9 Things TWW Thinks You Should Know About The Gospel Coalition

"You are blocked from following @TGC and viewing @TGC's Tweets."

Message to Dee from TGC via Twitter

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=156496&picture=number-9-black-white

Number 9 – Black/White

Joe Carter, an editor for The Gospel Coalition, has become famous for his 9 Things You Should Know About . . . posts. His latest in this series is entitled 9 Things You Should Know About TGC. No doubt the TGC National Conference, which began today, was the inspiration for Carter's post.

Here are nine things TWW thinks you should know about TGC:

1.  The Gospel Coalition is first and foremost Calvinistic (Reformed). While TGC describes itself as "Gospel-centered", it cannot be emphasized enough that a Reformed soteriology is non-negotiable.

Dee and I were aware of TGC before we launched our blog, and we wrote about it fairly early (December 2009) in this post: A Closer Look at The Gospel Coalition.

2.  TGC embraces complementarianism and considers it to be of first-tier importance as explained in its post Why Is TGC Complementarian? It is noteworthy that this post, published in 2012, has no comments. Here is a video included in this post, should you care to learn more about their comp position.

3.  According to Joe Carter, 8,500 people from across the globe have gathered in Indianapolis for TGC's bi-annual conference. Together for the Gospel (T4G), which alternates with TGC, reportedly had around 10,000 attendees last year, so it sounds like the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement has been able to attract quite a few true believers over the last decade. Could it be that it's basically the same group that convenes each year at these conferences?

4.  Mark Driscoll spoke at the 2009 National Conference (see screen shot below)

http://resources.thegospelcoalition.org/library?f%5Bcontributors%5D%5B%5D=Driscoll%2C+MarkIf you take a look at the 2009 plenary sessions and workshops listed under events on TGC's website, Mark Driscoll's name is no where to be found. 

Driscoll's 2009 message – Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth – has been preserved by The Gospel Coalition, but you have to know where to look for it.

Mark Driscoll was invited back to the 2011 conference where he conducted a workshop on the following topic (see screen shot below)

http://resources.thegospelcoalition.org/events/2011Driscoll also participated in a panel discussion (see screen shot below)

http://resources.thegospelcoalition.org/events/2011

5.  C.J. Mahaney and Joshua Harris were once TGC Council Members, as were James MacDonald (of Elephant Room fame) and Darrin Patrick (link).

James MacDonald resigned as a TGC Council member in 2012 and Mahaney and Harris resigned from the TGC Council at the same time in 2014.

Darrin Patrick stepped down as a pastor of Journey Church, leader in the Acts 29 church planting network and TGC Council member in 2016 due to a 'pattern of sin'.

Tullian Tchividjian's blog was once featured on The Gospel Coalition website; however, he was asked to leave TGC in 2014.

Was it 'providential' that these men be selected to serve on TGC's Council only to be removed later?

6.  In his 9 Things post about The Gospel Coalition, Joe Carter shared the following:

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/9-things-you-should-know-about-tgc-2017

However, not all of TGC's Council members are pastors. Two of them are presidents of Southern Baptist seminaries – Danny Akin and Al Mohler. One council member is president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission – Russell Moore. Another is president of Trinity International University and former president of Union University for 18 years – David Dockery.

TGC co-founder and Council member Don Carson is a research professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, and Ric Cannada is chancellor emeritus and an associate professor at Reformed Theological Seminary. David Powlison is Executive Director of CCEF (Christian Counseling & Educational Foundation).

At least a couple of Council members have retired from the pastorate, and David Platt (who formerly served as a pastor) is currently serving as president of the International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention.

7.  Only one of the T4G founders (Dever, Duncan, Mahaney and Mohler), will be speaking at the National Conference, namely Ligon Duncan.

8.  Some attendees of TGC's 2017 National Conference are getting seminary credit (plus a reduced ticket price). What great incentives to attend!

http://2017.thegospelcoalition.org/

9. TGC has a history of not being open to criticism. Dee, along with quite a few others, have been permanently blocked on Twitter (see screen shot below) and have had difficulty getting their comments approved.

http://thewartburgwatch.com/2016/06/13/the-gospel-coalition-critiques-culture-then-blocks-their-critics-and-evades-questions/

Dee called attention to this less than hospitable treatment in a post published last year: The Gospel Coalition Critiques Culture, Then Blocks Their Critics and Evades Questions and issued this challenge at the end of her post:

Everyone should be asking why Collin Hansen refuses to answer questions. People should ask Tim Keller, who was a TGC founder, why he supports such a repressive culture from folks who are supposed to be engaging the culture. What exactly are they afraid of?

The Gospel Coalition claims to be 'gospel-centered'; however, the Deebs are not convinced…


Comments

9 Things TWW Thinks You Should Know About The Gospel Coalition — 386 Comments

  1. Hats off to the Deebs (Dee and Deb here) for being two ladies with spunk. They take comments on their articles. On the Billy Graham Rule article we’ve just exceeded 850 comments in a couple of days.

    And the boys over at T4G are such cowards they don’t permit comments on their articles.

    Women: Lead the way!

  2. Short off topic announcement.

    Shauna and her son Billy in Texas are in a very tight financial situation. Shauna’s part-time job at a grocery store was cut to 13 hours a week. They have no money to pay their rent ($700). Any donations to their GoFundMe account that Dee set up would be appreciated.
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

    Thanks.

  3. I am sure this is just me but I can’t take John Piper with the hand singles and “fatherly” coaching. I mean talk about a litany of train wrecks and train wrecks in the making. This entire shooting down of our present culture in the US and comparing it to some time in the past. What time might that be, prevaccine times where millions died of the flu, small pox, etc. ? Is it the just the white males could vote, hold a good job, go to college. Those were not good times for Women, minorities, the disabled, mentally ill, women, etc. It was not good times for most white males either. The factory towns, the 80-hour workweeks, no worker rights, no safety rules for workers, no safety nets for the poor, no environmental protection in water, food, medicine, etc. This fake “good old days” rhetoric where things were more basic and more clear before say the 1960’s. That time never existed it was just that the veneer was better. Complementarianism is not complimentary it is exploitation with a smile, sometimes without the smile.

    I’m not saying this world does not have trouble it does, but their imaginary world never existed, even by their own theology it does not, it could not apart from Christ’s return. How goes a “gospel-centered” organization thinks they can bring about the Kingdom of God using the tools of the “world”? There is a great deal of cognitive dissonance in these groups.

  4. brian wrote:

    I’m not saying this world does not have trouble it does, but their imaginary world never existed, even by their own theology it does not, it could not apart from Christ’s return.

    And this has been a critique by many that they just pretend doesn’t exist. I was looking over articles about them last week, and I saw it in at least five major news sources.

    Until Christians (besides us), churches, and pastors start calling them out as what they are–a cult, they will continue to wreck havoc on the Western church. They have most of the controlling signs of a cult, and their theology is not Christian.

  5. brian wrote:

    This entire shooting down of our present culture in the US and comparing it to some time in the past. What time might that be, prevaccine times where millions died of the flu, small pox, etc. ? Is it the just the white males could vote, hold a good job, go to college. Those were not good times for Women, minorities, the disabled, mentally ill, women, etc.

    So true, Brian.

  6. Velour wrote:

    brian wrote:

    This entire shooting down of our present culture in the US and comparing it to some time in the past. What time might that be, prevaccine times where millions died of the flu, small pox, etc. ? Is it the just the white males could vote, hold a good job, go to college. Those were not good times for Women, minorities, the disabled, mentally ill, women, etc.

    So true, Brian.

    Not only pre-vaccine, what about pre-anesthesia? No thanks. What golden age of christianity are these folk looking back to? I suspect that if theyd been alive when the wheel was invented, they’d have been sighing for the ‘good old days’ when men had to use their muscles to move things as God intended!

  7. TGC = workers of iniquity, as is every Calvinist/Reformed organisation, “church” or whatever they refer to themselves out there, including the rather pathetic, dodgy and immoral “ACBC” arm of this false gospel movement, IMO. So, sue me; my old refrigerator and a lawnmower that has blunt blades are all you’ll get (and my old wedding band, worth probably about a dollar). That lot makes me sick…and they dare to bring in the name of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit into the drivel they spread?? Devils, IMO. Deceiving devils, IMO.
    Be gone!

  8. Matilda wrote:

    what about pre-anesthesia? No thanks. What golden age of christianity are these folk looking back to?

    You’re right.

  9. Can’t y’all just see John Piper in Barney Fife’s deputy uniform. Sheriff Andy prolly wouldn’t even let him have one bullet.

  10. Nancy2 wrote:

    Can’t y’all just see John Piper in Barney Fife’s deputy uniform. Sheriff Andy prolly wouldn’t even let him have one bullet.

    I used to talk to Andy Griffith on a regular basis when I had a job as a teenager. We always crossed paths. He was very funny and disarming.

  11. Pre-anesthesia, I don’t think so. But then again, it might shut these guys up to go thru something like I did with my surgery 2 weeks ago to have it done w/o anesthesia. Maybe that’s what they need, massive surgery to remove the super bad case of foot in mouth disease, and to implant a sympathetic heart and a true love of God. I don’t see that evident in any of these so called “Men of Gawd” and what they preach.

  12. I thought this article was an April Fools’ post where Joe admits TGC is just a sales figure obsessed racket as a joke.

    A revision to point 1: We’re Reformed, except when charismatics have a really neato idea for authoritarian doctrine. And while congregants submitting to pastors and elders is super-awesome, the typical Reformed practice of pastors and elders submitting to a presbytery and confessions is a total drag.

    @ brian:

    The Bible is for all people in all times. Western culture constitutes a very small portion of all people and times. If you need to base your theology off your negative opinion of just one the world and history’s many cultures instead of scripture, chances are it’s not biblical.

  13. Stan wrote:

    I thought this article was an April Fools’ post where Joe admits TGC is just a sales figure obsessed racket as a joke.

    Apparently, good ole Joe doesn’t know that many of those “16.4 million unique visitors” just visit for kicks and giggles.

  14. If I may be allowed to add another –

    10. They de-emphasize the importance and necessity of prayer, especially intercessory prayer. It is not one of Dever’s “9 Marks of a Healthy Church” (I mean, who wants to go to a church that really prays) and is not actively promoted or taught at their approved seminaries.

  15. Stan wrote:

    And while congregants submitting to pastors and elders is super-awesome, the typical Reformed practice of pastors and elders submitting to a presbytery and confessions is a total drag.

    Great point! These guys are wreaking havoc in the SBC where autonomy has been characteristic of Southern Baptist congregations for so long. Switching to an elder-led polity (where the pastor and his yes men have taken charge) has caused so much turmoil in churches far and wide.

  16. Stan wrote:

    I thought this article was an April Fools’ post where Joe admits TGC is just a sales figure obsessed racket as a joke.

    The truth finally comes out. It's all about nickels and noses. Conferences, book sales, church takeovers, etc.

    Follow the money…

  17. Oh my goodness, you’ve been blocked by TGC! Whatever shall you do?!? (written in sarcastic font!)
    Shunning, blocking and excommunicating folks won’t draw people to Christ. Of course, I don’t think that’s their goal anyway.

    Our church is still picking up the pieces from our reckless YRR pastor who tried to employ this ‘reformed theology’ on our congregation. He had made us members of TGC and 9Marx without anyone’s knowledge or the congregation’s approval. When we challenged him about it, he tucked and ran. I’ve got absolutely no use for any ecclesiastical methodology that you have to implement by ‘sneaking it in the back door.’ I think John chapter 10 addresses this issue quite soundly. If people want to willingly be deceived by this garbage, I reckon that’s their own business…but don’t you dare try to sneak it in on me, because I will call you out as a thief and a robber!

  18. Deb wrote:

    Great point! These guys are wreaking havoc in the SBC where autonomy has been characteristic of Southern Baptist congregations for so long.

    Exactly! And that’s why it won’t work for Southern Baptist churches. Congregationalism is what really makes Southern Baptist churches work. If that is taken away, then pastors and elders answer to no one (except God, of course, but woe to them on that day!)

  19. Root 66 wrote:

    I’ve got absolutely no use for any ecclesiastical methodology that you have to implement by “sneaking it in the back door” … don’t you dare try to sneak it in on me, because I will call you out as a thief and a robber!

    Interesting that you refer to New Calvinism’s deception in this way. I had a talk with a young reformer who planted an SBC church in our area. When I challenged him on preaching a theology contrary to mainline SBC belief and practice, he said “We are coming in the back door!” To which I responded, “There aren’t any back doors in the Church of the Living God. Anyone who comes in another way is a thief and a robber.” He smiled and walked away. These folks are arrogant, militant and aggressive.

  20. @ Root 66:
    If I wanted to be a Presbyterian, I would have joined a church in that denomination. Instead, I am a member of a traditional Southern Baptist church, and I will do everything in my power to keep it that way.

  21. “The Gospel Coalition claims to be ‘gospel-centered’; however, the Deebs are not convinced …” (Deb)

    When you believe that Calvinism = Gospel, you can say that. TGC is Calvinism-centered … who can doubt that at this point?!

    “… if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going to end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this New Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there …” (Al Mohler)

  22. “Only one of the T4G founders (Dever, Duncan, Mahaney and Mohler), will be speaking at the National Conference, namely Ligon Duncan.”

    Could it be that The Gospel Coalition is trying to distance itself from Together For the Gospel folks? They compete for the affection of the young reformers. TGC founders Tim Keller and Don Carson (classical Calvinists) identify more with Ligon Duncan than Dever, Mahaney and Mohler (new Calvinists).

  23. Stan wrote:

    And while congregants submitting to pastors and elders is super-awesome, the typical Reformed practice of pastors and elders submitting to a presbytery and confessions is a total drag.

    Seriously!

    Oh, all that ‘woman submit/stay at home and watch the kids’ stuff? I was listening to a podcast a while back about how during the middle ages or dark ages, because women died in childbirth so often and most men could not necessarily afford to remarry immediately, something like a fourth of men were single dads.

  24. Max wrote:

    When you believe that Calvinism = Gospel, you can say that. TGC is Calvinism-centered … who can doubt that at this point?!

    If you wanted to send that message to the rest of Christendom, you couldn’t do any better than using the following title for your conference:

    “NO OTHER GOSPEL: Reformation 500 and Beyond”

    The folks that will be gathered there this week firmly believe that Calvinism = Gospel and that they have come into the world for such a time as this with a new reformation to restore the true gospel (reformed theology) to the church. There is no other gospel to them. They will use their conference this week to fuel that fire, to indoctrinate more young minds, to energize and mobilize the rebellion.

  25. Deb wrote:

    If I wanted to be a Presbyterian, I would have joined a church in that denomination. Instead, I am a member of a traditional Southern Baptist church, and I will do everything in my power to keep it that way.

    Deb, it continues to amaze me that the SBC masses have remained silent as the denomination slips further into New Calvinist hands. The new reformers now control most SBC entities (leading seminaries, mission agencies, publishing house, ethics commission, and church planting program). The SBC multitudes are uninformed, misinformed, or willingly ignorant about this development. I was young and now am old (a 60+ year Southern Baptist). I’m kicking and screaming about it as much as I can, but most “traditional” Southern Baptists look at me like raccoons in car headlights when I tell them what’s going on. Church leaders at 45,000+ SBC traditional SBC churches should have been having family talks about this for years … any effort now may be too little too late to hold back the New Calvinist flood. Thank you Deebs for your efforts.

  26. I read TWW on an almost daily basis. I appreciate the work it does and its efforts to be fair to the subjects of its criticism. I think I’ve occasionally used something that I learned on TWW for my weekly Sunday school series on evangelicalism. In short, I am a fan.

    And as a fan, I’m going to point out something that I’ve pointed out in the comments section previously: Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms. The two terms should not be used interchangeably–unless TWW is resistant to both camps equally. Piper and CJ are not Reformed. Southern Seminary is not Reformed. To outside observers, the differences may seem small, but to us Reformed folk, they are significant.

    I grew up Roman Catholic. When I was in my early ’50’s, my family and I attended a Lutheran Church for a few years. To the casual observer, there were not many visible differences between my old RC church and my new Lutheran one. And yet, as most believers who know something about the Reformation know, the differences between the two are significant.

    John MacArthur is not Reformed. Mark Driscoll is not Reformed. To be sure, Calvinists do have a Reformed soteriology (at least as far as the order of salvation is concerned) or Reformed soteriology is Calvinistic, but Roman Catholics and Lutherans both recite the Nicene Creed. That does not make them one and the same.

    I have to concede, however, that there are some Reformed men in, say, TGC. Duncan comes to mind. Keller is another one, though he remains a controversial figure within his own Reformed communion.

    I am writing as a TWW fan! You are entitled to write whatever you want to write, but I would hate to see responsible Reformed believers be put off by your confusion of the two terms, believers who have no interest in Piper’s suffocating pietism or Driscoll’s testosterone-fueled evangelicalism and thus could be allies with TWW, but who find themselves lumped in with these men and others like them for no good reason.

    My two-cents.

  27. Root 66 wrote:

    Congregationalism is what really makes Southern Baptist churches work. If that is taken away, then pastors and elders answer to no one

    That is exactly why SBC’s young reformers are moving into place via one of two strategies: (1) new church plants where they promptly set up elder church polity, or (2) stealth takeover of a traditional church where they eliminate congregational polity at first opportunity. The latter approach is a much tougher row to hoe, with weeping and gnashing of teeth, but the more brazen of the young reformers are pulling it off – many SBC churches have split over this in recent years.

  28. Stan wrote:

    A revision to point 1: We’re Reformed, except when charismatics have a really neato idea for authoritarian doctrine. And while congregants submitting to pastors and elders is super-awesome, the typical Reformed practice of pastors and elders submitting to a presbytery and confessions is a total drag.

    LOL

  29. Root 66 wrote:

    Our church is still picking up the pieces from our reckless YRR pastor who tried to employ this ‘reformed theology’ on our congregation. He had made us members of TGC and 9Marx without anyone’s knowledge or the congregation’s approval. When we challenged him about it, he tucked and ran. I’ve got absolutely no use for any ecclesiastical methodology that you have to implement by ‘sneaking it in the back door.’

    Are you interested in telling the story of your church?

  30. Max wrote:

    Church leaders at 45,000+ SBC traditional SBC churches should have been having family talks about this for years … any effort now may be too little too late to hold back the New Calvinist flood.

    This was the reason I finally decided that I no longer wanted to go to SBC churches. The last SBC church I was a member of was big, influential, and I KNOW the pastor was aware of neo-Calvinism and disagreed with it. He is someone who could have a huge impact in changing the tide, but there was nothing. Dead silence. The church was not neo-Calvinist, and showed no signs of becoming so, but it also did nothing to let people know what a danger it is.

    The SBC fell to a cult. It’s already controlled by neo-Cals, and you know they aren’t going to let any resolutions through the committee which might threaten their power.

  31. @ Max:
    Max,
    I feel the same way. It seems like a ‘frog in the kettle’ kind of situation. I believe one of the reasons it has gotten as far as it has is the fact that they use incrementalism to bring it in. In our church’s own experience, it wasn’t until after the pastor had left that we realized what had been MISSING from our church, not so much as to what was there. They also like to couch their doctrine in terms familiar to most Southern Baptists, so that no one thinks to sound the alarm. I mean, who really doesn’t want to share the “gospel” or be saved by “grace,” or be “biblical” in our theology?!? It all sounds so good until you figure out what they’re really saying. The leadership of the SBC is now so top-heavy with reformers, though, it will take a ‘David v. Goliath’ effort to rid the denomination of this blight! Having said that, just remember–David won! 🙂

    I too, am thankful for the work of this site to bring the darkness to the light. Keep it up!

