Eric Raymond is also the main bad guy on the 80s cartoon JEM.

Unrelated to the topic, but I now blame TGC for making me think of Glamor, glitter, Fashion, and Fame.

You know. my violently abusive mother used to tell me that she only beat me because she ‘loved’ me and wanted me to know how bad I was….so that I could repent and learn to ‘be good’.

Didn’t work.

The pure unbounded grace and love of the Saviour did work miracles however….but only after a long time.

Run away from anyone who equates love with ‘discipline”….

the Holy Spirit does not beat us with the truth; He gently whispers in our hearts in love and affection and tenderness.

Beware a pastor who does not do the same thing.

Thank you Dee for your ministry here, along with Deb.

Praying for your mother-in-law at the end of her life and in her final days.
May she be comforted. May your husband and family be comforted.

You have a sweet family, down to your sweet Pugs.

If I were there, I’d swing by to help, or pray, or mow the lawn, or whatever you folks need.

But from California…I’m praying.

Love and hugs.

@ Dave (Eagle):

David/Eagle the train buff, Only you could figure out how to link trains with abusive churches!

It seems to me that so many churches are slowly becoming cult-like environments –
Isolation: the worldly world is dangerous; we’ll keep you safe if you stick with our church family!
Authority: we have all of the answers; we’ll keep you on the straight and narrow.
Love: No matter how much it hurts us, we will love you when we have to hurt you to help you.
I think it might be time to get a refresh course on recognizing cults because each church seems to become on in it’s own little way.

It seems like every time I happen across an especially bonkers article on The Gospel Coalition/Gnostic Corporation, it’s Erik Raymond. Here’s one:

https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/erikraymond/2015/06/10/are-you-discontent/

And there is absolutely, positively, no humble man who chooses a hairstyle like that. Dee could tell you that I should know.

When I read up on mormonresignation.com for tips on leaving my church that was in the process of going gospel™-centered (thanks to Deebs for linking that resource), it mentioned that the meetings that Mormon leaders hold to discuss dissenting members are called “courts of love”.

Julie Anne Smith wrote:

My cult leader, Chuck O’Neal, used the word love all the time. You better believe it is a trendy Calvinist word, especially used with the word, rebuke = lovingly rebuke…If you are not, they lovingly correct or rebuke you. If you don’t change your beliefs, you will probably have to repent for your stubborn unteachable heart.
Calvinism is their god, not Jesus.

Ditto for ex-church. Excommunications and shunnings for any signs of intelligent life.
Critical thinking skills…can’t have that! Threats in meetings and by phone. Demands for obedience. Seeing people that were sweet saints ‘read out before all’. Salem Witch Trials II. I had to look up excommunication and shunning when it happened to me. I landed on the blog by the Petrys, Joyful Exiles, about their experience at Mars Hill Church in Seattle with Mark Driscoll. Paul Petry (godly pastor/elder, Ivy-League educated attorney) was ordered to be fired, excommunicated and shunned for opposing Mark Driscoll’s un-Biblical consolidation of power. Ditto for anyone else that opposed Driscoll.

The whole Petry family was shunned. And without income. Friends had to help them.

Thank goodness for their blog. It got me to The Wartburg Watch and to Spiritual Sounding Board. These dear people have saved my sanity and made me realize that I wasn’t alone.

@ Julie Anne Smith:

My YELP review of my ex-church – NeoCalvinist/9Marxist/John MacArthur-ite/Council on Biblical Manhood Womanhood promoting – Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley (California).
A hot mess.

https://www.yelp.com/biz/grace-bible-fellowship-of-silicon-valley-sunnyvale

*hugs* Dee.

No time to read the blog post tonight, but I glanced at it and saw what you wrote about your mother. Praying for her and those who love her, and for strength, peace and comfort for you and yours.

Bill M wrote:

Preaching is demonstrating love? I think not, so I took the quick approach and compared Erik Raymond’s missive on love with the one Paul wrote to the Corinthians.

“Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;”

Erik may be able to preach in the tongues of angels, but his definition is not of love. He sounds more of a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

That very passage helped break me from holding to this very error (“love”=”correcting bad theology”).

Velour wrote:

Just a story about love, not the Neo-Calvinist variety. And this is why I parted company with my un-loving ex-church Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley.

***********************
At my former NeoCalvinist/9Marks/John MacArthur-ite church many people espoused a hatred for gays. They had vile speech, and were proud of it.
I can’t do that because of my job, I have to uphold anti discrimination laws, and because a boss (who is a wonderful, talented professional) is gay.
On a deeper level, I couldn’t abide by the lack of love. In these groups people also proudly shun gay relatives. John MacArthur recommends this.
As a Christian, I can’t.
Years ago, in December a few weeks before Christmas, some friends called to say that their young neighbor in the countryside in their town by a river had been taken by paramedics to my city’s emergency room. He was dying of AIDS.
It was the middle of the night, a pouring rain storm, I was in bed, cozy and warm.
And God insisted that I go visit this young man in the middle of the night. I had never done anything like that before, or with an AIDS patient (which on my own strength would have frightened me). But the Lord was insistent. “Go!”
So I got dressed, got a teddy bear and some Christmas candy together (early Christmas gifts from others). I called a little old lady friend Catherine, 100 years old, Catholic, a retired social worker and a lovely, warm, kind person who could melt anyone’s heart. I asked her if she wanted to come with me. I told her the Lord insisted I go, and I was going. It would be nice to have company, but I understood if she wanted to sleep.
She said she wanted to come. She got out of bed and got dressed as well.
I went to a 24-hour supermarket and bought a small table top Christmas tree, with little decorations on it, some sports magazines, entertainment magazines, and some snacks.
My elderly friend and I went to the hospital. I told the nurse at the ER that, “Sean’s [the young man who was so sick] Christmas Angels have arrived.”
He was so stunned when my little old lady friend and I walked in with gifts to see him. I introduced us. He was so terribly weak. And he hugged us. I got him a Pepsi and fed it to with him a straw. Sean kept hugging Catherine, 100 years old. She stroked his hair.
He kept saying, “This is the best Christmas I’ve ever had in my entire life.” He was in his mid 20’s. His mother had died when he was a child. His family that remained was very dysfunctional and they had disowned him. They lived back East in Massachusetts.
The little room for indigent patients was nothing spectacular to look at. Old large discolored white tiles on the floor. No art work on the walls. Old, tired sink near by.
It was 3am and it was pouring rain outside.
But I could feel the presence of God and the angels in that room. I could feel them.
I thought when I went to give Sean some Pepsi or a hug or whatever that I would bump into an invisible visitor. That room was physically ugly but it was so beautiful because it glowed from the presence of God!
Sean said to me, “If you ever need anything, call on me and I’ll be there.” I smiled and I thought to myself, “What is a guy with AIDS who is this weak going to do for me. He couldn’t even lift a box if I moved.” I smiled and nodded. Sean repeated it, “If you ever need anything call on me and I’ll be there.” I nodded and said, “If I ever need anything I’ll call on you and you’ll be there.” He smiled weakly and said, ” Yes.”
I went, or so I thought, to minister to a young man named Sean dying of AIDS that night.
I thought that was what God wanted me to do.
Instead something entirely different took place: I was ministered to. It was glorious.
I told Sean I would see him a few hours later that day, bring him some Mickey Mouse socks from the mall to keep his feet warm. He said he’d like that.
When I called the hospital in the morning to ask about Sean, the nurse said, “Oh you’re the lady who was here with the 100-year old lady visiting Sean. Sean passed away peacefully this morning at about 6:30 a.m.”
“When you did this for the least among Me, you did it for Me.” That is what my Lord would have me do. The Royal Law of Love.

Best. Story. Ever. I love you, Velour!

Dee, I’m sorry you are going through a time of trial right now, my thoughts and prayers are with you.

At the same time, you manage another excellent blog post that touches on the heart of the issues in the church today.

When you establish these four fence posts – recognizing your role in the church, pursuing personal health, guarding your flock, and knowing what you can and cannot do – you will enable and encourage growth in yourself and your church.

I think that growth is probably another word that means something different to them than it does to me. I think that to them “growth” means more butts in seats, more money in the plate, bigger buildings.

I had a wonderful pastor years ago who was always concerned with the *spiritual growth* of his flock. He truly enjoyed getting to know and spending time with each person. He’d ask ‘what is the Lord teaching you lately?’ or ‘what have you been reading in the word?’ and then listen with interest, he felt that when we discussed the word of God together as believers, that we are figuratively ‘breaking the bread’ of fellowship. He was a gem, there are very few out there like him.

The pastor of the last church disaster I attended made it clear he didn’t do any kind of visitation. He only seemed to hob knob with a select few. He didn’t even use the church office.

David wrote:

The Lead Pastor thing just seems too foreign — at least if you define it in this way where all of the actual pastoring goes to other people while one guy just lectures. I understand if you can’t do it All every day (Deacons, etc can certainly visit the sick on behalf of the church), but a church where the Lead Pastor just meets with the cogs and speaks from on high isn’t a church — it’s a scene from Office Space.

It’s kind of like being in an institution instead of a family.

@ Velour:
Beautiful!

@Dee … Sending up prayers and sending virtual hugs.

@ Velour:
That’s ‘love’, Velour.
This is NOT love: ” I explain I can’t do funerals, visits, phone calls, or meetings. This leaves the door wide open for our congregation to see areas of leadership where they are needed, and to respond accordingly.”

I don’t understand the thinking that says ‘I can’t do funerals’, when he means ‘I’m above that’ ….. to bury the dead in the sacred way of the Church is a holy thing, with all the beauty and mercy of committing the loved one into the arms of God until we see them again. ‘ashes to ashes, dust to dust, in the sure and certain hope of the Resurrection’

and this is NOT love: “I can’t do …. visits”. For the sick and the dying, to come and pray with them is a holy thing, a biblical thing, and it brings with it the gift of peace to the one who is ill/dying and to those loved ones in the room who long for those prayers also. What can he be THINKING ?

i don’t understand. How did it go so wrong for these neo-Cals?
They need to return to the things of God: the Christian burial of the dead and the blessing of the sick in the Name of Christ . . . these are the things of God. God meets us at the times of our lives when we are entering the ‘valley of the shadow’ and He does not abandon us there ….. but our MINISTER?????

Will SOMEONE who cares and who that man respects PLEASE reach out and set him on the Good Way again????

It’s not just an absence of ‘love’, it’s almost like a kind of spiritual death that a MINISTER would not visit the weary sheep and stand witness to The Risen Lord, at the burial of a dear Christian who loved Him. I don’t understand. It’s so sad.

[Update] Before I get into today’s topic, let me update you on the home front. Last Wednesday, my mother in law was seen at Duke and was determined to be in end stage cancer. She is becoming confused and very weak. I have learned much in caring for her and will share my thoughts in the future. Please forgive me for not answering emails and phone calls. I will get to them whenever I have a moment.

Take care of yourself, Dee. Many of us are praying for you and your mom.

I’m think you can ask many a LGBT person how they word “love” has been redefined by the church. This is not a new trend 🙁

It’s something I’ve been wary of for a LONG time, being on the receiving end of “love” as a person getting a divorce.

I know love sometimes hurts. I know sometimes I do things that in the short term hurt my children but in the long term prove to be loving. But love doesn’t *harm*, and it seems to often that the church harms people in the name of love (and then blames them for being harmed).

Dee-thank you for sharing life with us–prayers and our best to you and your family in this time.

One thing that must not be overlooked (Julie put it well when she referred to her cult leader) is that we, at least since the Walter Martin days, box cultic behavior into a purely doctrinal stance (for the most part). It is important that we begin to look at leadership patterns that fit a cultic pattern–and call them out even if the so-called doctrine of the system is ‘correct’. The redefinition of words, the exclusivity or stated superiority of these church systems in the eyes of the leadership, the automatic assigning of sinful motives to anyone who questions them, the behavioral immunity from gentle, loving behavior that leadership assumes (because they are the chosen ones). This is cultic behavior through and through–more damaging, I think, because their rightness of doctrine overrules or causes us to let down our discernment shields. We let them into our lives, naively and trustingly, and end up with the ‘gospel’ becoming painful to us, rather than the good news lifting us up.

It takes years to recover…

“Along with other like minded area pastors, Erik began The Omaha Gospel Network which later became The Omaha Chapter of The Gospel Coalition. This network strives to promote gospel-centered ministry in the region.”

Uh oh. Almost sounds like TGC are imitating Acts 29 in becoming their own de facto denomination.

“I explain I can’t do funerals, visits, phone calls, or meetings.”

This is one of the weirdest things I have ever read a pastor say. I had never before heard of a pastor that didn’t do funerals, except for the megapastors. Does he aspire to be one?

Christiane wrote:

This is NOT love: ” I explain I can’t do funerals, visits, phone calls, or meetings. This leaves the door wide open for our congregation to see areas of leadership where they are needed, and to respond accordingly.”

I know this post is not on Complementarianationism, but it is parallel to it in this way.

Egals often ask Comps to produce the chapter and verse where God/Jesus/Paul/Whoever is instructing husbands to lead their wives. No Comp has been able to do that. That verse exists nowhere in the Scriptures.
So in frustration some Egals have said things like, “Nowhere does scripture instruct husbands to lead their wives. It does instruct them to love their wives, however. Perhaps you mistook the word ‘love’ for ‘lead’. The are both four letter words that start with ‘l’. This must be what is confusing them.”

Now, reading Christine’s comment, I’m thinking, yes this is where they are confusing themselves and others. They are redefining the word ‘love’ in terms of ‘lead’ership. Love has to do with authority, pyramid structure, and nothing to do with laying down their lives for the sheep.

Synonyms:
Reprove – scold
Rebuke – scold
Exhort – urge
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So, a pastor shows his love for his congregation by scolding them, and then urging them on by scolding them some more?
Yeah, baby. That kind of attitude would really fill me with some kind of spirit, but that spirit surely wouldn’t be holy.

Dee – my prayers are with your family. We lost my mother-in-law last August. She was 96 yrs old. Her death was a celebration of her life and a homecoming to her Savior, who she served all her life.

I don’t think these so called ministers know the meaning of the word Love. If they did, then they would practice it. They would be the first to respond to a call of help from soneone. The first to visit the person at home or in a hospital. They would be the minister that the hospital would call on when a Man of God was needed. THey would be known in their community for their love for God and mankind. They would preach the funeral of the lowest of lowliest of mankind. They would be no respecter of persons. I haven’t seen that happen in a long time with a lot of pastors. They are all too concerned with their public image. I could care less of what the public thinks or doesn’t think of you. But what does God think of you? That’s the most important question. Are you living the life that Christ wants you to live. If more ministers lived their lives this way, then things would change.

Cousin of Eutychus wrote:

The redefinition of words, the exclusivity or stated superiority of these church systems in the eyes of the leadership, the automatic assigning of sinful motives to anyone who questions them, the behavioral immunity from gentle, loving behavior that leadership assumes (because they are the chosen ones). This is cultic behavior through and through–more damaging, I think, because their rightness of doctrine overrules or causes us to let down our discernment shields. We let them into our lives, naively and trustingly, and end up with the ‘gospel’ becoming painful to us, rather than the good news lifting us up.

Your comment hits on most of the main tactics of “totalist thought reform” in organizations and societies that seek to exercise total control over their members. And our trusting natures and desire to please God creates a particular susceptibility to thought leaders who play the God-theology-submission cards.

If you haven’t read it already, I’d highly recommend Robert Jay Lifton’s book, *Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of “Brainwashing” in China.* It’s the classic research work on “sociological cults.” He studies the Cultural Revolution, which shows that a “cult” don’t even have to have religious dogma attached — it can still seek to exert total control of its people.

https://www.amazon.com/Thought-Reform-Psychology-Totalism-brainwashing/dp/0807842532

okrapod wrote:

None the less it did confirm that we do have DNA which is consistent with our contention that we did have ancestors, so that is a start right there.

I have always wondered how that sort of thing would match up with family history. Which is mostly some scots who got on a boat, plus an irish lady who got on a boat, plus maybe some people who never got on a boat but were here already. And a smattering of other possibilities.

okrapod wrote:

None the less it did confirm that we do have DNA which is consistent with our contention that we did have ancestors, so that is a start right there.

Thanks for the laugh. Those in my family who have researched our genealogy have come to different conclusions based, I presume, on choosing between different assumptions. I think, however, they are in agreement that we do have ancestors.

Nancy2 wrote:

Synonyms:
Reprove – scold
Rebuke – scold
Exhort – urge
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So, a pastor shows his love for his congregation by scolding them, and then urging them on by scolding them some more?

Isn’t that how a verbally-abusive parent shows their Love(TM) for the kids they abuse?

Lea wrote:

I see this ‘keep me away from the peasants so I can do my holy work’ attitude as a very bad sign.

“MINE is a High and Lonely Destiny…”

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Off-subject:
My writing partner’s mother died over the weekend. (This is the burned-out preacher writing partner.) I think she was somewhere in her Eighties. I got an email notification and funeral announcement over the weekend:
Lois Loewen’s interment will be Friday, July 29 at Indiantown Gap National Cemetery, Pennsylvania at 9:30 am.
Her memorial service will be conducted on Saturday, July 30 at 10:00 am at the Fogelsanger-Bricker Funeral Home in Shippensburg, Pennsylvania.

Praying for your writing partner and his family, H.U.G. Please give him our condolences.

Erik Raymond’s article and Ed Stetzer’s Fence Posts suggest that love and care for the congregation are best conducted at the 30,000 foot level. I guess they can perform one-anothering without actual contact with their congregation.

Bill M wrote:

Preaching is demonstrating love? I think not, so I took the quick approach and compared Erik Raymond’s missive on love with the one Paul wrote to the Corinthians.
“Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;”
Erik may be able to preach in the tongues of angels, but his definition is not of love. He sounds more of a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

If the particular preaching is the proper outworking of the gift(s) of the Spirit through the one preaching – then it surely is an act of love (1 Corinthians 12-14).

n_paul wrote:

then it surely is an act of love (1 Corinthians 12-14).

The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!”

But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.

If I speak in the tongues[e] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.

–I think the issue is one of attitude. IS his attitude of love? Is his rejection of any interaction with the body love or biblical? Can the head say to the hand, I have no need of you, do not contact me on the telephone and I will not be present at your funeral?

Stan wrote:

It seems like every time I happen across an especially bonkers article on The Gospel Coalition/Gnostic Corporation, it’s Erik Raymond. Here’s one:

https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/erikraymond/2015/06/10/are-you-discontent/

Scrolling down on this page to see the guy’s haircut, I noticed that TGC17 in Indy would have the theme “No Other Gospel.” It sounds like they are continuing to redefine “the Gospel” as Calvinism, and themselves as it’s guardian and messengers.

By the way, thanks for the prayers on my job situation. I’ve already got a couple of freelance jobs lined up, which is probably the direction I should take.

Dee, praying for peace, for your MIL and you.

NJ wrote:

Okrapod…LOL. I’m in the same boat with my dad’s paternal family tree past the 1830 census. I’d love to know whether his people came directly from Scotland or did a stint in Northern Ireland, but early state/colonial records can be spotty. But hey, at least I’ll never claim to be 1/whateverth Cherokee, or something like that.

Ha ha. This 1/128 ( that would be 0.78%) Cherokee is blonde headed, light green eyed, and light skinned! I only know about the Cherokee part because historical records state that my ggg-grandmother was buried on the outside of the cemetery (3 miles from my house) because she was a half-breed. Research showed that she was 1/4 Cherokee. She was also a cousin to the Robertson County, TN Bells, of Bell Witch fame. So, I have wondered if that might have some bearing on the refusal to bury her inside of the cemetery.

