Just How ‘Healthy’ Is the 9Marks Organization?

"Your church is not a project to be fixed.  It is a people to be loved."

Jonathan Leeman

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=4031&picture=holy-bible

Holy Bible

If you are a Christian who hasn't yet heard of 9Marks, chances are you will.  This organization, initially called the Center for Church Reform, is based out of Capitol Hill Baptist Church (CHBC) in Washington D.C., where Mark Dever serves as Senior Pastor.  It began in November 1998 (according to a Ligonier Ministries interview with Mark Dever), and its foundational document is what was initially a self-published booklet by Dever called Nine Marks of a Healthy Church.  The Nine Marks have been expanded into a lengthy book published by Crossway

As the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement has been gaining momentum over the past decade, Nine Marks has been gradually expanding its influence.  The 9Marks website serves as a hub of information, featuring articles, a church directory, and other resources and information.  In addition to the boatload of books it has to offer, there is a multitude of events hosted by Dever and gang.  There are three Weekender events each year at CHBC, the 9Marks at 9 gathering during the Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting, the Together for the Gospel (T4G) Pre-Conference, 9Marks Workshops in cities such as Knoxville, Lynchburg, and Pittsburgh, not to mention 9Marks events in exotic places such as Hawaii, Barcelona, and Dubai, and annual 9Marks events at various Southern Baptist seminaries and a Christian university.

This past weekend (September 30-October 1), Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (SEBTS) hosted its 8th annual 9Marks event.  The first 9Marks event at Southeastern took place in the fall of 2009, and the theme was God Exposed.  We will always remember the launch of that particular SEBTS event because Mark Dever brought his BFF C.J. Mahaney, who delivered a message on "Expository Faithfulness", which you can access over at The Gospel Coalition website.

This year I was able to listen to much of the event because it was live streamed via the 9Marks Facebook page.  I actually enjoyed some of the speakers, who talked an awful lot about humility and repentance.  Believe it or not, Trip Lee, a Christian hip-hop artist and rapper, was one of my favorite speakers.  Why?  Because he hammered pastors who come into a church and try to take over.  Throughout his talk, he stepped on quite a few Calvinista toes. As a case in point, here is one of Lee's remarks, which was featured on the 9Marks Facebook page (see screen shot below).

https://www.facebook.com/9Marks/photos/a.97994926202.120416.85544241202/10154439401611203/?type=3&theater

Some of the panel discussions were interesting.  During one of these discussions, Jonathan Leeman polled panelists on matters such as:  whether a pastor should do an altar call, how young is too young to baptize someone, and how do you handle a church that has the American flag and Christian flag on full display, among a range of other topics.  The third one surprised me.  Yesterday morning I noticed that my church displays both flags, and I was pleased that they were featured prominently at the front of the church.  I was grateful that not all panelists agreed on these topics; however, it goes to show the degree to which 9Marks is attempting to influence the way church is done.

Just as I was becoming hopeful that the 9Marks gang was finally realizing the error of their ways and toning down their authoritarian approach to ministry (with a heavy emphasis on church discipline), I noticed a barrage of new articles published on September 30th (the first day of the 9Marks event at SEBTS).  Check out the screen shots of some of these articles below.

https://9marks.org/ (10/2/16)

https://9marks.org/ (10/2/16)These articles and more are featured in the latest 9Marks Journal (see screen shot below).  To access all twenty-one of the "authoritah" articles click here.

https://9marks.org/journal/If there's one thing we can agree on, it's that authority can be dangerous, especially when a 9Marxist is in charge.  And speaking of the descriptor "9Marxist", you will recall that Jonathan Leeman recently wrote an article called "Don't Be a 9Marxist" (which is included among the 21 articles in the 9Marks Journal).  He garnered over 30 comments in response and in the blink of an eye they disappeared! 

Out of sight, out of mind?  Not so fast…  You may recall that we recently featured one of Todd Wilhelm's posts on this very subject.  He and Janna Chan were able to retrieve the long lost comments using the wonders of technology, and voilá!

Jonathan Leeman: Parsing Words and Deleting Comments

Perhaps the most recent development over on the 9Marks website is that they are NO LONGER ALLOWING COMMENTS on regular articles; however, they are continuing to permit comments in response to Mailbag questions. 

In the long run, we believe 9Marks will regret that decision.  The comments section is a great way for believers to wrestle through tough issues.  Such dialogue, if mediated well, will allow truth to rise to the surface.  If what 9Marks teaches is true, we would think that 9Marks would jump at the opportunity to mediate a robust comments section to let that truth shine forth.  Shutting down the comments section gives the impression that 9Marks is either unable or unwilling to address concerns, disagreements, and misunderstandings.  We're hoping that the decision will eventually be reversed.  It will make for a much more interesting site.  And it would help 9Marks to maintain a crisp message. 

This disturbing lack of communication, coupled with a whopping 21 articles on authority, is deeply troubling. 

Not only has 9Marks removed ALL comments on previous posts and disallowed any future comments, but they deleted a controversial post that received well-deserved criticism via the comment section.  After quite a few months, the article was reposted with no commentary explaining that they had done so.  More on that in an upcoming post…

Given these manipulative actions, we are left wondering…

Just how 'healthy' is the 9Marks organization and what are Mark Dever, Jonathan Leeman and gang afraid of?

Comments

Just How ‘Healthy’ Is the 9Marks Organization? — 278 Comments

  1. Excellent article, Deb.

    And who knew, as someone else commented, that 9 Marks read Amazon book reviews and that Jonathan Leeman would devote an article to my 1-star review of Mark Dever’s 9 Marks of A[n] [un] Healthy Church.

    Thanks to Todd Wilhelm for covering my story all of the way over in United Arab Emirates.
    And to Dee and Deb at The Wartburg Watch for republishing it.

    And thanks to all of those great comments that folks here made over on the 9 Marks website. It’s too bad that 9 Marks is scrubbing the internet.

  2. It looks like the articles are all from the same journal rather than just “a barrage of new articles.” Doesn’t the journal usually follow a particular theme?

  3. John wrote:

    It looks like the articles are all from the same journal rather than just “a barrage of new articles.”   Doesn’t the journal usually follow a particular theme?

    Since they were all posted on the 9Marks website at the same time, it appeared to be ‘a barrage of articles’ to me. I didn’t know about the latest issue of the 9Marks journal til this morning.

  4. talked an awful lot about humility

    I wish they would just ditch the fashionable stubble and all the talk about humility and start practicing it instead.

  5. Is the YRR movement still growing? I remember how they were on the rise in early to mid 2000s. Are they still on that pace? Plateaud? Starting to decline? (Is the Mars Hill implosion indicative of the movement?). I no longer hang around folks who would be into YRR stuff so I can’t get a feel for it that way.

  6. What are they afraid of? Sounds to me as if they fear the erosion of their “god given” authority over others.

    How to have a church full of happy complementarians. Reading that title made me shudder.

    So, we can extrapolate just from the subject of that particular article, that a significant part of those “others” they are afraid of losing their authority over happen to be roughly half the population.

  7. @ refugee:
    From the screenshot:
    ā€œItā€™s time for the church to create space in its local assemblies for strong females who happily affirm authority while advocating for more opportunities for women to flourish according to their gifts and qualifications.ā€

    The images that come to mind…
    Mary Kassian, anyone?

    “Strong women who happily affirm authority” — reminds me of the Judas goat, that leads the others to slaughter.

    “Advocating for more opportunities for women to flourish according to their gifts and qualifications”
    Yes. Just so long as their gift is not speaking and teaching, and their qualification is not a degree from a seminary, for starters.

    I am reminded of our former church, where I heard leaders talking wistfully, in the way of people who have a vision for something better, about how they wished the people of our church would rise up and create new artwork, new music, new… stuff (writing?) to honoring the Lord and prove to the world that living a god-honoring life was the key to fruitfulness, fulfillment, and satisfaction.

    Unfortunately, somehow the rules grew more and more restraining, people were more and more constrained within their elder-defined “roles” and it felt like at the end, when we left, all that was left were these narrow definitions of what you were allowed to do, depending on who you were (both gender and perceived status – those with the best “appearance” of having it all together had the highest status, IIRC).

    In our experience, authority squelches. It kills. It breaks the bruised reed and quenches the smoldering flax.

    I’m sure the 9Marks people would be happy to assure us that properly applied authority brings life and that abundantly.

  8. It seems like their articles are getting weirder and weirder…
    “Authority, God’s good and dangerous gift”
    I mean, is that creepy or what?

    When did God give this “gift”? When he was washing the disciples feet? when he said many who are first will be last? When he granted the sons of Zebedee to sit on his right and left hand? oh, wait! he didn’t grant their mother’s request, instead he said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

    Spiritual authority may seem good to those who want to wield it, but it’s dangerous, both to them and to those they are meant to serve.

  9. “It’s time for the church to create space in its local assemblies for strong females who happily affirm authority while advocating for more opportunities for women to flourish according to their gifts and qualification.”

    This seems like an exercise in talking out of both sides of the mouth.
    A little cognitive dissonance, anyone?

  10. Bill M wrote:

    talked an awful lot about humility

    I wish they would just ditch the fashionable stubble and all the talk about humility and start practicing it instead.

    Do they know how? Do they know what living in imitation of Christ is? I’m not sure they know.

  11. Well, obviously the first mark of a healthy church is that it must have a healthy Jesus.

    As we all know, shortly ater the medieval Reformation Jesus was divided into many separate bodies. (This is why it became necessary for godly men, with a real passion to burn alive those who disagreed with them, to define “a church”.) Now, by God’s grace, there are thousands of Jesuses all over the world. Any godly man with a real heart to serve the gospel, a real passion to see souls transformed by the power of the gospel, and a real desire to see the gospel spread can go somewhere with lots of rich people and plant a new Jesus.

    So before you either plant a new Jesus, or choose a new Jesus to serve, you need to make sure of who’s in control of this Jesus and who is casting and driving forward its vision. Otherwise the devil will get you, and it’ll serve you right.

    That is why authority is so important.

  12. Nothing makes me angrier than deception and brain gaming. And that is all 9 Marx is arrempting to do now in order to survive all the pushback. It helps to take a Birdseye view of their confusing messages which is basically, we are to be good authorities who are not authoritarian. The problem is, they were conceived for authoritarian rule and it’s all they know.

    They want to say the right words and hope we don’t notice the praxis.

  13. Lydia wrote:

    Nothing makes me angrier than deception and brain gaming. And that is all 9 Marx is arrempting to do now in order to survive all the pushback. It helps to take a Birdseye view of their confusing messages which is basically, we are to be good authorities who are not authoritarian. The problem is, they were conceived for authoritarian rule and itā€™s all they know.
    They want to say the right words and hope we donā€™t notice the praxis.

    +100

  14. Deb wrote:

    One upcoming event I failed to mention is 9Marksā€™ ā€˜Revitalization Conferenceā€, which they are doing with the North American Mission Board.

    https://9marks.org/event/2016/11/9m-namb2016/?utm_source=9Mhome-nutsandbolts&utm_medium=9Mhome-nutsandbolts&utm_campaign=9Mhome-nutsandbolts

    Is anyone surprised? 9Marks believes it has all the answers for the revitalization of Southern Baptist churches.

    IMO they will just speed up the demise of the Southern Baptist Convention. It is truly sad what is happening to this once great organization.

  15. A 9 Marks title from the above article:
    “Is it self serving to teach on your own authority?”

    In a word, yes.

    In three words, without a doubt.

    In more words…

    How delusional do you 9 Marxist want to be? How far do you want to separate yourselves from the Words of Jesus Christ? How much do you want to mangle and twist the words of Paul for your own benefit and to the detriment of others?

    And the bigger questions? How long do you think God is going to allow you to steal His Kingdom away from Him by force and stealth? How long do you think God will watch you steal His church, shear His sheep, and boil & eat His ewes and lambs for supper before He steps in and gets sovereign all over you?

    You boys really don’t understand what you are toying with. You really don’t get that you are rushing in where angels fear to tread by propping yourselves up and teaching on your own authority. You really don’t get the gravity of the situation. Because it appears that you are boys who bully and toy, not men who understand and tremble at His holiness.

  16. refugee wrote:

    @ refugee:
    From the screenshot:
    ā€œItā€™s time for the church to create space in its local assemblies for strong females who happily affirm authority while advocating for more opportunities for women to flourish according to their gifts and qualifications.ā€

    Geesh, I missed the part in the gospels where Jesus said that. (Of course, Jesus really isn’t their Messiah…)

  17. Knowing that 9 Marks had recently held an event locally, I was anxious to see Fort Worth listed alongside “Hawaii, Barcelona, and Dubai” as one of the exotic places, but alas, it was relegated to being referenced with “annual 9Marks events at various Southern Baptist seminaries”. Surely there is room for Cowtown to be both exotic and the home to SWBTS?

    Thanks for the update on the latest from 9 Marks. I wonder if they gave any forethought to the name before committing it to permanence. What happens when another tablet, I mean mark, is discovered?

  18. Deb

    I loved this comment you made.

    “If what 9Marks teaches is true, we would think that 9Marks would jump at the opportunity to mediate a robust comments section to let that truth shine forth.”

    The problem for them is that the truth is not a bunch of *Amen, bro.* That is difficult for them to swallow. They know they are right.

  19. FW Rez wrote:

    Surely there is room for Cowtown to be both exotic and the home to SWBTS?

    I think the Stockyards are pretty darned exotic!

  20. @ John:

    What is interesting is that they posted them front and center on the 9Marks site. I read over there 3 times a week, and this is rather overwhelming.

  21. refugee wrote:

    I am reminded of our former church, where I heard leaders talking wistfully, in the way of people who have a vision for something better, about how they wished the people of our church would rise up and create new artwork, new music, newā€¦ stuff (writing?) to honoring the Lord and prove to the world that living a god-honoring life was the key to fruitfulness, fulfillment, and satisfaction.

    Unfortunately, somehow the rules grew more and more restraining, people were more and more constrained within their elder-defined ā€œrolesā€ and it felt like at the end, when we left, all that was left were these narrow definitions of what you were allowed to do, depending on who you were (both gender and perceived status ā€“ those with the best ā€œappearanceā€ of having it all together had the highest status, IIRC).

    Sounds like a form of fundamentalism. Both them and the Truly Reformed within the confessional Presbyterian and reformed world have never been known for producing great art. The great artists of all types have been Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran. The YRR have…LeCrae and Shai Linne? Not that I’m slamming those guys, I’m just saying that rap is not among the fine arts, assuming that’s what these leaders had in mind. If they were thinking of popular arts, that’s the only type of art either promoted in or coming from their form of Christianity that I know of, unless they’re all secretly into Thomas Kinkade.

  22. Mara wrote:

    How delusional do you 9 Marxist want to be? How far do you want to separate yourselves from the Words of Jesus Christ? How much do you want to mangle and twist the words of Paul for your own benefit and to the detriment of others?

    And the bigger questions? How long do you think God is going to allow you to steal His Kingdom away from Him by force and stealth? How long do you think God will watch you steal His church, shear His sheep, and boil & eat His ewes and lambs for supper before He steps in and gets sovereign all over you?

    You boys really don’t understand what you are toying with. You really don’t get that you are rushing in where angels fear to tread by propping yourselves up and teaching on your own authority. You really don’t get the gravity of the situation. Because it appears that you are boys who bully and toy, not men who understand and tremble at His holiness.

    Powerful words, Mara!