  32. dee wrote:

    @ Burwell:
    I never realized this. Thank you for brining it to my attention.

    Same here. As one who truly loves to pray for others (I feel God called me to do it around 35 years ago) this is sad…and just plain wrong, IMHO.

  33. Burwell wrote:

    10. They de-emphasize the importance and necessity of prayer, especially intercessory prayer. It is not one of Dever’s “9 Marks of a Healthy Church” (I mean, who wants to go to a church that really prays) and is not actively promoted or taught at their approved seminaries.

    I hadn’t realized this either, but it does seem par for the course. God made them Elect and has already determined everything. And men in neo-Cal theology are in the position of God on Earth and get all the blessings. Why would they need to pray?

  34. @ dee:
    Dee,
    That’s pretty much my story…not too much else to tell. However, I fear that this same scenario is being repeated over and over in countless other churches around the world, all with varying results of tragedy.
    I just want to encourage people to stand up and speak for what they KNOW is right. I am not exaggerating when I say this–pointing out our pastor’s deception was probably one of the hardest thing I have ever done in my life.
    I also don’t want anyone else going through this to feel that they’re on their own…there is a “great cloud of witnesses” and “7,000 men who have not bowed their knees to Baal!”

    This movement may seem insurmountable, but the One who is ‘The Gate’ and ‘The Good Shepherd’ told me differently!

  35. Geoff Smith wrote:

    I’m going to point out something that I’ve pointed out in the comments section previously: Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms. The two terms should not be used interchangeably–unless TWW is resistant to both camps equally. Piper and CJ are not Reformed. Southern Seminary is not Reformed. To outside observers, the differences may seem small, but to us Reformed folk, they are significant.

    Geoff,

    Thanks so much for your comment. I readily admit that I use these two terms interchangeably because those in The Gospel Coalition, etc. do.

    Could you please fill us in on the differences because I would never want to mislead anyone.

    We appreciate your loyalty to our blog. 🙂

  36. @ dee:

    To be ‘fair’, they pay lip service to prayer by recognizing that it is a part of the normal Christian experience, or something like that. However, look at the chapel message archives at the various seminaries (for those with online archives), and there are generally less than 8 messages on prayer in a space of a decade – which is pathetic considering chapel occurs at least once a week during the semester, if not more.

    Instead, there is more taught on theologically specific Bible study and teaching; brand building and marketing evangelism; how a pastor can get out of visiting by delegation to sub-leaders; relevant worship; etc.; than on spiritual warfare and intercession.

    Unfortunately, what the neo-Cal leaders are actually doing is teaching and promoting self-reliance and calling it Reformed theology.

  37. @ Root 66:
    It recently happened in my church, and the pastor moved on. I’m pretty sure he didn’t think anyone in the congregation knew about recent trends in Christendom. That’s how they get the upper hand over the flock.

  38. Oaky, I watched the video. 2 things stood out to me.

    1.) A person can be saved without agreeing to the subjugation and 2nd class status of women in God’s kingdom.
    But, in order to remained saved, a must must be educated and come to agree that the subjugation and 2nd class status of women is crucial to the gospel(TM).

    2.). If righteous men don’t subjugate their women, the whole gospel unravels.

    (And, I couldn’t help myself ….. through the whole video, I saw that Barney Fife hat on JP. I think I owe Barney Fife an apology.)

  39. Harley wrote:

    Maybe that’s what they need, massive surgery to remove the super bad case of foot in mouth disease…

    Don’t forget the Cranio-Rectal Insertion.

  40. Max wrote:

    When I challenged him on preaching a theology contrary to mainline SBC belief and practice, he said “We are coming in the back door!” To which I responded, “There aren’t any back doors in the Church of the Living God. Anyone who comes in another way is a thief and a robber.” He smiled and walked away.

    The sociopath’s “smile” of Triumph over the Bodies of all Enemies and Obstacles.
    “I. WIN.”

  41. @ Deb:

    @ Lea:
    @ dee:

    I can tell you about a “gospel-cantered, healthy” church in Houston where the six elders recommended the removal of the head pastor under the charges of: “lacking self-control, using double-speak, and being a poor example to the congregation, unkind, and ungentle”. And what did this senior pastor do? He said no to being removed and the elders had to leave. They realized the importance of a presbytery to counterbalance elder rule and joined a NAPARC church. No, just kidding about the last thing, they left and started another church with the same doctrine and polity. It’s all in a deleted Google review that I have a screenshot of (you’ve trained me well!).

  42. Nancy2 wrote:

    2.). If righteous men don’t subjugate their women, the whole gospel unravels.

    And “GAWD WILL HOLD YOUACCOUNTABLE(TM)!”

    Ever noticed that outside of the Church Bubble, “Righteousness” is a NEGATIVE thing?

  43. I know this is not a political blog, but not that TGC is featuring Senator Ben Sasse as a speaker. There are several Christian politicians, both active and former, who could say something productive to this group.

    Senator Sasse’s selection was due, I’m sure, to his close friendship with Russell Moore.

    You will recall that Senator Sasse, like Moore, was a #neverTrumper, and worked very hard to try and deny Trump the nomination and the Presidency.

    I know that this is not a political blog, and I don’t care about anyone’s politics on this blog.

    But it is quite obvious to me that TGC has also now labeled itself politically – conservative but virulently #neverTrump.

    So to be for the “Gospel”, one must also be of a certain political stripe.

  44. Lea wrote:

    Just read/skimmed the actual article. Wow, was it boring.

    Like a three-hour Marxspeech by Comrade Maximum Leader?

  45. ishy wrote:

    The SBC fell to a cult. It’s already controlled by neo-Cals, and you know they aren’t going to let any resolutions through the committee which might threaten their power.

    GAWD HATH PREDESTINED IT! IN’SHAL’LAH!

  46. Max wrote:

    (2) stealth takeover of a traditional church where they eliminate congregational polity at first opportunity. The latter approach is a much tougher row to hoe, with weeping and gnashing of teeth, but the more brazen of the young reformers are pulling it off – many SBC churches have split over this in recent years.

    The Young Communists didn’t have any trouble doing the same to Eastern Europe in the aftermath of WW2.

    Sixty-Seventy years ago, these Young Reformers would have been on-fire for Marx & Lenin instead of Calvin.

  47. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Don’t forget the Cranio-Rectal Insertion.

    IMO, concerning these guys, there’s really not much difference between the cranium and the rectum. They’re both full of the same thing, and it stinks.

  48. Max wrote:

    “NO OTHER GOSPEL: Reformation 500 and Beyond”

    Isn’t 500 years the usual interval for Great Schism or Reformation Wars-level shakeups in Church history?

    Except this time it won’t be the Vatican’s doors the 95 Theses will be nailed to, but the Truly Reformed’s.

  49. Lea wrote:

    Oh, all that ‘woman submit/stay at home and watch the kids’ stuff? I was listening to a podcast a while back about how during the middle ages or dark ages, because women died in childbirth so often and most men could not necessarily afford to remarry immediately, something like a fourth of men were single dads.

    And judging from death records, a lot of men went through three or four wives that way.

  50. Geoff Smith wrote:

    And as a fan, I’m going to point out something that I’ve pointed out in the comments section previously: Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms. The two terms should not be used interchangeably

    I too would be interested in hearing your definition of reformed. I think the calvinista guys use them interchangeably (as well as some old school Calvinists, who are not the same as calvinista, which I tend to bring up at times).

    I was never quite sure how the regular Baptists got left out of reformed…

  51. Nancy2 wrote:

    … (And, I couldn’t help myself ….. through the whole video, I saw that Barney Fife hat on JP. I think I owe Barney Fife an apology.)

    Too bad Gomer can’t run up and do a “CITIZEN’S AH-RAY-UST!!” on the whole deal.

  52. ” A husband who refuses his male headship role is not creating equality in the marriage but transferring the headship role to the wife. Hierarchy is not removed, only replaced by an unbiblical reversal of the creational norm.

    Evans claims that complementarianism is patriarchy, and here she stumbles upon the truth. ”
    ~ Joe Carter

  53. Nancy2 wrote:

    A husband who refuses his male headship role is not creating equality in the marriage but transferring the headship role to the wife.

    Here is the gist of the problem. They apparently do not believe it is even POSSIBLE for two people to come to a decision without somebody being in charge.

    Once you realize that this is nonsense, rejecting it gets much easier.

  54. Geoff Smith wrote:

    My two-cents.

    More like a buffalo nickel in my opinion (and that’s a good thing). I grew up in the Southeast corner of Wisconsin in the Lutheran church. A whole different cultural milieu than the wider majority of Southern Baptist folks here at TWW. One thing Lutheranism has is a strong central government as opposed to just the loose articles of confederation in the traditional Southern Baptist polity. This makes it extremely difficult for mountebanks and tyrants (TGC,9marks,etc.) to take over a pulpit.

  55. Nancy2 wrote (quoting a laddie by the name of Joe Carter:

    “A husband who refuses his male headship role is not creating equality in the marriage but transferring the headship role to the wife. Hierarchy is not removed, only replaced by an unbiblical reversal of the creational norm.”

    As @ Lea also pointed out, patriarchy is often propped up by this kind of continual proof-by-assertion: no relationship is possible without either force or the threat of force. Every time I read that, I think of another quote addressed to a group of similarly influential, but uninformed, people:

    Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God?

  56. Lea wrote:

    Here is the gist of the problem. They apparently do not believe it is even POSSIBLE for two people to come to a decision without somebody being in charge.

    Question …… In their little gospelly male world, who are the submissives and who are the dominants?
    I want to know what their pyramid of power looks like.
    Or, do power struggles only exist when it is male vs. female?

  57. Burwell wrote:

    If I may be allowed to add another –

    10. They de-emphasize the importance and necessity of prayer, especially intercessory prayer. It is not one of Dever’s “9 Marks of a Healthy Church” (I mean, who wants to go to a church that really prays) and is not actively promoted or taught at their approved seminaries.

    Burwell, my point about gospel™-centered polity vs. Presbyterian polity comes from you, so thanks to you for that.

    Interesting point. My pastor now, being a good Wesleyan, has been encouraging us to pray regularly in sermons for months. He says he doesn’t understand why people pray “weak” prayers for God to just do what He wants. Well, I’m not the only person who wandered in from the gospel™-centered world where I was told believing what I think is good and right is the ultimate sin of “self-reliance”.

  58. Talmidah wrote:

    Too bad Gomer can’t run up and do a “CITIZEN’S AH-RAY-UST!!” on the whole deal.

    I would rather Miss Helen Crump slap their hands with her ruler and make them go sit in corners.

  59. Long time reader, first time poster….the Collection of Calvinistas has converged on our great city here in Hoosier land. I’m sure my former pastor and his authoritarian loving cronies are there drooling over their semi-celebrity idols in the YRR sessions. I am saddened by what they might be teaching and filling these young, impressionable minds with. Thankfully, God is perfect and has led our family to a healthy, Christ centered (not man centered) church where we are treated like true coheirs with Christ. The power of the Holy Spirit is so great and I am thankful it opened our eyes to this. Also, I’m thankful for the Deebs and the others on here who genuinely care for others hurt by church abuse. Will be in touch soon. God bless!

  60. Nancy2 wrote:

    Or, do power struggles only exist when it is male vs. female?

    No, I think they exist male to male too.

    Pastor > Elder > Rich/politically powerful parishioner > poor parishioner.

    Etc.

  61. Nancy2 wrote:

    Talmidah wrote:

    Too bad Gomer can’t run up and do a “CITIZEN’S AH-RAY-UST!!” on the whole deal.

    I would rather Miss Helen Crump slap their hands with her ruler and make them go sit in corners.

    That might work if Miz Crump used a male(TM) ruler.

  62. Talmidah wrote:

    That might work if Miz Crump used a male(TM) ruler.

    Do you remember the episode where Barney and Thelma Lou set Andy up with Thelma’s cousin ….. Karen, I think? Andy took Karen to a shooting competition, thinking she knew nothing about shooting. Turned out, Karen was a target shooting champion and she showed Andy up?
    I took a shine to her.
    Wonder what she could do to get the attention of these boyz?

  63. Amy wrote:

    The power of the Holy Spirit is so great and I am thankful it opened our eyes to this. Also, I’m thankful for the Deebs and the others on here who genuinely care for others hurt by church abuse. Will be in touch soon. God bless!

    Welcome, Amy.

    God bless you and yours too.

    We are glad to have you here.

    Hugs,

    Velour in California

  64. Geoff Smith wrote:

    Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms. The two terms should not be used interchangeably–unless TWW is resistant to both camps equally. Piper and CJ are not Reformed. Southern Seminary is not Reformed. To outside observers, the differences may seem small, but to us Reformed folk, they are significant.

    thank you for clarifying this for the people here. I was aware that the Christians of the Dutch Reformed faith in Wyckoff NJ were nothing like neo-Cal types …. I know this because that faith community oversees the place where my son lives who has Down Syndrome and many medical issues: Eastern Christian Children’s Retreat. These reformed people and their pastor, Susan Dorward, are NOT anything like the neo-Cal folks. I can stand up for these reformed people as a valid Christian community filled with people of good will. The neo-Cals? A cult. And forget the ‘good will’ among them. BTW, I’m Catholic. And so is my son. And Susan, the reformed chaplain of the Retreat, has arranged for my son to receive communion from the local priests who come to visit the facility. These people are very dear to me.

  65. Amy wrote:

    Thankfully, God is perfect and has led our family to a healthy, Christ centered (not man centered) church where we are treated like true coheirs with Christ.

    Amen, and yahooooooo, from a Kentucky Wildcat fan in Kentucky Wildcat land!
    Stay strong!

  66. Nancy2 wrote:

    Question …… In their little gospelly male world, who are the submissives and who are the dominants?
    I want to know what their pyramid of power looks like.

    Read Dune or watch Game of Thrones.

  67. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    As @ Lea also pointed out, patriarchy is often propped up by this kind of continual proof-by-assertion: no relationship is possible without either force or the threat of force.

    Who Holds the Whip and who Feels the Whip.
    (Or electric cattle prod.)

  68. Lea wrote:

    Here is the gist of the problem. They apparently do not believe it is even POSSIBLE for two people to come to a decision without somebody being in charge.

    That’s what happens when everything is reduced to Power Struggle and ONLY Power Struggle.

    “There is no Right, there is no Wrong, there is only POWER.”
    — Lord Voldemort

    “…and POWER consists of inflicting suffering upon the Powerless.”
    — G.Orwell, 1984

  69. Nancy2 wrote:

    ” A husband who refuses his male headship role is not creating equality in the marriage but transferring the headship role to the wife. Hierarchy is not removed, only replaced by an unbiblical reversal of the creational norm.

    Something from the original “Anna and the King of Siam”: A passing mention that walkways and paths in Thailand of the time (at least in the Royal Palace in Bangkok) were only wide enough for one. Because no two in the entire country were of the same rank, the Inferior had to step off the path and stand in the mud/dirt while his Superior walked past. THAT’s how far Hierarchy can go.

  70. @ Nancy2

    Hah! Yes! I loved that episode with Cousin Karen. To steal from Dolly Parton in 9 to 5, I’ll bet Karen could turn a Gospelly Fanboy from a rooster to a hen with one shot (now, now, don’t y’all get offended by the : gasp : non-PC shooting reference – it ‘s a joke – and I hope I’m not insulting roosters).

  71. Muff Potter wrote:

    Geoff Smith wrote:

    My two-cents.

    More like a buffalo nickel in my opinion (and that’s a good thing). I grew up in the Southeast corner of Wisconsin in the Lutheran church. A whole different cultural milieu than the wider majority of Southern Baptist folks here at TWW. One thing Lutheranism has is a strong central government as opposed to just the loose articles of confederation in the traditional Southern Baptist polity. This makes it extremely difficult for mountebanks and tyrants (TGC,9marks,etc.) to take over a pulpit.

    True, unless the entire enterprise becomes corrupt or unfaithful, and then you have, well, a Reformation. Or at least a denominational split.

  72. Muff Potter wrote:

    One thing Lutheranism has is a strong central government as opposed to just the loose articles of confederation in the traditional Southern Baptist polity. This makes it extremely difficult for mountebanks and tyrants (TGC,9marks,etc.) to take over a pulpit.

    I don’t think it’s polity that protects churches from crumbling to errant theology and abusive leaders. It’s people who stand in the gap.

    I grew up Lutheran, so I’m also familiar with their polity, and while I do think having more people who are like-minded helps, it’s really the people sticking to their traditional theology and being careful to watch for abuse and bad teaching.

    There are abusive Lutherans, and there is a synod which has traditionally held very similar views on marriage and church membership to neo-Cals. My mom’s side of the family was a member of this synod, and ex-communicated because my grandfather didn’t tithe while he was dying in the hospital. Note–the whole family was excommunicated, not just him. Nobody in that church fought it, and people in that church shunned my family.

    People create the problems, and it takes people acting to solve them.

  73. ishy wrote:

    you know they aren’t going to let any resolutions through the committee which might threaten their power

    The SBC Resolutions Committee is also stacked with New Calvinists … surprise, surprise. Attendance at than annual SBC convention used to run 20,000+. It has dwindled to 5,000 in recent years … mostly young reformers who are attracted to side conferences like Baptist 21. Any ‘negative’ (but necessary) discussion from the floor about New Calvinism is discouraged by the SBC leadership elite. Even Frank Page, President of the SBC Executive Committee – once a vocal anti-Calvinist – has surrendered to the New Calvinist onslaught. Steve Gaines, current SBC President, also an anti-Calvinist has not said whoop about Calvinization of the denomination. All the big dogs are calling for unity … agree to disagree, get along to go along, make room under the big SBC tent for theological diversity … while the New Calvinists wink at such weakness and continue to move forward. Within a few more years, a once-great (non-Calvinist) denomination will be reformed. Al Mohler has proven to be a great General for the YRR Army.

  74. “Joe Carter, an editor for The Gospel Coalition, has become famous for his 9 Things You Should Know About . . . posts.” (Deb)

    Hey! I’ve got another one for Joe.

    “9 Things You Should Know About Together For the Gospel”

    All he would have to do is provide a link to the following page showing the mug shots of the T4G who’s who. There are 9 of them! His article could be short and to the point “All 9 are Calvinists!” (= Together For Calvinism)

    http://t4g.org/about/

    Whew! Man, what a crew!

  75. Christiane wrote:

    I was aware that the Christians of the Dutch Reformed faith in Wyckoff NJ were nothing like neo-Cal types

    There are several Southern Baptists that comment on TWW. I think most agree with me that our concern is not with classical Calvinism, but “New” Calvinism. In a 60+ year stint as a Southern Baptist, I have worshiped alongside classical Calvinists in a majority non-Calvinist denomination. While I don’t agree with the tenets of their theology, I have found them to be civil in their discourse and Christian in character. Now, this new bunch is a totally different beast. They are arrogant, aggressive, militant, and determined to takeover the SBC as they “reform” the spiritual life out of it!

  76. Max wrote:

    Now, this new bunch is a totally different beast. They are arrogant, aggressive, militant, and determined to takeover the SBC as they “reform” the spiritual life out of it!

    Chairman Calvin’s Red Guard.
    “TOMORROW BELONGS TO MEEEEEEE!”

  77. @ Christiane:
    Doesn’t our church have its own version of “Calvinism with Rosaries” called “Jansenism”?