Okrapod ~ in many instances, surnames a a difficult trace. On one limb of my family tree, the spelling of the surname has changed 3 times since arriving in America because of local dialects and literacy levels: Reiger > Reager > Rager. If it hadn’t been for oral stories passed down through the generations and the well kept Palatine ship records and extensive research done by distant kin, I would have hit a dead end right here in what is now Todd County. I have some very distant cousins in neighboring Logan County who still spell the name “Reager”.

dee wrote:

@ Velour:
Wow! That’s all I can say. I wish you lived near me.

I wish I did too, Miss Dee. I would just show up quietly and do whatever needed to be done, including take out the trash. Really. Anything. I wish I were close.

I love you – we all love you – so terribly much. You’re still in nursing, including with “patients” here who have been wounded. God bless you, dear lady.

Gram3 wrote:

I’m a shepherd who only does three things: play in the stream of water, gaze at the stars at night, hang out with the other shepherds. There are lots of other people in the village to take care of the stinky sheep.

Come on Gram3. Use some flowery, Piperesque speechee words to make that sound like a good thing!

Jeff S wrote:

But love doesn’t *harm*, and it seems to often that the church harms people in the name of love (and then blames them for being harmed).

Also love does not use other people and then blame them for not being useful enough. I think that some pastors view the pewpeons as resource units to supply funds and admiration and enough fame to climb the ladder at Gospel, Inc.

Nancy2 wrote:

the surname has changed 3 times since arriving in America

My Scottish last name changed spellings. The official family history said it was to ‘americanize’ it, but my grandfather said it was because there was another branch they didn’t want to be associated with so they changed the spelling! That one’s more fun, so I’ll stick with it.

Christiane wrote:

That’s ‘love’, Velour.

Thank you, sweet sister in Christ. Our Lord just moves in the most beautiful ways.
The Lord ministered to me that night in that little, funky hospital room where Sean was dying of AIDS. It was…magical.

brad/futuristguy wrote:

Your comment hits on most of the main tactics of “totalist thought reform” in organizations and societies that seek to exercise total control over their members. And our trusting natures and desire to please God creates a particular susceptibility to thought leaders who play the God-theology-submission cards.

Brad, I agree with what you say. But this “total thought reform” connection with religious “thought leaders” ……… Isn’t that the exact opposite of the example set by all of the prophets, as well as Jesus and the apostles?
Being a Berean is now a sin subject to church discipline.

Karen wrote:

Praises be to our LORD Jesus, the Christ. I so praise our Father for you and the truth you shared in your comment. That thread will be sewn into my thoughts for the rest of my day as you deeply touched my soul. This is Jesus, His Ekklesia, His called out ones, listening to His voice and doing His ministering through the power of God, the Holy Spirit

Amen, Sister Karen!

I too am humbled by our Lord Jesus, the Christ. He is an AWESOME God and it was amazing the way He tenderly took care of Sean, the young man dying of AIDS that night. Poor. Shunned. Without family. Without friends. And God said, “GO!” to me and I went. I’ve never done anything like that before, and the Lord wasn’t taking “No” for an answer from me. He just — powerfully — leaned on me. I couldn’t resist Him if I tried.

@ okrapod:

A funny Fraser episode was when the brothers thought they descended from Russian aristocracy but found out they descended from peasants and thieves. :o)

@ Velour:
I think it was ‘blessing’ … the nurse told you that Sean died peacefully in the early morning

what a gift to give a dying person . . . what a wonderful example for the poor minister who was ‘above visiting the sick/dying’ (and they say women can’t preach the Gospel?)

Your example should be required reading in the rehabilitation of these poor neo-Cal pastors-in-training ……

God IS present at the deathbed of believers and these ‘self’-important pastors are missing out of so much of that holy encounter

dee wrote:

Lea wrote:
Have you ever had a manager who came in and the first thing they told you was they did NOT have an open door policy?
That is a major red flag. A former church that I attended had a pastor who now runs for his office and locks himself in there.

This has been an issue for public schools here in getting principals out of their offices. It is so much easier not to interact and get to know people.

@ GSD:
Here is what Mr Raymond said when interviewed by Omaha.com when he bought out a Presbyterian church.

“We practice cutting-edge, 16th-century Reformation theology,” quipped Pastor Erik Raymond, 36. “We’re very old-fashioned, but we try to do it in a fresh way — engaging, compassionate and authentic.”

You can find more interesting facts here

http://www.omaha.com/news/youthful-congregation-gives–year-old-church-new-life/article_c4e626aa-bab5-5b26-9002-0428862e5b8f.html

Lowlandseer wrote:

“We practice cutting-edge, 16th-century Reformation theology

That + Beard = Christian Hipster.

Christiane wrote:

@ Velour:
I think it was ‘blessing’ … the nurse told you that Sean died peacefully in the early morning
what a gift to give a dying person . . . what a wonderful example for the poor minister who was ‘above visiting the sick/dying’ (and they say women can’t preach the Gospel?)
Your example should be required reading in the rehabilitation of these poor neo-Cal pastors-in-training ……
God IS present at the deathbed of believers and these ‘self’-important pastors are missing out of so much of that holy encounter

I doubt that those hard-hearted, unloving, NeoCalvinist pastors can be reformed by reading about my story of when my 100 year old friend Catherine and I visited Sean, the young man dying of AIDS, alone, shunned, destitute, without family and friends.

These are men (and many women too) who pride themselves on their lack of love, their knowledge of Bible verses, being so holier-than-thou. It may take a “Damascus Road” experience for them – like the Apostle Paul – on his way to do violence, blinded, humbled and confronted by the Lord Himself. Changed by the Lord Himself.

These “pastors” – like the ones at my ex-church – feel it’s their *right* to bully, control, threaten, and openly lie about people — including dear Christians in their midst. Even conservative Christians. Senior citizens. These NeoCal pastors believe these are their *rights* and you are *wrong* and they will *punish you*. And you will *obey* them, and *submit* to them. And you’re not one of The Elect if you don’t.

Pride goeth before a fall, and what a fall they are going to have.

mot wrote:

Lydia wrote:
dee wrote:
@ NJ:
He has gotten out of the whole pastor thing. he is now the head of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton. Its probably for the best given his unique views on being a pastor.
http://www.wheaton.edu/Media-Center/News/2016/05/Dr-Ed-Stetzer-Named-To-New-Billy-Graham-Chair
Wow.
Maybe “pastoring” was too much work for him?

I went and read the bio and it could be more influence. He was hired for his “expertise”, right?

Lowlandseer wrote:

We practice cutting-edge, 16th-century Reformation theology,” quipped Pastor Erik Raymond, 36.

Does he even know what the practice of theology actually looked like in the 1500s? I pray he is not actually practicing that theology.

Lea wrote:

FW Rez wrote:

Perhaps there could be a pastors’ conference on how to do the One-Anothers without actually interacting with any sheep?

I suspect many of these pastors have decided that their ‘body’ is not the church, but other pastors.

Lure of the Inner Ring.

Bridget wrote:

Lowlandseer wrote:

We practice cutting-edge, 16th-century Reformation theology,” quipped Pastor Erik Raymond, 36.

Does he even know what the practice of theology actually looked like in the 1500s? I pray he is not actually practicing that theology.

That has to wait until AFTER the Takeover.
You can’t make a Perfect Reformed Christian Nation omelet without cracking a LOT of eggs.

Lea wrote:

FW Rez wrote:
Perhaps there could be a pastors’ conference on how to do the One-Anothers without actually interacting with any sheep?
I suspect many of these pastors have decided that their ‘body’ is not the church, but other pastors.

I prefer to use the term, as I posted yesterday, “franchise”. These *pastors* (cough) go to so many of these money-making-rackets/cult-training-grounds (aka *seminaries*) as franchisees-in-training, like opening up your own 7-11.

*Body*? *Church*?

No, oh no. Customers. Cash-paying customers.

Nancy2 wrote:

Gram3 wrote:

I’m a shepherd who only does three things: play in the stream of water, gaze at the stars at night, hang out with the other shepherds. There are lots of other people in the village to take care of the stinky sheep.

Come on Gram3. Use some flowery, Piperesque speechee words to make that sound like a good thing!

Merlin? You around? We need a casting of Curse of Babel!

Cousin of Eutychus wrote:

One thing that must not be overlooked (Julie put it well when she referred to her cult leader) is that we, at least since the Walter Martin days, box cultic behavior into a purely doctrinal stance (for the most part). It is important that we begin to look at leadership patterns that fit a cultic pattern–and call them out even if the so-called doctrine of the system is ‘correct’.

This really came back to bite me when I was involved with that Heavy Shepherding group in the Seventies. There were a LOT of Christianese Cult Watch groups and Beware of Cults books in Jesus Junk stores — ALL of which defined “Cult(TM)” ENTIRELY by Theology, going over Doctrine under electron microscopes for any subatomic whiff of heresy. And these Not-a-Cults had the exact same Theology as the Cult-Sniffers (Jack Chick plus Hal Lindsay), so the Cult-Sniffers always gave them a Not-a-Cult rating (while ragging on the usual suspects plus the Catholics). And these Not-a-Cult Leaders and 20-year-old Elders would use that clean bill of health as a further weapon to beat down their people — PROOF that They Were the Real True Christianity and YOU were the Hardened Apostate to be Church Disciplined(TM) for your Hardness of Heart and SIN SIN SIN.

Lea wrote:

I suspect many of these pastors have decided that their ‘body’ is not the church, but other pastors.

That is exactly it. Well said.

Lea wrote:

That + Beard = Christian Hipster.

If one *really* wants to be radical and not just hipster, then one gets one’s beard dyed. Hair too, for that matter.

I worked at a seminary as an administrative assistant, and one of the students got a job as the receptionist at an up-scale hair cutting salon. This was also a hair design school, so they needed “hair models” on a regular basis. Voila! Sem-hair-nary — a match made in missional heaven!

Well, old guys going bald need hair cuts too, you know, so I signed up. And as a semi-cyberpunk myself, I was game for cutting-edge looks, so one of the hair design school students did a three-part hair dye experiment: medium brown on the “wings” (there was but a mosquito runway left atop), dark brown on the back, and a large Charlie Brown zig-zag over the neck. It was the zigzag that was the most experimental. First, bleach white. Wait. Then, color with cobalt blue. Wait. Finally, over-color with neon magenta. Wait. Rinse rinse rinse, dry dry dry, and I was done!

It was quite something, all that coloration, with a copperish rinse transforming my grey and crystalline white full beard that the hair design student had trimmed.

It turned into rather a grand spectacle a few days later, when, during the prep period for a professional meeting at the seminary, I happened to step in between the laptop projector unit and the huge portable screen. The PowerPoint had gotten messed up and so Windows was projecting its infamous “blue screen of death” onto the screen. As I turned, everyone found out that a bleached-and-dyed cobalt-magenta zig-zag glows in blue light just like under “black light.”

It was a mythic moment, complete with sitting ovation from those present.

And, to tie it in with the topic of the post, maybe real love includes submitting to the learning experiments of hair design students instead of dictating what they do.

P.S. Hope you weren’t drinking coffee while reading this. I can’t be responsible for what may have happened if the coffee … uhh … went in a different trajectory.

Amen.

Great thoughts.

The most busy pastor I ever knew was Lee Roberson. Dr. Roberson came to the Highland Park Baptist Church in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in 1942. He was in his mid thirties, I believe. Highland Park was a bedroom community a couple of miles from downtown.

Dr. Roberson had trained at the Cincinnati conservatory of music, had been a singer on WSM radio, but eventually went into full time ministry. He pastored at Germantown Baptist in Memphis, First Baptist Greenbrier, TN, and First Baptist in Fairhope, AL, and served as a state evangelist for the Alabama convention.

When he came to Highland Park in 1942, he was greeted by approximately 150 people. After becoming pastor, he began to write every address within a 5 mile radius of the church regularly.

He preached 3 times a week – Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night. He had a radio program every morning at 8:00 a.m. from the mid forties until the late 1990s.

After being at the church for a couple of years, the church began to Baptize over 1000 people a year on a regular basis.

The church planted over 50 “chapels”, or small churches in the mountainous and rural areas around the Chattanooga valley.

The church started a college to train pastors that could lead these chapels.

The college eventually became the second largest liberal arts college in Tennessee, behind only Vanderbilt University.

The church also founded “Camp Joy” which every child within a 100 mile radius of Chattanooga probably attended at some point, often with the cost underwritten by the church.

He also probably wrote 2 dozen books.

Most importantly, he and his wife raised 3 children.

Unfortunately, poor succession planning, a descent into fundamentalist legalism and other matters took the church and school in a downward direction over time.

My point in bringing this up is to compare Dr. Roberson with some of the leaders today with regard to weddings, funerals, visitation etc.

With all of the schedule that I just outlined, as busy as he was, Dr. Roberson still conducted funerals. Often 5 to 10 a week in his later years. He still presided at weddings. And he still made hospital visits, and visits for evangelism, and to see shut-ins.

He was so busy that early in his ministry in Chattanooga, he learned that he had to be ready constantly to conduct a funeral or visit a hospital.

This caused him to adopt a wardrobe that consisted of 1 outfit – a double breasted blue suit, with a white shirt and a blue tie. He wore that outfit everyday for probably 45 years of ministry.

He was not perfect by any means.

But I bring him up to contrast that with all he had on his schedule – daily radio show, preaching 3 times a week, leading a college, etc., he never gave up the responsibilities of ministering to the sick, conducting funerals and weddings, and all of the other things that we associate with pastors.

For his day, he was known as an excellent speaker. In addition to his regular speaking duties, he was asked to speak all of the time at various meetings, evangelist meetings etc.

He could have become only a talking head. But he did not go in that direction.

It is ashamed that too many younger preachers nowadays want to go in that direction.

They are missing some of the greatest joys of pastoral ministry.

Nancy2 wrote:

So, a pastor shows his love for his congregation by scolding them, and then urging them on by scolding them some more?

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

brad/futuristguy wrote:

As I turned, everyone found out that a bleached-and-dyed cobalt-magenta zig-zag glows in blue light just like under “black light.”

Giggle! A “halo” effect? I set my cup of hot coffee down before I got to that part. God is good ~ He protected my iPad.

Burwell wrote:

I understand the inherent trust we want to have in our spiritual leaders, but why would anyone sign such an agreement?

Cast out of the Body and Eternal Hell is quite a motivator.

“BEGONE FROM ME, YE CURSED, INTO EVERLASTING FIRE! JOIN THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS!”
— Great White Throne God in all the Jack Chick tracts

Velour wrote:

Julie Anne Smith wrote:

My cult leader, Chuck O’Neal, used the word love all the time. You better believe it is a trendy Calvinist word, especially used with the word, rebuke = lovingly rebuke…If you are not, they lovingly correct or rebuke you. If you don’t change your beliefs, you will probably have to repent for your stubborn unteachable heart.
Calvinism is their god, not Jesus.

Ditto for ex-church. Excommunications and shunnings for any signs of intelligent life.

“BEAM ME UP, SCOTTY! THERE’S NO INTELLIGENT LIFE HERE!”

n_paul wrote:

If the particular preaching is the proper outworking of the gift(s) of the Spirit

Good point, yet if someone relies on preaching for their expression of love they will have a terribly difficult time developing as a mature adult.

I liked FW Rez comment that it is love from 30,000 feet. You can drop bombs but don’t see the devastation in people’s lives.

I happened upon your website while looking for a good on-line Bible study for my daughter who is currrently living in France. She was talking about doing a study using systematic theology because so many people seem to be hung up on certain aspects of their theologies. I advised her of the shortcomings of systematic theology, warned her against the false doctrines of Calvinism and cautioned her about any legalistic teaching because these always set up an ungodly hierarchy within the church. I have done a lot of study on cults and have found that the ideologies that make a church a cult are pervasive throughout Christendom, causing so many Christians to be in bondage, and so many so-called Christians to be lost in their own theologies. God doesn’t care what you know about Him; He only asks if you know His Beloved Son. He doesn’t care how truthful your doctrine is, He wants to know if you know His Son who is the Truth. God is not going to force you to accept His gift of grace, His Only Begotten who died in your place, because His nature is Love, not force. A true Christian has the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is He who teaches us, enables us and empowers us to properly test the spirits to see whether they are of God. Satan prides himself on his doctrines (of demons); he exults in hierarchies; he delights in bondage; he is legalistic, capricious, punishing and a prolific writer who has penned many more works that are contained in our canonized Scriptures. Bad doctrine and bad behavior are always found together. Truth and Love are inseparable. Why? Because God IS Love and Jesus IS the Truth. It really shouldn’t be that difficult to discern which camp the pastor and his church are in.

Lowlandseer wrote:

I like his beard, by the way. Is it a symbol of a good expository preacher?

Tee heeee. News channel 5 out of Nashville, TN have been running Kia commercials featuring a bearded car dealer. The photo of Raymond reminds me of the dealer. Maybe he just needs to shave his head and start selling cars.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=kia+commercials+in+nashville%2c+tn&qpvt=kia+commercials+in+nashville%2c+tn&view=detail&mid=D75CE3B8756E492B1BFDD75CE3B8756E492B1BFD&FORM=VRDGAR

Bill M wrote:

Nancy2 wrote:
So, a pastor shows his love for his congregation by scolding them, and then urging them on by scolding them some more?
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Yep. We used to say this all the time in relation to how some organizations operated.

Again the church is poorly served by those who call themselves pastors and scholars.

People who heard Jesus likening himself to a good shepherd would have immediately understood what the analogy meant.

The Shepherd’s job was to know where the water and good grazing places were. The Shepherd’s job was to protect the sheep from predators. The Shepherd’s job was to look for the lost sheep. The Shepherd’s job was to provide a calming presence in the midst of thunder, lightening, and danger. Most of all the Shepherd was ceremonially unclean because he lived WITH the sheep, not apart from them.

In my experience, most pastors today are just the opposite. They hold themselves apart from the congregation by sharing little of themselves. They expect the sheep to protect them, while eating the fruits of the sheep’s labor. They don’t lead the sheep but bully the sheep into going where the pastor wants to go. Then when it turns out the grass is dry and there’s no water, the Shepherd abandons the flock and finds another.

brad/futuristguy wrote:

It was a mythic moment, complete with sitting ovation from those present.

That is a fantastic story. I’m sure your hair was fab!

@ Tracy:

Great comment and amen!

Your comment immediately reminded me of 1 John 2:

26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.

Kimberly Rock-Shelton wrote:

Most of all the Shepherd was ceremonially unclean because he lived WITH the sheep, not apart from them.

I did not know that until now. Thank you.

So what if you or anybody is first. Ignorant way to start a conversation on a blog.

Bill wrote:

So what if you or anybody is first. Ignorant way to start a conversation on a blog.

Please pay us TWWer marathoners no mind. It’s an inside joke at this blog. It’s been done for ages. We even award people fake medals for this ‘sport’. Gold, Silver, Bronze. A recent 10th placer wanted (humorously) recognition. I awarded her the medal: Vanadium, since it is the 10th metal list on the Periodic Table of Elements.

http://sciencenotes.org/list-metals/

Running the Good Race where we’re all winners,

Velour

Nancy2 wrote:

Giggle! A “halo” effect?

I did “glow in the dark.”

Julie Anne Smith wrote:

rebuke = lovingly rebuke.

A loving rebuke: ” well, that wasn’t the smartest thing you’ve ever done. Let me dry your tears and we’ll go get ice cream.”

molly245 wrote:

You know. my violently abusive mother used to tell me that she only beat me because she ‘loved’ me and wanted me to know how bad I was….so that I could repent and learn to ‘be good’.
Didn’t work.
The pure unbounded grace and love of the Saviour did work miracles however….