    My husband likes to say: “A word to the wise is sufficient. Fools have to be convinced.”

    When the 9Marks pyramid finally collapses under the weight of its own 'authoritah', at least they can’t say we didn’t warn them…

  23. Deb wrote:

    My husband likes to say: “A word to the wise is sufficient. Fools have to be convinced.”

    I like that. If they were truly 'wise' they would have gone back to the drawing board the minute they saw the need for 'don't be a nine marxist' videos and articles…

  24. dee wrote:

    The problem for them is that the truth is not a bunch of *Amen, bro.* That is difficult for them to swallow. They know they are right.

    But fear that they are wrong in the day-to-day application of their authority, as they usurp God’s authority. They are so involved in the OT approach to religion, and in twisting the meaning of the life of Jesus, that they cannot see that Jesus taught that what they do is AGAINST THE EXPLICIT TEACHING OF JESUS!

  25. “This organization, initially called the Center for Church Reform …”

    Which of course really meant Center for Church ‘Calvinization’, since Dever’s ministry is linked at the hip with Together for the Gospel – which is code for Together for ‘Calvinism’.

  26. An attorney wrote:

    But fear that they are wrong in the day-to-day application of their authority, as they usurp Godā€™s authority. They are so involved in the OT approach to religion, and in twisting the meaning of the life of Jesus, that they cannot see that Jesus taught that what they do is AGAINST THE EXPLICIT TEACHING OF JESUS!

    I don’t even think the OT recommends the level of authority that these groups take. I don’t see any biblical justification for their authority structure. That kind of structure comes from cults and cultural institutions.

    They pretty much have to ignore large swaths of the Bible to support their positions, and take half verses out of context to have even a little biblical support. The Bible isn’t their authority, and it definitely isn’t Jesus. Their authority comes from themselves alone.

  27. It’s worth noting that you could comment on Tim Challies blog some years ago. I believe it was people pointing out the shortcomings in his complementarian arguments that caused him to stop having comments.

    9 Marks has just done the same.

    This is typical behaviour in the reformed world. They simply can’t cope with being challenged, and their response is to silence dissenting views.

    And the irony is that 9 Marks did this just after publishing the “Don’t be a 9 Marxist” article !

  28. “… 9Marks is attempting to influence the way church is done.”

    And SBC seminaries are lining up to help them do it! They are depending on a YRR army educated by Calvinisitic SBC seminary professors teamed with other non-SBC ‘ministries’ like Acts 29, SGM, T4G, etc. to accomplish their mission … to change the way SBC has been doing church at 45,000 churches across America for over 150 years as non-Calvinists in belief and practice. I have heard young New Calvinists actually refer to folks like Dever, Mahaney, Piper, etc. as “influencers.” The only ‘influence’ these preacher-boys should need for ministry is Jesus, but they are not turning to Him for direction – choosing, instead, mere men to chart their course.

  29. refugee wrote:

    Iā€™m sure the 9Marks people would be happy to assure us that properly applied authority brings life and that abundantly.

    It does for the Highborn on top holding the whip.

  30. refugee wrote:

    I am reminded of our former church, where I heard leaders talking wistfully, in the way of people who have a vision for something better, about how they wished the people of our church would rise up and create new artwork, new music, newā€¦ stuff (writing?) to honoring the Lord and prove to the world that living a god-honoring life was the key to fruitfulness, fulfillment, and satisfaction.

    That hits upon a subject I have a stake in.

    http://alanloewen.blogspot.com/2016/09/guest-editorial-why-is-christian.html

  31. “This disturbing lack of communication, coupled with a whopping 21 articles on authority, is deeply troubling … Just how ‘healthy’ is the 9Marks organization and what are Mark Dever, Jonathan Leeman and gang afraid of?”

    History is cluttered with organizations that, when threatened with losing their authoritarian grip, intensified their authoritarian rule. Before the fall of great empires, supreme authorities became more demanding and more oppressive to keep their subjects under control. New Calvinism has gained ground in recent years because of its promotion of authoritarian elder-rule patriarchal systems. A generation of young whippersnapper preachers adopted this unhealthy method of ruling the lives of others because it was different and cool. With challenges now coming from various corners of Christendom, Dever, Leeman and gang fear that they will lose control of having control … so they authoritatively step up their message on “Authority.”

  32. I don’t know enough about how IX marks is applied in a church but based on the reports here, it hasn’t been a rousing success.

    It sounds like IX Marks is trying to tone it down in their conferences. This is their public face and in light of the bad press this is all part of the “rebranding” from a couple of posts ago.

    However (as Eagle mentioned) if you want to know what people really think, check out the library. And we can see from the IX Marks library that the conferences are a bit of a “bait and switch”.

    I would say that IX Marks will be changing its name soon as part of this ongoing “rebranding” to something less authoritarian. The core will remain the same.

  33. Jack wrote:

    I would say that IX Marks will be changing its name soon as part of this ongoing “rebranding” to something less authoritarian. The core will remain the same.

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if this happened. They have already had one name change. It was first called "Center for Church Reform'. Guess that went over like a lead balloon.

  34. Ian wrote:

    And the irony is that 9 Marks did this just after publishing the “Don’t be a 9 Marxist” article !

    Great observation! I believe it was that article where comments were first deleted. Then it was done site-wide (except for the mailbag section).

  35. Max wrote:

    With challenges now coming from various corners of Christendom, Dever, Leeman and gang fear that they will lose control of having control ā€¦ so they authoritatively step up their message on ā€œAuthority.ā€

    When Dever first went to CHBC, he requested some changes to their Church Covenant. This was one of the changes:
    “. . . exercise an affectionate care and watchfulness over each other and faithfully admonish and entreat one another as occasion may require”

    a new ‘tone’ was set at that point, according to the Church’s ‘history of the Covenant’ which shows the different versions through the years

    what was lost in that history is certainly as telling as what was added when Dever took over

    Here is a link:
    http://www.capitolhillbaptist.org/history-of-our-church-covenant/

    I daresay that the original congregation of that Church would no longer recognize what Dever has done in the way of structure, membership contracts, authoritarian rule, discipline, ‘keeping careful watch’, and nailing shut the back door of the Church.

    In a word, I wonder if the harm 9 Marks does to a community of faith is also found in what they REMOVE from what was an expressed part of that community’s Christian spirit. We know about the ‘add ons’ which are horrible. But examining what was dropped or ‘let go’ can also give insight into reasons why destructive behaviors flourish in a 9 Marks environment.

  36. Jack wrote:

    And we can see from the IX Marks library that the conferences are a bit of a “bait and switch”.

    An important point. So far it's been effective with the up and coming pastors and wannabe pastors who idolize Dever and his cronies.

  37. Deb wrote:

    @ mot:

    I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.

    The Southern Baptist leaders do a very good job of not informing the pew sitter of what is going on and it is forbidden to ask questions of the leaders.

  38. @ Christiane:

    Thanks for bringing up the CHBC church covenant. We need to explore this more. I know Todd Wilhelm's former church in Dubai adopted the church covenant that is included in Dever's 9Marks of a Healthy Church.

  39. @ mot:

    That's why we have to keep publishing these posts. Wish there were more folks asking questions and challenging the powers that be in 9Marks.

    Ignorance is definitely NOT bliss!

  40. @ Jack:

    I think you have hit the nail on the head. It is not a rousing success but in their minds it is because people are rebellious sinners. Ergo, the need for a new public face that is really a bait and switch. Improve the love bombing tactic?

    9 Marx is nothing but a shepherding cult that tries to masquerade as scholarly and intellectual. It’s SGM with a pocket protector.

  41. @ Lydia:
    I believe the first 9Marks booklet (60 or so pages in length) was published in 1997. In that Ligonier interview, Dever explained that he first began coming up with the 9Marks when he wrote to a church plant in New England back in the early 90s.

    How did 9Marks begin, and what is its mission?

    MD: I first thought of the nine marks in a letter I had written to a church plant I had been involved with in the Boston area. I wrote to them in 1991 laying out nine characteristics that marked their church, that were intentional, and that any pastor coming to work with them should understand before he came.

    If I am not mistaken, the pastor he was writing was Andy Davis, who a decade later implemented the 9Marks at First Baptist Church Durham.

    Given the fact that Dever and Mahaney became friends in the 1990s, I would assume that Mahaney may have had some input because Dever (and Wayne Grudem) viewed CLC and SGM as the church structure to emulate. And I do recall Mahaney saying at the first SEBTS/9Marks event that he was in complete agreement with 8 of the 9 marks.

  42. Christiane wrote:

    the original congregation of that Church would no longer recognize what Dever has done

    The original congregations of thousands of Southern Baptist churches would not recognize, nor agree with, the belief and practice of this generation of SBC pastors! They would roll over in their graves if they knew that the torch of evangelism had been extinguished.

  43. refugee wrote:

    How to have a church full of happy complementarians. Reading that title made me shudder.

    That and wanting strong women who defer to authority…ugh no.

    I’d just remind people that love is not one of the nine marks, yet Jesus said love was the one mark of his disciples.

  44. Deb wrote:

    I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.

    Nor Acts 29, T4G, SGM, etc. … or recognize even Dever’s name or the host of non-SBC personalities that are influencing SBC life right now (Piper, etc.). These organizations and leaders are steering the SBC ship right now and the pew hasn’t realized yet that they sneaked on board!

  45. Deb wrote:

    Thanks for bringing up the CHBC church covenant. We need to explore this more. I know Todd Wilhelm’s former church in Dubai adopted the church covenant that is included in Dever’s 9Marks of a Healthy Church.

    I wish I lived in DC, because CHBC just seems to need a picket on general principles. It would annoy the living daylights out of Dever to have a woman, not under his authority, on his sidewalk, with a sign calling him out: “The only mark of a Christian is LOVE.”

  46. mot wrote:

    The Southern Baptist leaders do a very good job of not informing the pew sitter of what is going on and it is forbidden to ask questions of the leaders.

    Well, there is one person at most (if not all) of SBC’s 45,000 churches who knows exactly what is going on … his name is “Pastor.” I fault local church leaders, not national leaders, for not having “family talks” to inform their members about SBC Calvinization. In the meantime, the “giving units” are financing this rebellion, as more SBC entities (seminaries, mission agencies, publishing house) fall to New Calvinist leaders.

  47. Deana Holmes (fka mirele) wrote:

    I wish I lived in DC, because CHBC just seems to need a picket on general principles.

    I actually attended there for two years and I don’t remember any of this! Mostly I remember awesome potlucks with old ladies and it makes me sad to think they might be gone now šŸ™

    Dever was an interesting preacher. I’ll give him that.

  48. Deana Holmes (fka mirele) wrote:

    ā€œThe only mark of a Christian is LOVE.ā€

    “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another” … love, indeed is the healthiest ‘mark’ of all. The one word that looms above all others at the New Calvinist works in my area is “Authority”, not “Love.”

  49. dee wrote:

    @ John:
    What is interesting is that they posted them front and center on the 9Marks site. I read over there 3 times a week, and this is rather overwhelming.

    Dee,
    That’s because, according to them, people hardly ever think about or consider authority, so they want to bring it to people’s attention.

    Of course, the “teachable” ones are going to want to know more.

  50. Kind of a side note. When it comes to their “church finder” map. Not all churches that are on that map are 9Marks. I was looking at it just the other day and I noticed a church that I have been personally involved with. Knowing that they were not even close in being a member of 9Marks I wrote them and they responded in very clear terms they had nothing to do with that organization and that they were contacting them to have their name removed…about five weeks later they still have not removed their name.

    If you noticed, it seems anyone can add a church.

  51. A.Stacy wrote:

    Not all churches that are on that map are 9Marks.

    On the other hand, when it comes to Acts 29, not all SBC-YRR churches who adopt Acts 29 methodology formerly sign on as Acts 29 members (part of the deception).

  52. An attorney wrote:

    they usurp Godā€™s authority.

    Yes, that is exactly what they do. The church belongs to Jesus, not to 9Marks. He is building *his* church, not Jonathan Leeman or Mark Dever. The Gospel has nothing to do with authority, despite what Greg Gilbert says. The Holy Spirit indwells everyone who belongs to Jesus and the Holy Spirit is quite capable of doing what he wills without the assistance of 9Marks or CBMW or TgC or T4g or the Roman Catholic pope or a Charismatic apostle or anyone else.

    These men are intoxicated with their own importance.

  53. Max wrote:

    A.Stacy wrote:
    Not all churches that are on that map are 9Marks.
    On the other hand, when it comes to Acts 29, not all SBC-YRR churches who adopt Acts 29 methodology formerly sign on as Acts 29 members (part of the deception).

    I was just thinking the same thing. Sojourn churches here have gone to a lot of trouble to erase their Acts 29/Mark Driscoll affiliation and training. Yet they are very same top down shepherding cult Neo Calvinist operation. Even have had former Mars Hill staffers. But the pew sitters think it is laid back and cool. Unless……they dare decide to dissent.

  54. @ NJ:
    Well, Gregory Wilbur did some stirring hymn arrangements, very Celtic in sound, actually kind of fun to sing (See “My Cry Ascends” in Amazon digital music to sample.)

    That in itself reminds me of the change that came over the church as the elders tightened their grip. Not long after they consolidated their power, an elder’s son introduced the church to Gregory Wilbur’s music. We started singing it at gatherings, like the annual campout. One of the songs had a lovely descant that the women enjoyed singing.

    We progressed to singing some of his hymns in workship service, complete with descant on that song (it was sung when the first verse got repeated at the end. But at some point, when that particular song was included in worship, they stopped repeating the first verse at the end. No descant.

    It seemed to me at the time that they were gradually but inexorably squeezing all pleasure (joy?) out of worship. That was one minor change, but because I am a musician, that was one of the changes that actually jumped out at me.

    I don’t know. Maybe you’re not supposed to enjoy worship. If you’re enjoying lifting your voice to praise God, if you’re enjoying joining with his saints to pray together, then maybe you’re dishonoring God somehow. Maybe the more miserable you are, the better your “sacrifice of obedience” in his eyes.

    That seemed to be the idea, though I’m sure the elders would just say I was misunderstanding or rebelliously misinterpreting their leadership, their ideas, their “heart” to honor god in the way they thought was scriptural.

    No wonder our kids walked away.

  55. @ Lydia:
    And Sojourn started their own church planting network. I know of one because I know an SBTS guy who moved to plant one in a Southern city full of baptist churches. They still troll me for donations because he took the Rolodex of his former church. Naughty.

  56. ishy wrote:

    The Bible isnā€™t their authority, and it definitely isnā€™t Jesus. Their authority comes from themselves alone.

    Yes. They *claim* that they are being faithful to the Bible, but they are twisting and reshaping it to use as a mere instrument in pursuit of their power. That is *not* what Jesus did. All these pastors need to look to the True Shepherd and see if their doctrines line up with his teaching and if their lives look anything like him. Will any of the 9Marks guys wake up and take a stand against this cult or is it too comfortable inside the coccoon?

  57. Max wrote:

    mot wrote:

    The Southern Baptist leaders do a very good job of not informing the pew sitter of what is going on and it is forbidden to ask questions of the leaders.

    Well, there is one person at most (if not all) of SBCā€™s 45,000 churches who knows exactly what is going on ā€¦ his name is ā€œPastor.ā€ I fault local church leaders, not national leaders, for not having ā€œfamily talksā€ to inform their members about SBC Calvinization. In the meantime, the ā€œgiving unitsā€ are financing this rebellion, as more SBC entities (seminaries, mission agencies, publishing house) fall to New Calvinist leaders.