    And that the Jansenists got shut down HARD?

  78. Nancy2 wrote:

    @ Max:
    And 7 of those 9 men on T4G are on the Gospel Coalition council.

    You mean the TGC POLITBORO?

  79. Geoff Smith wrote:

    And as a fan, I’m going to point out something that I’ve pointed out in the comments section previously: Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms. The two terms should not be used interchangeably–unless TWW is resistant to both camps equally. Piper and CJ are not Reformed. Southern Seminary is not Reformed. To outside observers, the differences may seem small, but to us Reformed folk, they are significant.

    Calvinism and Reformed are much more synonymous than you state. While it is true that many branches of theology came out of the reformation, “reformed” (in popular usage) has come to mean Calvinism and does not mean any of the other major branches such as Lutheranism or Methodism. As much as a non-Calvinist Protestant might want to claim all protestants are reformed, common word usage does not allow for this option. Try doing an internet search on terms like “reformed theology” or “reformed Lutheran” and you will find nearly every link equating “reformed” with Calvinism. Even the Lutheran sites describe the differences between reformed and Lutheran theology and practice. I think I understand the point you were trying to make, but I cannot find any reason to believe that “reformed” means anything other than Calvinist in common usage.

  80. Geoff Smith wrote:

    Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms. The two terms should not be used interchangeably

    I hear you, and, FWIW, I have tried to draw a distinction between the various groups. Even between the various P&Rs and Baptists. We’ve had an interesting life in several of them due to certain circumstances.

  81. @ Geoff Smith:
    My wife and I got into a discussion about this after I typed my earlier reply to you. Since I am neither Reformed nor Calvinist, I walk into this without a full appreciation for the differences. I do know that word meanings are determined by usage, and these two words in modern usage are becoming interchangeable. I am now wondering if that is partly by design (by whom?). It also struck me that the men you listed who are not reformed are also not Calvinist because they don’t believe in infant Baptism like Calvin taught. So if we cannot call them reformed or Calvinist I don’t know what is the correct term.

    I also found this just now: http://trinityrbc.org/?page_id=16

    It’s my contention that we can be Calvinistic and not Reformed but we can’t be reformed and not be Calvinistic. But my hearts desire is that we be Reformed. So we’re going to be Calvinistic if we’re Reformed but, additionally, there are going to be certain things true of us as individuals and true of us as a Church that are going to mark out what a Reformed congregation is.

    What do you think of how he describes the differences between reformed and Calvinist ? I’m not sure what to think about this distinction anymore.

  82. ishy wroete:

    I don’t think it’s polity that protects churches from crumbling to errant theology and abusive leaders. It’s people who stand in the gap.

    True enough. Abusers learn how to exploit any system.

  83. Max wrote:

    In a 60+ year stint as a Southern Baptist, I have worshiped alongside classical Calvinists in a majority non-Calvinist denomination. While I don’t agree with the tenets of their theology, I have found them to be civil in their discourse and Christian in character. Now, this new bunch is a totally different beast. They are arrogant, aggressive, militant, and determined to takeover the SBC as they “reform” the spiritual life out of it!

    thank you for your testimony, as my maternal grandmother of blessed memory was a Southern Baptist, and she was a faithful Christian woman who was a kind and generous soul;
    I am so sorry for you and people like you in the SBC who have to go through this trouble with the neo-Cal folks ….. you don’t deserve for this to happen to you, no

  84. Amy said: Thankfully, God is perfect and has led our family to a healthy, Christ centered (not man centered) church where we are treated like true coheirs with Christ.

    Amy, our kids are new to your area and are having a hard time finding a non-Calvinistic church. Would you be willing to make a recommendation?

  85. The speakers on the video mention a book about their view of the roles of men and women, according to their view of the Bible.

    In finding the aforementioned book on Amazon, it is notable that there are a plethora of books also explaining their view of the roles of men and women, according to their view of the Bible.

    Apparently, when God doesn’t properly explain Himself in His Word, a whole library is needed to spell out what God Himself neglected to clarify.

  86. Deb wrote:

    It’s all about nickels and noses. Conferences, book sales,

    @ JYJames:
    Because, after all, explaining things is a growth industry.

  87. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    reminds me of the ‘war’ in the Church between the Thomists and the Molinists; and how the Church finally told them to knock it off because they had gotten out of hand

  88. JYJames wrote:

    spell out what God Himself neglected to clarify.

    JYJames wrote:

    Deb wrote:
    It’s all about nickels and noses. Conferences, book sales,
    @ JYJames:
    Because, after all, explaining things is a growth industry.

    Explaining Calvinism, too – a growth industry. Which, BTW, I personally still don’t get, however, I’m not about to waste time and $$$ on the books and conferences. Since it doesn’t seem to be [clearly] in the Bible, anyway, skip that one, too.

  89. JYJames wrote:

    Apparently, when God doesn’t properly explain Himself in His Word, a whole library is needed to spell out what God Himself neglected to clarify.

    I remember responding to a man who commented on Wade’s blog frequently, who tried to ‘explain’ something Our Lord had said in a Gospel:
    “when Our Lord speaks, there are no ‘in other words'”

    what I HAD noticed was how some would take the words of St. Paul and try to twist them to change the impact of something that Our Lord Himself had taught ….. they did this saying that ALL the verses in the Bible were of equal status, which I said back to these folks: ‘no, Our Lord spoke and acted in the very Person of God, and His Words therefore take precedence when evaluating the meaning of the words of His creatures’

    they then called me a ‘red-letter Christian’ 🙂 and so were able to return in their thinking to use the words of St. Paul through their own lenses rather than examine his words through the lens of Christ Himself
    (sigh)

  90. Wasn’t there a TWW post about Tim Keller?

    The Wall Street Journal recently ran a story: A Seminary Snubs a Presbyterian Pastor – Princeton rescinds an honor to Tim Keller over his traditional theological views…

  91. Christiane wrote:

    they then called me a ‘red-letter Christian’ and so were able to return in their thinking to use the words of St. Paul through their own lenses rather than examine his words through the lens of Christ Himself
    (sigh)

    They (neo-cals, calvary chapel, whomever) sincerely believe that Paul is Messiah’s official mouthpiece and that his writings are to be taken as if the Almighty is still thundering out of Horeb through Paul, just as he did through Moses to the children of Israel.

  92. I watched all 17 minutes of that video.
    First instinct? Christianity has become a mad dog. I want all the bibles out of my house, I do not want my kids in church. The way these clowns just calmly the subjugation of 52% of the population, as if they are saving us all from the brutality of equality. It’s repugnant.

    Ok now back to the real world. I know that doesn’t characterize all Christians. I’m married to one who could kick all these jokers six ways past Sunday.

    This is like a funhouse mirror Christianity compared to what I was raised in.

    I reject it. Men and women are equal in every way.

  93. Thank you to the two people who made recent donations totalling $300 to the GoFundMe account for Shauna and her son Billy in Texas. (Dee wrote about their story.)

    Shauna and Billy are in a dire financial situation. She is a single parent and her part-time job at a grocery store was reduced to 13 hours.

    She is overdue on the rent ($700). Anyone else who can afford to contribute to these two dear people, please do so. Any contribution, large or small, would help. Many thanks.

    *****
    Hi All,
    An off-topic announcement from Shauna (Billy’s mom in Texas). Dee wrote about their story.
    ******
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk
    Thank you for lifting us up in your prayers. I meet today with human resources.
    Bills are due this week and I will have a little over 100. Please pray I can stay in our home
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

  94. Muff Potter wrote:

    They (neo-cals, calvary chapel, whomever) sincerely believe that Paul is Messiah’s official mouthpiece and that his writings are to be taken as if the Almighty is still thundering out of Horeb through Paul, just as he did through Moses to the children of Israel.

    Whomever…..you got that right!
    You would not believe how many men (preachers &I deacons included) I’ve heard say: God said, “I do not allow a woman ………” , when it was really Paul who said, “I do not allow a woman…….”
    While I’m thinking, “Read the Book, stooooopid!”

  95. Jack wrote:

    The way these clowns just calmly the subjugation of 52% of the population, as if they are saving us all from the brutality of equality. It’s repugnant.

    Indeed.

  96. Velour wrote:

    Thank you to the two people who made recent donations totalling $300 to the GoFundMe account for Shauna and her son Billy in Texas. (Dee wrote about their story.)
    Shauna and Billy are in a dire financial situation. She is a single parent and her part-time job at a grocery store was reduced to 13 hours.
    She is overdue on the rent ($700). Anyone else who can afford to contribute to these two dear people, please do so. Any contribution, large or small, would help. Many thanks.
    *****
    Hi All,
    An off-topic announcement from Shauna (Billy’s mom in Texas). Dee wrote about their story.
    ******
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk
    Thank you for lifting us up in your prayers. I meet today with human resources.
    Bills are due this week and I will have a little over 100. Please pray I can stay in our home
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

    Hi Wartburgers,

    I am quite concerned about Shauna and Billy in Texas. I don’t want them to become homeless.
    They have real and present needs and are in a very tight financial spot, with no money to pay rent. Shauna is a single mother and her part-time job at a grocery store was cut to 13 hours.

    I think we need to raise about $600 to keep a roof over their heads. Could folks here please donate to this GoFundMe account that Dee set up for them. Please donate at whatever level you can afford: $25, $50, $75, $100 or more.

    The link is above.

    Thank you.

    And please pray for them. They are very discouraged right now.

  97. Muff Potter wrote:

    They (neo-cals, calvary chapel, whomever) sincerely believe that Paul is Messiah’s official mouthpiece and that his writings are to be taken as if the Almighty is still thundering out of Horeb through Paul, just as he did through Moses to the children of Israel.

    That is a really dramatic way to say it, but indeed something like that understanding of the inspiration of scripture (and understanding of apostolic authority) is and has been the consensus in Christianity from the get go. It is not by any chance just the neo-cals and such that think that.

  98. JYJames wrote:

    The speakers on the video mention a book about their view of the roles of men and women, according to their view of the Bible.
    In finding the aforementioned book on Amazon, it is notable that there are a plethora of books also explaining their view of the roles of men and women, according to their view of the Bible.

    Apparently, when God doesn’t properly explain Himself in His Word, a whole library is needed to spell out what God Himself neglected to clarify.

    BAM! So true. Think how truly thin and flimsy their argument is, as it rests on only a handful of verses and is generally contradicted by so many more!

  99. JYJames wrote:

    Apparently, when God doesn’t properly explain Himself in His Word, a whole library is needed to spell out what God Himself neglected to clarify.

    Plus you need a specific English Bible translation that was done by their friends…

  100. JYJames wrote:

    The speakers on the video mention a book about their view of the roles of men and women, according to their view of the Bible.

    In finding the aforementioned book on Amazon, it is notable that there are a plethora of books also explaining their view of the roles of men and women, according to their view of the Bible.

    Apparently, when God doesn’t properly explain Himself in His Word, a whole library is needed to spell out what God Himself neglected to clarify.

    And while Bibles are essentially free, all those books cost at least $15, right?

  101. Thank you Velour! Many blessings.Velour wrote:

    Amy wrote:
    The power of the Holy Spirit is so great and I am thankful it opened our eyes to this. Also, I’m thankful for the Deebs and the others on here who genuinely care for others hurt by church abuse. Will be in touch soon. God bless!
    Welcome, Amy.
    God bless you and yours too.
    We are glad to have you here.
    Hugs,
    Velour in California

  102. Thanks Nancy2. I was born and raised in IL but spent 4 years in the great Bluegrass state for college. I even attended a couple games in Rupp during the 1998 championship season. Go Cats!Nancy2 wrote:

    Amy wrote:
    Thankfully, God is perfect and has led our family to a healthy, Christ centered (not man centered) church where we are treated like true coheirs with Christ.
    Amen, and yahooooooo, from a Kentucky Wildcat fan in Kentucky Wildcat land!
    Stay strong!

  103. Hi Mary27, I would be glad to offer recommendations. After a lot of prayer and research, my husband were able to discern which churches to avoid during our search. I can provide you my email if you’d like. I hope they enjoy the area! Lots of great things to see and do. Blessings, Amy. Mary27 wrote:

    Amy said: Thankfully, God is perfect and has led our family to a healthy, Christ centered (not man centered) church where we are treated like true coheirs with Christ.
    Amy, our kids are new to your area and are having a hard time finding a non-Calvinistic church. Would you be willing to make a recommendation?

  104. Thank you Talmidah! Blessings to you. We love NC and have been to the Outer Banks several times for vacation.Talmidah wrote:

    @ Amy
    What a great testimony – God is so good – blessings to you, Amy, from your Tar Heel sister!

  105. @ Lea:
    @ ishy:
    @ Stan:
    Ka-ching, ka-ching, and a wild goose chase through the explanations and arguments. Mind-bending, soul-rending, wallet emptying, idol worshiping of some [mostly dudes] explanations of “what God really means to say” about such-and-such. God forbid the pew sitter read their Bible and receive insight from His Holy Spirit. The enlightenment of these somebodies supersedes the Holy Spirit. Ouch.

    “When we walk with the Lord
    In the light of His word
    What a glory He sheds on our way
    While we do His good will
    He abides with us still
    And with all who will trust and obey.”

    Amen. Simple enough. God works in the hearts of His followers without the “isms” (Calvinism, etc.) of a capitalistic industry of “enlightenment” for someone else’s gain of $$$, power, recognition.

  106. Root66. New poster here. I’m so sorry to hear about what happened to your church. It sounds like what happened to our church almost to the letter, especially the “sneaking it in the back door” part. My husband was a deacon (not an elder) and really noticed this bait and switch happening as well as myself. In our case, the YRR pastor stayed and continues his rule and we made the decision to leave after a lot of prayer and time in the Bible. I truly felt the Holy Spirit called us to leave because I felt no peace in staying. The hardest part was uprooting our kids and also leaving behind our long time friends who stayed but we just are more intentional in getting together outside of church. Many of the long time mature members have since left, especially after a constitutional change too. Our story has a happy ending though. God led us to a wonderful Christ centered church where our whole family is flourishing. I pray that your church can pick up the pieces from what happened and beauty will truly come from ashes. God bless! tRoot 66 wrote:

    Oh my goodness, you’ve been blocked by TGC! Whatever shall you do?!? (written in sarcastic font!)
    Shunning, blocking and excommunicating folks won’t draw people to Christ. Of course, I don’t think that’s their goal anyway.
    Our church is still picking up the pieces from our reckless YRR pastor who tried to employ this ‘reformed theology’ on our congregation. He had made us members of TGC and 9Marx without anyone’s knowledge or the congregation’s approval. When we challenged him about it, he tucked and ran. I’ve got absolutely no use for any ecclesiastical methodology that you have to implement by ‘sneaking it in the back door.’ I think John chapter 10 addresses this issue quite soundly. If people want to willingly be deceived by this garbage, I reckon that’s their own business…but don’t you dare try to sneak it in on me, because I will call you out as a thief and a robber!

  107. @ Amy:
    Amy,
    So sorry to hear about your ordeal. But make sure you tell your story to anyone who will listen! The more people that can sound the alarm, the fewer places these snake oil salesman will have to hide! We must become the ever-vigilant watchmen on the wall. If nothing else, going through all of this galvanized what I already knew to be true and made me and several others in our church all the more resolute in our faith. In fact, our church is beginning to get a reputation as a safe-harbor from this movement. I hope that is a trend that continues.

  108. @ Amy

    I’m glad you’ve visited the Outer Banks. It’s so beautiful. Part of my family settled there waaay back, so it’s extra-special to me. I’m sure I have salt water running through my veins!

    I’m also glad you’ve found a wonderful church where you and your family may thrive. What a treasure these days.

    Y’all come see us again! 😉

  109. It amazes me how female subordination (let’s just call it what it is) has assumed the status of fundamental to the gospel for these people when Jesus mentioned nothing about it, and the other NT writings mention it just sporadically. It tells me something about their priorities.

    Thing is, if someone told me they believed the Bible says the husband should have authority in a family, I’d respect that interpretation. I wouldn’t agree with it, but I can see how someone would conclude that’s what the Bible teaches. To elevate that to the category of essential doctrine is something else altogether.

  110. Nancy2 wrote:

    Evans claims that complementarianism is patriarchy, and here she stumbles upon the truth. ”
    ~ Joe Carter

    Neither comp or patriarchy do anything for me, a single, never married adult woman. Nordo I see a whiff of comp or patriarchy in Paul’s proclamation of the Gospel as Christ crucified and resurrected.

    These guys have another gospel when they make comp or patriarchy a “gospel essential.”

  111. @ Robert:
    CompleMENtarians …… many of those people say that when the husband and wife cannot come to an agreement about something, the husband holds the tie-breaking vote. To me, that means the wife only matters when she agrees with the husband.

    What if our electoral system worked that way? Let’s see here ….. if we split along party lines, and the votes are tied, which party should hold the tie-breaking vote? Would the party who did not hold the tie-breaker feel slighted, unjustly treated, ignored, powerless ……?

  112. Nancy2 wrote:

    many of those people say that when the husband and wife cannot come to an agreement about something, the husband holds the tie-breaking vote. To me, that means the wife only matters when she agrees with the husband.

    I grew up thinking the husband made the tie breaking vote. Now as an adult, that seems pretty stupid.

  113. Lea wrote:

    I grew up thinking the husband made the tie breaking vote. Now as an adult, that seems pretty stupid.

    Here’s a thought: Let’s do away with overtime, extra innings, ect in sports. Let’s just assign the tie breaking point to one of the competitors!

  114. @ Robert:

    “It amazes me how female subordination (let’s just call it what it is) has assumed the status of fundamental to the gospel for these when Jesus mentioned nothing about it, and the other NT writings mention it just sporadically. It tells me something about their priorities.”
    +++++++++++++++

    Hi, Robert.

    1. When a church does not organize itself with a male-only ordained eldership, what are the consequences?

    2. In the Billy Graham post, you said,

    “I don’t see how you can walk away from the NT with anything other than a male-only ordained eldership.”

    In light of your amazement, is not power and decision-making exclusively given to men only because they are men crystal clear female subordination?

  115. @ elastigirl:

    Do we know that this is the same Robert from the other post? I was actually wondering if it might be a different person, and so didn’t’ comment. Maybe like a Ken/Ken/Ken situation.

  116. is there a complementarian in the house?

    *How is female subordination crucial to the gospel?

    *How does the gospel unravel when females are not subordinate?

  117. Lea wrote:

    @ elastigirl:

    Do we know that this is the same Robert from the other post? I was actually wondering if it might be a different person, and so didn’t’ comment. Maybe like a Ken/Ken/Ken situation.

    Different Robert. I don’t think I ever replied to the Billy Graham post.

  118. elastigirl wrote:

    is there a complementarian in the house?
    *How is female subordination crucial to the gospel?
    *How does the gospel unravel when females are not subordinate?

    You’re going to get primarily two different answers from complementarians here. Not all complementarians are authoritarians, and authoritarians are the ones that say subordination is a “gospel” issue. The problem is they don’t actually mean “gospel” in the traditional Christian sense of the word, but they define “gospel” as “authoritarianism”.

    So… if women are in submission, their authoritarian system works because there is a hierarchy where a lot of people obey the leader(s). If they are not in submission, then it falls apart, because they cannot fathom a world in which two people can discuss a problem and come up with a compromise. So they have to make women submit, but they also make a large number of men submit, too, to keep the hierarchy working. It’s the same system that’s been perpetuated by secular cultures since the beginning of time, and it’s antithetical to Jesus’ commands.