After Bill’s comment about who is first and Velour’s explanation of our little game, I got curious and went up to see who actually was first this time.
Somehow I missed this comment and wanted to appreciate it here by quoting it.

It is on par with Velour’s Christmas story. Coming from different angles, both are a testimonies on how to be a Christian in spite of abusive, authoritarian, religious zealots rather than because of them.

BL wrote:

That means that you and I are cousins! LOL

We’re all cousins! Just ask Gramp Noah!

LT wrote:

When the pastors stop pastoring and caring for their flock, what is the point of going to church?

Especially Robert Morris’s church, where you just watch the sermon on tv. Which is really weird by the way (have been dragged to Gateway before).

Part of the answer is the social club aspect of it. Part of me thinks that’s the point of church anyway, to fellowship with other Christians, but I don’t know why you have to be making the pastor rich as Croesus to do it.

nmgirl wrote:

Julie Anne Smith wrote:
rebuke = lovingly rebuke.
A loving rebuke: ” well, that wasn’t the smartest thing you’ve ever done. Let me dry your tears and we’ll go get ice cream.”

You could even order sundaes. The frozen dessert of choice for TWWers is “Sacred Cow Sundae” (Gram3’s TM).

I’m sure it has a shortbread cookie on top, cut in the shape of a cow and decorated with frosting and sprinkles!

Lea wrote:

Velour wrote:
I’m sure it has a shortbread cookie on top, cut in the shape of a cow and decorated with frosting and sprinkles!
I’m about to try to make Scottish shortbread again, and I’m quite tempted to make it in the shape of a cow now!

Please do! We need some for the launching of our official TWW frozen dessert:
Sacred Cow Sundaes.

@ Lea:
Here is the history of shortbread,with a recipe thrown in.

http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/Scottish-Shortbread/

Lowlandseer wrote:

@ Lea:
Here is the history of shortbread,with a recipe thrown in.

http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/Scottish-Shortbread/

Thanks! I actually already have a recipe from my trip to Edinburgh, but the last time I made it it didn’t turn out. I am interested in trying again because I think I know what I did wrong.

I like the explanation of why it was a ‘biscuit’, because the thing I read yesterday wasn’t as detailed.

Maybe this week I will shortbread and scotch in honor of Nick!

Lea wrote:

Thanks! I actually already have a recipe from my trip to Edinburgh, but the last time I made it it didn’t turn out. I am interested in trying again because I think I know what I did wrong.

I will type up and post a recipe for you over on the Interesting tab, Cooking tab a wee bit later.

BL wrote:

In their pomposity, they are actually equating themselves with the apostles as referenced in Acts, when they instructed people to choose deacons from among themselves so that they did not abandon teaching the word of God to wait tables.

Make that HEAD APOSTLE (chuckle chuckle)…

“If you encounter any preacher who claims the title of “Apostle” or “Prophet”, RUN!”
— my writing partner (the burned-out preacher)

Lea wrote:

LT wrote:

When the pastors stop pastoring and caring for their flock, what is the point of going to church?

Especially Robert Morris’s church, where you just watch the sermon on tv. Which is really weird by the way (have been dragged to Gateway before).

Part of the answer is the social club aspect of it. Part of me thinks that’s the point of church anyway, to fellowship with other Christians, but I don’t know why you have to be making the pastor rich as Croesus to do it.

I agree with you. A big part of a church is the fellowship with other members. But at some point when you need a pastor it’s a big deal when you cannot get to one after years and years of supporting the church. At Gateway, the lower end pastors have to serve one week a year on pastoral duty. So if you or your child, spouse or parent is dying of cancer, there is a different pastor on duty each week. Gateway knows that people don’t want to relive the whole story each week with a new guy so they just give up. It stinks. But it makes the pastors high-paid recreation time so much more enjoyable. They are trying to export that model to churches everywhere.

And you are right on the “social club” aspect. Some of these megas are nothing more than social clubs/country clubs with staggering country club “dues”. People go to these places to drink the coffee, order their burgers at the cafes, enjoy the “rockin’ awesome worship music” and listen to a 34 minute stand-up routine with the occasional reference to Jesus. It’s what makes them alluring in the beginning. It’s also what makes them so difficult to leave. You end up creating a social circle that is centered all around that “church”. Places like Gateway indoctrinate you that they are your “home” and your “real family”. They even give out t-shirts with these messages on them. It helps push out your biological family, your outside friends and co-workers. If you leave, you will be all alone and they know it and design it that way. It’s cultic, not church-like.

Velour wrote:

10. “The give an account for your souls” line was used at my ex-church the way “Biblical” was used — to gain compliance, without thinking, without accountability on their parts.
And this meant they were to mold us into Stepford children, totally compliant. Their picture of us and we were to ‘obey’ and ‘submit’.

No, they were molding you into domestic animals — a couple attack/guard dogs and the rest meat animals for slaughter.

BL wrote:

Quoting Big Ed:

Ed wasn’t a pastor, he was a hireling.

I think it’s pretty funny that many of these guys will preach on John 10:10 so that they can talk all about God wanting them to live abundantly, but somehow they never quite make it to the hireling part.

LT wrote:

You end up creating a social circle that is centered all around that “church”. Places like Gateway indoctrinate you that they are your “home” and your “real family”. They even give out t-shirts with these messages on them. It helps push out your biological family, your outside friends and co-workers. If you leave, you will be all alone and they know it and design it that way. It’s cultic, not church-like.

And the Gateway tactic/mind-control is also used by smaller churches like my ex-church, the NeoCalvinist/9Marks/John MacArthur-ite church Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley. They keep you busy — all of the time, running to and from church activities, scream at you if you don’t attend Bible studies, you create an entire social structure at church, and family and those with differences are placed further and further away from your life. It is very unhealthy and it is meant to be.

The whole thing started to wear on my last raw nerve: authoritarianism, no respect for the priesthood of all believers, no congregational vote, arrogant/puffed up pastors/elders who said if you asked anything, questioned – “You are bringing an accusation against an elder without cause” [what, pray tell, do they have to hide?], no respect for women [I’m one], no women teaching and using the gifts that God gave us in the New Covenant.

Adding on Comp doctrine and that women are to obey and submit…they’d literally tell us that to our faces, I felt like I’d been hijacked and dumped into a Dark Ages country some where far, far, far away from the United States.

The endless segregation of men and women, including in social activities, based on Comp.

So many other problems. My family and friends are glad I’m out of that nut case church. They said they didn’t like who I was becoming.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

“If you encounter any preacher who claims the title of “Apostle” or “Prophet”, RUN!”
— my writing partner (the burned-out preacher)

Or one who says, “You shall not bring an accusation against an elder without cause”, because you asked a question, used critical thinking skills, questioned anything.

Run, if they tell you to “obey your elders” and the manipulative “we will have to give an account for your souls” (carte blanche access to abuse people).

LT wrote:

They even give out t-shirts with these messages on them. It helps push out your biological family, your outside friends and co-workers. If you leave, you will be all alone and they know it and design it that way. It’s cultic, not church-like.

Add in the activities for kids/teens like sports and social. the state of the art gyms with walking paths and racquetball courts. I referred to it as a One-Stop shopping for a social life.

Once you are enmeshed in a small group (can be 300 people!) You are less likely to leave and also because your kids love it there.

Tracy wrote:

I happened upon your website while looking for a good on-line Bible study for my daughter who is currrently living in France. She was talking about doing a study using systematic theology because so many people seem to be hung up on certain aspects of their theologies. I advised her of the shortcomings of systematic theology, warned her against the false doctrines of Calvinism and cautioned her about any legalistic teaching because these always set up an ungodly hierarchy within the church. I have done a lot of study on cults and have found that the ideologies that make a church a cult are pervasive throughout Christendom, causing so many Christians to be in bondage,

Welcome, and brava Mama! Good job of discernment and guiding your daughter.
You are spot on in your assessment of this. I wish I’d had a mother like you to warn me of the dangers.

It is spreading like wild fire – NeoCalvinism – and it is authoritarian, cultic, and dangerous.

Lea wrote:

@ Stan:

“However, he is dangerous because of the reason you would not think, he is unteachable.”

That description sounds like the pastor!

Anyone read SGM wikileaks? This was a constant accusation between staffers and CJ!

@ Patti:

Ha! And I seriously was not copying you Lydia. I just thought her post was so good I didn’t bother to read on before I “blessed” it. As you well know, all it takes to know that no one has the corner on systemic theology is to read a few of the big wig authors who completely contradict each other.

When love morphs into a word meaning doctrinal preaching and discipline.

“It is not enough for you to obey Big Brother, 6079 Smith W. You must LOVE Big Brother.”

Nancy2 wrote:

Velour wrote:

So many other problems. My family and friends are glad I’m out of that nut case church. They said they didn’t like who I was becoming

Borg?

“There will come a time when men will go mad. And they will lay hands on the sane among them, saying “You are not like Us! You must be Mad!'”
— one of the Desert Fathers

I remember a time when Baptist churches and Bible Churches like Erik’s did not have anything like a membership contract. So, I am not sure what Erik thinks this adds to building the church. However, it is trendy, so there’s that. ISTM that modeling Christ-like service to the body is really what a “pastor” should do. Teaching primarily doctrine is different from indoctrination how? What does he even mean by “doctrine?” I assume he means the party line.

Lea wrote:

Especially Robert Morris’s church, where you just watch the sermon on tv. Which is really weird by the way (have been dragged to Gateway before).

Not TV — TELESCREEN!
“See His Face! Hear His Voice!”

Dee, my thoughts and prayers are with you and you family during this time. God grant you all peace.

Per you post, interesting discovering our ancestry. I recently discovered I’m descended from Oliver Cromwell. Not thrilled, but as he was a Puritan, will that get me any cred with the Calvinistas?

As to love…my former church cult (Faith Heights Church in Grand Junction, CO if anyone’s interested) talked a lot about love from the pulpit, it was all about “loving people.” Behind the scenes, it was all about “if you love you brothers and sisters, you will forgive and overlook any wrongs.” There were even self-appointed ‘love police’ who would correct you if you said anything they perceived to not be walking in love. It got exhausting. And it created an atmosphere where leaders could walk all over you and you had to overlook it because Love.

Josh wrote:

So yes, sadly, some of us have been all too well acquainted with this form of “love” for a while already.

the Church has much repenting to do in how it has treated people who are LBGT

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

“When Coin in Pastor’s Coffer Rings…”

“the soul from purgatory springs”

– Pastor Tetzel, the Indulgence Guy 🙂

Emily Honeycutt wrote:

I believe that membership covenants are the poor man’s sacraments, a symptom of a man-attempted and not God-attempted church,

Welcome, Emily.

Since these churches kicked the Holy Spirit to the curb, the pastors/elders have replaced themselves in the place of the Holy Spirit.

We aren’t a priesthood of believers guided by the Holy Spirit. We are now in servitude to pastors/elders and the Membership Covenant/Legal Contract is to make us all *obey* and *submit* to what they tell and guide us to do.

It’s not of God. And that’s why it’s blowing up.

Josh wrote:

The vitriol that is lobbed at us LGBT folk in the name of “love” feels mean-spirited, hateful, and contemptuous.

Completely agree, Josh, and I’m straight.

I couldn’t abide by the many ex-church leaders and members who buffed and shined their hatred of gays. They were relentless in their attacks on gays. And here’s what I noticed: They used gays to digress from the church leaders/members’ own incredibly messed up lives and the work they refused to do on themselves.

They didn’t just have ‘a log’ in their own eye, they had an entire forest.

roebuck wrote:

Velour wrote:
Beakerj wrote:
The NT talks about pruning the vine for it to be more fruitful, but the way these guys have it it’s all pruning & nothing else. Too much pruning kills things, & they bear no fruit.
These authoritarian, abusive NeoCalvinists don’t *prune* they spray the vineyard with Napalm (aka Agent Orange).
http://vietnamawbb.weebly.com/napalm-agent-orange.html
They also seem to confuse ‘pruning the vines’ with ‘fleecing the sheep’. They are a confused bunch.

Spot on, brother Roebuck.

Although, I don’t think they’re a *confused bunch*. I think they know precisely what they are doing. It’s about money and power for them.

Beakerj wrote:

The NT talks about pruning the vine for it to be more fruitful, but the way these guys have it it’s all pruning & nothing else. Too much pruning kills things, & they bear no fruit.

I think they practice reverse weeding- get rid of the real crop and fill the vineyard with weeds. They’re easier to grow and don’t require any care!

@ Emily Honeycutt:

Very interesting comment! I can certainly understand where you are coming from. Due to my age, most likely, I have another view. The SBC I grew up in Is absolutely nothing like what we see today. The pastor was more employee than leader and the members ran the church. The closest thing to a celebrity pastor was Billy Graham and further down on the food chain perhaps the guy on TV on Sunday morning. But back then there were only five or six channels.

I see this problem as much bigger than just doctrinal. It is cultural.

Yet, I keep meeting more and more people in their late 30s+ that are going liturgical. They seem to like the calm and are attracted to an older tradition that just seems quieter and less in your face. They also don’t have many celebrity pastors. I can relate In some ways. I miss the old tradition of just having a good old fashioned hymn sing. But few know them anymore. We sing them so much we knew all the words of all for stanzas.

Historically, I view the sacraments as more political than doctrinal. Could there be anything worse to a peasant than to have Grace withheld from them as a means of shame or punishment?

@ siteseer:
He was love bombing, most likely. My guess is he thought he had enough yes men in place to launch his real agenda.

roebuck wrote:

Velour wrote:
Although, I don’t think they’re a *confused bunch*. I think they know precisely what they are doing. It’s about money and power for them.
I know. I was just trying to show a little Christian Luv(TM).

I’ve got a verse. Don’t call an evil man good and a good man evil.

@ Lea:
Would be great if people could start shape-note hymn singing as an activity for members of the Church who love to sing
I think these hymns are SO SPECIAL, and they come from the spirit and the heart of the faith and are not some weak attempt to ‘entertain’

a favorite:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-w4yl0kjEQ&list=PLvxawOZ9FezfphaWSCH2d8vONSXM8S0d7&index=13

“On Jordan’s stormy banks I stand, And cast a wishful eye, To Canaan’s fair and happy land Where my possessions lie. Oh the transporting, rapturous scene That rises to my sight! Sweet fields arrayed in living green, And rivers of delight. There gen’rous fruits that never fail, On trees immortal grow; There rocks and hills and brooks, and vales, With milk and honey flow. All o’er those wide, extended plains Shines one eternal day!
There God the Son forever reigns, And scatters night away.”

BEAUTIFUL! no band needed, all contribute, and you can hear these singers’ joy four blocks away!

Christiane wrote:

“On Jordan’s stormy banks I stand, And cast a wishful eye, To Canaan’s fair and happy land Where my possessions lie. Oh the transporting, rapturous scene That rises to my sight! Sweet fields arrayed in living green, And rivers of delight. There gen’rous fruits that never fail, On trees immortal grow; There rocks and hills and brooks, and vales, With milk and honey flow. All o’er those wide, extended plains Shines one eternal day!
There God the Son forever reigns, And scatters night away.”

We still sing those songs out here in the boonies: Heavenly Highway Hymns and Hyms of Inspiration. Living in Caanan Now, When We All Get to Heaven, In the Sweet Forever, He’ll Hold to My Hand, How Beautiful Heaven Must Be ……….

A few years ago, we had a pastor who would occasionally have the whole church do nothing but sing hymns at Sunday night service. His favorite was That Good Old Gospel Ship.

My favorite: He’ll Pilot Me.

Quoting Raymond from the OP:

What is the content of this loving ministry? It is to be doctrinal preaching. Doctrinal preaching is preaching that endeavors to teach theological truth.

Loving ministry?

Love? Compare with the following:

See, I am ready to come to you a third time, and I will not be a burden, because I am not seeking your possessions, but you yourselves. For children should not have to save up for their parents, but parents for their children. And for the sake of your souls, I will most gladly spend my money and myself. If I love you more, will you love me less?

We cared so deeply that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God, but our own lives as well. That is how beloved you have become to us.

By this we know what love is: Jesus laid down His life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.

If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.

@ Nancy2:
🙂 What a wonderful tradition.

Christiane wrote:

@ Nancy2:
What a wonderful tradition.

Before my illness damage my vocal cords, I was a deep alto. I still love to make a joyful noise. People may not like it so much, but I think God does.

ishy wrote:

They aren’t affiliated with a church, which is interesting, so I’ve heard people come from all different churches.

‘people come from all different churches’
reminds me of this from the Didache:
“As this broken bread was scattered over the hills
and then, when gathered, became one mass,
so may Thy Church be gathered
from the ends of the earth into Thy Kingdom.”

we cannot predict or restrict where the Holy Spirit goes and within the Body of Christ, we have ever-new evidence of His Presence among us and with us ….. the seamless robe 🙂

They’ve been messing with “Love”TM for a while. My former father-in-law who was a member of Mark Driscoll’s Mars Hill Church professed love for me while sending an email entitled “Divorce” to myself and his daughter with full knowledge that our marriage was vulnerable. In my opinion, it is their way of punching you verbally and covering themselves (“He’s an idiot, bless his little soul” sort of idea).

My post describing that exchange is found here:
http://www.divorceminister.com/i-got-an-email-entitled-divorce/

Christiane wrote:

n we know we were in the presence of a goodness that not even being off-key could mar. I miss my Pop. And his singing. So much.

I know. My mom’s aunt ……. Ha ha, we could hear her, in her garden, belting out “It’s Shoutin’ Time in Heaven” a half a mile away. She’s gone, but I can still hear her. She could carry a tune. She sang still with that strong Kentucky Appalachian mountain twang.

@ Christiane:
Christiane wrote:

I still love to make a joyful noise. People may not like it so much, but I think God does.

NANCY TWO, you just go ahead and sing, dear

as Dr. Seuss once said:
“Those Who Mind Don’t Matter, and Those Who Matter Don’t Mind”

Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

It was only a matter of time. Fundamentalists have been doing this for years. I remember a pastor at a church i was forced to attend growing up told a story about a shepherd who found a lost sheep and brought it back to camp and broke its legs so it wander off again, because he “loved it so much.” Apparently mister shepherd hadn’t grasped the concept of fencing. Of course, it is a rank lie – most sheep will die of shock or infection if they break a leg. And of course, only a sociopath could interpret intentionally damaging a sheep as “love”.

Point two for pondering: the rhetoric coming out of TGC is so obvious, and so self-serving – how is anyone fooled by it? Thoughts?

I know this pastor is human, but he sounds like he has no human feelings for others. IMO someone like this should never be involved in ministry–they will only hurt people.

Emily Honeycutt wrote:

I think there is a problem of people simply wanting power, and helping professions attract personality disordered or abusive personalities. The more free churches and those who do not formally ordain in terms of government would have a hard time implementing this, but I think personality and psychological testing would be helpful in preventing this./blockquote>

I have heard that some denominations (I think the Episcopalians are one) do psychological testing before admitting seminarians. And people who don’t pass are weeded out for unhealthy characteristics. I think that’s good – just like cops, F.B.I. agents, and others.

Of course, this would require adherence to a lot (not all) of psychology being a form of natural revelation and discovery of humans as a gift from God as a way to discern ourselves and others. I notice that in SBC circles, for instance, there is minimal to no understanding of personality disorders and abusive characteristics…But, it could also be for many other reasons, distrust of psychology…

I don’t find them to be the sharpest tools in the shed. They seem to pride themselves on ignorance. Very Dark Ages’ thinking about lots of things.