    I am not defending these pastors at all, but they have seen what happens to most pastors that step out of line–they lose their churches. They fear the loss of their jobs. As I told my wife this morning at breakfast if I have to lose my pastor’s job to stand up for what is wrong with the SBC, then I will lose my job. I actually had to leave the SBC church I was pastoring because I said it was very wrong the way the Woman Pastor that was called in our Association was treated. Her church was disfellowshipped 2 weeks after she received the call to this church.

  58. Lydia wrote:

    Itā€™s SGM with a pocket protector.

    …in a French-cuff shirt and gold cufflinks. Mahaney taught them how to draw a crowd, and Dever (a truly intelligent man) taught them how to be an “intellectual.”

  59. Ian wrote:

    And the irony is that 9 Marks did this just after publishing the ā€œDonā€™t be a 9 Marxistā€ article !

    It is obviously irony that has gone completely over their heads. Pathetic.

  60. refugee wrote:

    It seemed to me at the time that they were gradually but inexorably squeezing all pleasure (joy?) out of worship.

    What a great observation. They take the joy out of worship, marriage, and relationships. Everything has to follow their formula. No serendipity or playfulness. Think of the way a loving father interacts with his beloved children. What they teach is not that. Joyless-Submission-To-Authority is their only message, and that comes through loud and clear in both the articles devoted to Authority but also in the other articles about membership.

  61. Bridget wrote:

    It is obviously irony that has gone completely over their heads.

    People who take themselves so very Seriously have no ability to see irony and lack insight into their deficiencies. They are governed by their fears. Fearful people are easy to recruit to the Leader’s cause which is usually the Leader. And Jesus is clearly not the Leader for these guys.

  62. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Did you ever hear Doug Phillips’ talk about how science fiction could be made honoring to God? Someone loaned us the DVD, I think it was, or maybe a CD, a long time ago.

    I remember being given a christian speculative fiction book to review (with a whole lot of other bloggers). It was awful. At best, the book got praised with faint damns.

    I was already becoming disillusioned with Vision Forum when I saw the book heavily featured in their catalog a year or two after that. It sort of confirmed for me that VF was full of it. (And I’m not talking the Spirit…)

  63. I don’t know how many marks there are of an abusive church, but I think obsession with authority has to be one of the biggest.

  64. Gram3 wrote:

    They take the joy out of worship, marriage, and relationships.

    Yes. There is no joy in submitting to ‘authority’ ad nauseum, no matter how many times you tell people they should do it joyfully!

    I think they believe that stating a thing will make it so. They want to imagine away problems, and think if you can just say the *right words* that will fix everything. (SCCL’s on facebook linked a ‘comic’ that was did that by just endlessly stating that women are equal because we say so they just have different ‘roles’ so it’s all ok!) Nope.

  65. @ Deb:
    The chronology and trajectory is so interesting. Basically, 9 Marx is coming up on 17 years of implementation. I was given a free 9 Marx book at some event back around 2008. I always viewed 9 Marx as basically a consultant to church restructuring. They provide the template and training conferences for pastors.

    When you add in all the church planting groups (Acts 29, Baptist 21, SGM, Sojourn, Fellowship, etc) and a restructuring arm like 9 Marx, it gets a bit overwhelming to take in just how hard the YRR movement worked to create an uber quasi denomination of sorts.

    I don’t think they could have done it without SBC money and resources through Mohlers power base in the SBC from training Neo Cals in SBC seminaries to funneling millions money through his protege, Ezell, at NAMB for Neo Cal church planting to the IMB with Platt as the new Neo Cal face for Neo Cal mission recriuting to Lifeway for Neo Cal literature which includes guys like Barnabas Piper as one example for the “content” of materials.

    Mohler is key to it all.

  66. @ refugee:
    Reading the article you linked. I wonder if that Texas symposium on xtian (I won’t dignify it with the word “christian”) sci-fi *was* Vision Forum and Doug Phillips!

    I do remember some christian themes in Ray Bradbury’s writing, I think. And Heinlein’s “Boy Scout” books (before he started getting wilder and, to my senses, weird) had a definite moral feel to them, a message of right-and-wrong. More recently, I enjoyed “The Light of Eidon” series, before I stepped away from most christian writers and christianized fiction.

    OTOH, further along in the article, and the idea of limiting one’s vision to near-future dystopian stories, that doesn’t sound VFish to me, though the “Calvinist” mention does. From what I gather, the VF types were planning to bring about the kingdom on earth through following the right set of rules.

    Good article. I concur with the author that much of this is fear-based. I got caught in a restrictive system that squeezed all the joy out of living, because of fear.

    The world is a large and sometimes scary place, but not half as scary as the thought of what it would have been like to remain “obedient” to those elders and that church. The scars cut deep, but at least there is some healing happening now.

  67. refugee wrote:

    I donā€™t know. Maybe youā€™re not supposed to enjoy worship. If youā€™re enjoying lifting your voice to praise God, if youā€™re enjoying joining with his saints to pray together, then maybe youā€™re dishonoring God somehow. Maybe the more miserable you are, the better your ā€œsacrifice of obedienceā€ in his eyes.

    Sanctified boredom. Was the sabbath made for man or man made for the sabbath? At the former church I would look around and observe the majority stood silently, not singing. When I approached the leaders about this I was given “they were not approaching worship with the right attitude”.

  68. refugee wrote:

    Unfortunately, somehow the rules grew more and more restraining, people were more and more constrained within their elder-defined ā€œrolesā€ and it felt like at the end, when we left, all that was left were these narrow definitions of what you were allowed to do, depending on who you were (both gender and perceived status ā€“ those with the best ā€œappearanceā€ of having it all together had the highest status, IIRC).

    In our experience, authority squelches. It kills.

    I can identify with what you described. At best, authoritarians breed mediocrity.

  69. Authority is not about lording it over other people (ed.) Authority is not assigned by oneself to oneself.

    Authority is given by others who determine the worthiness of the designee. The designee remains under the authority of that worthiness and of those who appointed him/her.

    Authority is not about dominating other people but about holding in trust things that are true and precious and living into those truths in a meaningful way, as an example and leader.

  70. Dang it. First sentence above got garbled. “Authority is not about lording it over other people.” Sorry.

  71. Deb wrote:

    @ mot:

    I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.

    Very likely. Some family members were completely unaware until they discovered that their new pastor was a closet neo-calvinist. Thankfully their church chucked him out but not without losses.

  72. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Well, obviously the first mark of a healthy church is that it must have a healthy Jesus.
    As we all know, shortly ater the medieval Reformation Jesus was divided into many separate bodies. (This is why it became necessary for godly men, with a real passion to burn alive those who disagreed with them, to define ā€œa churchā€.) Now, by Godā€™s grace, there are thousands of Jesuses all over the world. Any godly man with a real heart to serve the gospel, a real passion to see souls transformed by the power of the gospel, and a real desire to see the gospel spread can go somewhere with lots of rich people and plant a new Jesus.
    So before you either plant a new Jesus, or choose a new Jesus to serve, you need to make sure of whoā€™s in control of this Jesus and who is casting and driving forward its vision. Otherwise the devil will get you, and itā€™ll serve you right.
    That is why authority is so important.

    Yes, they are preaching a different Jesus–when they speak of Him at all. As we became more disillusioned at a small YRR church, my wife and I started counting how many references were made to Jesus from the pulpit: at one point pastor went over a month without saying the word “Jesus” once. There was much discussion of “The Mission” (never quite defined, but as near as we could make out, it vaguely involved growing our particular fellowship by bringing new twenty-somethings–and sundry others–through the doors and giving sacrificially of our monetary and time resources so that eventually our leader and coterie of young sycophants could control a church with enough revenues to provide them all with comfortable livings and have sufficient buttocks in the collapsible seats to make them feel important and, perhaps, have sufficient narcissistic supply upon which they could vent their sadistic schemes, which generally involved systematically eliminating any real fellowship that the people had in favor of programs that increasingly highlighted the leaders, while punishing anyone who questioned their unilateral manipulations).

    At the end of the day, we came to realize that The Mission apparently did not include Jesus, was really an attempt to get beyond this “Jesus Thing”. When Jesus was preached, it always seemed to be a Jesus with whom we were not familiar, one who, according to pastor “spoke more about money than any other topic” (that gem from one of several “give til it hurts” sermons), one who was essentially a tool used by pastor to control a group of people–not at all the Creator of the Universe before Whom pastor was to humbly submit along with the rest, before Whom pastor had no special standing.

  73. mot wrote:

    I am not defending these pastors at all, but they have seen what happens to most pastors that step out of lineā€“they lose their churches.

    I’m reminded of the Scripture regarding the blind man that was healed by Jesus. When he stood before the church elders and told them what had happened, they tossed him out of church. Jesus went looking for him.

  74. Lydia wrote:

    erase their Acts 29/Mark Driscoll affiliation and training

    I saw this here, too. When Driscoll (Acts 29 founder) became a potato too hot to handle, followed by the disgraceful exit of Darrin Patrick (Acts 29 VP), the SBC-YRR churches in my area distanced themselves from Acts 29 affiliation. However, they still use Driscoll’s method and message.

  75. Lydia wrote:

    But the pew sitters think it is laid back and cool.

    As Al Mohler would say “Where else are they going to go?!”. They could find “laid back and cool” in other churches that are on the margin of Christendom, but New Calvinism has a particular appeal, especially to young men who like potty-mouth preaching, oppressed women, and doing church without God.

  76. Deb wrote:

    One upcoming event I failed to mention is 9Marksā€™ ā€˜Revitalization Conferenceā€, which they are doing with the North American Mission Board.
    https://9marks.org/event/2016/11/9m-namb2016/?utm_source=9Mhome-nutsandbolts&utm_medium=9Mhome-nutsandbolts&utm_campaign=9Mhome-nutsandbolts
    Is anyone surprised? 9Marks believes it has all the answers for the revitalization of Southern Baptist churches.

    The 9Marxs Way:

    What you do is you kill the churches by setting up leader-centric programs, you destroy one-on-one fellowship between the laity so that you can focus attention upon yourself and your own imagined authority, you control and manipulate followers, you dominate and shun and abuse detractors.

    You prance around each week upon an elevated stage under a spotlight and speak of how humble you are.

    You demand many hours of volunteer time and many thousands of dollars of sacrificial giving, you use the money to set yourself up comfortably, you use their funds to attend 9Marxs and T4G and various conferences, all expenses paid, you refuse to lift a finger to bear the burden that you place upon the people.

    And then, when they are utterly exhausted, joyless, desperate because you have taken their joy of being blessed by their Lord away from them, you propose to revitalize them, yes, you have a new program that will give them back their joy–and all it involves is doubling down on everything that killed them in the first place.

  77. Mara wrote:

    A 9 Marks title from the above article:
    ā€œIs it self serving to teach on your own authority?ā€
    In a word, yes.
    In three words, without a doubt.
    In more wordsā€¦
    How delusional do you 9 Marxist want to be? How far do you want to separate yourselves from the Words of Jesus Christ? How much do you want to mangle and twist the words of Paul for your own benefit and to the detriment of others?
    And the bigger questions? How long do you think God is going to allow you to steal His Kingdom away from Him by force and stealth? How long do you think God will watch you steal His church, shear His sheep, and boil & eat His ewes and lambs for supper before He steps in and gets sovereign all over you?
    You boys really donā€™t understand what you are toying with. You really donā€™t get that you are rushing in where angels fear to tread by propping yourselves up and teaching on your own authority. You really donā€™t get the gravity of the situation. Because it appears that you are boys who bully and toy, not men who understand and tremble at His holiness.

    +++++++++

  78. Law Prof wrote:

    As we became more disillusioned at a small YRR church, my wife and I started counting how many references were made to Jesus from the pulpit: at one point pastor went over a month without saying the word ā€œJesusā€ once.

    A few years ago, when New Calvinism invaded my area with YRR church plants, I listened to their sermon podcasts to see what made them tick. I sat with pencil in hand and made checks under 4 columns on a tablet: God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, New Calvinist icon. “God” was mentioned a lot, Jesus’ name was only occasionally dropped, and the Holy Spirit was hardly ever referenced. Driscoll, Piper, and other NC notables actually got more air time than Jesus!

  79. @ Max:

    My reply to Mohler's 'Where are they gonna go?' query is this…

    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.

  80. Deb wrote:

    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.

    Agreed, but 'most' are still sitting in their pews and sowing seeds into the coming New Calvinist Kingdom, oblivious to the shift in belief and drift in practice in SBC life.

  81. Lydia wrote:

    Yet they are very same top down shepherding cult Neo Calvinist operation. Even have had former Mars Hill staffers. But the pew sitters think it is laid back and cool. Unlessā€¦ā€¦they dare decide to dissent.

    I always say, if a person wants to find out for sure what their church is really all about, test the waters. Ask some questions. Voice some disagreement on some issue. They will find out better this way than by joyfully submitting.

  82. Max wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    But the pew sitters think it is laid back and cool.

    As Al Mohler would say ā€œWhere else are they going to go?!ā€. They could find ā€œlaid back and coolā€ in other churches that are on the margin of Christendom, but New Calvinism has a particular appeal, especially to young men who like potty-mouth preaching, oppressed women, and doing church without God.

    Where else? A bar. I’d rather do that than this kind of church any day.

  83. Deb wrote:

    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.

    And they will say of the “Dones” that we went out from among them because we were not of them. The leaders will *never* consider for a moment that it might be their warped teaching and application. Because God’s Anointed.

  84. @ siteseer:

    Exactly what I said to my adult daughter yesterday, who’s currently attending a young, restless and reformed church with her husband. She’s uncomfortable with it, feels uneasy, it’s led by painfully young, thirty-something pastors who do some almost ridiculously immature things (e.g., the current sermon series is Pokemon themed, pastor puts up slides on the screen of Pokemon characters to illustrate points, refers to being a good Christian as being a new Pokemon character he imagined, called “Supermon”, as in, “Here’s how to be a righteous ‘Supermon'”).

    The whole concept makes me cringe, it’s hard to believe anyone could buy into this puerile nonsense, but she says to this point they haven’t said anything specifically wrong and unbiblical, and her husband thinks they’re godly men.

    I told her “Scratch a little on them, disagree with something, then you’ll see how godly they are”.

  85. PaJo wrote:

    Authority is not about lording it over other people (ed.) Authority is not assigned by oneself to oneself. Authority is given by others who determine the worthiness of the designee.

    They want us to accept their authority because they say so, but the problem is if you don’t TRUST someone you will never accept them. I don’t trust 9marx. I don’t trust ‘comp’ men. I don’t trust anyone who makes a huge effort to tell me why they are my boss.

  86. Mara wrote:

    Because it appears that you are boys who bully and toy, not men who understand and tremble at His holiness.

    I’ll add one more. I don’t think the boyz are saved, even Christians. They are Pharisees who know the Words of God, who search the Scriptures, and yet they do NOT know God.

  87. Gram3 wrote:

    And they will say of the ā€œDonesā€ that we went out from among them because we were not of them.

    And they would be right. Maybe they should ask if that’s a good thing or not. (ā€˜Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?ā€™ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ā€˜I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness.ā€™)

  88. Lydia wrote:

    @ Jack:
    I think you have hit the nail on the head. It is not a rousing success but in their minds it is because people are rebellious sinners. Ergo, the need for a new public face that is really a bait and switch. Improve the love bombing tactic?
    9 Marx is nothing but a shepherding cult that tries to masquerade as scholarly and intellectual. Itā€™s SGM with a pocket protector.