  119. elastigirl wrote:

    my apologies, Robert.

    No problem.

    I would say, though, not that I agree with the other comment, that it is a slightly different matter to make such a proclamation about church governance versus making a proclamation about how every single marriage is supposed to work.

  120. ishy wrote:

    If they are not in submission, then it falls apart, because they cannot fathom a world in which two people can discuss a problem and come up with a compromise.

    ‘What if they don’t agree???? ZOMGELEVENTY. How will two grown people, who disagree about a major or minor issue, ever come to an agreement?? Obviously it’s best to give one of them ‘always right’ authority. Because that will promote unity between them.’

  121. Amy wrote:

    “sneaking it in the back door” … The hardest part was uprooting our kids and also leaving behind our long time friends who stayed … Many of the long time mature members have since left, especially after a constitutional change too. Our story has a happy ending though. God led us to a wonderful Christ centered church …

    Sadly, your experience with an SBC-YRR pastor is far too common in the traditional churches they are taking over. They lie their way past the pastor search committee regarding their theological leaning and then progressively begin to Calvinize the church, eventually leading to elder church governance and preaching/teaching reformed theology. Sadder still, many long-time SBC non-Calvinist members who were uprooted have not yet found another place to worship (Praise God that you have!). They desire to stay with the SBC as they search for another church, but have learned they can’t trust just any pastor these days – particularly, if the “lead pastor” is in his 20s-30s and a recent SBC seminary graduate. Within a few years, after older traditional members leave or die, SBC Calvinization by Al Mohler and his YRR army will be fully accomplished. But God …

  122. Max wrote:

    Deb wrote:

    If I wanted to be a Presbyterian, I would have joined a church in that denomination. Instead, I am a member of a traditional Southern Baptist church, and I will do everything in my power to keep it that way.

    Deb, it continues to amaze me that the SBC masses have remained silent as the denomination slips further into New Calvinist hands. The new reformers now control most SBC entities (leading seminaries, mission agencies, publishing house, ethics commission, and church planting program). The SBC multitudes are uninformed, misinformed, or willingly ignorant about this development. I was young and now am old (a 60+ year Southern Baptist). I’m kicking and screaming about it as much as I can, but most “traditional” Southern Baptists look at me like raccoons in car headlights when I tell them what’s going on. Church leaders at 45,000+ SBC traditional SBC churches should have been having family talks about this for years … any effort now may be too little too late to hold back the New Calvinist flood. Thank you Deebs for your efforts.

    This has been a point of contention between my husband and I. I see the attacks and sneaking in the back door. He doesn’t. He thinks I’m extra critical. Right now he’s preferring to just stitck with what he knows. And I get that. When you are third generation preacher kids like us it’s scary to face that what you are familiar with is no longer what it used to be. I’m learning to just pray about it as my husband is on his own journey. But it still frustrates me that no one else can see what I see. This is why I hang out here. I find community here.

  123. ishy wrote:

    You’re going to get primarily two different answers from complementarians here. Not all complementarians are authoritarians, and authoritarians are the ones that say subordination is a “gospel” issue. The problem is they don’t actually mean “gospel” in the traditional Christian sense of the word, but they define “gospel” as “authoritarianism”.

    Which is shameful because Jesus consistently rebuked the authoritarianism of the scribes and Pharisees, and he explicitly told his disciples that they were not to seek authority over one another.

  124. Stan wrote:

    Burwell wrote:

    If I may be allowed to add another –

    10. They de-emphasize the importance and necessity of prayer, especially intercessory prayer. It is not one of Dever’s “9 Marks of a Healthy Church” (I mean, who wants to go to a church that really prays) and is not actively promoted or taught at their approved seminaries.

    Burwell, my point about gospel™-centered polity vs. Presbyterian polity comes from you, so thanks to you for that.

    Interesting point. My pastor now, being a good Wesleyan, has been encouraging us to pray regularly in sermons for months. He says he doesn’t understand why people pray “weak” prayers for God to just do what He wants. Well, I’m not the only person who wandered in from the gospel™-centered world where I was told believing what I think is good and right is the ultimate sin of “self-reliance”.

    You mean we aren’t supposed to pray that God does what he wants? That is literally how I was taught to pray. Just basically “do your will lord amen”. I always kinda hated it but figured it’d be selfish actually ask or beg for certain things to work out

  125. I fear a cage wrote:

    it still frustrates me that no one else can see what I see. This is why I hang out here. I find community here.

    I know that frustration well. Once you see it, you can’t un-see it. You know it because it’s in your knower. You can find affirmation here because many of us have been in your shoes. At times like these, you realize that the “Church” is not a building. However, may you someday find a building, a place, where others of like-mind meet together to worship in Spirit and Truth. There is freedom in Christ; no cages.

  126. @ Robert:

    “…it is a slightly different matter to make such a proclamation about church governance versus making a proclamation about how every single marriage is supposed to work.”
    +++++++++++

    hmmm…. is female subordination less egregious in church, then? or not egregious at all?

  127. Max wrote:

    I fear a cage wrote:

    it still frustrates me that no one else can see what I see. This is why I hang out here. I find community here.

    I know that frustration well. Once you see it, you can’t un-see it. You know it because it’s in your knower. You can find affirmation here because many of us have been in your shoes. At times like these, you realize that the “Church” is not a building. However, may you someday find a building, a place, where others of like-mind meet together to worship in Spirit and Truth. There is freedom in Christ; no cages.

    I lived through a Calvinist takeover of a church when I was a kid, 20 years ago. It was ugly. I’ve always been suspicious of them since. My husband, bless him, is the most loving gracious person I’ve ever met. So I don’t blame him even though we disagree. We are currently going to an SBC church that is overall okay though the Sunday school curriculum annoys me to no end. I long for a better church, but Jesus is here with us even now and he comforts me while I try to be patient and pray for my husband to see things differently.

  128. @ Max:
    What really infuriates me is that people feel like they have to flee from a church they love in order to escape this garbage. We chose to stay and fight only because the Holy Spirit never led us otherwise. It was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done–I’m not a very confrontational person at all by nature, but I could not in good conscience allow our former YRR pastor run roughshod over the good people in our congregation!

  129. Max wrote:

    I fear a cage wrote:
    it still frustrates me that no one else can see what I see. This is why I hang out here. I find community here.
    I know that frustration well. Once you see it, you can’t un-see it. You know it because it’s in your knower. You can find affirmation here because many of us have been in your shoes. At times like these, you realize that the “Church” is not a building. However, may you someday find a building, a place, where others of like-mind meet together to worship in Spirit and Truth. There is freedom in Christ; no cages.

    Frustrating here, too! I felt like some kind of wacky conspiracy theorist sometimes as the puzzle pieces were falling into place. Others didn’t see it, but we did. Don’t lose heart! Truth scatters darkness.

  130. Stan wrote:

    Well, I’m not the only person who wandered in from the gospel™-centered world where I was told believing what I think is good and right is the ultimate sin of “self-reliance”.

    Ha! Like in Deutoronmy 9 when God was going to destroy the Israelites for their disobedience and Moses said, “Thy will be done”? Not.

  131. @ I fear a cage:

    “You mean we aren’t supposed to pray that God does what he wants? That is literally how I was taught to pray. Just basically “do your will lord amen”. I always kinda hated it but figured it’d be selfish actually ask or beg for certain things to work out”
    +++++++++++++

    guess it depends on one’s philosophy on prayer.

    when i read in the bible of people’s encounters with the living God over millenia, i see people who asked very specific things, who negotiated with God, who saw God as a business partner of sorts (& much more, of course).

    in reading about those same encounters, i see a living God who values the thoughts, feelings, opinions, and ideas of the people he’s in relationship with. who wants to build something together, God and us, our contribution and his contribution. in the same way the people build a company together, an organization, a group, a project, an event, party, a vacation, Thanksgiving Day….

    no one can do what you can do. no one can do what i can do. the product of our effort is unique. i think God recognizes that. and i think the process of working together is fun for God. i think it’s the whole point.

    i think God can work with plan A, B, C, D. it’s not like if we miss God’s supposed perfect will in plan A it’s curtains. i think he honors our decision-making and together we make it a beautiful and powerful thing.

    anyway, prayer is God and us working together.

    “What do you think, God?”
    “I’m gonna need some help here, God.”
    “What’s the best way to do this? I’m thinking it’s C. I haven’t heard you tell me differently, so I’m going with C, and will do my best.”

  132. @ ishy:

    but, (sporting the 2 complementarian hats, if you would) how is female subordination crucial to the gospel?

    How does the gospel unravel when females are not subordinate?

    Convince me.

    (well, i know you have nothing to gain here, other than debate practice)

  133. ishy wrote:

    And men in neo-Cal theology are in the position of God on Earth and get all the blessings. Why would they need to pray?

    I have heard that these neo-Cal men expect to be bowed to by women in heaven also. Imagine that. For a group that twists the words of St. Paul to fit their male-idolatry, AND in their zeal to plan to be honored above women in heaven, they have forgotten Paul’s words in Philippians 2:
    “…God exalted Him to the highest place, and gave Him the name above all names, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth ….”

    I think women in heaven won’t have to bow to neo-Cal men there, and they won’t be put down, or made to feel inferior, or abused. And women in heaven will NOT be kept silent:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXrCD5KNLxQ

  134. elastigirl wrote:

    “You mean we aren’t supposed to pray that God does what he wants? That is literally how I was taught to pray. Just basically “do your will lord amen”. I always kinda hated it but figured it’d be selfish actually ask or beg for certain things to work out”
    +++++++++++++
    guess it depends on one’s philosophy on prayer.

    The Lords prayer has ‘thy will be done’ in it, but it also has requests for bread, forgiveness, etc.

    I see the same thing you do, people praying all sorts of prayers. I don’t think we have to be fake with God, that doesn’t even make sense, so if we want something specific why not say it? Not to say prayer is like a genie, which is where I think things can go wrong. We don’t get everything we want. But I see no reasons not to pray for those things.

  135. Robert wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    The problem is they don’t actually mean “gospel” in the traditional Christian sense of the word, but they define “gospel” as “authoritarianism”.
    //
    Which is shameful because Jesus consistently rebuked the authoritarianism of the scribes and Pharisees, and he explicitly told his disciples that they were not to seek authority over one another.

    Neo-Calvinists do not teach or preach the gospels of the Bible. As you can imagine, this results is seriously wrong interpretations of Scripture.

  136. @ ishy:

    ok, so i guess it’s only the authoritarian hat-wearing complementarians who think it’s crucial to the gospel, and without which the gospel will unravel.

    so, i want to know how.

    but i also want to know from the non-authoritarian hat-wearing complementarians why do you abide by male headship/female subordination if it’s not crucial to the gospel?

    *if i were to do the same, what would i benefit from?
    *if i don’t, what am i in danger of?

    (maybe this is too much to ask of someone as reasonable as yourself. it’s beginning to sound like an exercise in mental torture)

  137. @ Deb:
    To anyone affiliated with TWW who, in response to the comment that I posted yesterday, would like to know why Calvinism and Reformed are not synonyms (strictly-speaking, popular usage notwithstanding), let me offer an introductory answer.

    “Calvinism,” at its core, stands for God’s sovereignty in election, representing as it does the so-called Five Points of Calvinism. Calvinism is easily transferable from one type of church to another. There are plenty of Calvinistic Baptists and some Calvinistic Methodists. It is also transferable to para-church/incorporated entities like Desiring God or Grace to You or TGC or Together for the Gospel or Nine Marks or whatever, i.e., to entities that are not churches and not the church.

    So Calvinism is about how God sovereignly saves His elect by applying Christ’s redemptive work to them through His Holy Spirit. This is not an exhaustive definition, but it is a working one.

    It hardly begins to represent John Calvin’s thinking and theology. Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion is a big, thick book that covers Christian life, faith, and worship in such a comprehensive way that it remains a classic text for Reformed churches throughout the world. To be sure, Calvin clearly held to at least four of his own Five Points, but that represents a fraction of his theological legacy.

    Reformed Christianity is that branch of the Reformation that took hold in Switzerland–associated closely with Zurich and Geneva–and made its way to Holland (the Dutch Reformed) and to England and Scotland (Presbyterianism). It also found a home in Germany. The Reformed faith came to America with the immigrants from these countries and continued on here, sometimes in more exclusively ethnic communions (Dutch and German), sometimes in fewer ethnic communions (Presbyterians and Congregationalists).

    Reformed Christianity is a Word and Sacrament faith based firmly in the church. It is almost by definition suspicious of anything para-church, where individuals with charismatic personalities derive their authority from their popularity and not from the church’s (often multi-tiered) government. Reformed Christianity embraces worship forms that are regulated by Holy Scripture. Reformed Christianity defines itself by its outstanding creeds and catechisms. And Reformed Christianity is redemptive-historical–i.e., it reads the Scripture as the outworking of God’s singular redemptive plan in history, which is recorded for us in the Old and New Testaments.

    A personal word: the covenant theology contained that is the hallmark of the Reformed faith’s British branch is its theological crown jewel. I do not recall ever hearing a word about it from the Calvinistas. In my mind, a Calvinist without covenant theology is … just another Calvinist; he (and it is almost invariably a he!) is not Reformed.

    One additional point: Definitions include what a thing is and what a thing is not. I am currently doing an SS series called Evangelicalism’s 10 Harmful Tendencies. I’ve used TWW for some of my research. Calvinists are often right at home in evangelicalism, while Reformed (and probably the conservative Lutheran churches) are not so at home. So, Reformed Christianity resists evangelical tendencies that put personalities above the church, that exalt individualism over the community, that encourage feelings over facts, and make pragmatism their guiding rule for ministry. And, as one Reformed acquaintance put it, when he was comparing New Calvinism to Old Calvinism (i.e., the Reformed faith): “The New Calvinism uses words like robust, vibrant, embrace and lots of adverbs.
    Old Calvinists don’t.”

    I hope this helps!

  138. @ elastigirl:
    Actually there are 3 complementarian hats, AFAIK.

    1.) The Complementarians that actually live like egalitarians, which are living a “false gospel”, i.e. Russell Moore.
    2.). The Complementarians that believe Complementarianism is not crucial to the gospel, but a wife is living in rebellion if she is not submissive and the husband is failing to assume his God-ordained position.
    3.) The Complementarians who believe that Complementarianism is crucial to the gospel and the gospel will unravel without it, i.e. Keller, Piper, etc.

    IMO, they are all wrong. But, my comparison to the gospelly crucial comps’ version of the gospel : Their gospel is like a loosely crocheted scarf – cut the thread on one stitch, and when you run it through the washing machine, the whole thing falls apart. Now, given that the real gospel is the good news of what Jesus did for us, that makes their “gospel” the most false and the most weak.

  139. @ Geoff S.:
    yes, it does help …. and it makes sense, as I am close to the Dutch Reformed people at Eastern Christian Children’s Retreat in Wyckoff NJ and I find them to be an authentic, vibrant Christian people. I am Catholic and I respect their loving-kindness towards the disabled and their humility before the Lord. Thank you for your clarification that sets the neo-Cals apart from reformed Christians. I see the neo-Cal folks as cult members who worship male-headship in their arrogance.

  140. JYJames wrote:

    … God works in the hearts of His followers without the “isms” (Calvinism, etc.) of a capitalistic industry of “enlightenment” for someone else’s gain of $$$, power, recognition.

    Right on!

  141. elastigirl wrote:

    @ ishy:
    but, (sporting the 2 complementarian hats, if you would) how is female subordination crucial to the gospel?
    How does the gospel unravel when females are not subordinate?
    Convince me.

    You’re trying to make something make sense from theology which isn’t really a theological position. The “gospel” is their hierarchy, and female subordination lowers a large number of people to a low rung, so there’s less competition at the top.

    They will not argue this with you, because they can’t admit it’s about their hierarchy. What they will most often do is deflect and say that you just don’t know the Bible, or you need to read some book by so-and-so (usually Piper or Grudem or Ware), or they will say you’re a woman and not worth their time (or can’t possibly understand hard concepts like that). Neo-Calvinism is ultimately not about theology, but about power, and they just use theology like a marketing tactic to get gullible people to join.

    They do argue this somewhat in their eternal subordination of the Son theology, though, but they developed this theology after they developed their system of subordination. They say that Genesis 1-3 and NT verses like John 13:16 make it clear that there’s a hierarchy of men and women, and it’s modeled after Jesus submitting to the Father. It’s a willing submission, but eternal and God-commanded. Women are like Jesus, eternally in submission, and men are like God, eternally in charge of women. This theology does not go far enough to justify the fact that they do force most men to submit to their leadership, too, and usually by command and coercion.

    A non-authoritarian complementarian would say it’s not a gospel issue, but men and women having different roles is commanded in Scripture in Genesis 1-3 and in 1 Timothy 5.

  142. elastigirl wrote:

    @ ishy:
    ok, so i guess it’s only the authoritarian hat-wearing complementarians who think it’s crucial to the gospel, and without which the gospel will unravel.

    Is that true? Would the fundamentalists be considered authoritarians or does that vary? I think there is a little more to it than this.

  143. Nancy2 wrote:

    @ elastigirl:
    Actually there are 3 complementarian hats, AFAIK.
    1.) The Complementarians that actually live like egalitarians, which are living a “false gospel”, i.e. Russell Moore.
    2.). The Complementarians that believe Complementarianism is not crucial to the gospel, but a wife is living in rebellion if she is not submissive and the husband is failing to assume his God-ordained position.
    3.) The Complementarians who believe that Complementarianism is crucial to the gospel and the gospel will unravel without it, i.e. Keller, Piper, etc.

    I would put 1 and 3 together under authoritarianism, but there are varying views under both headings. I’m not sure I would use Moore as an example, as I believe he is more of a mouthpiece than a theologian, and he says what he thinks will attract more people. Moore and Mohler and several others I think are ultimately, and knowingly, dishonest about neo-Calvinist theology because they are all about raking in those YRR men.

  144. @ Geoff S.:
    In the Baptist world, I have heard of three kinds of Calvinsts: 1) old (classic) Calvinists, defined by almost strictly by TULIP, 2) new Calvinsts, that more closely align with Puritans? 2) and neo-Calvinists, that are more like dominionists? …….Then there are the Lutherns, EFCA, Presbies ……..
    It’s all very confusing to me!

  145. Geoff S. wrote:

    Reformed Christianity is that branch of the Reformation that took hold in Switzerland–associated closely with Zurich and Geneva–and made its way to Holland (the Dutch Reformed) and to England and Scotland (Presbyterianism). It also found a home in Germany.

    Ooh, I wish I had my book of confessions because they talked about some theological differences between one group and another (in Germany, or Switzerland maybe) that resulted in one of the confessions being written to talk about all the things they had in common. Very interesting history bits there about how the various churches got along and didn’t get along…

  146. ishy wrote:

    I’m not sure I would use Moore as an example, as I believe he is more of a mouthpiece than a theologian,

    JMO ….. I think Moore is politician that can’t cut the mustard in the secular world.

  147. Nancy2 wrote:

    @ elastigirl:
    Actually there are 3 complementarian hats, AFAIK.
    1.) The Complementarians that actually live like egalitarians, which are living a “false gospel”, i.e. Russell Moore.

    IE, the ones who need to check that box but also have sense enough to know it doesn’t work in practice.

  148. ishy wrote:

    They say that Genesis 1-3 and NT verses like John 13:16 make it clear that there’s a hierarchy of men and women, and it’s modeled after Jesus submitting to the Father. It’s a willing submission, but eternal and God-commanded. Women are like Jesus, eternally in submission, and men are like God, eternally in charge of women.