I don’t think a lot of people in high control groups necessarily are out for power or are trying to hurt others, but because they may think this is what God wants, or they may be receiving some benefit to it.

I think the top-dogs in high-control groups absolutely do know what they are doing.
There may be some innocent people who are hired for leadership positions, unawares, and then realize what’s going on.

It can get complicated to discern what draws us or why people do what they do. People I know that fall into the latter category have gotten caught up in some of these movements, across different denominations and groups, from charismatic to Neo-Calvinism and all over, their personalities started changing.

Ken Blue (pastor) who wrote Healing Spiritual Abuse wrote that many times people who had abusive childhoods are predisposed to abusive churches and miss the red flags/warnings.
Not everyone, of course. But when he counseled people he frequently saw that common denominator.

Emily Honeycutt wrote:

Looking at the fruit and the causes and the whys and the complexities of people for getting involved in different groups and theologies and movements is really complex and confusing at times!

Many at TWW have either been in churches taken over by Calvinista pastors, such as Velour, or have been studying them for many years (me). They might want people to think they really believe what they say, but they’ve fudged enough to show some pretty clear cracks.

It doesn’t take too long to see that they are driven by a small group of men who have rapidly, and very strategically, acquired power and leadership positions, and then give their friends and minions the rest of the positions. They have quite clearly amassed power and are trying to force, via legal contracts, the rest of the SBC into positions of subordination.

They sue people outside their movement with no compunction, but refuse to allow their subordinates an inch of free thought. There can only be one reason for this, and that is because they know if people start questioning them, they will see the enormous holes in their system. Everything they do borders on cultic, and much of cult research has shown that cult leaders cultivate their their power.

Dee and others of TWW have been tracking these things for a number of years now. I think it might help to read back at all of the information they’ve acquired.

ishy wrote:

f people start questioning them, they will see the enormous holes in their system. Everything they do borders on cultic, and much of cult research has shown that cult leaders cultivate their their power.

I had no clue what NeoCalvinism was and I landed in a small, local church (new church plant) that seemed ‘nice’ but turned out to be authoritarian, legalist, 9Marxist, John MacArthur-ite.

So my church wasn’t in the take-over category, I was just naive to the dangers of NeoCalvinism.

In my state (California) and in my county (Santa Clara/Silicon Valley) the pastors/elders think they can control everyone’s life via the Membership Covenant and that people will ‘obey’ and ‘submit’ to their pastors/elders in all things. Ditto for wives submitting to their husbands, including in NOT protecting their children from dangerous people.

And my (ex) pastors/elders’ bogus claims to authority are highly illegal in California and they can be arrested and prosecuted for crimes such as: Criminal Conspiracy [telling someone to violate the law], Aiding & Abetting [assisting in some way with a criminal act], Accessory After The Fact [covering up for a criminal act], Obstruction of Justice, Intimidating a Witness, Stalking, Criminal Harassment, and the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine [Nouthetic Counseling/Biblical Counseling].

The pastors/elders’ think that their ‘authority’ is all encompassing and that they are exempt from our criminal laws. They aren’t. Neither are wives/mothers who ‘obey’ their husbands and the pastors/elders. In California, the district attorney can go sailing down your back for your criminal conduct as a mother if you don’t protect your children, a mother can land in jail or state prison, and can get a “strike” if she’s convicted of a felony (like child endangerment). That means if she gets a 2nd conviction the sentencing is DOUBLE the punishment of what it would normally be. And if she gets a 3rd strike — it’s 25 years to life in prison.

Do these seminaries – like John MacArthur’s The Master’s Seminary – have ANY licensed California attorneys teaching seminarians about the limits of these Membership Covenants/Contracts, telling people to ‘obey’ and ‘submit’ to you in all things as a leader, and any one with an iota of legal knowledge teaching about these criminal dangers?

Why isn’t The Master’s Seminary teaching seminarians that the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine is a crime in California, that can be punished by jail or prison time?

Hi ishy,

Thanks for your response. For clarification, I myself have been studying this for years as well, experientially by observation, and academically thinking and studying through these things, but also have been spiritually abused, etc. have experience with other abusive systems outside of the church. Also, speak with people (friends to people I seem to providentially meet) who have likewise experienced it as well. I definitely empathize.

When I say that there are various reasons and complications and getting involved in different theologies and groups, etc. I meant that as a general, catch all neutral statement. I don’t mean that dismissively as to say there are not clear signs of bad or abusive behavior and leaders (and sometimes followers) who are disordered in their actions and treatment of others. Sometimes even followers or people with less power have evil or ego driven intent in partaking in high control groups, etc. When I say a lot of people who are in the second category I don’t think that to mean most or some sort of definitive statement on numbers, just that a lot of people I happen to know were confused or well intentioned or (as Velour points out) from abusive backgrounds and thought it was normal, etc. and had less evil intent or whatever in getting caught up in different groups. I don’t see those people necessarily as out to control others or with evil intent, if that makes sense. But what was concerning is the personality changes that occurred with some of them once they got further in.

**Also, I should say my above posts are not meant to be all inclusive statements on abuse or all my thoughts on the matter. I am only posting pieces or side thoughts. Particularly my views on the sacraments was just a side observation and wondering about how membership contracts are functioning in the larger picture of things from that standpoint, etc. That small picture was not intended to encapsulate the full picture or speak for all of its components, nor meant to dismiss the issue of people with bad intentions and dysfunction, etc. as if sacraments are the real problem – not true. It’s people (and our misuse and abuse of what God has given us, people to sacraments to everything, etc.)

Christiane wrote:

@ Lea:
Would be great if people could start shape-note hymn singing as an activity for members of the Church who love to sing
I think these hymns are SO SPECIAL, and they come from the spirit and the heart of the faith and are not some weak attempt to ‘entertain’

There are singinings in most of the United States, along with several European countries (and Australia):
http://fasola.org/singings/

Singings are open to, and welcoming of, people from all backgrounds. Many singers in the South are from a Baptist background, but otherwise come from a range of Christian, Jewish, non-Abrahamic, or non-religious backgrounds. Personally, I found more community and wisdom in my shape-note singing community than the Calvinistic church that I once attended.

The quintessential spine-tingling shape-note video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CTlxFwXHAs

@ Nancy2:
I bought a subscription to ancestry.com in order to fill my not-so-free-time. I have found many of my ancestors who came from France to Canada, which is cool. Some came to work for the military and had their passage paid for. Unfortunately, the further back you go, the more confusion there is with spellings of names and such, so currently I have a few ancestors with more than one spouse, but I don’t believe we have polygamy in our family. It’s either a mistake or there were deaths or divorces. Fun to research, though.

Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

Point two for pondering: the rhetoric coming out of TGC is so obvious, and so self-serving – how is anyone fooled by it? Thoughts?

I’m guessing someone has already said this, but when you are inside the bubble of groupthink, confirmation bias kicks in and you see what you expect to see and what you want to see. You interpret what you read positively if it comes from inside your bubble and reject it if it comes from outside your bubble. Generic “you” intended.

Emily Honeycutt wrote:

I notice that in SBC circles, for instance, there is minimal to no understanding of personality disorders and abusive characteristics, people seem to be generally uninformed or naive about it. This is sometimes due to the fact that you often have to be exposed to it yourself in a traumatic way before you recognize this reality, so people just don’t know or understand. But, it could also be for many other reasons, distrust of psychology, conflicting views of sin, wrong views of sin, minimization or leveling of sins, confusing talents or speaking abilities for high character, etc.

Yes, and it’s not just the SBC. It’s MacArthur’s churches and also any church which follows Jay Adams’ thinking. People with very serious mental problems are given Scripture assignments which makes as much sense as assigning Scripture for a broken bone or cancer.

I agree with your assessment of disordered people seeking control over others. That’s why I call the Calvinista theology and other control-freak theology “Cluster B Theology. And I also agree with you that the longer someone stays in that kind of groupthink, the more hardened they become. Some of us are trying to soften up after being in it, but it takes time.

Velour wrote:

Since these churches kicked the Holy Spirit to the curb, the pastors/elders have replaced themselves in the place of the Holy Spirit.

Smacking my forehead. Thanks for reminding me of what I forgot to say in my last comment to Emily. I agree totally that the Holy Spirit has been evicted from certain parts of the church. As someone pointed out (Nick?) the Holy Spirit is like the wind and cannot be controlled.

And apologies to you for not thanking you for your uplifting story.

I often hear certain street preachers (cough::CON::cough::Miano::cough) say that they are showing people that they love them because they are preaching truth. Problem is that they don’t even come close to being an example of showing the love that is spoken of in the Bible. They have their own version of love.

ishy wrote:

I’ve been really struggling with myself over whether to stay a Baptist in maybe a CBF church or to just go to a non-evangelical denomination where there’s more a sense of awe of God.

FWIW, I know one family who have been lifelong conservative Presbyterians, and they are Dones because their church has changed so much. For sure, there are not as many good options for conservative Baptists who are not Calvinista as there used to be.

Jamie Carter wrote:

It’s as if they view all people as children, and only pastors / elders / deacons are ‘adult’ enough to discipline / correct / reproof their children so that they help them grow.

Oh, yes. I had an out-of-body experience with a pup trying to tell (not teach) me and Gramp3 some theology. Said pup was well indoctrinated but had not learned life’s hard lessons because he had not yet had time to be faced with the hard lessons that come with real life. If it were not so sad, it would have been hilarious. His conclusion and the conclusion of his superiors up the food chain is that we were unteachable. And he was certainly correct that we were not receptive to his pontifications and proclamations. The cherry on top is that he did not once so much as open a Bible or quote a verse!

@ Bill M:
Lol! But remember, the first will be last. :o)

mirele wrote:

The writer, Kevin Don Porter, didn’t want to hear what I had to say. His defense was that Christian Post had written about Driscoll negatively in the past (but his article didn’t mention those articles). I also noted Driscoll isn’t a megachurch pastor, and I know for a fact (because I’m out there every Sunday) that Driscoll pulls in less than 400 bodies a week. After a couple more exchanges, including Porter chiding me for not attending church (I DO attend church, I’m just outside on the sidewalk), Porter blocked me, as well as one of our blogmistresses.

They refuse to hear the truth. God will hold them accountable!!

Gram3 wrote:

Smacking my forehead. Thanks for reminding me of what I forgot to say in my last comment to Emily. I agree totally that the Holy Spirit has been evicted from certain parts of the church. As someone pointed out (Nick?) the Holy Spirit is like the wind and cannot be controlled.

But, if the shekinah cloud of glory can leave the temple, the a Holy Spirit can leave a church.

Dee, you now have a reason to get one of those cool “Jonathan Edwards Is My Homeboy” t-shirts!

refugee wrote:

I’m still trying to deprogram myself and figure out the difference between grace and the Doctrines of Grace.

“Grace” flows directly from Heaven through Christ. It is the free and unmerited favor of God which brings spiritual life, as manifested in the salvation of sinners.

“Doctrines of Grace” flow from the teachings and traditions of men. It is law, not life … a system which has proven to be binding and not conducive to freedom in Christ.

Nancy2 wrote:

My favorite: He’ll Pilot Me.

“And I saw the river over which every soul must pass to reach the kingdom of heaven
and the name of that river was suffering:

and I saw a boat which carries souls across the river
and the name of that boat was Love.”

(Saint John of the Cross)

mot wrote:

The word Grace seems to be in a lot of churches names today. I often wonder how much biblical grace is shown in these churches.

It is said in my Church that God provides, in abundance,
the mercy and grace without which we can do nothing of everlasting importance.

mot wrote:

The word Grace seems to be in a lot of churches names today.

Yes, there has been an explosion of “Grace” this and that churches; it’s a way of letting the reformed community know they are on board with the new reformation. It’s a sign to other reformers, like carrying an ESV bible. For the first time in my life, the spiritual hackles on the back of my neck go up when I hear “grace” mentioned.

Lea wrote:

That is a fantastic story. I’m sure your hair was fab!

thank you kindly. it was … “unique.”

I intend to continue hair explorations, and am already working on The Wedge Ledge[TM] as my new look for when I turn 65. Think of it as a mega-mohawk from ear to ear. (Once the hair atop has completely stopped, this shan’t be so difficult to achieve.) Will let it grow out at least 8 or 9 inches, lacquer well, add some subflooring, and then use The Wedge Ledge[TM] as a platform for mini-action figures. Kind of create my own dioramas. I find the Barista[R] action figure particularly charming, and perhaps can work that into the mix for The Inaugural DioramaDrama.

P.S. When the time comes, I’ll be sure to post contest rules for those who want to submit construction plans for a Guest Dramarama

Gram3 wrote:

Muff Potter wrote:
When one of em’ gets their patootie sued off and they’re facing a substantial payout, maybe they’ll catch on?
MacArthur’s church was sued decades ago due to a young man committing suicide after receiving nouthetic counseling, IIRC. I believe the church prevailed, but do not remember the details. Perhaps the legal climate has changed.

Yes, the legal climate is changing here in California.

The California Medical Board is really coming down hard on the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine, a crime in California which can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor or a felony, in this highly-regulated profession (medicine).

With the spread of the whackery of Nouthethic Counseling (taught by Jay Adams and his untrained books and carried on at schools like John MacArthur’s The Master’s College and The Master’s Seminary), and spreading like wildfire among these NeoCalvinist churches,
they are using the *Bible is sufficient counsel* to diagnosis and treat serious medical problems — and blowing it!

I had to file with the State of California against my former pastors/elders, who repeatedly engaged this and actually had the temerity to blame me for a woman church member’s genetically inherited brain disorder – Dyslexia – and its attendant memory problems. Dyslexia isn’t just a reading problem, but a memory problem (that involves short-term memory problems, working memory problems, auditory memory problems and a host of other memory problems).

A woman church member with it, who can’t work and gets a monthly disability check from the Social Security Administration (and her disability was medically diagnosed to qualify for that), has spent decades refusing to go get special medical care and be in special groups for her disability.

She couldn’t remember entire events and accused other people like me of lying, telling church members and pastors/elders that I was for instance “a liar” and the “truth about me would come out”. She inflamed everyone and the pastors/elders said that I was in “sin”.

I wasn’t.

The pastors/elders nonetheless lied to hundreds of people about me and completely destroyed my reputation. And none of it was true.

And you can see now why my state so tightly regulates the practice of medicine and punishes the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine as an actual crime.

Gram3 wrote:

with very serious mental problems are given Scripture assignments which makes as much sense as assigning Scripture for a broken bone or cancer.

And the “advice” that the “Bible is sufficient counsel” for all problems is given to church members by pastors/elders who are usually wearing prescription eyeglasses for their vision problems! Why didn’t they treat their vision problems with a few Scripture verses and call it ‘cured’. Why wear glasses?

My ex-pastors failed to get an older woman alcoholic to a physician for medical care and spent months with church members in useless meetings drawing pictures about “gossip” on a chalkboard and going over Scripture verses. They harmed the alcoholic church member, her adult children (she was a widow), and church members. The real issue – alcoholism – and a physician supervising her treatment for it was NEVER dealt with.

Max wrote:

OK, I’ll finally announce it here since I have become rather fond of TWW and its readers …. I am a descendant of Noah!

Well, howdy cuz!

Brought me to tears. @ Velour:

Muff Potter wrote:

Velour wrote:
I’m a descendant of Jael.
Jael is one of my heroines from the Bible. Ellen Ripley and Clarice Starling are two more from literature and the silver screen.

I just love that Jael cartoon in the “Precious Moments” style that Rachel Stone’s dad did, as seen on Tim Fall’s blog.

Nancy2 wrote:

But, if the shekinah cloud of glory can leave the temple, the a Holy Spirit can leave a church.

“Elvis has just left the building, and so has the Holy Spirit. We now return to your regularly-scheduled Righteousness.”

mot wrote:

I know this pastor is human, but he sounds like he has no human feelings for others.

Doc had the right word: “Only a SOCIOPATH…”

Nancy2 wrote:

Nancy2 wrote:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L53eWf9gMKo
The Gaithers: He’ll Pilot Me.
Makes me cry, and I’m not a crybaby.
If any of you check this out, take a listen to Home of the Soul while you’re there. Beautiful, soothing.

I rock out to the Mississippi Mass Choir. “Having You There”…different…and awesome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqUW05Ti_f0&list=PL5RwJyc9wFuXplUl_igGULx0Cy9aI4uK0

It was older, African-American Christian women who carried The Gospel to me, a white woman. They reached into my life, called me “baby”, fed me fried chicken (I’m in Northern California), greens, potato salad, and sweet potato pie (“Have another piece of pie, baby”). Those women melted my heart.

They took me to black store-front churches and I was like a duckling and imprinted on their music.

Max wrote:

Amen! Folks this line is good enough to stick on your refrigerator! The American church has grieved and quenched the Holy Spirit – the Trinity itself has been relegated to the back pew. We are doing church without God in many places. We need to flush most of the stuff that is going on in our churches, humble ourselves, pray, repent, and seek God’s face … or else.

Oh but James McDonald has the answer to that! We need to make a lot of noise and move our arms and legs a lot during ‘worship’ to get the Holy Spirit to stick around for church!

Sorry for the sarcasm. The last church I went decided to follow “the Vertical Church” – none of the elders saw any problems with it…

Regarding the shepherds being discussed, a commentary from the pen of the Naked Pastor:
http://i2.wp.com/www.nakedpastor.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/feed-us-eat-us.jpg

http://i0.wp.com/www.nakedpastor.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/feed-us-then-eat-us.jpg

Velour wrote:

I just love that Jael cartoon in the “Precious Moments” style that Rachel Stone’s dad did, as seen on Tim Fall’s blog.

That was a big hit when I showed it around the office.

BTW, I looked over the website of your former church, their resources page reads as a veritable who’s who of nefarious organizations discussed here. I also note that at least half the elders are staff, this inverts the accountability and put way too much power in the hands of the the pastor. The preface to their statement of faith gives me the shivers and don’t get me started on their membership covenant.

Bill wrote:

So what if you or anybody is first. Ignorant way to start a conversation on a blog.

I thought the same thing the first time I saw it. After awhile it grew on me and now I smile when I see it. It is a light hearted game and a way of expressing delight that there is an excellent new post to read.

siteseer wrote:

mirele wrote:
Annnnnd….I just went and checked and yes, CP is promoting Driscoll AGAIN today, with an article “Mark Driscoll: 3 Christian Perspectives on Drinking Alcohol and Which One Is Wrong”. I just tweeted at CP itself since the “author” of this “article,” Stoyan Zaimov, does not have a Twitter account. And I’m REALLY wondering if this isn’t perhaps “advertorial” (a portmanteau of “advertising” and “editorial,” which is very controversial in journalism).
I do wonder.
It seems highly unprofessional to block people who point out issues with a story, but I’m not on twitter- do other publications do this?

Council on Biblical Manhood Womanhood blocks any of us who have had the temerity to ask a question about what they’re talking about, define their terms. Men and women have been blocked. I was blocked by them after asking precisely 1 question.

Velour wrote:

I think she is the prettiest woman alive – Mama Mosie Burks with the Mississippi Mass Choir
“When I Rose This Morning”. A rockin’, Grammy award-winning choir that I have seen in person!
What a night!

This is a slower one, but try it. You’ll love it!
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=amazing+grace+my+chains+are+gone&&view=detail&mid=337B7F8EFDD5F6C3C673337B7F8EFDD5F6C3C673&FORM=VRDGAR

^^^^^^
9 year old Brazillian boy singing it, so some of the words are a bit difficult to understand, but WOW!