    Spot on, Lydia, and Jack too.

  89. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    refugee wrote:
    I am reminded of our former church, where I heard leaders talking wistfully, in the way of people who have a vision for something better, about how they wished the people of our church would rise up and create new artwork, new music, newā€¦ stuff (writing?) to honoring the Lord and prove to the world that living a god-honoring life was the key to fruitfulness, fulfillment, and satisfaction.
    That hits upon a subject I have a stake in.

    I could not agree more – great art, writing, poetry, architecture, etc. But among the 9M/ TGC ‘intelligentsia’ and its disciples, the only worthy calling is church planting or pastoring a neo-Reformed church for the men or being a complimentarian wife for the women.

  90. Psychologist/author/Thought Reform/Cult expert Steve Hassan’s BITE Model about high control groups, which 9 Marks is (Mark Dever having re-birthed the 1970’s heavy-Shepherding Movement from the Florida 5, which most of the founders in Florida later repented for its abuses and un-Biblicalness).

    Steven Hassan’s BITE Model of Cult Mind Control
    Many people think of mind control as an ambiguous, mystical process that cannot be defined in concrete terms. In reality, mind control refers to a specific set of methods and techniques, such as hypnosis or thought- stopping, that influence how a person thinks, feels, and acts. Like many bodies of knowledge, it is not inherently good or evil. If mind control techniques are used to empower an individual to have more choice, and authority for his life remains within himself, the effects can be beneficial. For example, benevolent mind control can be used to help people quit smoking without affecting any other behavior. Mind control becomes destructive when the locus of control is external and it is used to undermine a personā€™s ability to think and act independently.

    As employed by the most destructive cults, mind control seeks nothing less than to disrupt an individualā€™s authentic identity and reconstruct it in the image of the cult leader. I developed the BITE model to help people determine whether or not a group is practicing destructive mind control. The BITE model helps people understand how cults suppress individual member’s uniqueness and creativity. BITE stands for the cult’s control of an individual’s Behavior, Intellect, Thoughts, and Emotions.

    It is important to understand that destructive mind control can be determined when the overall effect of these four components promotes dependency and obedience to some leader or cause. It is not necessary for every single item on the list to be present. Mindcontrolled cult members can live in their own apartments, have nine-to-five jobs, be married with children, and still be unable to think for themselves and act independently.

    We are all subject to influence from our parents, friends, teachers, co-workers… When this influence helps someone grow and maintain an internal locus of control, it is healthy. Influence which is used to keep people mindless and dependent is unhealthy. To download a PDF of the Influence Continuum graphic, click here.
    Destructive mind control is not just used by cults. Learn about the Human Trafficking BITE Model and the Terrorism BITE Model.

    The BITE Model
    I. Behavior Control
    II. Information Control
    III. Thought Control
    IV. Emotional Control
    Behavior Control

    1. Regulate individualā€™s physical reality
    2. Dictate where, how, and with whom the member lives and associates or isolates
    3. When, how and with whom the member has sex
    4. Control types of clothing and hairstyles
    5. Regulate diet – food and drink, hunger and/or fasting
    6. Manipulation and deprivation of sleep
    7. Financial exploitation, manipulation or dependence
    8. Restrict leisure, entertainment, vacation time
    9. Major time spent with group indoctrination and rituals and/or self indoctrination including the Internet
    10. Permission required for major decisions
    11. Thoughts, feelings, and activities (of self and others) reported to superiors
    12. Rewards and punishments used to modify behaviors, both positive and negative
    13. Discourage individualism, encourage group-think
    14. Impose rigid rules and regulations
    15. Instill dependency and obedience
    16. Threaten harm to family and friends
    17. Force individual to rape or be raped
    18. Instill dependency and obedience
    19. Encourage and engage in corporal punishment
    Information Control

    1. Deception:
    a. Deliberately withhold information
    b. Distort information to make it more acceptable
    c. Systematically lie to the cult member
    2. Minimize or discourage access to non-cult sources of information, including:
    a. Internet, TV, radio, books, articles, newspapers, magazines, other media
    b.Critical information
    c. Former members
    d. Keep members busy so they donā€™t have time to think and investigate
    e. Control through cell phone with texting, calls, internet tracking
    3. Compartmentalize information into Outsider vs. Insider doctrines
    a. Ensure that information is not freely accessible
    b.Control information at different levels and missions within group
    c. Allow only leadership to decide who needs to know what and when
    4. Encourage spying on other members
    a. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
    b.Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
    c. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group
    5. Extensive use of cult-generated information and propaganda, including:
    a. Newsletters, magazines, journals, audiotapes, videotapes, YouTube, movies and other media
    b.Misquoting statements or using them out of context from non-cult sources
    6. Unethical use of confession
    a. Information about sins used to disrupt and/or dissolve identity boundaries
    b. Withholding forgiveness or absolution
    c. Manipulation of memory, possible false memories
    Thought Control

    1. Require members to internalize the groupā€™s doctrine as truth
    a. Adopting the group’s ā€˜map of realityā€™ as reality
    b. Instill black and white thinking
    c. Decide between good vs. evil
    d. Organize people into us vs. them (insiders vs. outsiders)
    2.Change personā€™s name and identity
    3. Use of loaded language and clichƩs which constrict knowledge, stop critical thoughts and reduce complexities into platitudinous buzz words
    4. Encourage only ā€˜good and properā€™ thoughts
    5. Hypnotic techniques are used to alter mental states, undermine critical thinking and even to age regress the member
    6. Memories are manipulated and false memories are created
    7. Teaching thought-stopping techniques which shut down reality testing by stopping negative thoughts and allowing only positive thoughts, including:
    a. Denial, rationalization, justification, wishful thinking
    b. Chanting
    c. Meditating
    d. Praying
    e. Speaking in tongues
    f. Singing or humming
    8. Rejection of rational analysis, critical thinking, constructive criticism
    9. Forbid critical questions about leader, doctrine, or policy allowed
    10. Labeling alternative belief systems as illegitimate, evil, or not useful
    Emotional Control

    1. Manipulate and narrow the range of feelings ā€“ some emotions and/or needs are deemed as evil, wrong or selfish
    2. Teach emotion-stopping techniques to block feelings of homesickness, anger, doubt
    3. Make the person feel that problems are always their own fault, never the leaderā€™s or the groupā€™s fault
    4. Promote feelings of guilt or unworthiness, such as
    a. Identity guilt
    b. You are not living up to your potential
    c. Your family is deficient
    d. Your past is suspect
    e. Your affiliations are unwise
    f. Your thoughts, feelings, actions are irrelevant or selfish
    g. Social guilt
    h. Historical guilt
    5. Instill fear, such as fear of:
    a. Thinking independently
    b. The outside world
    c. Enemies
    d. Losing oneā€™s salvation
    e. Leaving or being shunned by the group
    f. Otherā€™s disapproval
    6. Extremes of emotional highs and lows ā€“ love bombing and praise one moment and then declaring you are horrible sinner
    7. Ritualistic and sometimes public confession of sins
    8. Phobia indoctrination: inculcating irrational fears about leaving the group or questioning the leaderā€™s authority
    a. No happiness or fulfillment possible outside of the group
    b. Terrible consequences if you leave: hell, demon possession, incurable diseases, accidents, suicide, insanity, 10,000 reincarnations, etc.
    c. Shunning of those who leave; fear of being rejected by friends, peers, and family
    d. Never a legitimate reason to leave; those who leave are weak, undisciplined, unspiritual, worldly, brainwashed by family or counselor, or seduced by money, sex, or rock and roll
    e. Threats of harm to ex-member and family

  91. PaJo wrote:

    Max wrote:
    Lydia wrote:
    But the pew sitters think it is laid back and cool.
    As Al Mohler would say ā€œWhere else are they going to go?!ā€. They could find ā€œlaid back and coolā€ in other churches that are on the margin of Christendom, but New Calvinism has a particular appeal, especially to young men who like potty-mouth preaching, oppressed women, and doing church without God.
    Where else? A bar. Iā€™d rather do that than this kind of church any day.

    I went to the Museum last Sunday and spent time with the Dutch Masters followed by Salmon and Argula salad in the Museum Cafe. It was a magnificent day.

  92. Gram3 wrote:

    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.

    Where do these folks go?

  93. Christiane wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.
    Where do these folks go?

    They are enjoying staying at home, going out for a Sunday drive, doing activities on Sundays, hobbies, hiking, biking, and any other wonderful things.

    They are staying home and making beautiful breakfasts or going to a restaurant for one.

  94. Velour wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.
    Where do these folks go?

    They are enjoying staying at home, going out for a Sunday drive, doing activities on Sundays, hobbies, hiking, biking, and any other wonderful things.

    They are staying home and making beautiful breakfasts or going to a restaurant for one.

    My daughter once said she felt the whole world was her Church. šŸ™‚
    I can’t imagine going to Church and seeing people being ‘disciplined’ publicly and shamed before the whole congregation, or hearing some sermon that dwells on the idolatry of male head-ship as something God approves of. That is not ‘Church’, no.

    I think of the ‘survivors’ of abuse who come to TWW and about how gracious Wade has been to provide for them on Sundays, knowing that many have suffered in a Church environment and need ministry ‘on line’. This is a blessing for such people until such time as they find a community to pray with and be with.
    TWW on Sundays IS ‘sanctuary’. TWW is in reality a kind of sanctuary for injured people twenty-four seven. This is a good work.

  95. Max wrote:

    As Al Mohler would say ā€œWhere else are they going to go?!ā€. They could find ā€œlaid back and coolā€ in other churches that are on the margin of Christendom, but New Calvinism has a particular appeal, especially to young men who like potty-mouth preaching, oppressed women, and doing church without God

    The sheer, naked arrogance is what gets me. I know where I’m not going to go, and that is to another elitist, authoritarian church. Been there, done that, hated it, still have the scars to prove it 30 years later.

    Before finding this blog I didn’t really think one way or another about Calvinism. It always struck me as Calvin wanting to do for Christianity what Euclid did for geometry, which is define a few basic axioms and prove some theorems from them. The problem is that God cannot be defined by axioms such as “omnipotent” and “totally sovereign” and it is idolatry to think that Calvin’s theology is equal to the Word of God.

    Having said that, if New Calvinism has any kind of appeal it is lost on me.

  96. @ Law Prof:

    I would be out of there so fast it would make your head spin!

    I remember when Pokemon was all the buzz back in the early 2000s. I wrote a letter of protest to the principal of my daughter's Christian school asking that the cards be banned. The students who brought them were grouping up on the playground and being anti-social with the other students.  As you can see, not much has changed with me over the years.  I still use my writing skills to express my concerns.

    Not a Pokemon fan this go round either! šŸ™

  97. @ Christiane:

    Thanks for your kind words. 

    And we do it for FREE!!!

    No conference fees to pay and no books to buy….

    Dee and I are working for our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, despite what our detractors might say about us.

  98. Anyway: to answer the question posed in the thread title.

    I’d have to say that, on a scale of 1 to 10, it’s only about this healthy.

    IHTIH

  99. Lea wrote:

    And they would be right. Maybe they should ask if thatā€™s a good thing or not.

    šŸ™‚ I know some who are rabid but who are also deluded. I have observed the fruit of the Spirit in their lives, but they really do idolize certain men. Not mine to decide or worry about.

  100. Christiane wrote:

    Where do these folks go?

    Can’t speak for anyone but Gramp3 and me, but I am busy doing ministry outside the LocalChurch. We meet together with longtime friends for meals and to pray and serve.

  101. refugee wrote:

    How to have a church full of happy complementarians. Reading that title made me shudder.

    A church full of happy complimentarians would be about as common as pasture full of unicorns.

  102. refugee wrote:

    “How to have a church full of happy complementarians.” Reading that title made me shudder.

    NORTH KOREA.
    Happy Happy! Joy Joy! before Comrade Dear Leader!

  103. Burwell wrote:

    I could not agree more ā€“ great art, writing, poetry, architecture, etc. But among the 9M/ TGC ā€˜intelligentsiaā€™ and its disciples, the only worthy calling is church planting or pastoring a neo-Reformed church for the men or being a complimentarian wife for the women.

    For the Rewolution, Comrades.

  104. Max wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    But the pew sitters think it is laid back and cool.

    As Al Mohler would say ā€œWhere else are they going to go?!ā€. They could find ā€œlaid back and coolā€ in other churches that are on the margin of Christendom, but New Calvinism has a particular appeal, especially to young men who like potty-mouth preaching, oppressed women, and doing church without God.

    I keep thinking of the Soteriology 101 blog and the one pic (for the posting on “Christian Liberty”) of the Neo-Cal Spokesman with the scraggy beard, watch cap, wall-to-wall cigars and big stein of beer.

    I called the pic “Thug Life”.
    Same appeal as Gangsta Rappas and Daesh recruiting sites — “WE SO BAD!”

  105. It’s interesting to see that Mark Dever joined the SB Founders Committee in 1997, the same year that his small booklet “Nine Marks of a Healthy Church” was published by the Founders Committee and that in early 1998 the Founders Magazine noted the following –

    “12th Annual Editora Fiel Conference in Brazil

    Under the guidance of founder and missionary Richard Denham the publishing house, Editora Fiel, sponsored its twelfth Leadership Conference for Pastors and church workers in Brazil. Two Southern Baptist pastors from the United States were the conference speakers. Mark Dever, from the Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington D. C., spoke 7 times on the “Marks of a Healthy Church” and once on “The Value of the Puritans for Today.” Tom Ascol, from the Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, spoke four times on “Spiritual Warfare” and four times on “The Bible for Today” (its authority, power, sufficiency and finality).

    A record number of pastors were among the 492 adult registrants with twenty one of Brazil’s twenty six states represented. Many traveled more than fifty hours one way by bus to attend. Over 425 video tapes and 1000 audio tapes of the messages were sold during the week. Pastors and leaders from churches in the Baptist Convention of Brazil met during the week to pray about and organize efforts to labor for biblical reformation and revival within their denomination.”
    https://web.archive.org/web/19980117100524/http://www.founders.org/FJ26/news.html#1

    Is this the start of the 9Marks phenomenon?

  106. Deb wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    I would be out of there so fast it would make your head spin!
    I remember when Pokemon was all the buzz back in the early 2000s. I wrote a letter of protest to the principal of my daughter’s Christian school asking that the cards be banned. The students who brought them were grouping up on the playground and being anti-social with the other students.Ā  As you can see, not much has changed with me over the years.Ā  I still use my writing skills to express my concerns.
    Not a Pokemon fan this go round either!

    You’re probably right, I just need to grit my teeth and get past the strong aversion to stepping in such a place. Not sure I could hold breakfast down–mean that literally. But I do think you’re right and just as I’ve had to get past the gag reflex when changing a particularly rank diaper, probably need to get past the gag reflex to check things out and protect the oldest child.

  107. Lea wrote:

    Yes. There is no joy in submitting to ā€˜authorityā€™ ad nauseum, no matter how many times you tell people they should do it joyfully!

    The last to try that were the classic Communists with their Joy-Filled Worker’s Democratic Paradises.

  108. refugee wrote:

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    Did you ever hear Doug Phillipsā€™ talk about how science fiction could be made honoring to God? Someone loaned us the DVD, I think it was, or maybe a CD, a long time ago.