    I’ll point out that this idea is not only heretical (semi-Arianism), but it ultimately is blasphemy when interpreted that men, especially men in neo-Cal leadership, are acting and should be treated as God on earth. And though they will not go so far as to admit that, this is how they live it out.

  149. ishy wrote:

    or they will say you’re a woman and not worth their time

    Tim Keller said we’re biased because we’re women, while admitting he is a man and should also be expected to have a bias. *headdesk*

  150. Lea wrote:

    Tim Keller said we’re biased because we’re women, while admitting he is a man and should also be expected to have a bias. *headdesk*

    I’ve heard that in-person from a YRR, but Piper has made a number of similar comments.

    I don’t understand why even people against the neo-Cals treat Keller like a “good guy”. I’m a bit frustrated with a (non-Calvinist) friend of mine who goes after stuff Piper says, but only says good things about Keller. Keller started the TGC, and says stuff that’s just as ridiculous as some of the others.

  151. ishy wrote:

    I’ll point out that this idea is not only heretical (semi-Arianism), but it ultimately is blasphemy when interpreted that men, especially men in neo-Cal leadership, are acting and should be treated as God on earth. And though they will not go so far as to admit that, this is how they live it out.

    Bailey Smith, non-cal SBC prez in 1980, said that a woman should submit to her husband as if he were God.

  152. Nancy2 wrote:

    Bailey Smith, non-cal SBC prez in 1980, said that a woman should submit to her husband as if he were God.

    Ah, Mr. Smith. I had forgotten about him. He’s a fundamentalist, but he came to Liberty a few times and spoke in my classes.

    I think if anyone puts themselves on any level with God, they are going to have a serious problem. I’m not standing near them in case they get hit by lightning or struck by a car.

  153. @ ishy:

    Some of the arguments used by people as to why it’s not ok to not give him an award are ridiculous, particularly the ones that talk about unity or accepting other peoples ideas in light of the fact that Kellers PCA was formed by people who were so incapable of accepting a denomination that thought differently than them that they created their own. (I realize that went in circles but I hope it makes it sense)

  154. Lea wrote:

    Some of the arguments used by people as to why it’s not ok to not give him an award are ridiculous, particularly the ones that talk about unity or accepting other peoples ideas in light of the fact that Kellers PCA was formed by people who were so incapable of accepting a denomination that thought differently than them that they created their own. (I realize that went in circles but I hope it makes it sense)

    I guess I’m ridiculously simple when it comes to awards. I ask if there’s someone better that earned it. And my answer to that is that I can think of a whole bunch of people I’d rather see get an award than Mr. Keller. But I have to admit I don’t see why they need an award in the first place.

    My friend’s argument was that if they didn’t give it to Keller, then it’s an offense to all conservative Christians because a conservative Christian didn’t win one. Which I kinda get, but why should Christians care what Princeton does?

  155. elastigirl wrote:

    prayer is God and us working together

    “God be in my head, and in my understanding;
    God be in mine eyes, and in my looking;
    God be in my mouth, and in my speaking;
    God be in my heart, and in my thinking;
    God be at mine end, and at my departing.”
    (from the Sarum Primer, Anglican)

  156. Ken F wrote:

    What do you think of how he describes the differences between reformed and Calvinist ? I’m not sure what to think about this distinction anymore.

    I think that fellow (didn’t see a name) marks out a “reformed congregation” in the same way 9Marx marx out a “healthy church”. So he’s not trying to draw the same distinctions as Geoff is. A church may be properly Calvinist but it’s not really reformed if it fails to have things like “elder rule” and “church discipline”.
    Ken F also wrote, “It also struck me that the men you listed (like CJ, JP, JMac, MD and formerly the other MD) who are not reformed are also not Calvinist because they don’t believe in infant Baptism like Calvin taught. So if we cannot call them reformed or Calvinist I don’t know what is the correct term.”
    I sometimes see Neo-Calvinist, but that really refers to a newer branch of the old Dutch Calvinism. Then there’s New Calvinist, used by Piper himself. Then there’s YRR, but the leaders are no longer Y and not particularly R or R. So there’s Calvinista. I prefer the spelling Calvaniesta, to emphasize their differences from Calvin’s teaching.
    Which brings me back to the article you linked. The guy goes to great lengths to distance their group from Anabaptists, whose persecution by the Reformed he attributes to their adding too much Spirit to the all-sufficient Bible. So I looked up a little historical article about the Swiss reformers. Even Pre-Calvin they were having difficulty deciding who qualified as truly Reformed, and the primary disqualification was refusing to baptize your infants (they were then called Catabaptists, as if they opposed all baptism– most did not, and many still sprinkled, poured, or dabbed) not being Charismatic. As for Calvin himself, who called Catabaptists “the devil’s own miscreants,” I don’t think he’d have had any qualms about drowning modern-day “Calvinist” Baptists.

  157. @ ishy:

    I think when you are going to give an award and then pull it back, that’s always pretty awkward.

    The question is, why was he going to get it in the first place? And I Honestly don’t know enough about this award or him to say, except that he’s ‘famous’.

  158. Deb wrote:

    @ Geoff S.:
    Thanks for this information. I’m still trying to understand it all.

    Yes, thanks Geoff S.

    I copied your comment to the top of the page under the Interesting tab, the Books/Movies/TV/ETC. tab so that people can refer to it in the future. Good stuff.

  159. Robert wrote:

    To elevate that to the category of essential doctrine is something else altogether.

    I think it may puzzle you because you are thinking it is a theological issue with them. I believe, if you research it back to George Knight III in the PCA archive and the contextual political setting in which he formulated his unique ideas of subordination (the founding of the PCA) that it is not a theological issue with them. Female subordination is a direct consequence of the doctrine of the Eternal Subordination of the Son. That is the historical fact. It is a deeply political issue. It is a third rail issue, and that is why they will go to the ridiculous extremes such as the ESV Somewhat Permanent Version to protect it.

    There are logical and textual problems with the traditional view that the office of elder is limited to male (granting for the sake of argument that there is and office) as I stated on the other thread. Those problems were becoming apparent way back then. Let me hasten to add that way back then and up until fairly recently I was a traditionalist on gender, though not what is now what is known as a “Complementarian.” I simply had no idea that the notion of complementarity had anything to do with hierarchy. Why should it?

    So I started reading their “scholarly” journals. Again, I hasten to add that I read the Complementarian scholars and saw what they were actually teaching and how they supported it. I was truly astonished how weak their reasoning is, but ideas which are not questioned tend to devolve. Fallacies and eisegesis are the norm. The Eternal Subordination of the Son horrified me! They defeated themselves since I did not read egalitarians, so I cannot speak to what they might believe.

  160. @ Deb:
    You’re welcome!

    I think there are some important take-aways from maintaining the distinction–at least for TWW readers, who may not agree with the Reformed faith. They are: the Calvinism in its neo-Cal and YRR forms is really, in my mind, just another American evangelical trend. It may be more serious theologically than, say, Jesus People or Promise Keepers, but it’s trendy nonetheless. It’s got traction, some momentum, it’s novel. Evangelicals love novel–it’s often the fuel that keeps them moving forward. The Reformed faith, with its Word and Sacraments beliefs, is slow and steady. It should be patient and modest–more interested in faithfulness than popularity.

    This helps to explain why Calvinism shows up in non-profits led by charismatic figures and/or new churches doing things new ways–especially for young people. They are personality-based and personality-driven. Nine Marks is a para-church group–how absurd is that? TGC has a truncated, common denominator gospel that only barely resembles Paul’s. But their spiritual center is the conference, the blog, the books, the conference, the live feed. It has to be, because ordinary ministers serving in ordinary ways are not very exciting.

    I’m Reformed, but I read TWW because the things that you are wary of are the things that I am wary of, even if for slightly different reasons. In short: charismatic individuals who base their authority on their popularity, are above the church and its jurisdiction (Tulian?), need money to operate, and inevitably make themselves into the story may be Calvinists, but they are not Reformed. Jonathan Edwards, who is Piper’s hero, was a local church minister and a missionary to the Native Americans on the frontier. He did not start The Excellencies of Christ ministries, slap his picture all over it, and ask for money. If John Piper announced that his work here is done, that he can write books in Pakistan as well as he can here, and that he intends to serve the Christians in the Muslim world for the remainder of his life, then I might just dig his books out of the trash and pay some attention to him again. Piper is a Christian Hedonist all right.

  161. elastigirl wrote:

    *if i were to do the same, what would i benefit from?
    *if i don’t, what am i in danger of?
    (maybe this is too much to ask of someone as reasonable as yourself. it’s beginning to sound like an exercise in mental torture)

    I could never see how anyone was in danger from not being complementation . . . the gospel is bigger than small minds.

  162. Geoff S. wrote:

    I think there are some important take-aways from maintaining the distinction–at least for TWW readers, who may not agree with the Reformed faith. They are: the Calvinism in its neo-Cal and YRR forms is really, in my mind, just another American evangelical trend. It may be more serious theologically than, say, Jesus People or Promise Keepers, but it’s trendy nonetheless. It’s got traction, some momentum, it’s novel. Evangelicals love novel–it’s often the fuel that keeps them moving forward. The Reformed faith, with its Word and Sacraments beliefs, is slow and steady. It should be patient and modest–more interested in faithfulness than popularity.

    I’m going to take issue with this, because I do not think neo-Cals are evangelicals. I don’t even think they are Christian as most Christians would define the world. I’m not going to argue that they don’t follow Reformed tradition, but in the same way, they do not follow evangelical tradition either.

    Evangelicals generally make the gospels the center of their theology. If the gospels are not how they interpret all other Scripture, then it holds a central place. Evangelicals traditionally love Jesus and He is their Lord and Savior (as they put it).

    Neo-Calvinists may reference Jesus as an atonement, or that he was “submissive to the Father”, but that’s pretty much the only thing they say about Him. They don’t teach and preach from the gospels in the Bible. All of their teaching comes from the Old Testament, usually about God’s wrath or sovereignty, and a few of Paul’s verses in the New Testament. I don’t know if you know this, but most neo-Cal churches only preach from the Old Testament.

    Most of Jesus’ words directly refute the hierarchy and theology of the neo-Cals. They can’t use Him as an example, or their whole system falls down. Christ said men are the bride and He is the bridegroom (*gasp* He said men are WOMEN!). Christ said that faith made the sick and the lame well. Christ said that the last must be first.

    It’d be like if you took Jesus and the Holy Spirit out of all the creeds. Ultimately this is probably why they don’t use the creeds–they talk too much about Christ.

    Neo-Calvinism, then, at best can be considered a Judaic sect, and at worst, a cult. As they do require signing your life away to obey the leadership, I classify them as a cult.

  163. ishy wrote:

    I’m going to take issue with this, because I do not think neo-Cals are evangelicals.

    I think they are sort of…cultural evangelicals? If that makes any sense.

  164. ishy wrote:

    I don’t know if you know this, but most neo-Cal churches only preach from the Old Testament.

    Really? I’ve never heard that.

  165. Lea wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    I’m going to take issue with this, because I do not think neo-Cals are evangelicals.
    //
    I think they are sort of…cultural evangelicals? If that makes any sense.

    They’re evangelical in the sense that they seem to talk an awful lot. But I don’t think they really fit in any Christian group once you really look at what they believe.

  166. ishy wrote:

    But I don’t think they really fit in any Christian group once you really look at what they believe.

    Less by belief than association, I think.

    So the people who actually believe differently either have to be converted or run into a wall of confusion and trouble.

  167. Gram3 wrote:

    I simply had no idea that the notion of complementarity had anything to do with hierarchy. Why should it?

    Because even the lowest ranking “Godly” man must have “authority” over someone.

  168. Geoff S. wrote:

    Jonathan Edwards, who is Piper’s hero, was a local church minister and a missionary to the Native Americans on the frontier.

    Who also wrote books cataloging New World arachnids, helped found a university, and died trying to set a public health example for smallpox inoculation (before the much safer cowpox vaccination was introduced).

    And today he’s known only for ONE Hellfire-and-Damnation sermon and for getting fanboyed by the Really Truly Reformed Red Guard.

  169. Lea wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    I don’t know if you know this, but most neo-Cal churches only preach from the Old Testament.
    Really? I’ve never heard that.

    I’ve been doing some covert studying of a number of neo-Cal sermons for some time now, and this is my own conclusion. Some of the sermons will have a “gospel” title, but… nope, all support is from the OT. They talk about Paul quite a bit in their writing, but only about 5 verses. I think they use the written stuff as propaganda, so they can look more “Christian”.

    Most people who go into neo-Cal churches probably never realize that they haven’t heard a sermon on the gospels since they started going there. One common tactic is verse-by-verse preaching of something like Exodus or Leviticus. And I mean, like one or two verses a week. You’ll never get to the New Testament that way.

  170. Nancy2 wrote:

    ishy wrote:

    I’ll point out that this idea is not only heretical (semi-Arianism), but it ultimately is blasphemy when interpreted that men, especially men in neo-Cal leadership, are acting and should be treated as God on earth. And though they will not go so far as to admit that, this is how they live it out.

    Bailey Smith, non-cal SBC prez in 1980, said that a woman should submit to her husband as if he were God.

    Say wha…?!

    So, they’re saying that we wimminfolk should become idolators. My bibles say that’s a *big* no-no. Perhaps Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 aren’t included in the bibles they use.

  171. Nancy2 wrote:

    Bailey Smith, non-cal SBC prez in 1980, said that a woman should submit to her husband as if he were God.

    Every time I hear a ManaGAWD say something like that, I wonder if he’s trying to keep his wife from ditching him.

  172. Lea wrote:

    So the people who actually believe differently either have to be converted or run into a wall of confusion and trouble.

    I think some sheerly don’t notice until they get disciplined. I’m sure some of these pastors are better trained than others in Christianese, but if you only focus on the OT, no need to bother on making up theology that works for the NT stuff that gets left out.

  173. ishy wrote:

    One common tactic is verse-by-verse preaching of something like Exodus or Leviticus.

    Can you even imagine how boring those Leviticus sermons must be!

    Now Samuel and Kings? I found those instantly entertaining.

  174. Lea wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    or they will say you’re a woman and not worth their time
    Tim Keller said we’re biased because we’re women, while admitting he is a man and should also be expected to have a bias. *headdesk*

    But having a Y chromosome and accompanying genitalia automatically makes your bias a CORRECT bias towards TRUTH.

  175. Lea wrote:

    Can you even imagine how boring those Leviticus sermons must be!
    Now Samuel and Kings? I found those instantly entertaining.

    And 4 years of Leviticus! Good night!

  176. Talmidah wrote:

    So, they’re saying that we wimminfolk should become idolators. My bibles say that’s a *big* no-no. Perhaps Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 aren’t included in the bibles they use.

    Ha ha! That sort of “woman submit” talk leads me to belligerently argue (but not believe, mind you) that women must not have souls! So, what’s it matter what we do?

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Every time I hear a ManaGAWD say something like that, I wonder if he’s trying to keep his wife from ditching him.

    Or …… if his wife won’t let him prop his feet on the coffee table? Didn’t rinse soap bubbles to his supervisory satisfaction? Didn’t put another log on the fire? Slapped his hand when she caught him in the cookie jar? …….

  177. Lea wrote:

    Can you even imagine how boring those Leviticus sermons must be!

    Now Samuel and Kings? I found those instantly entertaining.

    If you were a New Calvinist, you would hear a lot from the pulpit on Ephesians and Romans. They prefer the epistles of Paul over the Gospels.

  178. Nancy2 wrote:

    Slapped his hand when she caught him in the cookie jar? …….

    My grandmother had a special spot where she hid cookies from my grandfather 🙂 Otherwise he would eat them all in the middle of the night and she had a sweet tooth.

  179. Max wrote:

    If you were a New Calvinist, you would hear a lot from the pulpit on Ephesians and Romans. They prefer the epistles of Paul over the Gospels.

    I’ve found otherwise, though. They often don’t preach from the New Testament at all, at least not in the churches I’ve been following. They do use those in their writing, but not in their sermons. Even in Ephesians and Romans, if you go a few more verses, it totally says something different than what they would want.

    They will cherry-pick verses, but it must be easier in general to stick with the OT.

  180. Root 66 wrote:

    I felt like some kind of wacky conspiracy theorist

    We would stop with the conspiracy theories if the New Calvinists would stop giving us so much evidence to support them!

  181. Nancy2 wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    I simply had no idea that the notion of complementarity had anything to do with hierarchy. Why should it?

    Because even the lowest ranking “Godly” man must have “authority” over someone.

    Without going into my biography which might complicate things for some people, I did not question the term because it was not used a lot where we were before we were in our most recent former church. So we assumed complementary meant something like what it means in Math. Which doesn’t have anything to do with hierarchy. It is just another instance where they have hijacked a word and given it a foreign meaning that is way different that its original meaning. Like gospel.

  182. Nancy2 wrote:

    Talmidah wrote:

    So, they’re saying that we wimminfolk should become idolators. My bibles say that’s a *big* no-no. Perhaps Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 aren’t included in the bibles they use.

    Ha ha! That sort of “woman submit” talk leads me to belligerently argue (but not believe, mind you) that women must not have souls! So, what’s it matter what we do?

    Yes! Men who think like this must really want the goy version of a golem, lol!

  183. Gram3 wrote:

    where they have hijacked a word

    They chose that word specifically to deceive, imo. Who has a problem with the idea that men and women can complement each other?

    And I had never heard it before I started reading this site, although I grew up with the whole ‘men are pastors and at some point every 10-20 years husband might need to be a tie breaker’ idea. Which I now don’t agree with, but compared to the stuff they’re saying now seems fairly harmless.

  184. Root 66 wrote:

    I could not in good conscience allow our former YRR pastor run roughshod over the good people in our congregation

    I just talked to a 75 year old Southern Baptist who was tossed out of the church he was a member of for over 40 years. An excellent Bible teacher, he confronted the young whippersnapper who took over the church with his “elder” team of 20-30 year olds. Yep, excommunicated. His crime: after teaching his senior adult Sunday School class, he chose to attend worship services across the street with friends at an Assembly of God church. As a non-Calvinist, he could no longer tolerate the reformed message coming from the pulpit. The young pastor told him to attend there or leave. He made an agonizing decision to leave.

  185. Gram3 wrote:

    So we assumed complementary meant something like what it means in Math. Which doesn’t have anything to do with hierarchy. It is just another instance where they have hijacked a word and given it a foreign meaning that is way different that its original meaning. Like gospel.

    I get ya….. complementary angles….

  186. @ Bridget:

    i am so curious why people who practice gender roles feel it is so important.

    are they afraid of egalitarian/mutuality?

    do they look down on egal/mutuality as a lesser christian way?

    do they feel egal/mutality displeases God? wouldn’t they see it as a sin, then?

    i feel that garden variety gender role-ians would answer no to all these questions. but i see big logic disconnects with that. why don’t they?

  187. Max wrote:

    … The young pastor told him to attend there or leave. He made an agonizing decision to leave.

    Max, that is just sad. What a shame. On the other hand, we know that God’s love will still shine through him no matter where he attends. Blessings to your friend.

  188. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Nancy2 wrote:

    Bailey Smith, non-cal SBC prez in 1980, said that a woman should submit to her husband as if he were God.

    Every time I hear a ManaGAWD say something like that, I wonder if he’s trying to keep his wife from ditching him.