@ Nancy2:

Have you seen this beautiful black Gospel song “If It Had Not Been” sung by Lynda Randle (with the Gaithers), Andrae Crouch on the piano. It was written by Dr. Margaret Douroux.
The songwriter, the singer, and the pianist are all pastors’ children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KbkOdGFaxM

Lowlandseer wrote:

Oops! He must have forgotten the dangers of preaching theology rather than exposition!

What in the world happened between these two posts of his? I found more to like in the first one.

@ Nancy2:

“He Will Remember Me” at the Gospel Legends, Billy Preston on the organ.

Someone is killin’ it with the soprano voice somewhere in that room!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MxbxukdadI

I’ll be back on the thread topic tomorrow! This was too much fun trading good songs with Nancy2.

Lydia wrote:

I will go a step further and say I have come to the conclusion many Seminaries and such are actually teaching “Thought Reform” characteristics as the only proper way for pastors to organize and operate the church. These young pastors don’t know any different.

Yes, the way our pastor described it (in private), with a smug smirk, is that he “knew how to do church.” He’d heard it all in seminary, and he was well-prepared to head off any Bereans at the pass. He kept a file where he saved things he found that he might be able to use to discredit church members. Oh, he knew it all… except how to humbly follow God and feed his sheep.

Velour wrote:

I think you should have t-shirts made and bookmarkers.

Yes, bookmarks with those tasselly things hanging down 🙂

siteseer wrote:

Velour wrote:
I think you should have t-shirts made and bookmarkers.
Yes, bookmarks with those tasselly things hanging down

Yes. And phone covers for our i-phones. And key chains. And book covers.

Emily Honeycutt wrote:

Lydia,

I have been off and on studying there for seven years, and am not sure if I will return or not due to various external factors. Some if it is that I have also have been in a Baptist crisis for a long time, as well, and am trying to reconcile things and work out beliefs, etc and where I belong and where I can function. The women in ministry is the top concern and has caused me a lot of confusion and pain and back and forth (understatement). I am concerned about the loss of soul freedom and liberty of conscience in Southern Baptist circles, what I love about being a Baptist!, and these membership contracts for instance, seem to obviously oppose that, from my view, and the hyper-authoritarian and control going on not just in SBC circles but even all over.

I am actually using my real first and last name and am nervous! lol

In ministry, I am inclined toward more academic oriented ministry or professions, but am not sure if it will pan out because I have had quite the ordeal even getting this far and had to take many breaks. Further, it is such a long process to go that route and financially difficult. I do enjoy university ministry in general.

Have you considered coming on over here to the Methodists?

Catholic Gate-Crasher,

Did you get an email from Dee about Shauna’s (screen name “Marquis”) son Billy’s sizes for the clothing for him for high school?

Please advise. Shauna’s email needs to get to you.

Many thanks!

Velour wrote:

Some of them are being fed arsenic by these *pa$tor$/elder$*.

Oh Baby, they need hammers and tent stakes!

@ Nancy2:
well, when a woman is forced to live unable to stand up to her full height as a human person in this world, after a while, she just might WANT to join the ‘Daughters of Jael’

comes a time when the human spirit will come into its own if nothing more than to stand tall in praise of its Creator, and on that day, the ‘headship’ that suppressed it has lost to something infinitely primal within the human soul: we are told to CHOOSE LIFE by our Creator, so that we may live and our daughters and sons may live

If the Creator of human kind has given us freedom to choose, who are these men who would tell us we have no such authority to live also in dignity as human persons?????

Nancy2 wrote:

siteseer wrote:
Yes, bookmarks with those tasselly things hanging down
Jael licsense plates!

I’m putting it on the list!

Nancy2 wrote:

Velour wrote:
Some of them are being fed arsenic by these *pa$tor$/elder$*.
Oh Baby, they need hammers and tent stakes!

Spot on, sister Nancy2.

Velour wrote:

zooey111 wrote:

Have you considered coming on over here to the Methodists?

I have. Are they sane?

I think we are. (Mind you, there is the occasional oddball in the lot, but they tend to meander off in search of stranger pastures).

zooey111 wrote:

Velour wrote:
zooey111 wrote:
Have you considered coming on over here to the Methodists?
I have. Are they sane?
I think we are. (Mind you, there is the occasional oddball in the lot, but they tend to meander off in search of stranger pastures).

Do they have women pastors, adult Sunday School teachers, elders, deacons, etc?
Do they have a congregational vote?

Do they believe in medical care as well as counsel from someone at church (who is actually trained and not running their mouth like the ship of fools I had to deal with at my ex-NeolCalvinist church)?

Methodists don’t strike me as the ‘obey’ and ‘submit’ type, like the Council on Biblical Manhood Womanhood shoved down our throats/Comp doctrine at my ex-church.

Any other important things I’ve missed you’d like to share?

mot wrote:

Max wrote:
“Ed Stetzer doesn’t do funerals or hospital visits but preaches. Is this love?”
SBC church planters in my area will not visit sick folks in hospitals or nursing homes. But you can find them tweeting their lives away in coffee shops. Is this love? NO!
They are clueless as to what a minister is and does. They are loveless.

This caught my attention as it seems the terms “lead pastor” and “senior pastor” are being used as the catch all – be all title in tons of baptist churches, and not just neo cal ones. It is why I don’t trust the multi-site movement (which are only slightly worse than mega churches) because there is NO WAY for a pastor to be involved with his flock. He only preaches and then “shepherds” his campus pastors and they are supposed to individually shepherd the leaders in their individual campuses who in turn lead those underneath them. Is this new movement for multi-site the new MLM?

I do believe, though, this is how new pastors are being trained for the most part and I’m pretty sick at this discovery. I was aghast to read “how to’s” for pastors accepting a new “call” (how come it is ALWAYS a bigger paycheck and bigger church with better facilities that is involved in the “call”?). One pastor wrote an article telling his experience with a deacon who was upset at his leaving and the pastor wrote the article to show he was NOT the former church’s “friend,” he was their “pastor.” Wow.

If posting the article is allowed, I can provide a link.

Max wrote:

Dee, you now have a reason to get one of those cool “Jonathan Edwards Is My Homeboy” t-shirts!

🙂 LOL

waking up wrote:

One pastor wrote an article telling his experience with a deacon who was upset at his leaving and the pastor wrote the article to show he was NOT the former church’s “friend,” he was their “pastor.” Wow.
If posting the article is allowed, I can provide a link.

Go for it. The rest of post links to relevant articles all of the time.

Thank you.

I must say this now before I go out to cut the grass. The humidity is awful, and it quickly gets into the 90s, and I am a little old woman and if I do not live through it, well goodbye and it has been good hearing what you all have to say. This statement is not said in jest entirely since all the facts are correct.

But before I go I want to say, in reference to some various ideas that have been presented here, more or less.

I spent my entire professional life of some half a century in a ‘caring’ profession and to my knowledge I have no diagnosable personality disorder nor do I crave to manage other people’s lives.

My faith journey took me from a non-sacramental way of thinking to a sacramental way of thinking, and the ideas associated with that journey were already developing in the long ago decades when I was SBC and then FWB. My faith journey took my from the ideas of how one relates to God as basically confined to scripture to being a continuationist / semi-charismatic in my ideas about and experience of the Holy Spirit. The rather disturbing event that brought about that latter change of ideas was while I was an SBC young adult ‘missions volunteer’ in training. I see these two changes in my thinking as having some relatedness.

Here is the point: To my knowledge and in my experience it is a mistake to think that just because some person may be a Baptist or Methodist or whatever they necessarily toe the doctrinal line with whatever group they affiliate with. A lot of people make that mistake. The think ‘oh, you are a whichever then you certainly believe whatever’ and this may well not be accurate.

zooey111 wrote:

Christiane wrote:

It’s not just an absence of ‘love’, it’s almost like a kind of spiritual death that a MINISTER would not visit the weary sheep and stand witness to The Risen Lord, at the burial of a dear Christian who loved Him. I don’t understand. It’s so sad.

Yes, indeed. I cannot imagine calling himslef a “minister” when he clearly refuses to minister…..

http://i1.wp.com/www.nakedpastor.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/the-theologians.jpg

okrapod wrote:

The humidity is awful, and it quickly gets into the 90s, and I am a little old woman and if I do not live through it, well goodbye and it has been good hearing what you all have to say. This statement is not said in jest entirely since all the facts are correct.

Isn’t there a neighbor, including a junior high aged child or a teen, who could help you do this?

I am praying for you right now! We love you, dear friend.

I asked my mother about it. Turns out my parents decided that since they are already Christians, they don’t need to join an official church organization to be members of the Church universal. Instead, they attend whatever church they feel God calls them to and invest their time, serve, attend, give to the church’s ministries, etc. in that way.

I’m glad to hear it wasn’t anything weird with my former church. That’s a relief.

After hearing about all the church covenant membership agreement stuff here, I can definitely see where my parents are coming from. Not to say that I think official church membership is a bad thing, just that it’s something that needs careful consideration and discernment.@ dee:

Regarding the title of this blog “now they are messing with love”, Dave Hunt wrote a book several years ago when the New Calvinist movement began to raise its head. The title of that book says it all “What Love Is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God.” TWW and other watchblogs continue to report on New Calvinism’s misrepresentation of God’s character. Control, manipulation, and intimidation are not spiritual gifts. What love is this?!

waking up wrote:

“lead pastor” and “senior pastor”

Yep, they want you to know that they are the man! “Lead pastor” appears to be the title of choice among the New Calvinists, even among the 20-30 year old YRRs who have no experience leading! You know you are in trouble when you visit a church if the man on stage is a “lead pastor” carrying an ESV Bible!

Max wrote:

Regarding the title of this blog “now they are messing with love”, Dave Hunt wrote a book several years ago when the New Calvinist movement began to raise its head. The title of that book says it all “What Love Is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God.” TWW and other watchblogs continue to report on New Calvinism’s misrepresentation of God’s character. Control, manipulation, and intimidation are not spiritual gifts. What love is this?!

Yes, people can go to the top of the page here under the Intersting tab, the Books tab
and find that book and some others.

(Please note that I also copied and stashed some good quotes over there about Comp
and other issues.)

Max wrote:

TWW and other watchblogs continue to report on New Calvinism’s misrepresentation of God’s character. Control, manipulation, and intimidation are not spiritual gifts. What love is this?!

Love in the diabolical meaning, My Dear Wormwood.

Christiane wrote:

An archbishop in a city in South America used to take a bus and travel to the outskirts of the city to serve the poor. He baptized them, he tended the sick, he ate with them, he celebrated the Eucharist with them. He was a beloved member of their community. He belongs to a larger community now, but he is still going out to the outskirts to be ‘with’ them what needs ministry.

You have to be talking about Pope Francis.

Ok. Here is the link… I mean Jesus is my friend. But some pastors are above all that…

http://www.christiancentury.org/article/2012-12/pastor-not-friend

Lea wrote:

There was a beautiful story a while back about a lady in Arkansas who ministered to a bunch of young men with aids whose families had turned their backs on them…
http://www.arktimes.com/arkansas/ruth-coker-burks-the-cemetery-angel/Content?oid=3602959

Notice who were the nastiest towards what she was doing.
Hint: SCRIPTURE(TM)!

FW Rez wrote:

Velour wrote:
Nouthetic Counseling. GBF leaders believe that Bible is sufficient counsel for everything. They have no training and licensing, do not follow Cal. law
DOES NOUTHETIC COUNSELING PROVIDE A SHEILD FOR NPD’s IN AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH
There seems to be a close association between the authoritarianism that has been rising in recent years in the evangelical community and the adoption of Nouthetic Counseling. In addition to local churches using Nouthetic methods, many seminaries have abandoned long standing programs leading to state licensed counselors for the “Biblical Counseling” approach. At the same time, there has been much speculation that many authoritarian pastors and leaders are blessed with the non-spiritual gift of NPD. Could it be that there is a hidden agenda behind the proliferation of Nouthetic counseling? By adopting the Nouthetic approach, these leaders put themselves out of scope of the discipline that would correctly label them as NPD.

That’s entirely possible.

My ex-pastor (the chronic liar/bully) recently sent out an email to church members saying that I was mentally ill, that all of the law enforcement agencies in the area had said that (had they really? all of them? whom said that?) and that I was texting members (I have never texted any church members), calling church members (another outright lie as I’ve never called any church members), and emailing church members (you know the answer to this one — another LIE! — and I’ve done no such thing).

Then he used the big, bad word in the email that I was “gossiping” about them.
And being the drama queen that he (and the pastors/elders are)…that they are (sob)
under “persecution” and to pray for them.

I had contacted a Christian school where my church rented a gym for a sports camp and warned them about the church’s policy about Megan’s List sex offenders — giving them access to children, without telling all parents and the owners of facilities. If a child is the victim of a crime on the property, the owner can be sued (i.e. school). It can also harm their reputation.

Parents also also being lied to – both church members and non-church members – who entrust their children to the church for the 5-day basketball camp. What parent in their right mind would hand over their child(ren) to a church knowing that a sex offender who is sexually attracted to children and was convicted for child porn can show up at any time, because the pastors/elders “said so”, he’s their friend, and he said a few words about Jesus.

The pastors/elders are facing arrest and prosecution and that is entirely their fault in California (my state). Their conduct is criminal conduct in California.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Lea wrote:

There was a beautiful story a while back about a lady in Arkansas who ministered to a bunch of young men with aids whose families had turned their backs on them…
http://www.arktimes.com/arkansas/ruth-coker-burks-the-cemetery-angel/Content?oid=3602959

Notice who were the nastiest towards what she was doing.
Hint: SCRIPTURE(TM)!

What a touching article? How can you as a Christian abandon your own children?

Bill M wrote:

So many replace their relationship with Jesus and with each other with a devotion to their institution.

Amen Bill! Jesus came to redeem and work through individuals, not institutions. It’s all about relationship, not religion. The institution we call church is OK if it is leading the lost to Christ, discipling them in the Word (not the teachings of men), equipping them to do the work of the ministry, and then turning them loose on the Great Commission. In God’s eyes that is “mega”, whether it be a small or large gathering of God’s people! Any thing less than that is doing church without God.

waking up wrote:

One pastor wrote an article telling his experience with a deacon who was upset at his leaving and the pastor wrote the article to show he was NOT the former church’s “friend,” he was their “pastor.” Wow.

Wow, indeed!

He as a “pastor” couldn’t be a friend, but Jesus, as THE SAVIOR could?

“I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.”

Quoting from the article you linked:

“Since hard-working pastors devote most of their energy to the church, they inevitably become close to the lay leaders who work beside them.

…

It sure sounds like friendship. But it can’t be.

Can’t be? Paul managed to have friends…

“The next day we landed at Sidon; and Julius, in kindness to Paul, allowed him to go to his friends so they might provide for his needs.

And John…

“I hope to see you soon, and we will talk face to face. Peace to you. The friends here send their greetings. Greet the friends there by name.”

Now you have to love us enough to no longer expect mutuality.” It wasn’t long after I stood up from the ordination prayer that I discovered this. But the elders have a hard time understanding the holy distance they created by their decision to make me their pastor.

HOLY distance?

He didn’t really say that out loud, did he?

Should God call the pastor to go to another place, it’s asking too much of the congregation to expect them to discern this with the pastor.

Well, isn’t he just too special?

Acts reveals how often Paul spoke to the hoi poloi about what God was calling him to do. An *apostle* didn’t think it too much for the congregations he spoke to – but Mr. Pastor is just so much higher above his congregation, than the Apostle Paul was…

@ Max:

Max,

Thank you for your comment, and for the reminder that God loves me. It’s such a simple but powerful truth.

I think I was able to make a noneventful exit from that ministry because of what I’d seen on TWW. I’d heard about what had happened to other people, and I didn’t want it happening to me. I feel like a coward sometimes for not ever really confronting the leadership of the ministry about how I felt, and I feel like they probably would have at least listened to what I had to say. I should have tried. But the last thing I wanted at that time was even the possibility of a conflict. I just wanted to get out with my faith intact.

I’ve lurked here for several years now, and I’ve really enjoyed reading the comments by the posters here. Thank you for sharing your experiences and wisdom. You all have helped me and have no doubt helped countless others.

ishy wrote:

I do think there’s value in being very careful who you choose as a counselor. I know people who went to secular counseling who ended up changing in very dramatic ways, and not for the better. I think you can find Christian counselors who believe God can help you, but don’t discount secular counseling methods, either.

That is a great clarification, thank you. When I needed to find a counselor to help someone in my family, I insisted on a licensed Christian counselor. Unfortunately, SBC seminaries will no longer be preparing counselors this way.

Serah wrote:

At least I didn’t lose my entire support network, but it was hard for me to open up to the new group after that, and I only really did to a couple of people.

I think this is the real reason we have more trouble making friends as an adult. Too many painful experiences behind us.

okrapod wrote:

My faith journey took me from a non-sacramental way of thinking to a sacramental way of thinking, and the ideas associated with that journey were already developing in the long ago decades when I was SBC and then FWB. My faith journey took my from the ideas of how one relates to God as basically confined to scripture to being a continuationist / semi-charismatic in my ideas about and experience of the Holy Spirit. The rather disturbing event that brought about that latter change of ideas was while I was an SBC young adult ‘missions volunteer’ in training. I see these two changes in my thinking as having some relatedness.

I can relate to this, myself, but having hard understanding how sacraments fit.

It is too hot to mow! Now I will be on pins and needles until you comment as I check in and out. In meetings today.

siteseer wrote:

I have heard that story, too, and I *despise* it. I agree it is sociopathic, no shepherd would do this. Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.

Papa Chuck (the founder of Calvary Chapel) was quite fond of this old chestnut, as were his lieutenants back in their good old days. I remember a gifted young woman in her last year of seminary (ELCA Lutheran) who demolished this cruel myth in a guest homily. She was like a prophetess taking a hammer to Chemosh. Nary a dry eye in the place.

Muff Potter wrote:

siteseer wrote:
I have heard that story, too, and I *despise* it. I agree it is sociopathic, no shepherd would do this. Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.
Papa Chuck (the founder of Calvary Chapel) was quite fond of this old chestnut, as were his lieutenants back in their good old days. I remember a gifted young woman in her last year of seminary (ELCA Lutheran) who demolished this cruel myth in a guest homily. She was like a prophetess taking a hammer to Chemosh. Nary a dry eye in the place.

Amen!

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
I’m talking about someone who has a shepherd’s heart, and now has a much larger flock to tend, yes. But someone who now gets ‘accused’ of grand-standing when he does the things of ministry; and he bears this criticism patiently, because he knows he WAS a member of a little community on the outskirts of Buenos Aires for many years, and he was still one of them long after the Church decided he was ‘more’ than that and began ‘elevating’ his titles.
This man still wanders in disguise out of the Vatican and meets people where they are. You can move a real shepherd to a palatial residence, but if it is IN HIS NATURE to go out and seek and serve the ones who need Christ, then there’s no force that can prevent him from his true calling.

@ Christiane:
How do you know he wanders in disguise unless it is reported? That is a bit confusing. And are you suggesting right and wrong is a matter of a nature we are born with and cannot (or does not) develop?

@ Christiane:
He ended up pretty high on the food chain at Treasury in DC. Has been a done all his life. Comes from an extremely dysfunctional family with a dark childhood. I am thinking maybe God could have been protecting him considering the types of kids that were Targeted for grooming.

Gram3 wrote:

I think the root of the nouthetic fad is that certain people think they have priestly ability that they do not have, and they view the Bible as a handbook and verses as magically curative. Naturally, they would never say that. It’s even worse if they are lacking in real life experience. For people who need real help as well as the people affected by their disorders, that is a needless tragedy.