    No, but consider the (ESQUIRE) source.

  109. Gram3 wrote:

    I know some who are rabid but who are also deluded.

    Like Paul, I have more sympathy for the deceived and confused. The ones who are just out for power and control otoh? Not so much.

  110. Lowlandseer wrote:

    The Value of the Puritans for Today

    Maybe they should have read up a little more about those pesky witchhunts before they started trying to bring back the puritans! They might have avoided some problems.

  111. Gram3 wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    Itā€™s SGM with a pocket protector.
    ā€¦in a French-cuff shirt and gold cufflinks. Mahaney taught them how to draw a crowd, and Dever (a truly intelligent man) taught them how to be an ā€œintellectual.ā€

    “You don’t need any intellect to be an Intellectual.”
    — G.K.Chesterton, one of the Father Brown Mysteries

    (And as someone who grew up as an IQ 160 Kid Genius, I can attest that it has its problems. BIG problems.)

  112. Lea wrote:

    Deana Holmes (fka mirele) wrote:
    That and wanting strong women who defer to authorityā€¦ugh no.
    Donā€™t forget *happily*!

    “Stay Sweet…”

  113. Jack wrote:

    I would say that IX Marks will be changing its name soon as part of this ongoing ā€œrebrandingā€ to something less authoritarian. The core will remain the same.

    ChEKA changes its name to OGPU which changes its name to NKVD which changes its name to KGB, but the Liquidation Quotas in GULAG are met without interruption.

  114. Gram3 wrote:

    What a great observation. They take the joy out of worship, marriage, and relationships. Everything has to follow their formula. No serendipity or playfulness. Think of the way a loving father interacts with his beloved children. What they teach is not that. Joyless-Submission-To-Authority is their only message, and that comes through loud and clear

    Hmmmm …… in their world, being a “Christian” is like being drafted into the army?
    No thanks.

  115. Law Prof wrote:

    You really donā€™t get that you are rushing in where angels fear to tread by propping yourselves up and teaching on your own authority

    There was one angel who wasn’t afraid to go there: Lucifer.

  116. Lea wrote:

    Lowlandseer wrote:
    The Value of the Puritans for Today
    Maybe they should have read up a little more about those pesky witchhunts before they started trying to bring back the puritans! They might have avoided some problems

    What ‘value’ would the Puritans have for the people and culture of Brazil, anyway? What a wasted opportunity to teach the pastors something of value…how many of those who attended had graduated from seminary? Probably very few. But rather than help them learn the Bible, they taught the orthodoxy of the Puritans and the orthopraxy of Mark Dever.

    Shame on those two men!

  117. Christiane wrote:

    Where do these folks [essentially, the Nones and Dones] go?

    Like (Gram + Gramp)3, I can only speak for myself and Lesley.

    We’re investing the remainder of our working lives in the setting up of a professional, but non-profit, organisation that perfects entirely new ways of creating decent jobs that are accessible to the low-paid and the unemployed (those experiencing “workplace exclusion” as it’s known in Scotland).

    Lesley and I are using our God-given ability to question and challenge established assumptions and cultures on this, because we’re doing things nobody thinks are possible. And we’re praying big prayers than very few people around us are praying. In fact, you would not believe how hard it has been to persuade even two Christians round here to pray with us, as distinct from nit-picking, quarrelling, arguing, criticising and “advising” us. We expect to see people calling Jesus “King” for the first time; as well as being healed (ill-health and injury is a big factor in a lot of long-term unemployment). You know the kind of thing; the blind seeing, the deaf hearing, the poor hearing the good news and blessed is the person who doesn’t find Jesus to be a stumbling-block.

    This isn’t charity or handing out sandwiches to the poor. It’s more like this fae 1 Samuel (Hannah’s song, to be exact, although strictly speaking I shouldn’t read it as it amounts to allowing a woman to teach me):

    He raises the poor from the dust and lifts the needy from the ash heap;
    he seats them with princes and has them inherit a throne of honour.

    Of course, that’s not the correctInterpretation of that verse. Like we give a sh**.

  118. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    In a very unfortunate failure to close a <blockquote> tag, in my last quote I ascribed the phrase Like we give a sh** to God. This was not intentional…

  119. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    in my last quote I ascribed the phrase Like we give a sh** to God. This was not intentionalā€¦

    At least his heart’s in the right place, bless him.

    Best regards,
    God

  120. PaJo wrote:

    Authority is given by others who determine the worthiness of the designee.Ā The designee remains under the authority of that worthiness and of those who appointed him/her.

    And on and on it goes. Sorry, not buying the institutional hierarchy that has been on going for centuries.

    All authority in heaven and on earth belongs to whom?

  121. Lea wrote:

    Lowlandseer wrote:
    The Value of the Puritans for Today
    Maybe they should have read up a little more about those pesky witchhunts before they started trying to bring back the puritans! They might have avoided some problems.

    No kidding?

  122. Thanks for the great article, Deb. Thanks for all you do, Dee and Deb. Ditto commenters.

  123. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    scraggy beard, watch cap, wall-to-wall cigars and big stein of beer

    With the exception of the cigars (I think), you’ve just described a New Calvinist pastor at a church down the road from me.

  124. Robert wrote:

    The sheer, naked arrogance is what gets me.

    Definitely no shortage of arrogance in New Calvinist ranks! I figure at least 80+% of all arrogant church leaders on the planet are confined to that group.

  125. PaJo wrote:

    Where else? A bar. Iā€™d rather do that than this kind of church any day.

    Unfortunately, you can’t escape bumping into New Calvinists by going to bars! They frequent them! The Acts 29 Journey Church in St. Louis (of Darrin Patrick fame) made national headlines by holding a Bible study called “Theology at the Bottleworks.” The church leaders would sip beer with tavern patrons while eisegesing the Bible between burps. Patrick did this for years before he ‘journeyed’ out of the ministry.

  126. Gram3 wrote:

    And they will say of the ā€œDonesā€ that we went out from among them because we were not of them.

    And they would be right!!

  127. NJ wrote:

    theyā€™re all secretly into Thomas Kinkade.

    Aha! You’ve put your finger on the problem! šŸ˜‰

  128. Max wrote:

    going to bars

    Yes, well, here in my town there is a thing called ‘a priest and a rabbi went into a bar…’ and what actually happens is that a local episcopal priest and a local rabbi go to a local bar and have public discussions. I have never been but I hope to go sometime. That is one of the things that I like about being an episcopalian; nobody who would see me do that would even raise an eyebrow.

  129. Bridget wrote:

    PaJo wrote:

    Authority is given by others who determine the worthiness of the designee.Ā The designee remains under the authority of that worthiness and of those who appointed him/her.

    And on and on it goes. Sorry, not buying the institutional hierarchy that has been on going for centuries.

    All authority in heaven and on earth belongs to whom?

    Sorry. This isn’t the contrast I attempted to draw. The point was that authority is derived from outside oneself and it is not autonomous in its exercise.

  130. Christiane wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    A good number of Southern Baptists are hitting the exits never to return out of protest to the doctrinal shift and pastoral power plays.
    Where do these folks go?

    I don’t know that I qualify completely, but I’m definitely a “Done with the SBC”. I’m also done with megachurches. I think the push for power and fame has driven megachurches, and I’m going far away from them.

    We (finally!) move next week, and I’m going to try very tiny churches, I think. There’s a neighborhood one with two female pastors. I think that might be my church.

  131. Mark Dever was “Pastor, New Meadows Baptist Church, Topsfield, MA, 1985-86.”

    (no website for this as it apparently went belly up in the 1990s)

    The ‘9 Marks’ are derived from a letter written by Dever to this church in the early 1990s to guide them in choosing a pastor. He described the things that had supposedly characterized the church and urged them to select a man who held to the same dogma. They ended up elevating fellow parishoner Andy Davis, an engineer and spouse of a deacon, to the pastorate.

  132. Mark Dever was “Associate Pastor, Eden Baptist Church, Cambridge, England, 1992-94.”

    Like a number of other future TheGospelCoalition Councilmembers, Mark Dever was invited to serve under Roy Clements at Eden Chapel while scholars at Cambridge.

    http://www.stevemaughan.com/sermons/roy-clements/

    “Eden Baptist church. The minister at the time was Roy Clements….Don Carson was the supporting act, Mark Dever was the intern”

  133. “Shutting down the comments section gives the impression that 9Marks is either unable or unwilling to address concerns, disagreements, and misunderstandings.”

    Well stated! 9Marks is big on accountability – for others. If they believed what they taught they would be open to the cleansing power of a robust comments section. For all their talk on manliness, this was a very unmanly decision.

  134. A proto-9Marks assemblage from the opening days of Mark Dever’s current pastorate (from Sept 24, 1994 Washington Post):

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1994/09/24/upcoming-events/bf38e688-c885-499e-89ed-2decd726faa7/

    “The Rev. Mark E. Dever will pose the question “What’s Wrong With the Local Church?” to a seven-member panel at 7 p.m. today at Capitol Hill Metropolitan Baptist Church, 525 A St. NE. Forum panelists include Don Carson, professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Chicago; Fred Catherwood, president of the Evangelical Alliance of Great Britain; author and theologian Carl F.H. Henry; the Rev. Bill Kynes, pastor of the national Evangelical Free Church in Annandale; and the Rev. R. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville.”

    [That’s at least four future founding Councilmembers of TGC]

    Note the topic “What’s Wrong With the Local Church?” is a much more negative formulation than the later “Church Reform” and present “Healthy Church” iterations of Dever’s Marksist ideology.

  135. John wrote:

    It looks like the articles are all from the same journal rather than just ā€œa barrage of new articles.ā€ Doesnā€™t the journal usually follow a particular theme?

    I find it very timely that they pushed this as a theme right after they shut down their comments. Coincidence?

  136. Robert wrote:

    The sheer, naked arrogance is what gets me.

    The Arrogance of the Predestined Elect who can do no wrong.

  137. Hi All:

    Just a few quick comments on the “tech side” of this great article:

    “Not only has 9Marks removed ALL comments on previous posts and disallowed any future comments, but they deleted a controversial post that received well-deserved criticism via the comment section. After quite a few months, the article was reposted with no commentary explaining that they had done so. More on that in an upcoming postā€¦”

    Todd and I were able to find both the comments on the original deleted article and the comments that 9Marks deleted after they re=posted the article under a different URL. I feel like I read, in the comments section for

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2016/09/26/jonathan-leeman-parsing-words-and-deleting-comments-guest-post-by-todd-wilhelm/

    , that someone else was also able to find this old content as well. If so, kudos to that person, too!

    I don’t know about anyone else, but I can say that Todd and I (he’ll say it was all me because I’m his official tech but that’s not entirely true šŸ˜‰ ) would not have been able to find the deleted content in question without the help and leads we got from people at TWW.

    For example, one of TWW’s old articles had the URL link to the first version of the article that 9Marks deleted more than 2 years ago. I think that Deb thought that info wasn’t helpful because the page it linked to was gone (showing a 404 error message) but it turned out to be exactly the piece of the puzzle we needed to find the deleted comments in question.

    I’m sorry if this is all confusing from a tech perspective. I’m only trying to make a pretty big point about the importance of collecting and passing on raw data. Namely,if you want to find deleted content, please send links and any other information you have about it (e.g. the date it was published) to Dee and Deb/me and Todd, as soon as possible.

    No detail is too small. Thanks!

  138. Deb wrote:

    @ mot: I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.

    Truth! They have not. I am no longer in the Southern Baptist Church but, many old friends and all my family are. My mother especially is starting to notice things aren't really like the SBC she has always known. So, I told her about 9Marx and she flat out said if what I am saying is true she will leave the SBC even if that is all she has known for 70 years. The music minister who came to their church last year used to be a pastor at an Elder led congregation. I told her that was a red flag but she assured me it was no big deal. Well, the head pastor retired and guess who is trying to make a power play to be the new pastor?? You guessed it!

  139. Robin C wrote:

    Deb wrote:

    @ mot:
    I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.

    Truth! They have not. I am no longer in the Southern Baptist Church but, many old friends and all my family are. My mother especially is started to notice things arenā€™t really like the SBC she has always known. So, I told her about 9Marx and she flat out said if what I am saying is true she will leave the SBC even if that is all she has known for 70 years. The music minister who came to their church last year used to be a pastor at an Elder led congregation. I told her that was a red flag but she assured me it was no big deal. Well, the head pastor retired and guess who is trying to make a power play to be the new pastor?? You guessed it!

    I hate it every time I type it, but the Southern Baptist Denomination is dying quickly. People like your mom have made so many sacrifices for the the SBC over the years, but she is no longer wanted and is being replaced by the YRR who are so young and indoctrinated they are clueless about Jesus and how a group of people devoted to him works.

  140. PaJo wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    PaJo wrote:
    Authority is given by others who determine the worthiness of the designee.Ā The designee remains under the authority of that worthiness and of those who appointed him/her.
    And on and on it goes. Sorry, not buying the institutional hierarchy that has been on going for centuries.
    All authority in heaven and on earth belongs to whom?
    Sorry. This isnā€™t the contrast I attempted to draw. The point was that authority is derived from outside oneself and it is not autonomous in its exercise.

    Thanks for clarification.

  141. Gram3 wrote:

    Yes. They *claim* that they are being faithful to the Bible, but they are twisting and reshaping it to use as a mere instrument in pursuit of their power.

    There ain’t nobody, an’ I mean nobody, can spin the Bible like Calvary Chapel.
    Them guys have evolved it into an art form.

  142. mot wrote:

    replaced by the YRR who are so young and indoctrinated they are clueless about Jesus and how a group of people devoted to him works.

    No need for Jesus when you have CALVIN.
    CALVIN has God all figured out.

  143. Max wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    scraggy beard, watch cap, wall-to-wall cigars and big stein of beer

    With the exception of the cigars (I think), youā€™ve just described a New Calvinist pastor at a church down the road from me.

    And though it didn’t show in the pic, the Soteriology 101 article also mentioned enough tattoos for a Yakuza. Again, Thug Life.

  144. Nancy2 wrote:

    Hmmmm ā€¦ā€¦ in their world, being a ā€œChristianā€ is like being drafted into the army?

    “The one in a thousand Predestined to walk the hard, drab, grey, joyless path of Salvation.”
    — James Michener, Hawaii, describing the Massachusetts missionaries to “Owhyhee”

  145. Bill Kinnon wrote:

    A church full of happy complimentarians would be about as common as pasture full of unicorns.

    Flip side, if you ever saw either one they would be fake.

  146. Gram3 wrote:

    Canā€™t speak for anyone but Gramp3 and me, but I am busy doing ministry outside the LocalChurch. We meet together with longtime friends for meals and to pray and serve.

    I’m hoping to hear more details as the months go by.

  147. In a lot of church movements historically and at present there seems to be a hint (or maybe not so subtle reality) of utilitarian anthropology running and working underneath them. The greatest happiness is an agenda or theological – ecclesiological application or desire. People are “de-peopled” and reduced to being maneuvered, assimilated, or rejected as caricatures or extensions and projected objects in response to that decided “happiness”, the group’s highest order or perceived optimal good.

    If Christ is not the embodied center of life and measure of highest good and “Great Desire” and THE locus of knowledge = you get pseudo-Christian kingdoms and thus virtues awry and skewed, at best confusing. Even when using Christian language and theo-speak in describing and trying to implement the environment.