    My husband used to say garbage like that to me, and for that reason. I can’t say what I did to stop it. I’m not sure the statutes of limitation have expired.

  189. @ Talmidah:
    The church has now split along a generational/theological fault line. The older folks (non-Calvinists) started a new church, leaving the old church and the resources ‘they’ had paid for in the hands of the young reformers rather that continue to weep and gnash teeth over differences in belief and practice. I’m sure the New Calvinists didn’t really give a big whoop to see them leave … but they might later, since the old folks were the biggest tithers! They have already eliminated Wednesday and Sunday evening services to conserve electricity. These folks might be militant and aggressive, but they ain’t very smart as they restore the gospel that the rest of us lost.

  190. Christiane wrote:

    I have heard that these neo-Cal men expect to be bowed to by women in heaven also. Imagine that. For a group that twists the words of St. Paul to fit their male-idolatry,

    Yet another reason why I have no desire to go to their ‘heaven’.

  191. @ Max

    Wow, Max. Sounds like the NewCal bunch got much more than they bargained for. Those bills come around mighty often when the money to pay them dries up.

    You’re right, they ain’t very smart, and I personally will never understand how young, professing believers can treat fellow brothers and sisters in Jesus that way, especially older folks. They seem to take the term *know-it-alls* to a whole nuther level.

  192. Talmidah wrote:

    My husband used to say garbage like that to me, and for that reason.

    Yikes!
    I would have kneeled and prayed to him ……. loudly in a very public place.

    My husband went through something like that, not in words, but his actions…… ya know? I was sick and a bit distracted when it started. But, when I woke up caught on ….. I had a few things to say about it. (Example: He decided we were moving, started making plans, and everyone at church knew except – guess who – me. I found out through overhearing him talking to our then pastor about it. I asked, “What were ya gonna do ….. Just put me in a pet carrier and throw me in the back of the truck?”)

    He got in a huff, packed and left, said we would not get a divorce, period. I said divorce, or work things out! That was a little over 2 years ago, but I am still watchful.

  193. @ Nancy2

    Sheesh…although I had to laugh at the pet carrier comment (I would say something like that too!), none of this is really funny. Years ago, my husband declared that he owned me, blah blah, etc. etc. This statement was the result of church teaching (!) that most of us here have heard or heard of. The gall, the nerve…and he’s said and done other things that I can’t speak about. Use your imagination.

    Your husband sounds a lot like mine, and I’m still married as well – miserably so, but the Lord gets me through each day. At least I’m no longer tied to him emotionally. I asked God to release me from him years ago and it was almost instantaneous. If that hadn’t happened, I’d be in an even bigger mess.

    I’m sick too and can’t leave (I believe you’ve said that you have some health issues – ?) so I simply do the best I can. I hope you stay watchful and safe, Nancy. Bless you and may God protect us both.

  194. Talmidah wrote:

    Years ago, my husband declared that he owned me,

    Yeah? He should have taken you to the PVA office or the county clerk’s office to see how much he owed on you in property taxes! Would that dog hunt?
    Seriously, though. A girl’s gotta do whatta girl’s gotta do.
    I came down with a serious case of mono in ’09. Bedridden for 8 weeks. Had a stroke while I was down (the stroke has had minimal affect on me). Ended up being officially diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome before it was all over. Had to resign from my teaching position. I can still function, but not well enough consistently enough to have a steady job! My mind and my spirit are still strong, though! I’ll go down fighting before I’ll allow anyone to walk all over me.
    I hope the best that you can do gets better! Much better.

  195. Gram3 wrote:

    So we assumed complementary meant something like what it means in Math. Which doesn’t have anything to do with hierarchy. It is just another instance where they have hijacked a word and given it a foreign meaning that is way different that its original meaning. Like gospel.

    Somehow the comps have become efficient at hijacking/redefining words for their pleasure alone . . .

  196. @ Dave A A:
    Thanks for the feedback. In the same way that TGC is ruining the word gospel, it seems like the gospel glitterati (aka calvinistas, YRRs, new-Cavinists) are ruining the word reformed. It seems like it used to mean something when talking about the various strands coming out of the reformation, but now it pretty much means Calvinism. Ligon Duncan is partly to blame for this because he is truly reformed in the old sense of the word, but he is teaming with the glitterati in significant ways (one of the T4G founders) and is not doing anything to maintain the distinction. For the reformed believers who use the term in the old sense, it might be too late to recover the original meaning. Like it or not, common usage no longer recognizes the distinction.

    The “Reformed Baptists” probably have a big role in this as well, since they claim to be reformed but don’t fit the definition. That was the case of the article I cited above. Here is a recent article on Founders about this: http://founders.org/2017/03/30/what-is-a-reformed-baptist/.

    As much as the old reformed folks might bristle under the new terminology, I think the word “reformed” has come to mean what the New-Calvinists mean by it. They’ve ruined quite a few words by now, such as gospel, glory, winsome, complement, submission, elder, intentional, mission, …

  197. @ Root 66:

    “….they use incrementalism to bring it in. In our church’s own experience, it wasn’t until after the pastor had left that we realized what had been MISSING from our church, not so much as to what was there.”
    +++++++++++++

    i’ve never been in a baptist or a reformed/calvinist/neocalvinist environment. the fog on what all this means never seems to lift.

    can you describe what you found was missing from your church?

    i do want to understand — my childhood church (which i don’t attend) all of a sudden is calling itself ‘a gospel church’, belongs to TGC, has instituted ‘covenant membership’, self-describes as complementarian… none of this was part of the church as i knew it.

  198. Bridget wrote:

    Somehow the comps have become efficient at hijacking/redefining words for their pleasure alone . . .

    I disagree. I think the hijacked words are used as bait ……. similar to duck blinds and decoys, deer scent …..

  199. Nancy2 wrote:

    I think the hijacked words are used as bait ……. similar to duck blinds and decoys, deer scent …..

    For me the words feel more like a repellent by now. For example, I have a hard time feeling joy when I hear the word “gospel” because it has way too many negative connotations for me after having it experienced it being misused so badly for so long.

  200. Nancy2 wrote:

    Bridget wrote:

    Somehow the comps have become efficient at hijacking/redefining words for their pleasure alone . . .

    I disagree. I think the hijacked words are used as bait ……. similar to duck blinds and decoys, deer scent …..

    Bingo!

  201. @ Ken F:

    It’s because changes the meaning of words only works until people are on to you.

    Maybe it’s more like baiting a trap with fake cheese.

  202. @ Talmidah:

    Reminds me of a joke I heard once. Thinking I’ve already shared it here at one point:

    “My husband and I divorced for religious reasons. He though he was God and I didn’t.”

  203. @ Nancy2

    Nope, that dog just ain’t gon’ hunt, lol! Nancy, I love your sense of humor. Honestly, if I didn’t have one I’m sure I wouldn’t have a shred of sanity now.

    Wow – mono. I really feel for ya. I had that and pretty much every other childhood disease in elementary school, in the space of about 3 years. I believe that paved the way for my being so sick now, but hey, I can walk and I can talk. I can’t work outside the home either, but I am blessed.

    I’m so glad that the stroke didn’t have a terrible effect on you. That is scary. My mom had them before she finally passed away, while I was caring for her. It was heartbreaking.

    I too have chronic fatigue/fibro and other nasties, but I think the bottom line is MS. I don’t have an official diagnosis (I haven’t been to a doctor in years), but everything is there, even family history. Also, the stress of living with a personal terrorist for decades has totally wiped me out. I believe that it’s made these illnesses much worse. I’ve read so many accounts of women who have said the same thing.

    I’m a fighter too, especially the past few years, since I found TWW and Crying Out For Justice. I never even knew that I had the *right* to be upset about my husband’s treatment of me, and of course it was drilled into my head that I’d go straight to hell if I divorced him. Yeah, I read some of those silly books and listened to the MenaGAWD experts and it dang near got me killed. The thing is, I was dead already, inside, for a long time anyway. The life is now coming back, praise Yeshua.

    If any other women or men reading here are trying to understand things like abuse, submission and complementarianism (I despise that word), keep reading and know that you have allies in this place. We get it, and we get how hard it is to undo years of faulty teaching. Hang in there.

    Love you, Nancy – hugs from stormy NC.

  204. Mara wrote:

    @ Talmidah:

    Reminds me of a joke I heard once. Thinking I’ve already shared it here at one point:

    “My husband and I divorced for religious reasons. He though he was God and I didn’t.”

    Hahaaa! I love it!

    And that reminds me of this: “Marriage is an institution, but who wants to live in an institution?” – I’ve seen it attributed to Groucho Marx and Mae West – maybe others.

    Thanks, Mara!

  205. Off-topic announcement.

    Hi Folks,

    Just a note that someone made a $100 donation to the GoFundMe that Dee set up for Shuana and her son Billy in Texas. (Dee wrote about their story here on TWW.)

    Shauna and Billy are in a dire financial situation right now. Shauna’s part-time job at a grocery store was cut to 13 hours per week. And she doesn’t get paid a lot per hour.

    Right now there is $425 in the GoFundMe account for them, minus fees that are taken out.

    Rent is due $700 and Shauna doesn’t want them to become homeless.

    Would you kind folks please donate whatever you can to this campaign: $20, $25, $50,
    $75, $100 or more so that we can help them keep a roof over their head.

    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

    Thank you, friends!

  206. Burwell wrote:

    If I may be allowed to add another –
    10. They de-emphasize the importance and necessity of prayer, especially intercessory prayer. It is not one of Dever’s “9 Marks of a Healthy Church” (I mean, who wants to go to a church that really prays) and is not actively promoted or taught at their approved seminaries.

    I’ll add to that list.
    They are iconoclasts to the core. They have become ashamed to display even a simple cross in their sanctuaries. I wonder why that is.
    They are subversive and deceptive. They purposefully endeavor to cause division in the body of Christ, making Calvinism equal to the gospel itself. They give seemingly innocuous names to their churches, disguising their true identity as Calvinists.

  207. Bridget wrote:

    Somehow the comps have become efficient at hijacking/redefining words for their pleasure alone . . .

    My Dear Wormwood,

    I refer you to my previous epistle on Semantics, specifically the redefinition of words into their “diabolical meanings”.

    Your Ravenously Affectionate Uncle,
    Screwtape

  208. Darlene wrote:

    They are iconoclasts to the core. They have become ashamed to display even a simple cross in their sanctuaries. I wonder why that is.

    Gotta make room for the image of Calvin with the incense table in front of it.

  209. Velour wrote:

    Off-topic announcement. …

    Velour, thanks so much for posting these reminders. You’re an angel. Shauna and Billy are on my mind all the time.

    Jeannette is too. She still needs funds for food, a sofa (she uses that for a bed) and a vehicle:

    http://www.gofundme.com/ljahelp

    I’m continuing to pray for them and all others here.

  210. Christiane wrote:

    I have heard that these neo-Cal men expect to be bowed to by women in heaven also.

    Are they talking about Harems of 72 ever-virgin Houris each?

  211. Talmidah wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    Off-topic announcement. …
    Velour, thanks so much for posting these reminders…
    I’m continuing to pray for them and all others here.

    Thanks, friend, for the encouraging words.

    I just get burdened by these needs and I can’t have these folks becoming homeless when
    they are without a church community and others to look after them.

    God calls us to help them, and so does common decency.

    Praying for you and others facing the big storms.

    Hugs,
    Velour in California

  212. Bridget wrote:

    Somehow the comps have become efficient at hijacking/redefining words for their pleasure alone . . .

    That is the art of propaganda. I say that with great personal sadness but at the same time I am absolutely indignant at what these many men and a few women have done.

  213. elastigirl wrote:

    i’ve never been in a baptist or a reformed/calvinist/neocalvinist environment. the fog on what all this means never seems to lift.
    can you describe what you found was missing from your church?

    This is just my experience from being in two institutions taken over by the neo-Cals, but imagine you work for a boss you like in an environment where everyone may not get along, but you have meetings and hash out issues and have a voice. Your boss, while not perfect, takes advice and criticism.

    Then your boss quits suddenly. Your company, true to form, starts a hiring process, but lets you all be a part of it. You get a number of good applicants, but one seems to really be excited about working there and says everything you all want to hear. He wants everyone to keep the same processes. He doesn’t want to change much. He will let everyone keep their positions, and will promote from within.

    The moment that person is hired, they immediately start making changes. First, they hire a couple of really young guys (yes, only men) right out of the same college that person attended. Those guys very quickly get promoted over people who have been there for years, and who have vastly more experience. They are also really obnoxious know-it-alls who only quote textbooks when asked any question. The manager declares these guys have better vision than anybody else, and they will be taking all the decision-making “dilemmas” so you all can focus more on your jobs.

    Some people get laid off, and for little reason other than to make room for more of these young, obnoxious recent grads with no experience. Others get fired for really insignificant reasons, like they asked a question about an important account. That account was given to one of these young guys.

    Then your boss presents you all with a new set of company rules, which he says are retroactive, and include agreements to things you did not sign. You either have to sign or get fired. Maybe there’s a rule about never questioning the boss or his “vision team”. Maybe it says you have to stand and recite the vision every day for the boss and his cronies.

    And maybe the boss says that they’ve decided all women are going to be demoted to clerks, and that they’ve already secured a lawyer who will make sure your lawsuit could never win against them, and that if you do try to sue them, they’ve kept every record about you for years and they will find something to countersue you about to make sure you aren’t a bother to them.

  214. @ elastigirl:
    That’s a terrific question! Thanks for asking. I’ll attempt to be brief. When our pastor came, he began moving the church in the direction of the 9 Marks method of destroying churches to change us from being traditional Southern Baptists to having reformed theology and elder-led polity.
    A sample of some of the things missing:
    -sermons that were expositional, yet seldom (if ever) mentioned the person and work of Jesus Christ (or the Holy Spirit for that matter);
    -he attempted to do away with our invitation or “altar call” at the end of the service (but since I was the worship leader, that wasn’t gonna happen!);
    -you would never have heard “Jesus loves you” or “Jesus died for you” in his sermons, either;
    -did away with many outreach programs and didn’t even want us to have VBS, since they don’t believe children are capable of responding to the gospel;
    -insisted that all classes in our Sunday School only teach the “Calvinista-approved” Gospel Project and take away the teachers’ choices;
    -he attempted (unsuccessfully) to stop having a monthly member’s business meeting (he wanted to do it much less often–it’s a control thing!);
    -at the time, our church became very discordant and we were not in harmony with each other. We even had one of our very godly deacons leave during this time;
    -the main thing that was missing though, was the fact that he never bothered to tell us he was going to “reform” our church when the pastor search committee interviewed him! He was a genuine deceiver!

    There is probably much more, but that’s just a smattering of the things missing in our church. He started adding things too, but I’ll not belabor the point with those particulars!

  215. Velour wrote:

    I just get burdened by these needs and I can’t have these folks becoming homeless when
    they are without a church community and others to look after them.

    God calls us to help them, and so does common decency.

    You’re welcome, my sister.

    I feel the same way. It just breaks my heart. As I’ve said before, I know what it’s like to rake and scrape. It ain’t fun. Been there, and hopefully won’t go there again, but I am far from secure materially.

    Thanks to all who are willing and able to give. Even if you can’t give financially, please give some time to pray for all who have needs, especially those who are in survival mode.

    May the Lord enable all of us here to prosper and live in abundance.

    Hugs and prayers, Velour, from Just This Side of Lizard Lick, NC 🙂

  216. @ Talmidah:
    Love back from a currently very windy Southern Kentucky!
    So glad to hear you say the life is coming back! The body may be weak, but the heart and mind are strong! I can not imagine living with the kind of person you live with, and going through the religious brainwashing. I have a friend whose husband is a narcassitic emotional abuser. Sometimes I just get this urge to cover the guy in bacon grease and use him for live coyote bait. He knows we see through him, and my friend has learned to blow him off like nobody’s business over the last two years. I think that stings him more than using him for coyote bait would!

    I had the stroke somewhere around my 45th birthday. When I was 18 (1982), a man passed out at the wheel of a truck and T-boned my car, doing about 55 mph. I had a crushed skull and headlight glass from the truck embedded in my arm. The dr’s and I both think the stroke was a result of being down for a weeks + scar tissue on my brain from the wreck. They say that the reason the stoke didn’t have much of an impact on me was because my brain had already trained itself to re-route things because of the head injury. So, all I’m fighting physically is the CFS!
    I shouldn’t have survived the wreck. The EMTs were absolutely certain I would be DOA. After surgery, I was in a coma. The neurosurgeon told my family that I might never come out of the coma. And if I did, there was a long list of problems that I could have: paralysis, amnesia, mental disabilities, personality reversal, and so on. 32 hours later, I was demanding 2 aspirin and a ride home. I had a hard time for nearly a year, but I never gave up. The only permanent damage – I’m dead in my left ear. God still works miracles, maybe small ones, but miracles all the same.

    CFS, fibro, MS…… cures have been found for so many things. Maybe cures will be found for those things, and like I said……I still believe in miracles. Never give up! Ever!

  217. ishy wrote:

    Lea wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    I don’t know if you know this, but most neo-Cal churches only preach from the Old Testament.
    Really? I’ve never heard that.

    I’ve been doing some covert studying of a number of neo-Cal sermons for some time now, and this is my own conclusion. Some of the sermons will have a “gospel” title, but… nope, all support is from the OT. They talk about Paul quite a bit in their writing, but only about 5 verses. I think they use the written stuff as propaganda, so they can look more “Christian”.

    Most people who go into neo-Cal churches probably never realize that they haven’t heard a sermon on the gospels since they started going there. One common tactic is verse-by-verse preaching of something like Exodus or Leviticus. And I mean, like one or two verses a week. You’ll never get to the New Testament that way.

    Interesting! Do they ever preach on the Sermon on the Mount?

    Years ago I heard a dispensationalist IFB preacher claim that the Sermon on the Mount was not for the “church age.” Supposedly it’s just for the Jews during the Great Tribulation, or something like that.

    I thought, “Well, that’s convenient!”

    But I thought such nonsense was just a Dispy Thing. I didn’t realize it was a Calvie Thing, too.

  218. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    Interesting! Do they ever preach on the Sermon on the Mount?
    Years ago I heard a dispensationalist IFB preacher claim that the Sermon on the Mount was not for the “church age.” Supposedly it’s just for the Jews during the Great Tribulation, or something like that.
    I thought, “Well, that’s convenient!”
    But I thought such nonsense was just a Dispy Thing. I didn’t realize it was a Calvie Thing, too.

    They don’t preach from anything in the gospels, at least, not the ones I’ve gone through. They certainly wouldn’t teach the Sermon on the Mount. It has too many things that would totally derail everything they teach. You’ll find a few references to John in the stuff they write, but it’s always framed as Jesus saying He is submissive to the Father, and then they take that and say it means women have to submit to men.

    I’ve heard IFB dispensationalists teach from the Sermon on the Mount, so that’s not universal. I can see how some of them would take that view, though. IFB has a surprising range of views, because each church is autonomous.

  219. Well, I just watched that video of Piper, Carson and Keller. The glaring, angry looks of Piper were quite obvious to me. Keller wasn’t zealous enough in his answer about the importance of Complementarianism being at the Top Tier of The Gospel Coalition. The question directed at Keller by Carson did put Keller in an awkward position. “Why must the gospel be tied to a Complementarian, confessional stance?” Keller basically said Comp. isn’t directly tied to the gospel. Whoa Nellie! Keller didn’t play right according to the Gospel Comps. Piper let him have it in an indirect sort of way. Anyone else who watched that video notice that?