In my state – California – the practice of medicine is a profession that is highly regulated. The Unauthorized Practice of Medicine is a crime that can result in jail or prison time upon conviction. No harm needs to have occurred. Just violations of CA law.
If these pastors/elders want to be doctors, then they should go to medical school, do a residency, take exams, and apply for and pass with the State of CA to be licensed physicians.

I think the lot of these Nouthethic pastors/elders belong in jail/prison and I have no sympathy for their quackery and arrogance.

Lydia wrote:

@ Christiane:
He ended up pretty high on the food chain at Treasury in DC. Has been a done all his life. Comes from an extremely dysfunctional family with a dark childhood. I am thinking maybe God could have been protecting him considering the types of kids that were Targeted for grooming.

But Our Lord knows that once, as a young man, your friend went to the Church for help, and the door was closed to him. The thing is that Our Lord KNOWS the truth of what happened to many, many ‘nones’ and ‘dones’, and He is not one to shut the door to helping them in the world to come.

Christiane wrote:

Christiane wrote:

And are you suggesting right and wrong is a matter of a nature we are born with and cannot (or does not) develop?

I don’t understand this portion of your comment. Can you clarify, please. Thanks

FW Rez wrote:

Unfortunately, SBC seminaries will no longer be preparing counselors this way.

That is because they do not believe in secular counseling. They really only want to support biblical counseling which is dangerous as those counselors are not trained appropriately to deal with the situations that might walk through the door. An unlicensed (state licensing) biblical counselor will do more harm than good in most situations.

Firstly I will pray for your mother in law. I hope she recovers.

I agree with the article, but the section on being critical to Erik Raymond’s article is very short and not descriptive enough. I think a reader will not really understand your point. I have read it and will give my 2 cents. Hope this helps you edit it later. =)

https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/erikraymond/2016/07/22/does-your-pastor-love-you/

1) John 21:15

Jesus here was saying that Peter need to feed his sheeps. And his sheeps are young Christians. Feeding is actions of love and includes everything. Teaching the word of God is only ONE PART of them. Feeding includes food, water and any other thing they need. A leader cannot see a homeless man, go teach him about God, and then go away. The leader should feed the homeless man. That is true love. The same goes for a church member that needs help moving a heavy book case. Or a church member with a broken car and he cannot afford to fix it.

Erik said “There are many ways that a pastor can show his love for Christ and his church, but none is more prominent then the ministry of the Word.”

He was very wrong. The GREATEST commandment is not to teach the word of God. The GREATEST commandment is to ACT out of love. There needs to be actual action of WASHING THE FEET of the least of these, not just speaking and teaching. Empty words means nothing.

Now in a church of 1000+ members, of course it is not possible for the pastor to physically be there to help each member of all their problems. And it is impossible for the pastor to know each member personally at that deep of a level. But even then, it is STILL that pastor’s responsibility to help each member. How? He should be setting up a culture of LOVE and HELP in his church, so other members will be there to help the suffering members. And that his church members will go out and feed the poor and the least of these. And that no one in his church will feel along and helpless, because they are all plugged into small groups that knew them personally very well.

If the pastor truly have love, he would have acted out of love to help both believers and non-believers. That pastor WON’T JUST TEACH and call it a day. True love has no limits.

2) John 21:16

Jesus said here to tend his sheeps. This do indeed mean leading his sheeps. The difficult part is, of course, how to NOT lead the sheeps astray. There are cases where the church needs protection from the pastor and elders himself. Because all pastors and elders are also sinners. In fact they are attacked by Satan even more.

If the pastor has true love, he would set up a system to PROTECT his sheeps from ABUSE from both HIMSELF and from ELDERS. Even if the pastor or elder himself is loving and good, how can his GUARANTEE the people that come AFTER him will be as loving and good as he is? He would not leave an opening in his system for evil men and women to abuse his sheeps.

3) Erik said “Does your pastor give you the Word of God? Does he reprove you? Rebuke you? Exhort you? Is this done patiently? Is it done doctrinally? If so, you have reason to believe that your pastor loves you.”

When it comes to the issues of rebuking, there are two extreme camps on this and they are both wrong. But I will list them:

i) Love everyone. Sins are not even sins anymore.

If we go this route, we lost the truth. And if God’s truth, what he said was right and wrong, cannot be trusted then we cannot trust the judgement of God neither.

Also we ignore the harm that person is doing to God’s honour, harm to his neighbor and harm to himself. If we just let that person harm like that, we are not really loving him/her.

ii) Hate, discipline and excommunicate all sinners.

If we go this route we must hate, discipline and excommunicate EVERY SINGLE CHRISTIAN! Everyone is a sinner. Must everyone stop sinning before they come to church? Of course not.

And there are many opposing point of views. For example young earth vs old earth. Now it is perfect alright for a pastor to have an opinion, say young earth. But is it really his authority to ENFORCE his OPINION on his members? That anyone that believe in old earth deserves discipline and excommunication?

Same goes for other OPINIONS like the need to throw away certain CDs & DVDs and donate at least $500 or whatever) a month. These are all opinions that the bible wasn’t clear about. In fact Jesus was against the oppressive temple model for making the poor women donate her final 2 mites (Mark 12:44). Instead shouldn’t the temple of God, out of love, donate to that poor women so she will have food to eat that day? And donating, even being a martyr, without love in the heart was pointless anyways (1 Corinthian 13:3).

Must we bite and devour each other over OPINIONS until the church is destroyed? (Galatian5:15) Where is the love in that?

So what is love?

True love is in the middle of the above. It do not forsake truth just to remain popular. It does not say nothing when someone harm the honour of God, harm neighbor and harm himself. But at the same time love, even when it is correct, is not abusive and oppressive. The goal must never be to humiliate and embarrass the person, but to restore out of love. Love leaves plenty of room for patience and gentleness. Love in authority do not aim to rule over its subjects, but instead use its power and influence to serve those below them.

And love knows the difference between the actual and clear word of God, and the unclear verses and opinions of humans. When in doubt and only an opinion (not 100% certain truth) can be formed, love chooses to ERROR on the side of love, grace and mercy. (Yes I just said that.)

Many of questioned “What is the ideal church?” And I have read a lot of very complicate answers. To me the ideal church is very simple. The ideal church fulfill the Greatest Commandant and the Great Commission.

If a church ever loses its first love for God and its first love for neighbor, the two so closely related that Jesus himself refused to separate the two, it is no longer a church for God. It has been led astray in the greatest way, because it has failed the Greatest Commandant. You can tell a good tree by the good fruit it produces, and a bad tree by the bad fruit it produces. No one can see the heart on the outside. But you can have a very good guess on the heart by that person’s actions. Whoever claims that they love God but hates his brother is a liar. For if he cannot love his brother who he can see, how can he love God who he cannot even see? (1 John 4:20)

For non-believers:

When an alcoholic walks in the church, he feels loved. When a homeless man walks in, he feels loved. When a prostitute walks in, she feels loved. There are plenty of food, water and help for these people.

When a multi-million walks in, he feels loved and he no longer needs to chase after the wind. And he finally find people that is not after his money or is jealous of him.

For believers

When someone loses their job, they are supported heavily by the church. And he remembers that God loves him.

When someone sins, no one judges him in a prideful way. Instead the church moans heavily for him. He truly feel loved by the church, in their patience and gentleness toward him. In fact even as he was struggling with his sins, the church welcome him even more. It is the sick who needs a doctor. (Mark 2:17)

CHIPS wrote:

Jesus here was saying that Peter need to feed his sheeps. And his sheeps are young Christians. Feeding is actions of love and includes everything.

“his sheeps are young Christians”
So we older Christians are what? Left alone, out in the cold?

Lydia wrote:

I asked you how you knew that for a fact.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/02/pope-francis-homeless_n_4373884.html

CHIPS wrote:

BTW I am not totally against discipline and excommunication. But I am saying that these MUST be very carefully applied.

Too frequently, when leaders implement membership contracts then discipline becomes their go-to tool. Just like for the guy who only has a hammer everything looks like a nail, every perceived sin seems an opportunity to escalate to the discipline process.

CHIPS wrote:

In a church of 1000+, how can the pastor do everything?

I would say that out of the majority of churches the minority of churches would have 1000 or more active members.

I’m former SBC and while it would be nice to find an “ideal” church, sometimes I would settle for a REAL church.

Let me explain some background for that statement. Please don’t flame me, as I know the little SBC church of my childhood may not be orthodox enough for today’s crop, but here goes:

We were monotheists. Plain and simple, we worshipped, taught about, preached about, sang about, and prayed to Jesus. We believed His I AM statements taught Jesus was Jehovah. Even His name in Hebrew was “Jehovah who saves.” We believed in One God (and yep, knew the Shema)who had shown Himself to mankind as Jehovah in the OT, Jesus in the NT. The OT pointed forward to Jesus and the Holy Spirit points back to Him. We believed that in the OT not all outward Jews were really Jews, but only those with faith in that One God. And today that only those with faith in Jesus as Lord (meaning God) for forgiveness and salvation were saved.

We were probably only one taco short of being a Oneness Pentecostal combo plate in that respect.

And then some what I know now was Replacement Theology folks came in. One day I was called on to close church in prayer and was rebuked afterward for praying to Jesus, since we are TRINITARIANS. A few years later Dispensationalists took over, and we moved away. I agreed with them regarding simple free grace, just not the end times stuff.

But we worshipped Jesus, sought to obey Him, and were ALL equals.

Jesus was LORD at that little Baptist church, not the pastor. Which we didn’t have anyway, we had preachers.

I’m in another denom now where Jesus is still Head, and life is good. But I would love to find an SBC church that is still Christian. Old habits die hard.

I’m not saying we were right, or asking anyone to agree with the teaching in that little church. Just saying our one deacon was right when he said the Replacement folks would sooner or later demote Jesus from full Godhood.

He is fully God, or He is not God. That deacon was right, imho.

Praying peace, comfort, and in God’s timing an easy passing into Glory for Dee’s mom in law.

okrapod wrote:

Those ‘groups’ can be a vehicle for everybody getting into everybody else’s business whether people want their business gotten into or not.

I can see how this would backfire on a Church. If someone is getting into the business of someone else, and digs up dirt and spreads it (for ‘the glory of God’ or whatever they call it);
then the VICTIM is not going to want to continue coming to that Church (I know, the deal may be that they have ‘signed a legal contract’).

If anything, Church members would want to protect the dignity of one another, and that calls for respecting their privacy. Upholding the dignity of others seems to be something neo-Cal folk might want to focus on, as we all need to work on it from time to time.

What really is obvious:
1. neo-Cal invasion of marital privacy seems horrifically damaging to the healthy union of spouses
2. the corrosive and destructive public ‘shaming’ of people who haven’t ‘cooperated with leadership’ (whatever that means), as in a teenager being ridiculed for not ‘confessing his sins’ to his assigned ‘small group’ at Church camp (good on him that he refused that intrusion)

so much seems destructive . . . . at first, only directed at victims, but eventually the whole community will be affected negatively, if only through the dynamics of ‘witch-hunt’ psychology which once encouraged among a group by its leaders, can lead to some fairly injurious behaviors

Julie Anne Smith wrote:

My cult leader, Chuck O’Neal, used the word love all the time. You better believe it is a trendy Calvinist word, especially used with the word, rebuke = lovingly rebuke.

And yet, when another Christian, a person who has the Holy Spirit as well, a co-heir, a priest of the New Covenant just like them (assuming they know Jesus at all), one also with discernment given by the Holy Spirit, one to whom John said “You are not in need of teachers…for the Spirit teaches you everything”, attempts to rebuke them for their sin or errors, do they listen or care or change one scintilla? Or for the most part, do these types thereafter seek to destroy the messenger?

Julie Anne Smith wrote:

Here is how it works. You go to their church and say you are a Christian. They absolutely do not believe you are a Christian…

Fine, then they and I are even, I feel the same way about most of them.

@ Velour:
Sorry to hear, but not surprised. Hang in there!

@ Velour:
These things have a way of blowing up in peoples’ faces, sociopaths eventually find a way to braid the rope with which they are ultimately hanged. Why? Because as cunning as they may seem, they are pathologically incapable of understanding their actions in light of the larger picture and the long term and eventually, they are tripped up and exposed. Time and truth go hand-in-hand.

Linda wrote:

One day I was called on to close church in prayer and was rebuked afterward for praying to Jesus

So we’re supposed to have a relationship with him but we can’t talk to him? Bizarre.

Serah wrote:

Thankfully, I do have friends that are there for me, regardless of where I am or what church I’m involved in. Their support means the world to me.

I have a half dozen similar friends that have stood the test of time and trial. They are worth their weight in gold.

Christiane wrote:

Why is prayer to Jesus considered ‘wrong’ in some Churches?

I’ve heard this, also. The reason I was given is that the Lord gave us the example of how we are to pray in the Lord’s Prayer and he prayed to the Father. Secondly, in several places in the Bible Jesus said to make our requests to the Father in his name, and the Father would grant our requests. So, of course, some people will always see things as a formula to follow and rules to go by.

siteseer wrote:

. The reason I was given is that the Lord gave us the example of how we are to pray in the Lord’s Prayer and he prayed to the Father. Secondly, in several places in the Bible Jesus said to make our requests to the Father in his name, and the Father would grant our requests.

The words of Jesus:
John 14:14 If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+14%3A14&version=NASB

Gosh darn legalists. Again, getting completely hung up on one or two verses while ignoring anything that doesn’t go along with their narrow interpretation.

Muff Potter wrote:

I remember a gifted young woman in her last year of seminary (ELCA Lutheran) who demolished this cruel myth in a guest homily. She was like a prophetess taking a hammer to Chemosh. Nary a dry eye in the place.

I would have liked to hear that!

Mara wrote:

Gosh darn legalists. Again, getting completely hung up on one or two verses while ignoring anything that doesn’t go along with their narrow interpretation.

They’re everywhere! The nit-pickers.

And then we have this promise- “we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words” Romans 8:26
He knows our heart.

Velour wrote:

And they’ve all said how bizarre it is and that NO these pastors/elders have no legal rights to make the claims that they’ve been making. (Many of their demands are criminals acts in California.)

Hi VELOUR,
you know the ‘leadership’ of your old Church sounds dangerous . . . did you ever worry about your own personal safety?

It was very brave of you to stand up to these evil people and to work to inform the police and others about the leader and his paedophile buddy. These sound like real criminals. You may have saved some children from dreadful abuse, Velour. Very brave work!

Christiane wrote:

Velour wrote:
And they’ve all said how bizarre it is and that NO these pastors/elders have no legal rights to make the claims that they’ve been making. (Many of their demands are criminals acts in California.)
Hi VELOUR,
you know the ‘leadership’ of your old Church sounds dangerous . . . did you ever worry about your own personal safety?
It was very brave of you to stand up to these evil people and to work to inform the police and others about the leader and his paedophile buddy. These sound like real criminals. You may have saved some children from dreadful abuse, Velour. Very brave work!

I have taken precautions. I moved.

Max wrote:

Yes, there has been an explosion of “Grace” this and that churches; it’s a way of letting the reformed community know they are on board with the new reformation. It’s a sign to other reformers, like carrying an ESV bible. For the first time in my life, the spiritual hackles on the back of my neck go up when I hear “grace” mentioned.

Remember the TV Tropes page “People’s Republic of Tyranny”?

Where the more adjectives about Democracy there are in a country’s official name, the nastier a dictatorship it is?

This is just the Christianese version.

Christiane wrote:

okrapod wrote:
Those ‘groups’ can be a vehicle for everybody getting into everybody else’s business whether people want their business gotten into or not.
I can see how this would backfire on a Church. If someone is getting into the business of someone else, and digs up dirt and spreads it (for ‘the glory of God’ or whatever they call it);
then the VICTIM is not going to want to continue coming to that Church (I know, the deal may be that they have ‘signed a legal contract’).
If anything, Church members would want to protect the dignity of one another, and that calls for respecting their privacy. Upholding the dignity of others seems to be something neo-Cal folk might want to focus on, as we all need to work on it from time to time.
What really is obvious:
1. neo-Cal invasion of marital privacy seems horrifically damaging to the healthy union of spouses
2. the corrosive and destructive public ‘shaming’ of people who haven’t ‘cooperated with leadership’ (whatever that means), as in a teenager being ridiculed for not ‘confessing his sins’ to his assigned ‘small group’ at Church camp (good on him that he refused that intrusion)
so much seems destructive . . . . at first, only directed at victims, but eventually the whole community will be affected negatively, if only through the dynamics of ‘witch-hunt’ psychology which once encouraged among a group by its leaders, can lead to some fairly injurious behaviors

The thing is we can’t just assume that love isn’t there. Because if love is there, having a small group that really love and care about you is great.

BUt yeah I agree that it shouldn’t be a law that everyone joins a small group. And anyone in a small group should be free to 1) Not share secrets. 2) Leave at any time.

Christians cannot live alone. Christian life is meant to be shared with others. Christians are meant to love one another. However there are always wolves in sheep skins in every church. There is always that prideful guy. Or a jealous guy. etc. When Christians interact, there will always be abuses of power and conflicts.

That’s why I had been telling everyone I talk to that churches really need to go back to the BASICS and focus on love. I mean yeah knowledge is important. And it is interesting to debate about old earth vs new earth, etc. However if a church focus so much on knowledge and forget about love, the church has losts its main purpose. And it become just like the pharasees.

Drill love into the church members’ heads. Make sure they don’t forget about love. And with love comes kindness, patience, mercy and many other things. Then go teach them about deeper knowledges. BUt always return to remind them to love again. Love is the basic core of Christianity, because Jesus loved us. And love is always more important to other deeper knowledges.

If a church is filled with love for GOd and neighbour, especially the least of these, I say it is a successful church.

ishy wrote:

FW Rez wrote:

Could it be that there is a hidden agenda behind the proliferation of Nouthetic counseling? By adopting the Nouthetic approach, these leaders put themselves out of scope of the discipline that would correctly label them as NPD.

Of course there’s a hidden agenda! If you go outside the church to find answers, you will challenge all that carefully implemented brainwashing!

I do think there’s value in being very careful who you choose as a counselor. I know people who went to secular counseling who ended up changing in very dramatic ways, and not for the better. I think you can find Christian counselors who believe God can help you, but don’t discount secular counseling methods, either.

Last year I went to professional counselor for the first time in my life for PTSD. The first thing I told her was that I did not want to know what her religious or non-religious belief system was because did not want that knowledge to change how I was going to communicate with her.
I told her that I was having PTSD after running into my high school boyfriend who raped me nearly 40 years ago. I told her that 15 years later I had become close with God and had good Christian counsel and I had forgiven him. Wacky Christianity had contributed to the initial trauma however. What she helped me to understand was that my physical chemistry needed help to put that era of trauma back into its proper timeline in my life. I still feel some PTSD when I pass my rapist’s businesses in town, but that secular counselling has kept me from the substance abuse I was about to fall back into to make the PTSD stop. I do not believe my therapist is a Christian, but she was respectful of my beliefs.