    The main issue I have with 9Marks is the usage of church contracts as part of their membership understanding. I wish there would be scholarship opened up to dialogue about this issue because I think it is the center of all the ethical and communal problems they are facing. It may help to serve reconstruction and reorientation in their movement after a process of true deconstruction and reassessment which would require open dialogue and critique.

    Without going into academic goober gob and arguing this from biblical studies, systematic theology, metaphysics, and so on and so different fields that all can be explored here: Essentially, the main thesis is that JESUS himself IS the church contract. And he is rather a sufficient one that demystifies and disqualifies this seemingly new need for human made contracts in the church. And the ethical implications of that mis- or half-understanding about Jesus as church contract himself are paramount. This misapplication, I think, allows and triggers the organic misuse of all the marks in their 9Marks paradigm.

    I myself am turned off and disheartened by the demeanor and type of culture (even if it is only implied and carried out in the unspoken) of which you are not *really* allowed to engage in some really good theological debate and questions and self and communal reflection. True belief and association to God, self, and others requires constant reformations, testing, and reflection and that should be a highest value not and never forfeited in participating in theology. There *should be* absolutely nothing to fear.

  148. Emily Honeycutt wrote:

    I myself am turned off and disheartened by the demeanor and type of culture (even if it is only implied and carried out in the unspoken) of which you are not *really* allowed to engage in some really good theological debate and questions and self and communal reflection. True belief and association to God, self, and others requires constant reformations, testing, and reflection and that should be a highest value not and never forfeited in participating in theology. There *should be* absolutely nothing to fear.

    well said, EMILY

  149. Jerome wrote:

    Note the topic ā€œWhatā€™s Wrong With the Local Church?ā€ is a much more negative formulation than the later ā€œChurch Reformā€ and present ā€œHealthy Churchā€ iterations of Deverā€™s Marksist ideology.

    How many cults have begun on the premise that the local church had departed from what it was meant to be, and some figure claims they need to set it back on the right path?

  150. Christiane wrote:

    I canā€™t imagine going to Church and seeing people being ā€˜disciplinedā€™ publicly and shamed before the whole congregation, or hearing some sermon that dwells on the idolatry of male head-ship as something God approves of.

    I know, what’s next? The pillory and the stocks?

  151. Deb wrote:

    I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.

    I wonder how long this will continue?

  152. Deb wrote:

    Thanks for bringing up the CHBC church covenant. We need to explore this more.

    I highly recommend that you do. It was a primary instrument in my dissatisfaction with, and eventual departure from, CHBC. The way they used it in Communion services was especially brutal.

  153. @ Emily Honeycutt:

    This is a long series of great points, Emily. If I may:

    In a lot of church movements historically and at present there seems to be a hint (or maybe not so subtle reality) of utilitarian anthropology running and working underneath them.

    The basic problem with the single, charismatic leader: if it ultimately begins with his vision, the congregation or business will only ever really exist to staff and resource his personal project. I affirm the importance of vision and purpose, on all kinds of levels, but Christians have not often got to grips with building a truly collective vision, in which everyone contributes right from the start. Indeed, most of the movements whereof you spake, ISTM, are founded by men who dismiss the possibility of everyone contributing. They’ve never seen God do it his way.

    If Christ is not the embodied center of life and measure of highest good and ā€œGreat Desireā€ and THE locus of knowledge = you get pseudo-Christian kingdoms and thus virtues awry and skewed, at best confusing. Even when using Christian language and theo-speak…

    One might almost say, especially when using Christian language. As witness the increasing, and fatuous, use of the word “gospel” as an adjective to legitimise ungodly behaviour. And as you say, it’s Christ HIMSELF, not a static portrait of words about him. That’s the great tragedy of the church’s rejection of the person of the Holy Spirit: He, like Jesus, is in very nature God, and like Jesus, is God With Us.

    …JESUS himself IS the church contract. And he is rather a sufficient one that demystifies and disqualifies this seemingly new need for human made contracts … [which]… allows and triggers the organic misuse of all the marks in their 9Marks paradigm.

    Absolutely. It’s so simple, and so obvious, that it gets rejected time and time again. Technically, Jesus is Lord, yes; but first we must create a visible Jesus that conforms to what we think Jesus ought to be. Then, and only then, can we follow it.

  154. siteseer wrote:

    Christiane wrote:
    I canā€™t imagine going to Church and seeing people being ā€˜disciplinedā€™ publicly and shamed before the whole congregation, or hearing some sermon that dwells on the idolatry of male head-ship as something God approves of.
    I know, whatā€™s next? The pillory and the stocks?

    Check this out if you have time. Our shaming society is interesting to read about ……and chilling

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?_r=0

  155. Lydia wrote:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?_r=0

    not a valid comparison to victims of abuse in churches being shamed publicly, no

    In the link, ‘careless’ making-fun of the silly high-school level LACK of maturity CAN spark a response far beyond the person’s twitter followers …. well, if you put it out there on line, it’s public

    some people can put it out there but they CAN NEVER CONTROL the extent of the damage once it’s in the public sphere … to others OR to self, and maybe if ‘self’ gets boomeranged, it is not so life-destroying after all if it makes someone think about the possibility of the effects of their ‘negativity’ exploding once it is ‘released’ into the world

    “Behold, how great a forest a little fire kindles 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire by hell. 7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and has been tamed by mankind. 8 But the tongue can no man tame”

  156. Lea wrote:

    Iā€™m kind of amazed they are getting away with this in dc.

    I’m not. Much of that same kind of extreme fundamentalist power and control philosophy is also highly prized in certain circles that purposefully fly under the radar and are at work towards a theocratic ‘Christian Nation’. Big money, power politics, secrecy.

  157. @ Lydia:
    Lydia wrote:

    @ Christiane:
    Thanks for the lecture on proper application of information. I am sure you have a higher moral conscious.

    I just don’t agree that the conflating of
    some silly high-school bad-mouthing tweets backfiring
    with
    victims being shamed publicly in a ‘church’
    makes a whole lot of sense, to be honest.

    The tweeter creates the problem for themselves. It backfires. They get hurt.

    The victims of abuse in a ‘church’ being publicly humiliated?

    What IS the connection, LYDIA? I’m not seeing it, no.

  158. Emily Honeycutt wrote:

    Essentially, the main thesis is that JESUS himself IS the church contract. And he is rather a sufficient one that demystifies and disqualifies this seemingly new need for human made contracts in the church.

    AMEN!

  159. Eeyore wrote:

    Deb wrote:

    Thanks for bringing up the CHBC church covenant. We need to explore this more.

    I highly recommend that you do. It was a primary instrument in my dissatisfaction with, and eventual departure from, CHBC. The way they used it in Communion services was especially brutal.

    Can you refresh my memory? Does CHBC have closed communion?

  160. Deb wrote:

    Can you refresh my memory? Does CHBC have closed communion?

    Bearing in mind this data is almost 15 years old, but when I was there it was still open. VERY reluctantly open. Dever was very up-front in his sermons about wanting communion to be fully closed to non-covenanted members.

  161. mot wrote:

    I hate it every time I type it, but the Southern Baptist Denomination is dying quickly. People like your mom have made so many sacrifices for the the SBC over the years, but she is no longer wanted and is being replaced by the YRR who are so young and indoctrinated they are clueless about Jesus and how a group of people devoted to him works.

    I say this as one who decades ago was baptized in an SBC church, was the first church in which I was a member, so I’m not purely disinterested (or uninterested), but if it’s to die, let it die, if the people in the pews have become so undiscerning that they let the wolves in, then let it die. Jesus does not need the Southern Baptist Conference or any man-made institution, the sacrifices that moms made for the SBC were made for Jesus, and those sacrifices will be remembered by Him–and if they were not, if they were truly made just to promote the greatness of a temporal institution, then it’s good that they go up in smoke, because that’s where they were going regardless.

  162. Eeyore wrote:

    Dever was very up-front in his sermons about wanting communion to be fully closed to non-covenanted members.

    If, on due and fair investigation, it were proven that Mr Dever did indeed believe and teach that only believers of his own sect should be invited to share bread and wine in Jesus' name, then the remainder of the Church would be obligated to have nothing further to do with him. The concept of "closed communion" is the very heart and soul of what the Bible means by "division".

  163. Lowlandseer wrote:

    Tom Ascol, from the Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, spoke four times on ā€œSpiritual Warfareā€ and four times on ā€œThe Bible for Todayā€ (its authority, power, sufficiency and finality).

    Ascol is the most prominent personality among the Founders movement within SBC. Classical Calvinists, the Founders nurtured folks like Mohler and Dever until they could strike out on their own as “New” Calvinists. I suspect his “Spiritual Warfare” includes warring against anything that stands in the way of Calvinization of the SBC. And, of course, “The Bible for Today” would be focused on those Scriptures which can be twisted to support the tenets of reformed theology. It’s interesting that Ascol has no visible platform in America in the New Calvinism movement. He and the Founders operate behind the scene to influence and encourage their neo-brethren to accomplish what they could not over the years … Calvinization of the Southern Baptist Convention. They actually call their efforts the “Quiet Revolution.” It looks like they pulled it off!

  164. @ Christiane:

    It was an example of the shaming culture bandwagon. Whether it is church, work, etc. In fact, churches use the same tactics we read about in the article.

    I think her tweet was stupid. but Not one person asked her what she meant or to clarify as it went viral (with only 170 followers). She was condemned. She lost her job and reputation smeared. Same with the other examples.

    At least we have discussions here. Sorry my link did not meet your standards.

  165. okrapod wrote:

    go to a local bar and have public discussions

    In “traditional” Southern Baptist life, such behavior would border on the “unpardonable sin!” Southern Baptists have passed many resolutions over the years in opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages. That may sound fuddy-duddy in the 21st century, but that’s who Southern Baptists have been. So, when Darrin Patrick and his Acts 29 upstarts decided to take church to taverns, it was like sticking a finger in the eye of a long-standing Baptist position. Of course, the New Calvinists taking over SBC don’t really give a big whoop what traditional non-Calvinist Baptists think … it’s cool to rebel against your parents’ religion and take all the stuff they paid for (seminaries, mission agencies, publishing house, churches).

  166. @ Eeyore:
    I remember discussions about this on pastor blogs years ago. I got the impression more and more SBC Neo Cal pastors were making the case for closed communication tied to church discipline issues, too. They were treating it like a sacrament that could even be withheld on members– which is not Baptist at all.

    After learning about the “keys” later on, it all started to make more sense. The elders could decide to withhold communion based on their own opinion of your spiritual standing.

  167. In the recent 9Marx Journal, which is being discussed here, I think it is interesting to note a few items:

    9Marx “asked three pastors from three different traditions to answer the question: What is the nature of a pastorā€™s authority?” Kevin DeYoung was asked to write on the Presbyterian tradition. Kevin DeYoung has been a member of the Presbyterian church (PCA) for one year. Prior to that he had spent his whole life in the Reformed Church of America. His leadership was key in getting his RCA church to withdraw from that denomination and join the PCA. They left for reasons of conscience. It seems strange to me that 9Marx couldn’t find a presbyterian pastor to comment on the question who wasn’t actually a novice to the denomination.

    Second, to demonstrate the overlap between 9Marx and The Gospel Corporation, DeYoung’s 9Marx article has also been published on the TGC website. One difference of note – TGC still accepts comments.

    https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/kevindeyoung/2016/10/04/what-is-the-nature-of-pastoral-authority-a-presbyterian-perspective/

  168. Eeyore wrote:

    The way they used it in Communion services was especially brutal.

    The creepy part about that to me is the covenant is recited as if communion is about re-affirming the church covenant rather than thanksgiving for what Christ has accomplished for us and looking forward to the consummation of the Kingdom. Reciting the church covenant takes the spotlight away from the New Covenant Christ inaugurated at the Last Supper.

  169. Gram3 wrote:

    The creepy part about that to me is the covenant is recited as if communion is about re-affirming the church covenant rather than thanksgiving for what Christ has accomplished for us and looking forward to the consummation of the Kingdom. Reciting the church covenant takes the spotlight away from the New Covenant Christ inaugurated at the Last Supper.

    ‘Creepy’ is an understatement!

  170. Gram3 wrote:

    The creepy part about that to me is the covenant is recited as if communion is about re-affirming the church covenant rather than thanksgiving for what Christ has accomplished for us and looking forward to the consummation of the Kingdom.

    It’s brainwashing if you ask me. The local church and/or elders become central to the Christian’s walk and not Christ.

  171. refugee wrote:

    I donā€™t know. Maybe youā€™re not supposed to enjoy worship. If youā€™re enjoying lifting your voice to praise God, if youā€™re enjoying joining with his saints to pray together, then maybe youā€™re dishonoring God somehow. Maybe the more miserable you are, the better your ā€œsacrifice of obedienceā€ in his eyes.

    I’m sure they would deny that’s what they teach. Of course, the idea that church isn’t about you and your preferences, you’re not there to GET anything but just serve God, is everywhere. When it comes to the leaders’ convictions and preferences though, they sure seem to get whatever they want.

  172. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Eeyore wrote:

    Dever was very up-front in his sermons about wanting communion to be fully closed to non-covenanted members.

    If, on due and fair investigation, it were proven that Mr Dever did indeed believe and teach that only believers of his own sect should be invited to share bread and wine in Jesus’ name, then the remainder of the Church would be obligated to have nothing further to do with him. The concept of “closed communion” is the very heart and soul of what the Bible means by “division”.

    Closed communion is a feature of denominations that believe in some version of the literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist, along with the apostle Paul’s warning about possible judgement for not discerning the Lord’s body, and the abuses coming with it. Since they don’t believe in sacraments, what the 9 Marx inner circle wants to do is teach it in conjunction with their ideas on church discipline. If excommunication from one 9 Marx church means no communing in any of them, but you can’t officially leave the fold without first being safely tucked away in a new one, you must either submit to their discipline, or walk away from your vows and written membership covenant. If possible, they will try to pursue you to your next church to make sure you’re still getting the discipline they think you should have, even if conviction and conscience are in play.

  173. NJ wrote:

    If possible, they will try to pursue you to your next church to make sure youā€™re still getting the discipline they think you should have, even if conviction and conscience are in play.

    i.e. Tattling to Teacher. “YOU’RE GONNA GET IN TROUBLE! YOU’RE GONNA GET IN TROUBLE! I’LL SHOW YOU! I’LL SHOW YOU! YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO ME WHEN I GAVE YOU THE CHANCE! NYAAAH! NYAAAH! NYAAH!”

    And some non-9Marx pastors have laughed in their face and hung up on them when they tried this.

  174. Lydia wrote:

    @ Christiane:

    It was an example of the shaming culture bandwagon. Whether it is church, work, etc. In fact, churches use the same tactics we read about in the article.

    I think her tweet was stupid. but Not one person asked her what she meant or to clarify as it went viral (with only 170 followers). She was condemned. She lost her job and reputation smeared. Same with the other examples.

    And all the Righteous who piled on her got full confirmation of their Righteousness from all the other Righteous Ones. Instant doublepluswarmfeelies.

    Beware of the Righteous saints who have never been caught.