    Another observation. Piper wants to blame the malfunction of our society solely on egalitarianism. This is what he said:

    We live in a culture where for the last 30 or 40 years the collapse of the meaning of biblical masculinity has not produced a beautiful society. It has produced a brutal, masculine society.” Then he goes on to paraphrase something he heard from Russell Moore. “If you leave sinful men untaught about what godly, humble leadership is, they don’t default to egalitarian kindness, they default to passivity, which flares up in moments of rage or brutality.

    Does Piper even have a minuscule knowledge of human history? So, what caused men in former generations to be brutal before evil egalitarians came on the scene? Notice how Piper implicitly makes excuses for men’s rage, by blaming it on their lack of being taught biblical masculinity? That reminds me of wives who are told that they are complicit in their husband’s abuse because they aren’t submitting enough. That somehow they said or did something to offend their husband’s ego, thereby causing him to lash out uncontrollably. Whatever happened to men just being personally responsible for their sin and not blaming it on the woman or modern society or egalitarians or fill-in-the-blank? Another thing. My father was not a Christian man, yet he was one of the kindest, most patient and humble men I have ever known. He didn’t need to be taught “biblical masculinity” to be a decent human being. What do you say about that, Piper?

    Then Piper goes on to blame the existence of homosexuality, the abuse of women, the neglect of children, absent fathers and hostile men on the lack of “biblical” teaching on masculinity. What, pray tell, Mr. Piper, would then be the reason for the existence of these things in past cultures and societies? Piper is clueless if he thinks women weren’t abused back in the day when males dominated society – and I’m speaking of Christian societies here. What caused all those lovely Christian Patriarchalists to rape their slave women and whip and beat their slaves? If Complementarianism teaches men to humbly lead and be kind, then why are women (and men for that matter) from Comp. churches exposing the ways that they have been abused and mistreated by their husbands and pastors/elders? Why isn’t Comp. producing the fruit that they say it does? Ah, right…the No.True.Scotsman.Fallacy.

    Another of Piper’s quotes from that video: “This issue is huge when it comes to what the flourishing of culture is.” And as we know here at TWW, that flourishing includes:

    *Women enduring abuse for a season.
    *Muscular women are not glorifying God.
    *Women must not give directions to men because that would be offensive to their godly role.
    *Women should never be police officers
    *Dogs can be an impediment to living the Christian life.
    *Women should never publicly read Scripture in church.
    *Going on vacations and collecting sea shells is a waste of your life.

    I’m sure there are other things that I can’t think of at the moment. Feel free to add to the list.

  220. This is just my opinion and I mean no offense at all to any people who are not Christian or to people who are atheist/agnostic. But I really think, again just a personal opinion, that many of these men are actually very closeted atheist/agnostics deep down. I think they really are scared that their version of the bible, God, Jesus, the atonement, sacraments, baptism, end times, gender roles, the resurrection, history, literal 24-hour creation, etc. is just not true the way they think it should be true. I think they are afraid their house of cards is going to fall if someone pulls out a few or even one. That is why they are so adamant on all of these gospel” TM issues. They don’t have to gut it out down here in the gutter with the rest of us so to speak.

    This could be just me but I think I am on to something here.

  221. Root 66 wrote:

    Our church is still picking up the pieces from our reckless YRR pastor who tried to employ this ‘reformed theology’ on our congregation. He had made us members of TGC and 9Marx without anyone’s knowledge or the congregation’s approval. When we challenged him about it, he tucked and ran. I’ve got absolutely no use for any ecclesiastical methodology that you have to implement by ‘sneaking it in the back door.’ I think John chapter 10 addresses this issue quite soundly. If people want to willingly be deceived by this garbage, I reckon that’s their own business…but don’t you dare try to sneak it in on me, because I will call you out as a thief and a robber!

    Deception is their m.o. – a guiding principle in the take-over of non-Calvinist, evangelical churches. Just like the Communists under Lenin and Stalin, the ends justifies the means for those in this Neo-Calvinist movement. Right now, even as we type on our computers, Calvinistas are plotting and scheming how to take over another non-Calvinist church. They are coming to a church near you, you can bet on that!

  222. ishy wrote:

    This is just my experience from being in two institutions taken over by the neo-Cals,

    Just want to say that, with the exception of the last paragraph and some other things here and there, your description fits a church I know quite a bit about. There surely is a playbook.

  223. Darlene wrote:

    If you leave sinful men untaught about what godly, humble leadership is, they don’t default to egalitarian kindness, they default to passivity, which flares up in moments of rage or brutality.”

    That was such a ridiculous comment.

    As is passifism leads to rage? And entitlement and disrespect don’t.

    He is as you say contradicted by all of human history.

  224. 1) Al Mohler has been on a crusade to destroy anything resembling education or critical thinking at the self-proclaimed SBC “flagship” seminary. He is succeeding. The idea that seminary credit can be earned from attending a conference is embarrassing.

    2) Anyone who has paid attention to Joe Carter on social media understands that the man is a fool, the kind I would lump with Frank Turk in terms of fleshly indulgence and intellectual vapidity. It is telling that he represents the coalition.

    3) Ye shall know them by their fruits. Enough said.

  225. Nancy2 wrote:

    Talmidah wrote:
    Too bad Gomer can’t run up and do a “CITIZEN’S AH-RAY-UST!!” on the whole deal.
    I would rather Miss Helen Crump slap their hands with her ruler and make them go sit in corners.

    Or how about Aunt Bea baking a nice banana cream pie and tossing it in their direction. I know what you’re going to say. That’s a waste of a darned good pie!

  226. Darlene wrote:

    “We live in a culture where for the last 30 or 40 years the collapse of the meaning of biblical masculinity has not produced a beautiful society. It has produced a brutal, masculine society.” Then he goes on to paraphrase something he heard from Russell Moore. “If you leave sinful men untaught about what godly, humble leadership is, they don’t default to egalitarian kindness, they default to passivity, which flares up in moments of rage or brutality.”

    You ask if Piper even thinks about history. I think the answer is clearly no, he does not. He is blinded by something far deeper than the facts of history and even the facts of the world at large outside of the modern Western world. And even inside the modern Western world where women are abused in the ways he says that Complementarianism would prevent. When people are so obviously and willfully blind to facts and reality, there is a reason for that. And they will not be persuaded by more facts. That’s just the way it is. Same for Russell Moore.

    Keller may be moving in another direction, and he has been in some tension with the PCA over female unordained deacons at Redeemer. We’ll see. For all practical purposes he already has his own brand, so there’s that, and I think that in the future, TgC may find that being tied so closely with Female Subordination is a huge negative.

  227. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    1) Al Mohler has been on a crusade to destroy anything resembling education or critical thinking at the self-proclaimed SBC “flagship” seminary. He is succeeding. The idea that seminary credit can be earned from attending a conference is embarrassing.

    2) Anyone who has paid attention to Joe Carter on social media understands that the man is a fool, the kind I would lump with Frank Turk in terms of fleshly indulgence and intellectual vapidity. It is telling that he represents the coalition.

    3) Ye shall know them by their fruits. Enough said.

    It is truly frightening that many of these young men at this seminary will soon be looking for churches to pastor.

  228. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    The idea that seminary credit can be earned from attending a conference is embarrassing.

    I really hate to be the one who is always talking about the economics of things. But I see it as a mark that they are offering the credits as a sweetener to boost attendance at the conference. If attendance numbers show a decline year-over-year, that’s not a good thing.

    Of course it is true that your statement and my statement are perfectly compatible and may both be true. Sadly.

  229. Darlene wrote:

    Or how about Aunt Bea baking a nice banana cream pie and tossing it in their direction. I know what you’re going to say. That’s a waste of a darned good pie!

    Don’t waste a good pie. Use the kerosene pickles.

  230. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    Here is the gist of the problem. They apparently do not believe it is even POSSIBLE for two people to come to a decision without somebody being in charge.
    That’s what happens when everything is reduced to Power Struggle and ONLY Power Struggle.

    Again, this goes back to the Neo-Cals interpretation of Gen. 3:16. They teach that the woman’s desire is to “dominate” their husband and “push him out of his place of leadership. That is why they came up with a new translation for that Genesis passage in the most recent ESV Bible. “Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, and he shall rule over you.” They replace for with contrary.

    In the linked article at the end of my post written by Tim Challies, he explicitly says there will be a power struggle between wives and husbands. “In place of the family structure God calls us to, with a husband lovingly leading his wife and the wife joyfully submitting to his leadership, there would now be a power struggle, a struggle to dominate.” These Comp. folks may say that their teaching doesn’t mean a woman can’t have an opinion, or express her opinion, or give her input. However, women doing this sort of thing with a man who has a fragile ego, or who believes his leadership is not to be questioned, or who takes offense at his wife disagreeing with him, or any number of similar scenarios, will indeed result in a “power struggle.” So in essence, the best way for a good Comp wife to behave is to be quiet and just let her husband lead, thereby avoiding any evil struggle, which is sure proof that she is looking to DOMINATE.

    These Complementarians sure do love their Gender Wars, don’t they? They can’t preach their doctrine without mentioning all the Power Struggles that must ensue between men and women.

    https://www.challies.com/articles/her-desire-his-rule

  231. Nancy2 wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Or how about Aunt Bea baking a nice banana cream pie and tossing it in their direction. I know what you’re going to say. That’s a waste of a darned good pie!
    Don’t waste a good pie. Use the kerosene pickles.

    Oh my yes! I remember that episode where Andy and Barney ended up eating all those dreadful pickles Aunt Bea made.

  232. brian wrote:

    This is just my opinion and I mean no offense at all to any people who are not Christian or to people who are atheist/agnostic. But I really think, again just a personal opinion, that many of these men are actually very closeted atheist/agnostics deep down. I think they really are scared that their version of the bible, God, Jesus, the atonement, sacraments, baptism, end times, gender roles, the resurrection, history, literal 24-hour creation, etc. is just not true the way they think it should be true. I think they are afraid their house of cards is going to fall if someone pulls out a few or even one. That is why they are so adamant on all of these gospel” TM issues. They don’t have to gut it out down here in the gutter with the rest of us so to speak.
    This could be just me but I think I am on to something here.

    It’s not just you. Have often thought the same thing. Probably most of them think they actually believe in God, but their extreme insecurity combined with the focus on their own intellect, the exaltation of celebrity men that borders on idolatry, the abuse of those who stand in their way, the smug dismissal of those outside their camp, it appears almost as if they doth protest too much, as if they’re trying to convince themselves; it certainly doesn’t add up to anything like Christ. Most appear to be running scared, and when you see one fall hard and out of favor, so often in my anecdotal experience they turn to hard-bitten atheism. I think a significant percentage of the movement’s leaders and more committed followers simply not believers or lovers of Jesus. If they are, they certainly do a magnificent job of masking that love by my reckoning.

  233. Nancy2 wrote:

    @ Max:
    And 7 of those 9 men on T4G are on the Gospel Coalition council.

    Could someone name each of those men from left to right? There are 3 men that I can’t identify in that line-up.

  234. “When you get the doctrine of the cross wrong, you’re in the grip of Satan.” (Tim Keller, a tweet today from TGC’s conference)

    Does everything have to be a “doctrine” to these folks? How many flavors of the doctrine of the Cross are there in Christendom? Too many doctrinal jots and tittles confuse the simple message of the Cross of Christ for ALL people. Is that the grip of Satan?

  235. @ Darlene:
    David Platt, Thabiti Anyabwile, Ligon Duncan, Kevin DeYoung, Matt Chandler, CJ Mahaney, John Piper, Al Mohler, Mark Dever
    ….. and I have a pet name for each of them.

  236. Jack wrote:

    I watched all 17 minutes of that video.

    Me too. It was painful to watch. Piper with his seething anger and wild hand movements. Keller looking just a wee bit uncomfortable sitting between Carson and Piper.

  237. Nancy2 wrote:

    @ Darlene:
    David Platt, Thabiti Anyabwile, Ligon Duncan, Kevin DeYoung, Matt Chandler, CJ Mahaney, John Piper, Al Mohler, Mark Dever
    ….. and I have a pet name for each of them.

    Oooh….let me hear the “pet” names. Pretty please. 😉

  238. Max wrote:

    to these folks? How many flavors of the doctrine of the Cross are there in Christendom? Too many doctrinal jots and tittles confuse the simple message of the Cross of Christ for ALL people. Is that the grip of Satan?

    Is there a doctrine about Peter cutting off the guard’s ear?

  239. Root 66 wrote:

    In fact, our church is beginning to get a reputation as a safe-harbor from this movement. I hope that is a trend that continues.

    Perhaps churches like yours can have a sign outside that reads: All Those Who Have Suffered Abuse At Neo-Calvinist Churches Are Welcome Here!

  240. Darlene wrote:

    Could someone name each of those men from left to right?

    Together for the Gospel Council Members, from left to right at http://t4g.org/about/

    David Platt, President, SBC International Mission Board
    Thabiti Anyabwile, Sr. Pastor, First Baptist Church of Grand Cayman (G.C. Islands)
    Ligon Duncan, Chancellor/CEO of Reformed Theological Seminary
    Kevin DeYoung, Sr. Pastor, Senior Pastor, University Reformed Church, Lansing Mich.
    Matt Chandler, Lead Pastor, The Village Church & President, Acts 29
    C.J. Mahaney, Sr. Pastor for Sovereign Grace Church, Louisville KY
    John Piper, Founder, Desiring God Organization, retired pastor, author
    Al Mohler, President, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
    Mark Dever, Sr. Pastor, Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington, DC.; Pres., 9Marks

    TOGETHER FOR CALVINISM

  241. Darlene wrote:

    Perhaps churches like yours can have a sign outside that reads: All Those Who Have Suffered Abuse At Neo-Calvinist Churches Are Welcome Here!

    There’s enough SGM Survivors and SBC Survivors to fill them up!

  242. @ ishy:
    Wow Ishy! You’ve just described a typical New Calvinist takeover of an SBC church! The same “how to” model is being played out across the SBC landscape. It’s as if the young whippersnappers are reading out of the same playbook on how to deceive a church and capture it for the reformed movement. What is Christlike about this behavior?!

  243. @ Max:
    Great list! As an update, Thabiti is now pastoring a church plant in the D.C. area and Kevin DeYoung will begin pastoring a PCA church in the Charlotte area this summer.

  244. Darlene wrote:

    Oooh….let me hear the “pet” names. Pretty please.

    Kevin Da Mess, Malarky Mohler, Mark Never, David Splat, CJ? my Hiney!, John Pooper, An’ ya Bile, Matt Panhandler, Ligon’s wrong way Truckin’

    Pet names I can easily remember. Ligon Duncan – there used to be a trucking company in Madisonville (Mark Dever’s hometown) named Ligon Trucking. Somehow, I always associate the three.
    I have some worse names, but I don’t thing the DEEBS would let me slide.

  245. @ Nancy2:

    Yours is convincing testimony that women Are Not the weaker vessels so many fundagelicals claim that 1 Peter 3:7 “so clearly states”.

  246. Lea wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    If they are not in submission, then it falls apart, because they cannot fathom a world in which two people can discuss a problem and come up with a compromise.
    ‘What if they don’t agree???? ZOMGELEVENTY. How will two grown people, who disagree about a major or minor issue, ever come to an agreement?? Obviously it’s best to give one of them ‘always right’ authority. Because that will promote unity between them.’

    The only problem is that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And in the case of the Comp. marriage, even when the wife’s opinion/idea/suggestion is the one that is chosen, it is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS the husband who gets to decide. So, for example, if wifey and hubby are having a discussion about, oh – I dunno – the style of the new living room furniture. The husband wants something really manly like leather (I’ve heard men like leather). But the wife wants herculon fabric. They discuss the matter and wifey winsomely expresses her opinion that herculon is also a durable, manly fabric. And hubby is convinced by wifey’s winsomeness and declares: “Then herculon it shall be!” Hubby still had the Final Decision. Of course, one could argue that women in Comp. marriages just learn to use their feminine wiles and manipulation techniques to control their man, without their man even knowing it. 😉

    Complementarianism results in being this pretzel-twisting, naval gazing, anxious system where men and women must make sure that they are following the godly gender roles and behavior that have been prescribed for them since the beginning of time. Am I being submissive enough? Am I leading my wife enough? Does my husband think I’m trying to dominate him? Does my wife really respect my authority? Am I being a respectful wife even though my husband is shirking his responsibility to lead? Is my wife trying to take control of our marriage? The different scenarios of questions could make a person go coo coo.

  247. Darlene wrote:

    I’m sure there are other things that I can’t think of at the moment. Feel free to add to the list.

    Thankfully through the efforts of TWW and others, more and more people are beginning to see what a steaming pile of horse poo-poo Piper and crew are trying to foist upon American Protestantism at large.

  248. Muff Potter wrote:

    Yours is convincing testimony that women Are Not the weaker vessels so many fundagelicals claim that 1 Peter 3:7 “so clearly states”.

    I feel sorry for the women that believe they are weak because of the way certain people translate that passage. We are all strong in our own ways, male and female. God gives us all strength of some sort.

    Hey Muff – I can use the car wreck as an excuse for doing dumb things. When somebody asks if I have a hole in my head, I say, “Yes, actually. I do”. Part of my skull, just above my jaw and in front of my ear, was so badly crushed that the surgeon couldn’t put it back together. He didn’t try to put in a steel plate. If my body had rejected the plate, I wouldn’t have survived a second surgery and there is enough muscle tissue there to protect my brain!

  249. Off-topic announcement.

    Hi Folks,

    Just an updated note that someone made a $200 donation to the GoFundMe that Dee set up for Shuana and her son Billy in Texas. Thank you donors. And all those who pray for this little family.

    (Dee wrote about their story here on TWW.)

    Shauna and Billy are in a dire financial situation right now. Shauna’s part-time job at a grocery store was cut to 13 hours per week. And she doesn’t get paid a lot per hour.

    Right now there is $625 in the GoFundMe account for them, minus fees that are taken out.
    Rent is due $700 and Shauna doesn’t want them to become homeless.

    Would you kind folks please donate whatever you can to this campaign: $20, $25, $50,
    $75, $100 or more so that we can help them keep a roof over their head.

    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

    Thank you, friends!

  250. ishy wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    Tim Keller said we’re biased because we’re women, while admitting he is a man and should also be expected to have a bias. *headdesk*
    I’ve heard that in-person from a YRR, but Piper has made a number of similar comments.
    I don’t understand why even people against the neo-Cals treat Keller like a “good guy”. I’m a bit frustrated with a (non-Calvinist) friend of mine who goes after stuff Piper says, but only says good things about Keller. Keller started the TGC, and says stuff that’s just as ridiculous as some of the others.

    Here’s what I think from what I have seen and read when it comes to Keller. I think Keller is a man who is going through a transition, if you will. On one hand, he is still trying to defend what he has said in the past. On the other hand, the dissonance that he is experiencing is causing him to say things, and act in a certain way that indicates he is not as zealously on-board with all the Neo-Calvinist distinctives. While watching that video with Carson, Piper and Keller, I observed that he was just a bit uncomfortable. And I think Piper was dissatisfied with Keller’s answer about the connection between the gospel and Complementarianism. If I’m not mistaken, I think Keller was criticized by one of the Bayly Brothers for allowing women to have certain positions in his church that should only be reserved for men.

  251. Nancy2 wrote:

    Bailey Smith, non-cal SBC prez in 1980, said that a woman should submit to her husband as if he were God.

    Nancy, is there a recording of that somewhere? That is blasphemous.