@ Bill M:
some choices are more deadly than others ….. I would hope that people who are Christian will always ‘Choose Life’ that they and their children may live

it has never been more important to remember that the privilege of ‘choice’ also comes with a responsibility . . . a burden of immense importance: what we do will affect the lives of those who are dependent on our wisdom or lack thereof

‘affairs of state’ …. I can leave those behind easily . . . but demagogues, whether they be husbands, or head preachers, or those who would be ‘king’ . . . they all want to ‘rule’, and we are not as Christians OR as Americans wanting to be ruled by men who lord it over others with tones of self-importance and with threats and with the engendering of hatred and fearfulness

we have one Lord, and our ‘leaders’ serve instead of rule so I am regretting of any statements here that would be offensive to the Deebs and detract from ‘mission’ and create ‘tit for tat’ responses. But I do see a connection between all spoiled demagogues, this: they cannot operate in this world without hurting others, without victims, without toadies, and without those who will come down hard on the brave people who stand up to these bullies and try to protect and defend innocents from harm

I salute Velour’s bravery. And I DO KNOW that in this world, there is ONLY one ‘enemy’ and he seeks our destruction through his minions who are pride-filled and display out-of-control destructiveness . . . the ancient enemy, yes

“and what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born” (Yeats)

I see ‘connections’ in all destructive demagogues that lead back to the ancient enemy of mankind . I suppose I had drawn a circle too wide when I included the one who now stalks those nuclear codes. I will restrain my comments, but I cannot for the life of us all, make that circle smaller, though I wish I could. My dear God, I wish I could.

Patti wrote:

Last year I went to professional counselor for the first time in my life for PTSD.

PTSD is a familiar foe in my family. So sorry to hear of these incidences that have caused you such trauma. It sounds like you are getting some good help.

TWW is a great resource for those recovering from “Wacky Christianity” as there are far too many stories to be told such as yours.Thanks for having the courage to share.

okrapod wrote:

because there is a tendency to neglect Whomever one does not pray to. People develop favorites.

That’s one way to think of it. We say the lords prayer every week in church, so I don’t feel the father is neglected. I think I grew up praying ‘in jesus name’ which seems to be fairly biblical.

And now I’m sort of reminded of Talladega night! (Dear Lord Baby Jesus, lying there in your…your little ghost manger, lookin’ at your Baby Einstein developmental…videos, learnin’ ’bout shapes and colors…)

Bridget wrote:

“In Session 7, Matt explains that women struggle with disordered desires as a consequence of the fall. These desires are evidenced in a woman’s battle with perfectionism and comparison

Like the Gospel(TM) Gitterali boys have some kinda room to talk.

Besides, would we “girls” be more holy if we ran around in ratty clothes, with no make-up, dirty faces, and bed-head hair?

Bridget wrote:

comparison

Also, comparison has what to do with the fall, exactly???

Velour wrote:

For all of the times that I judged people (harshly) for “not knowing better” and “not going to church”, for being “slackers”, now that I’ve gone through a horrific church experience/spiritual abuse — I now “get it”. I get why people are leery of churches
and church people. Churches can be quite dangerous for adults and children alike.

I don’t think that many of the marriages at my ex-church will survive the Comp teaching, including the younger couples. I think they are nice people, had a fighting chance. But with the Comp nonsense shoved down their throats and hobbling their marriages…I just don’t think that’s possible.

My sister said that she’s glad that my ex-church kicked me out, that she’s glad that I stood my ground with them. She said that she was very worried about the type of person I’d become around them, someone she didn’t like, that friends said same about me. They were all worried about me being in that cult (it’s not a church). She said that she worried that if I stayed there would come a day when I would no longer speak to her again.

Yes exactly. I never expected to end up in this situation – I’ve been a Christian for a long time, I had grown up going to church, I had listened to the pastors and all of the articles who told people they needed to go to church and agreed with them. It never crossed my mind that I would end up in my current more or less churchless state. Now I’m a lot more compassionate towards other people who are Nones or Dones. I understand where they’re coming from a lot better now. I still feel nervous when I step inside a church.

I sometimes wonder too what comp doctrine will do to marriages long term, especially for the people my age who believed it going into their marriages. I worry about it, to be honest. Hopefully most of them are comp in name only.

I’m glad you got out too. And it’s good to hear your sister was so concerned about you. She cared more about you than that “church” ever did. I’m glad for her sake too that you got out of such a toxic environment.

@ Lydia:
This reminds me of our youth group in the late seventies when the wife of a deacon tried to introduce person-centred therapy into our Friday night games night. Sit in a circle, talk about yourself, reveal your innermost thoughts and fears, listen to the criticism of others, break down into tears, receive affirmation and feel better. She did it once and then she was shown the door and we got back to our games. Horrible manipulation and dangerous.

Christiane wrote:

we humans came out from the OT picture of a ‘God of Wrath’.

I not see God as seen in the OT as a ‘God of Wrath’ and I am not really conversant as to where people got that idea. That has not been taught in any church where I have been, nor do I see that Jesus thought that. Nor do I see how we can reasonably say the the God of the OT was a god of wrath, but the god who is revealed in Jesus is not a god of wrath while at the same time saying that it is all the same God and while listening to Jesus say ‘the Father and I are One’.

But I do know that people have thought that and/or seen that in scripture. So I listened, again on youtube, to Amy-Jill Levine who is an Orthodox Jew who teaches both OT and NT at Vanderbilt. She says that the Jews see grace and mercy in the OT. They do not see this picture of God that some Christians seem to see. They had healers also, she says, in discussing Jesus as healer. I see also that there is forgiveness, reconciliation and restoration in the OT. There is preaching to the gentiles in the OT. There is the option of conversion to God in the OT. Does God also get angry and run out of patience from time to time in the OT? He does.

So what about the NT? That also brings up the question as to whether the ‘wrath of God’ is in fact a part of God’s thinking and how that may or may not play into theories of the atonement, but when we ask that question we cross the boundaries of OT and NT on the question of wrath since the crucifixion and resurrection are NT. Why did God demand satisfaction for the sins of man, if that theory of the atonement is valid? Could He not forgive without that? Apparently not. Why did Jesus clearly teach that people can deny and defy God if they choose to, but that they will not enjoy the end results of that, if the God of the NT is all mercy in the absence of justice? Why would Jesus submit to the will of the Father in Gethsemane if there was any other way? How is that any different between the OT and the NT, if God Himself does not change but only that we see further revelation of the same God?

In other words, I do not see this alleged difference between God and God as it were. I do think that God’s revelation of Himself is progressive, but I just do not see the vast differences between the OT God and the NT God that some see. It looks to me like one and only one narrative, of which we are a part.

@ Velour:

I read your review of your old church – wow. I have no words. It sounds truly awful. I’m glad you got out.

There was a chance they might have reacted strongly if I had made it more clear I was leaving. But to be honest, I don’t think I was important enough in their eyes to warrant a reaction like that. That’s another reason why I left – after over two years of involvement, and a year and a half of involvement in the church that often partnered with them (which also had its issues, and which I also left), I still didn’t feel like I belonged. And I was very involved, too – I was on the leadership team for the church’s college ministry, and I attended the extra optional meetings for the the campus ministry. I was also involved with Bible studies/small groups, I went on one of their mission trips, etc. I just never broke into the Inner Ring.

Eventually I got fed up with feeling like an eternal outsider. There shouldn’t even be an Inner Ring – we should all feel welcome where other Christians have gathered. The exclusivity, along with all of the highly concerning doctrine (almost completely Neo-Cal and comp – not sure if any other sides were even presented) and pushy, pyramid scheme-esque evangelism practices made me throw in the towel and leave for good.

Lowlandseer wrote:

@ Lea:
John 14 strongly suggests that the Lord encourages us to pray to Him -“If you ask anything in my name, I will do it. John himself at the end of the book of Revelation prayed “Even so come Lord Jesus” Stephen prayed “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” when he was being martyred. Paul prayed to Jesus after he was blinded on the road to Damascus. Ananias asked the Lord what to do. So there are plenty of reasons to pray to the Lord Jesus, as well as to the Father, and dare I say, to the Holy Spirit as well.

Yes.

siteseer wrote:

My husband and I, after all of our church experiences, have a saying- when it comes to pastors, there is no way you are going to bring up any objection or perspective to them that is new to them or that they are unprepared for. Our experience is that they’ve decided early on what they were going to believe and do and how they would deal with other viewpoints. I think you did the best thing, it’s painful any way you do it but at least you spared yourself some part of it.

I think I was also afraid of that happening. I didn’t want to hear about how comp and other doctrines that make me sick to my stomach are actually right and I’m just resisting God’s good truth if I disagree.

Come to think of it, every now and then the leaders of the campus ministry would address people’s concerns every now and then by bringing the concerns up in front of the whole group and then saying why things were the way they were and why they weren’t going to change.

For example, the way we did evangelism really made a lot of people uncomfortable (myself included). It entailed going up to random strangers on campus, pulling a bait and switch on them so they didn’t realize you were going to talk to them about God, and then whipping out the Four Spiritual Laws (if you made it that far). Attendance would be noticeably lower if people knew it was evangelism night. Critiques of the way the ministry did evangelism were dealt with by basically saying “this is what we believe (that this form of evangelism is necessary), and if you don’t agree, go elsewhere.” When I brought up my concerns in a on-on-one setting, someone basically questioned my obedience to God. Needless to say, I eventually flat out refused to participate.

Lydia wrote:

They give me solutions to problems I did not have and answers to questions I did not ask.

Now that is also a good point, the subjective need or not to ask this or that question. I had a difficult relationship with my father and found it almost impossible to pray to God as Father without having some really negative feelings about God, transferring feelings about my father to the Father. In disciplining myself to do what Jesus said and pray to the Father, (I am not saying this is an exclusive commandment), when I seriously wanted some short cut around that, I was forced to do battle with myself and to my own ultimate advantage to do so. So, yes, the same thing may be an issue for one person and not for another.

And let us not forget that the use of the word Lord can be either in the singular sense like in the Kyrie or in a singular/plural sense as in another word for the Trinity, which I think is what people actually do a lot of the time regardless of whether or not of whether there is some theological approval of that thought.

Serah wrote:

For example, the way we did evangelism really made a lot of people uncomfortable (myself included). It entailed going up to random strangers on campus, pulling a bait and switch on them so they didn’t realize you were going to talk to them about God, and then whipping out the Four Spiritual Laws (if you made it that far). Attendance would be noticeably lower if people knew it was evangelism night. Critiques of the way the ministry did evangelism were dealt with by basically saying “this is what we believe (that this form of evangelism is necessary), and if you don’t agree, go elsewhere.” When I brought up my concerns in a on-on-one setting, someone basically questioned my obedience to God. Needless to say, I eventually flat out refused to participate.

I decided some time ago that anyone who said “This is the only way to do something” either don’t know very much about that topic to begin with, or they have a controlling personality. There are always lots of ways to do something, and different people are going to do well with different methods.

And I think there are a lot of people that pretend like they know a lot, but really haven’t studied the topic very much at all. You’ll find they tend to sound like they are on repeat.

okrapod wrote:

there is a tendency to neglect Whomever one does not pray to

Great point! There is no doubt that New Calvinists put way too much emphasis on “God” at the expense of Jesus. They call themselves Christ-Followers, but don’t talk much about Him.

okrapod wrote:

And let us not forget that the use of the word Lord can be either in the singular sense like in the Kyrie or in a singular/plural sense as in another word for the Trinity, which I think is what people actually do a lot of the time regardless of whether or not of whether there is some theological approval of that thought.

I think I’ve heard prayers done all sorts of ways. I don’t feel any are right or wrong. Maybe it’s like calling someone…you call the person you need to speak to at that moment. You call on the aspect of god you need at that moment, father son or spirit. Or you call on all, using lord. You speak to the lord, in Jesus name. I don’t think any are wrong.

okrapod wrote:

Lydia wrote:

And let us not forget that the use of the word Lord can be either in the singular sense like in the Kyrie or in a singular/plural sense as in another word for the Trinity, which I think is what people actually do a lot of the time regardless of whether or not of whether there is some theological approval of that thought.

This made me think of another situation that is interesting to consider when we are speaking of prayer. Some extended family members were involved in humanitarian aid in Afghanistan shortly after Kabul was secured. During their time there they noticed that it was somewhat acceptable to use the generic “God” word in prayer in certain situations but there would be problems if Jesus Christ were mentioned. Jesus is, however, known in some folk Islam groups there as a good prophet but even that had become problematic when the Taliban took over.

Ironically the problem of prayer became a real one when they were attempting to set up rudimentary clinics for women and children who had been bitten by the sandflies. Not only did they have to bribe the tribal chief or elder but often found themselves in situations where they were invited to participate in prayers as a sort of deal making ritual.

Dee, I find it inexplicable that someone would take the title “Pastor” but not the pastoral duties that go with it. No hospital or home visits for the infirm? This is basic Pastoral Ministry 101. Perhaps it would be better to give those leaders another title, like Chief Preacher. It would be more accurate to do so.

As for covenants, no thanks. Jesus did not say we are to covenant with each other. Rather, he made a way for us to have a lasting covenant directly with God. (The Problem with Church Membership Covenants – bad doctrine hurts God’s people.)

Tim wrote:

like Chief Preacher

Teaching Elder. That’s what they call them in presby land, I think. But they somehow still manage to do hospital visits and funerals…

Christiane wrote:

Velour wrote:
I have taken precautions. I moved.
You have lived through a nightmare. God keep you safe.

Thanks.

Yes, they are truly evil men at that ex-church. They, as you’ve probably read my posts, excommunicated and ordered to be shunned a godly doctor in his 70’s on some trumped up charge. Many people secretly taped that on their phones. And many families and individuals left the church shortly after that.

The senior pastor (manipulatively) told us to “pray for the doctor’s wife”. The doctor’s wife, when I interviewed her, told me a completely different story – of course! She said that she’d always hated the senior pastor, the elders, the church, thought something was terribly wrong with the whole place, thought many of the members were emotionally unhealthy, and she warned her husband that they should not go to this church!

My ex-pastor NEVER told us what the doctor’s wife really thought!

Bridget wrote:

“In Session 7, Matt explains that women struggle with disordered desires as a consequence of the fall. These desires are evidenced in a woman’s battle with perfectionism and comparison.”

Yes, Matt. In Karen Hinckley’s case, it was *her* disordered desire to divorce her pedophile husband. That’s why the ELDERS at The Village wanted to “push her under” their care. Because Karen’s desires are disordered. Seriously, that is the moral logic that these spiritual and moral “leaders” follow.

Problem I have with this “pastor” thing is there seems to be no clear description of one in the entire NT, and the word only shows up once in the singular in the entire NT, Eph 4. So frankly, the office that has been created of general CEO, head teacher, one who visits the elderly and ill and shut ins, one who gets paid and takes a title and does all these things, that position does not exist in the NT. So the whole thing’s a crock, the only thing we can compare “pastor” to is our made up social construct of pastor–but that’s not a NT position. Does. Not. Exist.

Gram3 wrote:

disordered desire

They do not think a man’s desire to rule over his wife is disordered, even though it is actually in the text.

Law Prof wrote:

. So the whole thing’s a crock, the only thing we can compare “pastor” to is our made up social construct of pastor–but that’s not a NT position. Does. Not. Exist.

Totally agree.

Bridget wrote:

Matt Chandler seems to have everything figured out for all the women on earth.

Chandler calls female members of his church “our girls”, noting that they love being subordinated. For an enlightening lesson on “Calvinism and Sexual Complmentarity”, check out John Piper’s interview with Matt Chandler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEpVzHnUw0

Max wrote:

I am not your pastor. I will preach to you only, even though I am not really called to do so, because I don’t love you as I ought.”

Your comment made me think of the parallels with their view of marriage. Maybe someone has already said this 500 comments ago, but ISTM that their view of a husband’s “role” roughly parallels their view of a pastor’s “role.” They give lip service to the servant part of Servant-Leader, but practically speaking, it is all about giving directives which only flow one way. The wife’s “role” is to be a support and help and joy to her husband, and that sounds a lot like the way they see the “role” of the congregation. They do not seem to want a real give-and-take relationship that is mutual in any respect.

Lea wrote:

They do not think a man’s desire to rule over his wife is disordered, even though it is actually in the text.

Yes, but, you see they are only really concerned about what is in the actual text when it supports the grander Narrative. Interpretive methods and citing the actual text is optional as is consistency and any attempt at sound reasoning. It really is all about the Narrative of Authority Structures and Hierarchy.

Tim wrote:

young

Surely you jest. I think I’m about a 3 half-birthdays ahead of you.

Max wrote:

Lydia wrote:
Small groups have become a danger to be aware of and navigate carefully.
It’s clear from comments on this blog, that “LifeGroups” in New Calvinist ranks are a way to indoctrinate church members in reformed theology, as well as keep an eye out for potential dissenters. The “lead pastor” hand-picks small group leaders with these goals in mind. Good Lord … the New Calvinists have even given home Bible studies a bad name!!

Spot on, Max.

My ex-NeoCalvinist *pastor* (with his $299 *Ph.D.* from a Missouri diploma mill as I’ve since discovered) SCREAMED at me for not attending a week night Bible study and what was my excuse? Me, staring him down: “I am at work and commuting. I’m not home in time.”

Max wrote:

Bridget wrote:
Matt Chandler seems to have everything figured out for all the women on earth.
Chandler calls female members of his church “our girls”, noting that they love being subordinated. For an enlightening lesson on “Calvinism and Sexual Complmentarity”, check out John Piper’s interview with Matt Chandler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEpVzHnUw0

And anyone who disagrees with Matt Chandler is what? “A narcissistic zero”. Isn’t that called projection in psychology?

Max wrote:

It’s clear from comments on this blog, that “LifeGroups” in New Calvinist ranks are a way to indoctrinate church members in reformed theology, as well as keep an eye out for potential dissenters. The “lead pastor” hand-picks small group leaders with these goals in mind.

Party Cells, Comrade.

Law Prof wrote:

That is amazing, if that really was their mindset; but it does seem as if there was more hand-wringing and discipline directed at her “disordered desires” than at her husband’s, who’s desires were for sex with children!

But he has a (male organ ed.) (just like Pastor and Elders), so that is that.

Tim wrote:

Dee, I find it inexplicable that someone would take the title “Pastor” but not the pastoral duties that go with it. No hospital or home visits for the infirm? This is basic Pastoral Ministry 101. Perhaps it would be better to give those leaders another title, like Chief Preacher. It would be more accurate to do so.

I go back far enough to remember when Lutheran pastors still wore the cassock on high holy days. One such pastor by the name of Sorensen went on foot across town in a blizzard (the city snowplows could not keep the streets clear) to be with an old saint in her last hours in hospital. Men like Sorensen are the real McCoy, few and far between, in any era past or present.

Tim wrote:

Dee, I find it inexplicable that someone would take the title “Pastor” but not the pastoral duties that go with it. No hospital or home visits for the infirm? This is basic Pastoral Ministry 101. Perhaps it would be better to give those leaders another title, like Chief Preacher. It would be more accurate to do so.

At my former church they accepted someone from the denomination who openly said he wasn’t going to do those pastoral duties, that was even more inexplicable. In two or three years I don’t think he has visited someone dying more than once and meeting with the family before a funeral is delegated to someone else for the heavy lifting. I do not know why they put up with it.

Max wrote:

Law Prof wrote:
the only way He treated the vast majority of them (Pharisees) as He walked among us was with public rebukes
In an authoritarian church which is elder-ruled, there are no congregational meetings allowed which could be a platform for such rebukes. And you only get one shot at standing in church to proclaim:
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness … You serpents, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the sentence of hell?” (Matthew 23).
Was Jesus speaking in love when He said this? Yes. Warnings are the best way to love people who are desperately off-track. It is the sort of tough love needed to challenge the ails of New Calvinism.