  175. @ NJ:

    R D Culver grounds the idea of closed communion in the Baptist view of the nature of the church. Quoting AH Strong he says that “Baptists regard a local church as that smaller company of regenerateprsons who in any given community, unite themselves together in accordance with Christ’s laws. In this definition regenerate church membership and obedience to Christ’s was are included. On this basis some Baptists have argued that the only true churches in the world are Baptist churches and others who practise believers immersion and congregational polity. To call a Presbyterian local group a ‘church’, then, is not a matter of accuracy but only of ‘courtesy’. Further, since the ordinance of the Lords Supper is held to belong to the local church, unimmersed people, who by definition of the church cannot be church members, are excluded, hence many Baptist churches practice ‘close’ communion. It is partly out of a background such as this that Southern Batistsave persisted in staying out of ecumenical and other inter-churchorganizations. They are not unfriendly, nor do most Baptists deny the catholicity of the church. Rather they feel an essential principle of ecclesiology is at stake.”
    (Culver: Systematic Theology, Ecclesiology, p 804)

    Seen on this light, Mark Dever is reiterating long established SBC principles and not really saying anything new.

  176. NJ wrote:

    Closed communion is a feature of denominations that believe in some version of the literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist, along with the apostle Paulā€™s warning about possible judgement for not discerning the Lordā€™s body, and the abuses coming with it. Since they donā€™t believe in sacraments, what the 9 Marx inner circle wants to do is teach it in conjunction with their ideas on church discipline.

    9 Marks believes in being hateful. That’s what closed communion is about and demeaning dear saints.

    As someone pointed out, Mark Dever/9 Mark wants closed communion at Capitol Hill Baptist Church but is in a bind because of all of the 9 Marks fans who visit CHBC and what an affront it would be to them to be denied communion!

  177. @ Lowlandseer:
    The idea that baptism should be delayed until a child reaches majority is a new thing in the SBC, at least in my lifetime. If the local Baptist church refuses baptism, then they are also refusing communion to a child until said child reaches majority and is baptized. That is new and peculiar to 9Marks churches, AFAIK.

  178. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Eeyore wrote:
    Dever was very up-front in his sermons about wanting communion to be fully closed to non-covenanted members.
    If, on due and fair investigation, it were proven that Mr Dever did indeed believe and teach that only believers of his own sect should be invited to share bread and wine in Jesus’ name, then the remainder of the Church would be obligated to have nothing further to do with him. The concept of “closed communion” is the very heart and soul of what the Bible means by “division”.

    Nick,

    Mark Dever’s beliefs about having closed communion have been written about and are on the internet. I’ve read them previously and was in shock. It may also be on the 9 Marks website.

  179. I know of other Protestant denominations that have closed communion… I also know of a demonenation that will not acept people into membership unless they have baptised by dunking three times foward… once for the son, once for G&d, and once for the HS..

    They would not acepted that I was forward dunked only once! With that, I did not go back…

    It is all about marketing their “brand” which they think is superior to other “brands”…

  180. With regards to my query about whether CHBC practices 'closed communion', I believe I have found the answer over on the 9Marks website – Mailbag 17.

    Here is a quote by Jonathan Leeman who answers the Mailbag questions.

    To be clear, my church adheres not to “closed communion” but “close communion.” We don’t believe you have to be a member of our church to receive the Lord’s Supper. Rather, we fence the table by saying you should be a member in good standing of some church where the gospel is preached.

    "Close" communion, NOT "closed" communion.  Apparently, there are three types of communion:  'open', 'closed', and 'close'. šŸ˜‰

  181. I wonder what “good standing” and “gospel is preached” means? What about a “free will baptist” with weekly alter calls? I can see the Neo-Cals saying that might not be the “gospel” as they define it!

    Deb wrote:

    With regards to my query about whether CHBC practices ‘closed communion’, I believe I have found the answer over on the 9Marks website – Mailbag 17.
    Here is a quote by Jonathan Leeman who answers the Mailbag questions.
    To be clear, my church adheres not to “closed communion” but “close communion.” We don’t believe you have to be a member of our church to receive the Lord’s Supper. Rather, we fence the table by saying you should be a member in good standing of some church where the gospel is preached.
    “Close” communion, NOT “closed” communion.  Apparently, there are three types of communion:  ‘open’, ‘closed’, and ‘close’.

  182. Gram3 wrote:

    Eeyore wrote:
    The creepy part about that to me is the covenant is recited as if communion is about re-affirming the church covenant rather than thanksgiving for what Christ has accomplished for us and looking forward to the consummation of the Kingdom. Reciting the church covenant takes the spotlight away from the New Covenant Christ inaugurated at the Last Supper.

    ExACTly. Communion goes from being the ultimate expression of Gospel to the ultimate expression of Law. All in the name of (as several other comments here already noted) Proper Church Discipline.

  183. My way or the High Way… (or in this case, the low, damned way!)

    Eeyore wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    Eeyore wrote:
    The creepy part about that to me is the covenant is recited as if communion is about re-affirming the church covenant rather than thanksgiving for what Christ has accomplished for us and looking forward to the consummation of the Kingdom. Reciting the church covenant takes the spotlight away from the New Covenant Christ inaugurated at the Last Supper.
    ExACTly. Communion goes from being the ultimate expression of Gospel to the ultimate expression of Law. All in the name of (as several other comments here already noted) Proper Church Discipline.

  184. Todd Wilhelm wrote:

    It seems strange to me that 9Marx couldnā€™t find a presbyterian pastor to comment on the question who wasnā€™t actually a novice to the denomination.

    Precisely.

  185. Deb wrote:

    With regards to my query about whether CHBC practices ‘closed communion’, I believe I have found the answer over on the 9Marks website ā€“ Mailbag 17.

    Here is a quote by Jonathan Leeman who answers the Mailbag questions.

    To be clear, my church adheres not to ā€œclosed communionā€ but ā€œclose communion.ā€ We donā€™t believe you have to be a member of our church to receive the Lordā€™s Supper. Rather, we fence the table by saying you should be a member in good standing of some church where the gospel is preached.

    “Close” communion, NOT “closed” communion.Ā  Apparently, there are three types of communion:Ā  ‘open’, ‘closed’, and ‘close’.

    So weird. Everybody growing up in an sbc church got baptized as a kid, probably in elementary school.

    We have some statement about communion and it says it is by intinction but I wasn’t paying close attention and thought it was by Instinct! Ha. Had to look the other up.

  186. I’m with former President Jimmy Carter who takes communion in whatever church he’s worshipping.

  187. @ Deb:
    Only the really hard-core Southern Baptist churches practice “closed” communion (their church members only). I always had a problem with churches while visiting them during a communion service. It’s as if they didn’t recognize other believers as a member of the Body of Christ.

  188. Robert wrote:

    It always struck me as Calvin wanting to do for Christianity what Euclid did for geometry

    Oh thank you! Let’s call the healthier old form Euclidian Calvinism.

  189. Deb wrote:

    Not a Pokemon fan this go round either!

    In our area over the summer, Pokemon Go had the benefit of reducing the amount of teen partying, vandalism, joy riding, etc. Some parents had the mind-bending thought that, “Oh well, at least Susie and Johnny are chasing invisible monsters instead of raiding the liquor cabinet.” Kids today! šŸ˜‰

  190. Max wrote:

    Itā€™s as if they didnā€™t recognize other believers as a member of the Body of Christ.

    Yes, that’s how it feels to me too, although I don’t recall it every happening to me in a Protestant church. It rubs me the wrong way.

  191. @ Lea:
    Some years back Mark Dever and Al Mohler both stated that they would deny communion to Ligon Duncan because he was a paedobaptist. Sam Storms made this comment about it

    “Let me repeat that. Because of Duncan ‘s paedo-baptist convictions, both Dever and Mohler would prohibit his participation in the Eucharist. They would deny to him partnership in the table of our Lord. They would withhold the bread and the cup from him because of his disagreement with them on who are the proper recipients of Christian baptism.”

    The whole story and context can be found here.
    http://www.samstorms.com/all-articles/post/piper–grudem–dever–et-al–on-baptism–the-lords-table–and-church-membership–just-how–tog

  192. NJ wrote:

    Closed communion is a feature of denominations that believe in some version of the literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist…

    Not necessarily…

    The Church of England, for instance, is a sacramental denomination (as they’re known) and certainly takes very seriously the literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist. As an interesting example, I came across an example of a church that was planted by an inner-city Anglican church here in the UK (I forget where, other than that it was in England). The congregational members who joined the plant considered it a great sacrifice, because there was no ordained priest (only a lay preacher) in the planted-out congregation, and this meant that they could not receive Holy Communion: in taking the gospel to an impoverished inner-city area, they missed out on the Body and Blood of Christ. I do not personally believe they missed out; but they certainly did. But anyway – to return to the point – the C of E practices open Communion.

  193. Lea wrote:

    I donā€™t recall it every happening to me in a Protestant church

    I’ve actually visited churches which had closed communion and the non-members were asked to leave before the communion service. That makes a believer bought-by-the-blood of Jesus feel like a lesser citizen of the Kingdom (at least in that church’s little kingdom).

  194. And this was quite difficult to find, even with the help of the Wayback Machine. It's an excerpt from an interview featuring Mark Dever. The question was. "How do you reform the church in the face of opposition?" (link)

  195. http://sbcvoices.com/my-beliefs-about-the-extent-of-communion/#comment-230107

    “I attended a 9Marks Weekender and the subject of close communion came up. CHBC practices close (not closed) communion at their church. . . .visitors may if they are baptized (believerā€™s baptism) and not under discipline with their church. . . .Ligon Duncan was mentioned, as he has taken communion there. . . .Mark said that Ligon has been baptized as a believer and is in good standing with his church and is thus welcome when he visits.”

  196. Lowlandseer wrote:

    Some years back Mark Dever and Al Mohler both stated that they would deny communion to Ligon Duncan because he was a paedobaptist.

    What this shows, I think, is just how little the sharing in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit means to these people. Would they send someone to the electric chair for disagreeing with them on baptism? Would they pull the trigger? Calvin did, of course, but that’s splitting hairs. Life was cheap in those days. Today, fellowship is cheap. It’s easy, and comfortable, to call “heretic”, and painless to cast an excommunication spell on someone you don’t like.

    I’ve never met Duncan Ligon *, if I did we might or might not get on well; what I’ve heard about his theology isn’t promising. But his being a paedobaptist doesn’t disqualify him from bread and wine; nor does his stance on theMillenium (even if he’s not an Amillenialist like me, to the degree I think it’s important) or on the evils of Manchester United.

    “Duncan” is a Scottish name, and it’s primarily a first name. So there. “Ligon” is possibly Polish, but google isn’t sure.

  197. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    What this shows, I think, is just how little the sharing in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit means to these people. Would they send someone to the electric chair for disagreeing with them on baptism? Would they pull the trigger? Calvin did, of course, but thatā€™s splitting hairs

    Never underestimate what Utter Righteousness is capable of.

  198. Friend wrote:

    Deb wrote:

    Not a Pokemon fan this go round either!

    In our area over the summer, Pokemon Go had the benefit of reducing the amount of teen partying, vandalism, joy riding, etc. Some parents had the mind-bending thought that, ā€œOh well, at least Susie and Johnny are chasing invisible monsters instead of raiding the liquor cabinet.ā€ Kids today!

    “Gotta catch ’em all…”

    And things get funny. Just search YouTube for “PokĆ©mon Go”.

    Here’s a little something from the last time PokĆ©mon was big; a third party pencil/paper/funny dice RPG:
    https://www.amazon.com/Fuzzy-Seizure-Monsters-Small-Mouth/dp/1894525175

  199. Lowlandseer wrote:

    R D Culver grounds the idea of closed communion in the Baptist view of the nature of the church. Quoting AH Strong he says that ā€œBaptists regard a local church as that smaller company of regenerateprsons who in any given community, unite themselves together in accordance with Christā€™s laws. In this definition regenerate church membership and obedience to Christā€™s was are included. On this basis some Baptists have argued that the only true churches in the world are Baptist churches and others who practise believers immersion and congregational polity. To call a Presbyterian local group a ā€˜churchā€™, then, is not a matter of accuracy but only of ā€˜courtesyā€™. Further, since the ordinance of the Lords Supper is held to belong to the local church, unimmersed people, who by definition of the church cannot be church members, are excluded, hence many Baptist churches practice ā€˜closeā€™ communion. It is partly out of a background such as this that Southern Batistsave persisted in staying out of ecumenical and other inter-churchorganizations. They are not unfriendly, nor do most Baptists deny the catholicity of the church. Rather they feel an essential principle of ecclesiology is at stake.ā€
    (Culver: Systematic Theology, Ecclesiology, p 804)
    Seen on this light, Mark Dever is reiterating long established SBC principles and not really saying anything new.

    I have been a member of a baptist church for almost 40 years, and all baptist churches in my area are “close” communion. My home less than an hours drive from where Mark Dever grew up.
    Ahem, I’m just glad Mark left Southern Kentucky!

  200. mot wrote:

    Robin C wrote:
    Deb wrote:
    @ mot:
    I daresay the average Southern Baptist has never even heard of 9Marks.
    Truth! They have not. I am no longer in the Southern Baptist Church but, many old friends and all my family are. My mother especially is started to notice things arenā€™t really like the SBC she has always known. So, I told her about 9Marx and she flat out said if what I am saying is true she will leave the SBC even if that is all she has known for 70 years. The music minister who came to their church last year used to be a pastor at an Elder led congregation. I told her that was a red flag but she assured me it was no big deal. Well, the head pastor retired and guess who is trying to make a power play to be the new pastor?? You guessed it!
    I hate it every time I type it, but the Southern Baptist Denomination is dying quickly. People like your mom have made so many sacrifices for the the SBC over the years, but she is no longer wanted and is being replaced by the YRR who are so young and indoctrinated they are clueless about Jesus and how a group of people devoted to him works.

    It is sad! They specifically are targeting the older generation. This man even began a sermon by addressing people who were “gossiping” about him. I laughed when she told me because I knew what would come next. But my mom is right about one thing. Older people liker her and my father faithfully tithe and always give to missions. The young ones.. not so much. I believe the Neo Cal baptist’s are biting the hands that feed them.

  201. Robin C wrote:

    I believe the Neo Cal baptistā€™s are biting the hands that feed them.

    So true. The older folks have tithed and supported missions, but these youngins do not want these older folks. If these older folks leave or are forced out there will not be very much money for these youngins to have church with. It is a very poor strategy.

  202. Bryan wrote:

    Mark Dever faithfully preaches the. word. Thankful for his service to the kingdom.

    That depends on how one defines “faithfully.” Leeman as much as admits that they are imposing something as, effectively, law with no explicit commands. I am not thankful for Dever’s insistence that females are subordinate to males simply because XX and not XY. That is simply not in the text and is more stuff like the “keys” that 9Marks just makes up. And ESS, which 9Marks has taught, though it has probably been scrubbed from the internet by now. So, no, I don’t think the dictionary meaning of “faithfully” fits. Those are essential to faithful presentation of the gospel, according to 9Marks. If you add to the gospel, you are preaching another gospel. And now everyone knows why I got keyed out of a 9Marksy church.

  203. Gram3 wrote:

    Which kingdom?

    I still recall that Dever excommunicated 256 members from his kingdom in the mid-1990s … for not coming to church regularly! He claimed they had not taken the radical nature of conversion seriously. Perhaps they just didn’t like his radical authoritarian way of doing church!

  204. A little comment re: closed communion: it is entirely possible that i am wrong but it is my understanding that until ~150 years ago, no one practiced open communion. Open communion is a fairly recent innovation.

