘the only correct’ interpretation/response from their ideology.
Terrible actions can be rationalized after one slaps a stencil on reality and spray-paints it over.
Patrice wrote:
Very much agreed. And the real kicker? It doesn’t have to be this way. We are endowed by our Creator with the means to put an end to it. The vast majority of human misery and suffering is on our own dime, God has nothing to do with it.
@ Bridget:
Elijah and Jesus certainly had their low moments but I wouldn't call them manic/depressive. Life has it's down times and to know that we can call upon the Lord and He will never leave us or forsake us makes all the difference.
False teachers are another matter for they seem to be without conscience and only come up with crocodile tears when they are caught and they want to be out from under the consequences.
@ dee:
There’s also the Bethl3hem, PA Moravian settlement. Lots of Morabians still in the srea, and they put on a mean Bach Festival!
Lydia wrote:
Now when I remember that quote demanding the tithe I will hear it with Marlon Brando’s voice. Good suggestion, just the right thuggish tenor.
@ Muff Potter:
“how is it that there are ‘unsaved heathen’ who would not eject an elderly woman from their enclaves for financial reasons, and yet here we have an ixtian ‘pastor’ who has no qualms about doing it?”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
ixtians in the stupor of heady church culture turn off common sense and natural, healthy impulses (such as kindness, empathy, compassion). instead, they subject their mind and emotions to something akin to a weird and uncomfortably twisted golf swing, because they’re told it’s ‘biblical’.
contortionists for Christ!
and zombies.
what fools.
@ Muff Potter:
“Jiminy Cricket gets sprayed with DDT and one’s moral compass gets demagnetized and points nowhere.”
+++++++++++
Ha! that’s funny! great visual image — gospel aerosol cans being wielded with all the panic a black widow would engender. gospel clouds of the toxic stuff, & ‘thank goodness we’re safe now!’
@ Muff Potter:
A conscience is that still, small voice that people won’t listen to.
~ Jiminy Cricket
@ Deb:
Thanks, Deb, for an interesting link. Much strength to those caring people at CSNW who give these chimpanzees a wonderful life after their years as research experiments.
Muff Potter wrote:
This understanding of the cross/resurrection is practically non existent in Christendom.
Gram3 wrote:
Now there’s a thought.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
Well, as a good friend of Pastor Reverend Tim I can honestly say that’s just the kind of pitiful and bitter gossip I have come to expect from this counterfeit community. Pastor Reverend Tim is an honourable and godly man who would never do anything you might decide to allege he had done. It’s a shame you can’t all stop biting and devouring a man of God and start preaching the gospel. The “church” is the only army in the world that shoots its wounded. I would also say that if you ever find the perfect church, don’t join because you are certain to spoil it.
God bless you all with the precious gifts of humility and repentance,
Roger Bombast
Gram3 wrote:
Never heard of either of them. BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA !!!
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Quite true, that. (As much as I admire John Wesley, I have to say that I believe that his whole family were beset by OCD).
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Another person who relies on the [EXTREMELY] uncanonical “Gospel According to St. Wombat the Scratchy” 😉
Max wrote:
Amen!!
Deb wrote:
We Methodists have a practice which tends to insure against such shemnanigans: Every person holding an office has an “expiration date”; that is,you can’t be an “elder” forever, you have to hand it over when your time is up. (And there is no one person making all the decisions about who should replace them. It just doesn’t work that way).
WenatcheeTheHatchet wrote:
We have, I fear, had more than a few such innovations in the history of this country.
elastigirl wrote:
Or like Beavis & Butthead wielding their bug spray cans in a closed room, you end up passed out on the floor from bug spray poisoning.
Lydia wrote:
You know what they say: The surest way to become a CELEBRITY Megachurch Pastor is to be born the son of a CELEBRITY Megachurch Pastor with a name ending in “Junior”.
The Bob Jones Dynasty is going on four generations and counting.
The other Tywin Lannister wannabes (like Oral Roberts), not so much.
Gram3 wrote:
Grudem = WayneGrudemGoWayneGrudem!(TM)
“Gnostic” is Koine Greek for “Those Who Are In The Know”.
Well, I’m not sure a Membership Covenant would be so bad in this particular instance, I mean, 92 years isn’t really long enough to see if she is committed to the church …
for the spirit of this good woman, I found a poem to honor her:
Women are warriors. They are the ones who run with wolves, the ones who follow the moon. They are the ones who give life and they are the first story tellers their children will hear.
Women have all the power of humanity. All the power to shape the world.
Are you waiting for permission? Give it to yourself.
Are you waiting for your time? It’s now.
Are you waiting for a sign? Look around.
You are the linch-pin, the tipping of the scales.
The moment you say you’ve had enough. The moment you rise …
Everything changes.”
I don’t know the author. It might have been a woman. Or the son of a woman who runs with wolves. There are such sons. And they are decent men. 🙂
Cayuga wrote:
Maybe she gave him too much homework. 😛