True. You get no socially acceptable platform for rebuke of a leader in most churches, because those who give themselves the title “pastor” (whatever it actually means, again, who knows, the NT is largely silent on the point) tend quite often to work in a milieu where the only opportunity for rebuke of any sort is in a closed and private meeting of elders in an inner room of the church to which no one in the church is invited, save that inner circle, and any sort of elder-led rebuke of the pastor is quite often likely to result in disaster for the elder (have personally experienced that one twice as an elder). So for the most part, there’s no hope of doing it without severe repercussions; you’re right, only “one shot”. Jesus always seemed to be taking that one shot, however; same for Paul, Peter, John, James. There’s generally no socially or church institutionally-acceptable means of telling leaders just exactly what they are, especially if they’re an ugly monster in a monstrous system, but Jesus guaranteed us that we’d be persecuted, and the greatest persecution invariably seems to come from the church, and now, just as in His day, the place that calls itself “church” is in large part false.

Law Prof wrote:

There’s generally no socially or church institutionally-acceptable means of telling leaders just exactly what they are, especially if they’re an ugly monster in a monstrous system

Agreed … “Touch not my anointed” is not applicable in such cases, so let the rebuke fly! I don’t sense much, if any, anointing in New Calvinist ranks (their leaders are more annoying, than anointed). As you note “just as in His day, the place that calls itself ‘church’ is in large part false.”

Velour wrote:

Max wrote:
Bridget wrote:
Matt Chandler seems to have everything figured out for all the women on earth.
Chandler calls female members of his church “our girls”, noting that they love being subordinated. For an enlightening lesson on “Calvinism and Sexual Complmentarity”, check out John Piper’s interview with Matt Chandler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEpVzHnUw0
And anyone who disagrees with Matt Chandler is what? “A narcissistic zero”. Isn’t that called projection in psychology?

I tried to watch it, but after about two minutes, I could no longer stand the smugness between the two. Years ago, my former pastor brought in a whole series by Matt Chandler and we endured them complete with worksheets. I remember at the time that something seems so “off” with Matt and I could not pinpoint it. I also remember being bored out of my mind because it was so boring and fluffy.

Law Prof wrote:

waking up wrote:
Velour wrote:
Max wrote:
Bridget wrote:
Matt Chandler seems to have everything figured out for all the women on earth.
Chandler calls female members of his church “our girls”, noting that they love being subordinated. For an enlightening lesson on “Calvinism and Sexual Complmentarity”, check out John Piper’s interview with Matt Chandler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEpVzHnUw0
And anyone who disagrees with Matt Chandler is what? “A narcissistic zero”. Isn’t that called projection in psychology?
I tried to watch it, but after about two minutes, I could no longer stand the smugness between the two.
I don’t watch anything with John Piper anymore, either. Twenty years ago I sat in Bethlehem Baptist and heard him preach, watched him in person at a large public event, and for a time was part of a ministry in Mpls that met once a week at Beth Bap. He seems to be one of the most revoltingly smug individuals I have ever seen or heard in my life, the polar opposite of Christlike.
Would rather share a beer with an atheist in a strip club than spend five seconds in the presence of Mr. Piper.
Have never seen anything with Matt Chandler. I can read his words, read about his actions, that’s enough.

In the video linked above, you can watch them both and it is sort of comical because I think Chandler is trying to outsmug Piper. I actually have no idea what point he is trying to make, and I don’t think he does either, but hey, he’s smug!

Law Prof wrote:

Would rather share a beer with an atheist in a strip club than spend five seconds in the presence of Mr. Piper.

Laugh of the day!

waking up wrote:

I tried to watch it, but after about two minutes,

I fast-forwarded to the comp part – couldn’t listen to it all. But, MC is saying that he only teaches/preaches to the men. And “our girls” love it? Oh yeah, I’ll beat down the doors every Sunday morning to listen to someone tell me that it was God’s original intent for women to be the bottom of the food chain and we don’t matter, never did!

Law Prof wrote:

Would rather share a beer with an atheist in a strip club than spend five seconds in the presence of Mr. Piper.

Well, if you decide to do that, you may bump into New Calvinists there! Some of them have no problem abusing Christian liberty to stretch moral boundaries.

@ Lea:

I think the girl actually chucked whatever we were supposed to do that particular week.

Gram3 wrote:

That was Ware’s line at Denton Bible Church. If a guy is passive or aggressive, then it is his wife’s fault because she is not being sufficiently submissive.

When they put up that false dichotomy of reaction…do they really not think there is any middle ground or do they just think the only other option is ‘woman shuts up and does whatever a man tells her’?

Gram3 wrote:

Bridget wrote:
“In Session 4, we see how man’s struggle with sin manifests itself in two ways: selfish passivity and selfish aggression.” Matt Chandler
That was Ware’s line at Denton Bible Church. If a guy is passive or aggressive, then it is his wife’s fault because she is not being sufficiently submissive.
Seems to me a reasonable person cannot argue that this kind of thinking is at the core of their theology because more than one of the Glitterati teach it as a core principle.

In my opinion, Bruce Ware should have been in extremely good psychotherapy years ago to deal with his anger toward women.

Bruce Ware prides himself on the fact that women are ‘derivative images’ and not made in the ‘image of God’. Bruce Ware’s mother is a derivative image of God, who carried Bruce Ware who was ‘born in the image of God’ unlike his own mother, and raised him. And something must have happened in the Ware Family for him to be this angry. A normal mother with a spine would have NEVER stood for an ingrate, sass-filled son like Bruce Ware.

John Piper also seems to have problems with women and men, going back to his own parents. Apparently his father was a pastor who was gone a lot on the road.

So I went back and watched more of the video. MC really is incoherent discussing his love affair with Calvanism. I found that it was better if I just put the video on CC and read the subtitles (some were pretty awesome) and then watched his hands doing all those gestures. I kept thinking maybe he had worked as a magician at one time with all of those hand motions, and I expected like a bouquet of plastic flowers to appear. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEpVzHnUw0

Nancy2 wrote:

And “our girls” love it?

There was a time when they would have said “our Negroes” with the same aplomb.

Last one. Finally, there is a cure for “Hyper Calvinism” http://babylonbee.com/news/fda-approves-ritalin-treat-hyper-calvinism/

Gram3 wrote:

Lea wrote:
When they put up that false dichotomy of reaction
False dichotomies are what they do. Biblical Womanhood or….Feminism. Do What We Say or….Rebellious.
I think it would be fun to take a highlighter set and do a markup on RBMW with each logical fallacy or eisegetical statement having its own color.

Wow, that would be worthy of an article for The Wartburg Watch. You should email Deb, since Dee is busy with her extremely fragile, sick mother-in-law.

I’d love to see such an article and I’m sure others would too.

Gram,

I should have used both terms sacrament and ordinance, as you are correct many Baptists or typical memorial view people don’t like to use the term sacrament for what is implied about beliefs surrounding Eucharist, etc from the word meaning itself. I qualify it as, and was thinking in my head and didn’t make clear enough, of simply having a low view of what God has already provided for us to sustain our communities regardless of which views you hold to. Nothing to do with memorial to trans, etc. So simply, I think church contracts are man attempted (thus a sign of control) as trying to replace or minimize the good means God has already provided to help us in our communities. From sacraments – oridinances to the Holy Spirit and priesthood of all believers and qualifications for character in leaders in the community, and so on in other provisions. In short, we don’t need to sign papers because we already sign with our baptism, etc. (And I think that can be true regardless of your view of baptism, pedo or credo, salvific in itself or a representation of salvation, etc. etc.) Hopefully that makes more sense.

That was confusing of me, also because there is the use of the neutral descriptions (though people can use it in a condescending or derogatory way) of low church and high church to simply describe how a church service functions in their execution of liturgy, doctrine, and such. Where typically, for example, Catholic = high church, typical non-denominational or Baptist churches – low church environment.

Lydia,

I’m using my real name here because 1) I am talking in generalities and not sharing anything too personal, and 2) if I just used my first name or whatever people from the SBC might think it’s me anyways (no idea if anyone I know reads here) if they have had contact with me and already know my thoughts! haha. I am also at a stage in studies and personal processing where I am moving to talk more publicly about things to add to the conversation, not necessarily just publicly dialoging about “problems” in the church but in general theology and such.

I get vague nervousness with some creepy or controlling men I have encountered in the SBC (not any SEBTS professors to be clear so no one infers something) or general circles in other like-minded movements who don’t do well with women speaking about anything on these kind of topics. Being a woman in real life is awkward enough…it’s a special kind of weird online. Also, this coupled with the general anxiety vibe in the SBC and other movements mentioned here – a social norm we all adhere to subconsciously or consciously – that you cannot just say what you are thinking and processing about a certain issue especially if you have reservations or disagreement, without fear of social consequence. This points to a larger sociological problem, and in the Baptist context, is specially anti-Baptist! I hope this changes and people can have more freeing, open, and encouraging discussions surround the church and theology, even with disagreement. This is sadly often not the case for many different reasons.

I am talking about general theological discussion here and how this pertains to me personally in my specific context. I understand and think it wise why most people have to post anonymously online with these things, as it also further allows for people to share more personal things and help with the process and healing.

@ Emily Honeycutt:

In my denom we have high church and low church and in between there is broad church. It has been said: low and lazy, broad and hazy, high and crazy.

@ Emily Honeycutt:
Well, I still think it brave. I had early run ins from blogging that even targeted my children. I am under No Illusion about what and who I am dealing with. My family suffered enough.

I tried the path of discussion and unity in disagreement and found they only use it for ammunition and control. It’s one of those situations that unless you’ve been around the upper levels and seen it first-hand most people are not likely to believe it. It’s a lonely place.

Thankfully social media has changed a lot of that and people are starting to see the patterns of behavior don’t match words– if they connect the dots long enough and are willing to question their favored institutions and gurus.

I sure wish you Godspeed in your endeavors.

CHIPS wrote:

I would prefer people to pay to Jesus instead of to God.

the problem is this:
that if you are praying ‘to Jesus’, you are praying to the visible image of the Father, so you cannot avoid praying ‘to God’

same with praying to the Holy Spirit, who is like the invisibl

CHIPS wrote:

I would prefer people to pay to Jesus instead of to God.

I respect, and understand, whomever the person leading a prayer is praying to: God, Lord, Father, Jesus, Abba, and a variety of names that are found in the Bible.

@ CHIPS:

I think that is correct about the muslim thing. But in my original comment I did not say ‘God’, I said the ‘Father’. And I quoted Jesus. Christiane is correct that praying to any Person in the Trinity is praying to ‘God’. The words here are specific. Jesus did not say ‘pray to God’ when he discussed the issue in the passage I cited. Neither did He forbid people from praying to Himself or the Spirit, but He made sure we knew about praying to the Father. But nowhere do I see the generic term God used to represent a singular unique person in this context. Now can we say ‘God’ and/or say ‘Lord’ and mean the Trinity? Yes, we can, or at least we certainly do. But can we eliminate praying to the Father as the Jesus Only Pentecostals do? No, not and be true to scripture. And can we baptize only in the Name of Jesus? No. I dare say on this Christiane and I agree.

The issue of whether the god of the muslims is the same god as the god of the christians has been discussed here. The issue of whether the god of the jews and the god of the christians is the same god has not been the subject of conversation since I have been here. But before it is all over with the current political situation in the world we will as persons have to think a lot about those two issues.

Lydia wrote:

@
You are right. It took me a while to catch on to the concept of what they were doing at mega churches. They were actually conflating Jesus Christ with the church. Those are one and the same in that world.

Perfectly stated Lydia! They conflate Jesus with their 501(c)3 then sell it as one in the same.

For the last 18 months, Gateway Church, which exports their teaching all over the globe, has started attacking other faiths and doctrines that do not embrace their TBN-style Pentecostalism, Word of Faith and Prosperity Gospel teachings. They refer to those who do not embrace Benny Hinn style theology as outdated, wrong theology, bad doctrine, false teaching and just plain “crazy”.
.
This past year Gateway ran three lengthy sermon series for their junior/senior high students that were focused solely on Pentecostalism and making the children believe they have the identical powers as the original 12 apostles. They can basically possess “super powers” by tapping into the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit. “Super Heroes” was also this year’s theme for Gateway VBS for ages 6-11. This type of teaching is dominating their children’s curriculum.
.
Gateway undermines prior teaching by telling the children to forget what their parents, teachers or old pastors have previously taught them because that is old-fashioned “second hand” or “vicarious” faith/religion. The kids need to stand under the confetti cannons with the 86 decibel music blaring, the fog machines swirling bright red (slightly sinister looking)fog while rave dancing and rely on that personal “experience” or “encounter” to replace/become their new faith/religion.
.
Gateway just finished their Student Conference last week where 4,200 students and 500 leaders came from 25 different states to embrace this indoctrination. Next year their conference is going to be a three day long Benny Hinn style miracle crusade. For those who understand the psychology of how those crusades work, it turns out there are few to almost zero documented miracles that actually take place. But several thousand students will be there believing that God doled out miracles to hundreds of other children while not heeding or responding to their desperate pleas for help. I have seen the disenfranchisement from God that this can create. These kids are 11-18 years old. They have no clue that the other kids are experiencing group think/hysterical responses that do not provide lasting results nor are miracle cure-alls. In the end, all they see is a God who helped hundreds of others yet abandoned them. We need to pray for these children.
.
Gateway said their goal is to create an “Army” out of these thousands of students, who will then go forth and promote these teachings at their colleges and work places, which includes demeaning any other belief system that is not like their own. It is a form of zeal and fascism (you accept “our” brand of Christianity otherwise you are part of a “dead” church) that is not backed up by research, the Bible, basic critical thinking, tolerance, discernment or understanding. How many young people were able to figure out that the Reset 2016/Together 2016 million young person march on Washington DC was really just a big commercial for Nick Hall’s book/career and the promotion of Toronto Blessing based Pentecostalism? Not many. Yet hundreds of thousands showed up and they now think this concert and flag-waving, merch selling venue is “authentic” Christianity. How does this Teen Mania, miracle doling god hold up during times of extended pain and suffering? It’s a house of cards.

Christiane wrote:

The more I read into the faith of those whose trinitarian concepts are different from my own, the more I notice the ‘separation’ of Jesus Christ from ‘God’ in their language;
and I always thought ‘they mean THE FATHER when they say God’; but maybe I’m wrong

Well, see if this rings a bell. When I grew up SBC I never heard the words ‘Holy Spirit’ (Holy Ghost at the time) except when in use as the trinitarian baptismal formula. Never. I don’t think that we had a different trinitarian theology, but we certainly had a different emphasis. The first time I even heard the term ‘Holy Spirit’ was at an interdenominational revival and then I heard it from another child at the water fountain. True story. I knew all about Santa and sex before I knew about the Spirit in spite of the fact that we were in church at least twice on Sunday and again on Wednesday night.

Time passed. There came to be an emphasis on Jesus more than, or almost to the exclusion of the Father or the Spirit. This was in the ‘Jesus is my buddy’ period. Jesus in all that was not so much a Divine Person of the Trinity but pretty much a really nice guy who really loved you just as you were and who basically made few if any demands on you in any way. He in fact loved you so much the way you were that He let you stay the way you were. Nobody postulated any non-trinitarian theology. It was the application of things that changed.

Time passed. Both the charismatic movement and the Conservative Resurgence appeared on the horizon. Suddenly the Spirit on the one hand and the bible on the other hand was all you ever heard as though both the Spirit (for the charismatics) and the bible (for the evangelicals) eclipsed the Father and the Son, and the Son was some guy who died for our sins, however that worked, and the Father was somebody in the OT who made Jesus do that, kind of-though that was never said outright. Nobody actually varied from Trinitarian theology, but the emphasis shifts and the understandings wax and wane.

Time passed. Now we have the neo-cals and the great exodus from SBC and apparently from everywhere, though denominational preference come and go.

Perhaps it has not been as bad as I have thought it to be. Let us hope.

okrapod wrote:

Nobody actually varied from Trinitarian theology, but the emphasis shifts and the understandings wax and wane.

Time passed. Now we have the neo-cals and the great exodus from SBC and apparently from everywhere, though denominational preference come and go.

Perhaps it has not been as bad as I have thought it to be. Let us hope.

Yes, I see. Thank you for this. ’emphasis’ instead of ‘difference’ . . . that seems a wise point of view and it makes sense here

@ CHIPS:

“When a multi-million walks in, he feels loved and he no longer needs to chase after the wind. And he finally find people that is not after his money…”
++++++++++++++++++

ha…. (a humorless ha). this is the one thing all churches i observe are after — money.

even the best of churches, with great human beings as leaders and staff.

a church’s entire gameplan pivots on what will bring in money. what will bring people to the building on a regular basis, what will cause people to associate in the church’s groups. there is evidence that ‘small groups’ increase tithing potential.

the stakes are simply too high not to.
*leaders have to justify seminary costs & sacrifices (money, effort, time, nuissane factor). to themselves and to their families.

*leaders have careers to sustain, for the sake of the investment they’ve already put into them, as well as their financial needs and wants for present and future.

*the standard (& peer pressure inducing) is this CEO model, where size does matter & which commands bigger and yet bigger salaries.

*drawing and retaining giving units is expensive (nice facility, landscaping, carpet, paint, utilities, janitorial, interior decor, the feeling of belonging to a fun and organized people group)

either a church leader will favor the multi-millionaire, or they will despise their own inclination to favor the multi-millionaire and subconciously disfavor & distance them (because the church leader’s purpose and viability pivots on money — it just does).

elastigirl wrote:

‘if anyone’s listening’

I think think God must be moved by this kind of humility . . . a child-like asking, in the darkness . . .

for such a person, there will come an answer

elastigirl wrote:

@ elastigirl:

i truly believe my muslim friend connects with the same God i do. she is every bit the spiritual reservoir as the best christian people i’ve known. despite differences in practice (which i see as minor) and specificity of doctrines, she is a living tree of fruit of the holy spirit.

i understand many will strongly disagree with the implications of my thoughts here.

I accept your witness . . . the Holy Spirit goes where He wills to go and cannot be confined or restrained or limited by our frail human understanding

LT wrote:

Gateway undermines prior teaching by telling the children to forget what their parents, teachers or old pastors have previously taught them because that is old-fashioned “second hand” or “vicarious” faith/religion.

The same attack route the Jihadis use to radicalize young Muslims.

After which, they present their On-Fire version of Islam — the Talibani/Boko Haram/Daesh Islam — as Real True Islam, As It Was In The Days of The Prophet.

Jihad radicalization/recruitment — the Islamic counterpart of Teen Mania.

Christiane wrote:

I don’t think ‘dominie’ is too ‘snarky’, no . . . they would probably LOVE it . . . ‘master’ sounds about right for what these mega boys have been acting out in their high places well above their sick, their dying, and their dead sheep. ‘Dominie’ ….. yep, it’s about right

How about “Domine” — Latin for “LORD”?

Becky Hill wrote:

one who visits the . . . ill

I’m not sure if this makes a difference among people who don’t see Our Lord as ‘the Good Shepherd’, but there is this:

“Is any among you sick?
Let him call for the elders of the church;
and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil
in the name of the Lord ” (Book of St. James 5:14)

I would say that Our Lord Himself gave us a model for those who would follow Him in pastoral care for those in need of Christ.
I think that is one of the great teachings of the NT.

Emily Honeycutt wrote:

So simply, I think church contracts are man attempted (thus a sign of control) as trying to replace or minimize the good means God has already provided to help us in our communities. From sacraments – oridinances to the Holy Spirit and priesthood of all believers and qualifications for character in leaders in the community, and so on in other provisions.

Thanks for that clarification. I agree that these are poor substitutes for what the Holy Spirit has already provided and continues to provide.

LT wrote:

Super Heroes” was also this year’s theme for Gateway VBS for ages 6-11. This type of teaching is dominating their children’s curriculum.

This is so weird! I have never been involved in any charismatic or Pentecostal type mega church but a constant for the kids in some megas was the theme, ‘Jesus as their superhero’. It is ridiculous. Such a skewed view of our Lord being taught so young.