    One’s position will be determined in some degree by what one believes communion to be. If it is a representation, an ordinance a presentation or a memorial, then open communion makes sense. But if it is a sacrament, a uniting of a physical action with a mystical reality, then closed communion makes sense. The definition of what it means to be in communion is the crux of the matter.

    Piping up with historical perspective and the need for clarity in definitions. As usual.

  205. Deb wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    I can understand your sentiments, but remember that some of these Neo-Cal pastors are not being transparent with pastor search committees.

    I understand fully, it can be hard. But we have the Holy Spirit, we shouldn’t just have to rely on great hair and smooth talk and resumes and references. There’s discernment in every believer. Every church catastrophe I’ve run into with the family over the last decade was a situation in which I knew something was wrong from virtually the first moment I got to know the people there, but there was something I wanted that wasn’t quite the right thing, and so fell for glitz and big welcomes and the typical love bombs–and just ignored the clear voice until it was a flat out scream and we had to get out to preserve our faith and keep our children from more abuse.

    It was my fault the whole way, willing to bet a lot of those committee members who pick the smilin young feller lying through his teeth about his intentions had to ignore a lot of troubling thoughts as well.

  206. Bryan wrote:

    Mark Dever faithfully preaches the. word. Thankful for his service to the kingdom.

    Mark Dever has simply released the 1970’s cultic, heavy-Shepherding’s tactics that most of the Florida 5 founders repented of for being un-Biblical and abusive.

    Mark Dever needs to repent. There is “nothing new” or for that matter good about his cultic teachings. He has damaged countless Christians.

  207. PaJo wrote:

    Oneā€™s position will be determined in some degree by what one believes communion to be. If it is a representation, an ordinance a presentation or a memorial, then open communion makes sense. But if it is a sacrament, a uniting of a physical action with a mystical reality, then closed communion makes sense. The definition of what it means to be in communion is the crux of the matter.

    Actually, from my observation, it stems from how broadly the church in question interprets the “examine yourselves” chapter in I Corinthians. Even in theologically “sacramental” denominations, when push comes to shove most pastors there practice open communion where possible. But for those who read the “examine yourselves” passage with no historical context, they close communion to make sure people aren’t committing “suicide by wafer”. The ironic thing is, they end up taking the duty of examination upon themselves and out of the hands of the individuals concerned. Ultimately, they don’t trust people to make the right decision.

  208. @ Eeyore:
    It’s sometimes like this, but one also has to allow for discretion. Modern assert individualism –definition of oneself by oneself. But the ancients, and most, historically, assert personhood or personality, which is determined in relationship. And it would be in relationship that one would determine readiness to receive communion.

    I am Orthodox Christian-we engage in confession. My more-true-than-not joke is that I go to my family and friends and ask what I need to confess. šŸ™‚

  209. PaJo wrote:

    A little comment re: closed communion: it is entirely possible that i am wrong but it is my understanding that until ~150 years ago, no one practiced open communion. Open communion is a fairly recent innovation.
    One’s position will be determined in some degree by what one believes communion to be.

    I appreciate your piping up with historical perspectives! The following is not an argument lobbed back at you – it’s a crystallising of my own thoughts which, again, are not God’s final word!

    I must admit I don’t know how long the Church of England has practiced open communion – I am, technically, a member of the C of E, having been baptised (ed.) as a bairn and confirmed at 12 or 13 – and I’ve never known anything else here in the UK. With the informational proviso that the Baptist Union of Scotland is enormously different from, say, the SBC – they have no formal affiliation together in any sense – it also practices open communion.

    I suppose one might say that open communion isn’t new at all, having been practiced by the church in Acts! Though I realise that’s not what you were saying. I see what you meant by it depending partly on one’s understanding of communion. It also depends, I think, on one’s understanding of “church” and, indeed, of Jesus since the Church is His body and, more to the point, is His, period. If my group is the only group of believers on earth, then indeed I should share communion with nobody else. Refusing to share it with a given person affirms my claim, ISTM, that he/she is not in Christ.

    It’s one thing to deny communion to someone I’ve never met – I accept that this does make sense if one genuinely fears that person may eat and drink judgement on themselves. But to deny it to someone I do know, over secondary doctrine, I believe is sectarian and factional. That’s the tragedy.

  210. PaJo wrote:

    But the ancients, and most, historically, assert personhood or personality, which is determined in relationship. And it would be in relationship that one would determine readiness to receive communion.
    I am Orthodox Christian-we engage in confession. My more-true-than-not joke is that I go to my family and friends and ask what I need to confess.

    You know, there’s a lot of sense in this.

    The NT talks about confessing sins to one another. Not that we shouldn’t confess them to God, but there’s a case for saying that a sin that has not been confessed to another believer – and I mean one who has properly earned the right to be trusted here – is unconfessed sin.

  211. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    having been baptist as a bairn

    Just spotted that typo which, in context, really muddies the meaning. I meant to type: having been baptised as a bairn…

  212. Lydia wrote:

    I think her tweet was stupid. but Not one person asked her what she meant or to clarify as it went viral (with only 170 followers). She was condemned. She lost her job and reputation smeared. Same with the other examples.

    At least we have discussions here. Sorry my link did not meet your standards.

    That’s why I don’t ‘tweet’, LYDIA, as I get in enough trouble just commenting on blogs. Don’t concern yourself with my ‘standards’ or the state of my ‘moral conscientiousness’ …. I have no illusions of any superiority, believe me.

    As for that tweeter ….. well, she may not have meant what it implied, no, and I can see that;
    but others couldn’t and didn’t see it and took her at her word ….. is an old saying in Judaism that ‘we can speak in Jerusalem and kill in Syria’ …. an inference to how we cannot control the destructiveness of our words, which once spoken and released may have consequences far different from our own intentions. I not lecturing, I’m speaking from my own failures, Lydia.

  213. PaJo wrote:

    Oneā€™s position will be determined in some degree by what one believes communion to be.

    Yes, and I have voluntarily abstained from communion a few times because I do not believe it is sacramental as well as some other personal reasons. That was a matter of conscience and definitely *not* a rule for anyone else! I can imagine there are some with a sacramental view who would abstain in a Baptist church, as well, since it is considered memorial and not sacramental. Once upon a time, Baptist churches invited all who have professed faith and been baptized to join in the Lord’s Supper. I don’t even remember immersion being specified. The YRR have made some changes that seem much more aligned with a sacramental view, and they have tied it firmly to membership covenants. And that has resulted in a move toward delayed baptism.

  214. Just wondering about the word ā€œCommunion.ā€

    The word ā€œCommunion;ā€ What does it mean in the Bible?

    Not from a religious standpoint, or a religious tradition,
    or a religious sacrement, or a religious ritual…

    But – What does the Bible have to say about ā€œCommunion?ā€
    Does your Bible Version even have the word ā€œCommunion?ā€
    Many english versions do NOT.

    In the Bible…
    Did any of His Disciples ever ā€œTake Communion?ā€ ā€œReceive Communion?ā€
    ā€œGive Communion?ā€ ā€œCelebrate Communion?ā€ ā€œServe Communion?ā€

    If, in the Bible, His Disciples did NOTā€ˆDo these things?

    Why do WE, His Sheep, His Ekklesia, His Church, His Body, His Servants…

    Why do WE? Do these things?

  215. A. Amos Love wrote:

    But ā€“ What does the Bible have to say about ā€œCommunion?ā€
    Does your Bible Version even have the word ā€œCommunion?ā€
    Many english versions do NOT.
    In the Bibleā€¦
    Did any of His Disciples ever ā€œTake Communion?ā€ ā€œReceive Communion?ā€
    ā€œGive Communion?ā€ ā€œCelebrate Communion?ā€ ā€œServe Communion?ā€
    If, in the Bible, His Disciples did NOTā€ˆDo these things?
    Why do WE, His Sheep, His Ekklesia, His Church, His Body, His Servantsā€¦
    Why do WE? Do these things?

    Technically, the baptist churches in my area don’t call it “communion”. It is referred to as “the Lord’s Supper”. That is in the Bible. I just use the word “communion” on TWW because that’s what other commenters use.

  216. Gram3 wrote:

    The YRR have made some changes that seem much more aligned with a sacramental view, and they have tied it firmly to membership covenants. And that has resulted in a move toward delayed baptism.

    I think the problem here is that they want to be presbyterians and they aren’t willing to just own it. They want the elder led, calvinist but they know you can’t actually change the baptism part of baptist, even though it fits better with Calvinist worldview, imo. So you have this mishmash of presbyterian and baptist that doesn’t really fit well. Weirdly, they seem to have gone the opposite way with baptism, like if we can’t baptize babies we will wait till they are full grown adults? There is no in betweeN?

  217. A. Amos Love wrote:

    If, in the Bible, His Disciples did NOTā€ˆDo these things?

    Why do WE, His Sheep, His Ekklesia, His Church, His Body, His Servantsā€¦

    Why do WE? Do these things?

    Even before the sacred Scriptures were first written down, the early Christians gathered for prayer and for ‘the Thanksgiving’ (Eucharist) which is also known as ‘the Lord’s Supper’. It pre-dates the writing of the New Testament and the formation of the canon by the early councils

    Why did they do it?
    Because Our Lord had asked them to do it.

    Why do we do it?
    Because it is a part of what the apostles preserved and handed down to us through the centuries.

  218. PaJo wrote:

    A little comment re: closed communion: it is entirely possible that i am wrong but it is my understanding that until ~150 years ago, no one practiced open communion. Open communion is a fairly recent innovation.

    Lord’s Supper at the North Carolina Baptist Convention’s Boiling Springs campmeeting, 170+ years ago:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=NFIbAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA345

    “we reached the Boiling-Spring camp-ground, and all around saw abundant indications of the immense gathering. …an ample circle of the ministers of Christ; and as a courtesy due to the strange brotherā€”as they called us, we were announced for the next sermon….After this discourse the Lord’s Supper was administered, and we trust to many a believing heart the Saviour manifested Himself in the breaking of bread.”

  219. Lea wrote:

    they seem to have gone the opposite way with baptism, like if we canā€™t baptize babies we will wait till they are full grown adults?

    Contrast Dever’s claims and Spurgeon’s reality:

    http://www.capitolhillbaptist.org/sermon/the-baptism-of-children-at-capitol-hill-baptist-church/

    “the practice of baptizing pre-teenage children is of recent development (largely early 20th century) and of limited geography (largely limited to the United States, and places where American evangelicals have exercised great influence). Baptists in the past were known for waiting to baptize until the believers were adults.”

    http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols28-30/chs1785.pdf

    “What would you think if I introduced six children to you whom I saw, one after another, last week, and who all came forward with eagerness to say, ā€œWe have been washed in the blood of Jesus and we want to join His Churchā€? I said, ā€œCome along, my children; I am glad to see you.ā€ When I talked with them and heard what God had done for them, I had great confidence in proposing them to the Church! I have not found young converts turn back. I usually find that these young ones who are introduced early to the Church hold on and become our best members! Do not refuse to receive them, lest it should ever happen to you as it did to one who was cruelly prudent. A child had loved the Savior for some two or three years, and she desired to make a confession of her faith. She begged her mother that she might be baptized. The mother said that she thought she was too young. The child went to bed broken-hearted, and in the morning a great tear stood in her eye. She had joined the church triumphant above! Do not let your child ever have to complain of you, that you will not believe in its truthful love to Jesus. Do you expect perfection in a child before it joins the church? Then I hope you are perfect yourself”

  220. Lea wrote:

    So you have this mishmash of presbyterian and baptist that doesnā€™t really fit well.

    Well, that’s pretty much what Congregationalism was back in the days of Jonathan Edwards, their hero of the faith. The denominations coming out of the Church of England went in very diverse directions. Throw Edwardsians in with Anabaptists and you get the messy nature of traditional (post-Civil War) Southern Baptists. We used to live together pretty well until the neo-Edwardsians decided we needed to be distilled until there was hardly anything left that resembled how we started. Baptists are supposed to be messy, not tidy like the Reformed. That is not a slam at the Reformed but merely an observation that the cultures are (usually) very different.

  221. Nancy2 – Christiane

    Thanks for the replys.

    And have you ever noticed this,
    In 1st Cor it says, Jesus said,
    ā€œthis is my body which is broken for you.ā€

    But NOT a bone of His body was broken on the cross
    in order to fulfill prophecy.

    And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said,
    Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you:
    this do in remembrance of me.
    1 Cor 11:24 KJV

    He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken.
    Ps 34:20 KJV

    For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled,
    A bone of him shall not be broken.
    John 19:36 KJV

    If not a bone was broken;

    What did Jesus mean when He said,
    ā€œThis is my body which is broken for you?ā€
    ———–

    And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
    them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice;
    and there shall be ā€œONEā€ fold, and ā€œONEā€ shepherd.
    John 10:16

    One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice.

    {{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}

  222. ā€œItā€™s time for the church to create space in its local assemblies for strong negroes who happily affirm authority while advocating for more opportunities for negroes to flourish according to their gifts and qualification.ā€

    Thanks, 9Marx

  223. @ NJ:
    This SO resonated with me, given that the great sacred choral works are my first and greatest music love. My husband and I have had season tickets for the local professional art-music choir for a few years. One of the concerts two seasons ago featured British composer John Tavener’s gorgeous “Svyati,” with the principal cellist from our local professional symphony. Tavener (who died in 2013) was a convert from the Anglican faith to the Orthodox faith, and his conversion influenced his compositional style.

    Tavener wrote about this work: “The cello represents the Priest or Ikon of Christ, and should play at a distance from the choir, perhaps at the opposite end of the building. As is [sic] Greek drama, choir and priest are in dialogue with each other. Since the cello represents the Ikon of Christ, it must be played without any sentiment of a Western character, but should derive from the chanting of the Eastern Orthodox Church.”

    The performance we attended, held at a large Roman Catholic church, was utterly beautiful and profound and worshipful. (Actually, many of these “secular” choral concerts we attend serve as worship experiences for meā€”pretty much the only ones nowadays.)

    Back to the topic at handā€¦ Apologies if I’ve gone too far OT.

  224. Deb wrote:

    With regards to my query about whether CHBC practices ‘closed communion’, I believe I have found the answer over on the 9Marks website ā€“ Mailbag 17.
    Here is a quote by Jonathan Leeman who answers the Mailbag questions.
    To be clear, my church adheres not to ā€œclosed communionā€ but ā€œclose communion.ā€ We donā€™t believe you have to be a member of our church to receive the Lordā€™s Supper. Rather, we fence the table by saying you should be a member in good standing of some church where the gospel is preached.
    “Close” communion, NOT “closed” communion.Ā  Apparently, there are three types of communion:Ā  ‘open’, ‘closed’, and ‘close’.

    This, in a nutshell, but without the close/closed terminology, is what the OPC church plant’s planting pastor (formerly Calvary Chapel church planter) told us when explaining why we couldn’t participate in communion. He also said something about church membership being necessary because Church Discipline. At the time, I had no idea what he meant. After we left (horrified by the Calvinism) and I found TWW, I came to understand what he meant: elder power and control over the members.

  225. Lea wrote:

    Weirdly, they seem to have gone the opposite way with baptism, like if we canā€™t baptize babies we will wait till they are full grown adults? There is no in betweeN?

    That’s because when they’re full-growm adults, their signatures are binding on legal contracts.
    Like Dry Pledges at Altar Calls 100 years ago, they can bindingly sign the Membership Covenant when they come up out of the dunk tank.