  252. Nancy2 wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Oooh….let me hear the “pet” names. Pretty please.
    Kevin Da Mess, Malarky Mohler, Mark Never, David Splat, CJ? my Hiney!, John Pooper, An’ ya Bile, Matt Panhandler, Ligon’s wrong way Truckin’
    Pet names I can easily remember. Ligon Duncan – there used to be a trucking company in Madisonville (Mark Dever’s hometown) named Ligon Trucking. Somehow, I always associate the three.
    I have some worse names, but I don’t thing the DEEBS would let me slide.

    Love it, Nancy2!

  253. Talmidah wrote:

    Velour wrote:

    I just get burdened by these needs and I can’t have these folks becoming homeless when
    they are without a church community and others to look after them.
    God calls us to help them, and so does common decency.

    You’re welcome, my sister.
    I feel the same way. It just breaks my heart. As I’ve said before, I know what it’s like to rake and scrape. It ain’t fun. Been there, and hopefully won’t go there again, but I am far from secure materially.
    Thanks to all who are willing and able to give. Even if you can’t give financially, please give some time to pray for all who have needs, especially those who are in survival mode.
    May the Lord enable all of us here to prosper and live in abundance.
    Hugs and prayers, Velour, from Just This Side of Lizard Lick, NC

    Hugs and prayers to you sweet friend from Silicon Valley, California (a few miles from Google headquarters).

  254. ishy wrote:

    and that they’ve already secured a lawyer who will make sure your lawsuit could never win against them, and that if you do try to sue them, they’ve kept every record about you for years and they will find something to countersue you about to make sure you aren’t a bother to them.

    JUST LIKE SCIENTOLOGY!

  255. Max wrote:

    It’s as if the young whippersnappers are reading out of the same playbook on how to deceive a church and capture it for the reformed movement.

    The same playbook as Josef Stalin when he deceived and captured Eastern Europe after WW2 – “Salami Tactics”.

  256. mot wrote:

    It is truly frightening that many of these young men at this seminary will soon be looking for churches to pastor.

    “TOMORROW BELONGS TO MEEEEEE….”
    Cabaret

  257. Darlene wrote:

    Another of Piper’s quotes from that video: “This issue is huge when it comes to what the flourishing of culture is.” And as we know here at TWW, that flourishing includes:

    *Women enduring abuse for a season.
    *Muscular women are not glorifying God.
    *Women must not give directions to men because that would be offensive to their godly role.
    *Women should never be police officers
    *Dogs can be an impediment to living the Christian life.
    *Women should never publicly read Scripture in church.
    *Going on vacations and collecting sea shells is a waste of your life.

    Don’t forget:
    *Don’t Waste Your Cancer…
    *Every disaster with a body count is God rubbing our faces in Who’s In Charge…

  258. Ken F wrote:

    Nancy2 wrote:

    I think the hijacked words are used as bait ……. similar to duck blinds and decoys, deer scent …..

    For me the words feel more like a repellent by now. For example, I have a hard time feeling joy when I hear the word “gospel” because it has way too many negative connotations for me after having it experienced it being misused so badly for so long.

    Just like the words “Scripture” (i.e. The Party Line) and “Praise the LORD!” (i.e. “Long Live Big Brother!”) feel to me.

  259. Piper has good reasons:
    *Muscular women are not glorifying God.- because Piper wouldn’t stand a chance if his woman fought back.
    *Women must not give directions to men because that would be offensive to their godly role.- because Piper hates to admit that he couldn’t find his glasses if they were on his face, especially to a woman.
    *Women should never be police officers- Piper’s jealous because he knows he’d make it through training school.
    *Dogs can be an impediment to living the Christian life.- because they understand the Bible better than Piper does.
    *Women should never publicly read Scripture in church. Because Piper can’t stand to hear an alto with a lower pitch than him.
    *Going on vacations and collecting sea shells is a waste of your life.-Piper doesn’t need to hold a sea shell to his ear to hear the ocean roar when he’s no where near the ocean.

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

  260. Darlene wrote:

    Well, I just watched that video of Piper, Carson and Keller.

    You’re brave, Darlene.

    I’ve been having a good week so far and I wouldn’t want to ruin it by watching P & Co.

  261. Ken F wrote:

    Nancy2 wrote:
    I think the hijacked words are used as bait ……. similar to duck blinds and decoys, deer scent …..
    For me the words feel more like a repellent by now. For example, I have a hard time feeling joy when I hear the word “gospel” because it has way too many negative connotations for me after having it experienced it being misused so badly for so long.

    The Calvinistas haven’t ruined the word gospel for me, but that may have something to do with being Orthodox. In every liturgy we hear: “Listen to the Holy Gospel. Peace be unto all. Wisdom attend!” It is chanted very beautifully and offense cannot be taken. Now the word biblical is a different case altogether. I cannot abide that word anymore. The Calvinists have ruined it for me.

  262. Talmidah wrote:

    I’m a fighter too, especially the past few years, since I found TWW and Crying Out For Justice. I never even knew that I had the *right* to be upset about my husband’s treatment of me, and of course it was drilled into my head that I’d go straight to hell if I divorced him. Yeah, I read some of those silly books and listened to the MenaGAWD experts and it dang near got me killed. The thing is, I was dead already, inside, for a long time anyway. The life is now coming back, praise Yeshua.
    If any other women or men reading here are trying to understand things like abuse, submission and complementarianism (I despise that word), keep reading and know that you have allies in this place. We get it, and we get how hard it is to undo years of faulty teaching. Hang in there.

    Talmidah, I am so sorry for your pain. I wish I could give you a big hug and take you out for a nice meal. God be with you!

  263. Off-topic update.

    Hi Folks,

    Just an updated note that we have raised the $700 to pay for Shauna and Billy’s rent in Texas in the GoFundMe account.

    *We now need to raise the $60 in fees that GoFundMe charges (they charge about 8%).
    *Also we do need to raise some more funds to pay for food, household items, and gasoline for them.
    (I think for right now another $220 would be helpful for these expenses.)
    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

    Thank you to all of our donors!! Thank you to everyone who is praying for Shauna and Billy. (Shauna has a part-time job at a grocery store that was reduced to 13 hours per week.)

    (Dee previously wrote about Shauna and Billy here on TWW.)

    Love and thanks to all,

    Velour in California

  264. Darlene wrote:

    by

    Basically the crap I was taught. Submit to your husband like you would to God. And everything would be okay and God would bless and reward you for it. What. Ever.

  265. Oops. The above comment was in reference to someone quoting that a preacher said that wives where to submit to husbands like they were God.

  266. Gram3 wrote:

    When people are so obviously and willfully blind to facts and reality, there is a reason for that. And they will not be persuaded by more facts.

    You can’t be reasoned out of an opinion you weren’t reasoned into.

    Indeed.

  267. Gram3 wrote:

    Keller may be moving in another direction, and he has been in some tension with the PCA over female unordained deacons at Redeemer.

    Is it because they’re female or because they are supposed to be ordained (at least, deacons are ordained in my denom).

  268. Nancy2 wrote:

    *Women must not give directions to men because that would be offensive to their godly role.- because Piper hates to admit that he couldn’t find his glasses if they were on his face, especially to a woman.

    You know what happens when you don’t give men directions? They drive and drive 15 miles in the wrong direction. I guess that’s better, but it sure is annoying when you’re with them!

  269. Lea wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    Keller may be moving in another direction, and he has been in some tension with the PCA over female unordained deacons at Redeemer.

    Is it because they’re female or because they are supposed to be ordained (at least, deacons are ordained in my denom).

    It is because female and deacon do not go together in the PCA because deacons are ordained and women may not be ordained. Obviously, there were female deacons in the NT but for some reason not now.

  270. @ Lea:
    My first husband and I we going to a friend’s new home once. He was driving. The directions they gave said turn right at so and so crossroads. He turned left. We argued about it a while – you turned the wrong way – no I didn’t. He said the directions were to turn right I turned right! I asked him, which arm do you wear your watch on? He stopped the car in the middle of the road, held his hands up in the air, looked from one wrist to the other, and said, “Oh.”
    There was another time he wouldn’t listen to me and we wandered for an hour and a half. Not that he was a sexist, he just though he knew everything!

  271. Nancy2 wrote:

    …I still believe in miracles. Never give up! Ever!

    Nancy…gosh. What a story. Wow. I’m so glad you’re here (of course!) and your life certainly does seem miraculous. You are one strong woman.

    I believe Deb wrote some time back of a serious accident she was in as well. That, and your story along with others here, really do inspire me to keep going. I’ve never gone through anything like that personally but have experienced tragedy, like everyone if they live long enough. In our extended family we’ve lost an elementary school-age child, an infant, there are miscarriages, and there’s even an unsolved murder, along with other bad, bad stuff. Life is terribly hard at times.

    Good on ya, my Kentucky friend, and better health to you!

  272. Nancy2 wrote:

    There was another time he wouldn’t listen to me and we wandered for an hour and a half.

    ha.

    I was thinking of a particular ex bf who had come to visit me, but was driving his car down the road and I said ‘I think that was the turn’. He kept driving. 5-10 miles down the road I said ‘pretty sure that was the turn back there’ and he said ‘why didn’t you tell me!’

    Was I being winsome without knowing it? Should I have let us drive half way across Maryland until he figured it out?

  273. @ Talmidah:

    “Also, the stress of living with a personal terrorist for decades has totally wiped me out. I believe that it’s made these illnesses much worse…..

    I never even knew that I had the *right* to be upset about my husband’s treatment of me, and of course it was drilled into my head that I’d go straight to hell if I divorced him. Yeah, I read some of those silly books and listened to the MenaGAWD experts and it dang near got me killed.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++

    oh, Talmidah — i’m so sorry for these circumstances.

    re: divorce = hell, were you told this in explicit terms? or was it implied? with language that painted that kind of picture?

    i find that when christian teachers/speakers/writers address shoulds and shouldn’ts, they don’t come out and say things so much as they imply them. they use language that pretty much scares people into the conclusions they want them to have.

    examples:
    *”gender roles are a gospel issue” (& many other iterations of this idea) = it is a sin not to adopt them

    *”God hates divorce” (& many other iterations of this idea) = divorce is a sin, you better not or else

    …and many other examples i can’t think of at the moment.

    it is so crafty, so slippery, so deceptive. people are burdened with cruel mandates that are life-taking. one can never confront the christian teachers/speakers/writers with this — they respond with “i said no such thing”. it is true, they never actually came out and said it — but the conclusions are so heavily implied.

    i find this so irresponsible. their audience is vulnerable. they want to do right, they want to please God, they want to be “sold out for God”. Sin and hell are terrifying prospects. they feel overwhelmed by all this and that they are in need of an expert to show them the way.

    they are putty in the expert’s hand. the expert has an agenda, based on his/her own fears, needs, and wants. or the expert doesn’t have an agenda but is already steeped in the language and is clueless as to the impact his/her words have, and the messages they contain.

  274. @ I fear a cage:

    “Basically the crap I was taught. Submit to your husband like you would to God. And everything would be okay and God would bless and reward you for it”
    +++++++++++

    but i suspect it was never outright stated, just implied. words used to paint a picture of that conclusion. am i right?

  275. Velour wrote:

    Talmidah wrote:

    from Just This Side of Lizard Lick, NC

    I looked up your community. Neat!

    Greetings to you out there in Googleland. Yep, that’s the same Lizard Lick of TV fame. I live within spitting distance in a tiny, rural community.

    In fact, around 3 years ago we had a lot of rain for a spell and had to call Lizard Lick Towing 3 times to pull people out of the mud when they came to visit. On the last call, the Lizard Lick Towing truck itself got stuck. They had to call in an even bigger rig to get it out.

    Ahh, the joys and trials of living in the sticks!

  276. Talmidah wrote:

    I believe Deb wrote some time back of a serious accident she was in as well. That, and your story along with others here, really do inspire me to keep going. I’ve never gone through anything like that personally but have experienced tragedy, like everyone if they live long enough. In our extended family we’ve lost an elementary school-age child, an infant, there are miscarriages, and there’s even an unsolved murder, along with other bad, bad stuff. Life is terribly hard at times.

    And Dee’s daughter had a brain tumor. My first husband died in a car wreck when our daughter was 6 yo, too. Lot’s of people here have have to heal/are healing from wounds inflicted by abusive churches.
    We all have our individual strengths. We all have our individual wounds. We cover a lot of ground, but we still have strength in numbers!

  277. Nancy2 wrote:

    My first husband and I we going to a friend’s new home once. He was driving. The directions they gave said turn right at so and so crossroads. He turned left. We argued about it a while – you turned the wrong way – no I didn’t. He said the directions were to turn right I turned right! I asked him, which arm do you wear your watch on? He stopped the car in the middle of the road, held his hands up in the air, looked from one wrist to the other, and said, “Oh.”

    I can see that happening. I’m very strongly left-handed and tend to confuse left & right a lot. Thinking “left” instead of “right” and that sort of thing.

  278. @ Talmidah:

    Oh that’s funny about living in the sticks and the rain.

    I looked up your screen name too. It means “disciple” in Hebrew. Correct?

  279. Lea wrote:

    I was thinking of a particular ex bf who had come to visit me, but was driving his car down the road and I said ‘I think that was the turn’. He kept driving. 5-10 miles down the road I said ‘pretty sure that was the turn back there’ and he said ‘why didn’t you tell me!’

    Was I being winsome without knowing it?

    Yes you were. By God’s Predestined Omnipotence:

    Rule #1: It’s ALWAYS the woman’s fault.
    Rule #2: See Rule #1.
    Rule #3: See Rule #1.
    Rule #4: See Rule #1.
    Rule #5: See Rule #1.

  280. Nancy2 wrote:

    @ Lea:
    My first husband and I we going to a friend’s new home once. He was driving. The directions they gave said turn right at so and so crossroads. He turned left. We argued about it a while – you turned the wrong way – no I didn’t. He said the directions were to turn right I turned right! I asked him, which arm do you wear your watch on? He stopped the car in the middle of the road, held his hands up in the air, looked from one wrist to the other, and said, “Oh.”
    There was another time he wouldn’t listen to me and we wandered for an hour and a half. Not that he was a sexist, he just though he knew everything!

    “Oh don’t take it personally they just think they know everything. It’s that male ego.” This was how men were explained to me my entire life growing up. Excused so much bad behavior.

  281. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    I can see that happening. I’m very strongly left-handed and tend to confuse left & right a lot. Thinking “left” instead of “right” and that sort of thing.

    My 1st hubby was strongly right-handed. It had nothing to do with that with him. He just didn’t pay attention.
    When he was 14 he broke his nose riding his bicycle………. Look mom, no hands. While he was looking at his mom, he plowed right into a stop sign. He drove that way, too. He drove my ’78 T-Bird into a brick wall – at least he was going slow, minimal damage. Bet I told him a million times, watch where you’re going, or pull over and swap seats with me! He liked to drive fast, too. Very wreckless. And, his dad was police chief!
    On his way to work one morning, he got off of the shoulder of the road at about 60 to 65 mph, hit a culvert, his Toyota – with a sunroof – flipped 4 times, nose-over-end. He was thrown through the sunroof and the car landed on top of him.

  282. I fear a cage wrote:

    “Oh don’t take it personally they just think they know everything. It’s that male ego.” This was how men were explained to me my entire life growing up. Excused so much bad behavior.

    I don’t think it’s so much the male ego as it is an ego problem. I’ve known a few women like that, too.

  283. elastigirl wrote:

    it is so crafty, so slippery, so deceptive. people are burdened with cruel mandates that are life-taking.

    Theirs is a cruel and petulant god who cares for nothing but to micro-manage you (generic you) and aggrandize his own glory.

  284. Talmidah wrote:

    Ahh, the joys and trials of living in the sticks!

    Whew! Now, I live in the sticks. But at least I’m 100 yards from blacktop, and from there, 150 yards from a highway! We have had people get stuck because they made a wrong turn, or missed a turn.

  285. @ elastigirl

    Yes, yes, yes to all you’ve written. Exactly.

    Elastigirl, you are so kind. Thank you.

    Back in the ’80s-’90s, when my family was in church together, I remember mainly the attitude of what might happen if you got a divorce, as in, watch out, you just might wind up in hell, as if that were the unpardonable sin. Do you know what I mean? It’s hard to explain, and I don’t remember the pastors/teachers ever being able to explain it. They were simply repeating what they’d been taught in seminary, I guess (the “God hates divorce!” thing, etc.), but it kept a lot of women in fear and bondage. I mean, who wanted to make God angry and risk enduring a fiery eternity? I was so naive, but at the same time had a great hunger for Him and His truth. I still do.

    We attended several Assemblies of God churches and a Freewill Baptist. The AoGs, while allowing for freedom in the Spirit, frowned upon getting help for much of anything (like serious marital issues, depression, etc.) but it was OK to see a doctor for physical issues…after much prayer.

    So, being who I am, I just figured I had a lousy faith and was a total loser because my life was such a mess. It was awful. I’d always felt that I was something of a rebel and non-conformist because I believed women and men were equally valuable, so hearing from churchfolk that women had certain roles and needed to submit to their husbands was hard for me to deal with – heck, I even had a subscription to Ms. magazine during its heyday, lol! However, I so wanted to please God. Unfortunately, looking back, I think I lost myself in the submission process. To this day I wonder who I could have been had I not been so brainwashed. The Lord comforts me in this, however.

    I hope I’m making *some* sense and not rambling too much. I’m still working through this and quite frankly my brain seems to shut down when I attempt to put it into words. I hope that ends soon, as I want to help others in abuse situations and I must be coherent.

    The bottom line (for me right now, anyway) is that I suspect many men who claim to be spokesmen for God just don’t like women. Or they want a Stepford Wife around. Or they fail to properly study scripture. Or all of the above. It puzzles me and makes me sad and angry.

    Having said all that, I’ve been out of church for a long time but am ready to go back. I’ve been studying the Bible on my own for many years, learning all I can from the original languages, historical context, ancient culture, and so on. Wow – what an education it’s been. Undoing previous bad teaching brings me a strong sense of God’s great love and total freedom in Him.

    Again, elastigirl, thank you for such a thoughtful post – God bless.

  286. Talmidah wrote:

    I hope I’m making *some* sense and not rambling too much.

    Of course you are. I’m enjoying these comments today, I just don’t have anything to say.

  287. @ Deb:
    Thanks for your update on the whereabouts of the Magnificent 9! You and/or Dee should go check out DeYoung when he moves to your neighborhood … he’s New Calvinist royalty!

  288. Nancy2 wrote:

    Howz about all of those SBC connections!

    Yes, makes this old Southern Baptist sad. The old gospel ship ain’t what it used to be.

  289. Nancy2 wrote:

    I fear a cage wrote:

    “Oh don’t take it personally they just think they know everything. It’s that male ego.” This was how men were explained to me my entire life growing up. Excused so much bad behavior.

    I don’t think it’s so much the male ego as it is an ego problem. I’ve known a few women like that, too.

    Oh it’s def a human ego problem. However in my fundamentalist upbringing women were never ever allowed to act that way because you’d drive away your man. Husbands could act that way because well, “men are like that.”

  290. @ Talmidah:

    “I remember mainly the attitude of what might happen if you got a divorce, as in, watch out, you just might wind up in hell, as if that were the unpardonable sin. Do you know what I mean? It’s hard to explain, and I don’t remember the pastors/teachers ever being able to explain it. They were simply repeating what they’d been taught in seminary, I guess (the “God hates divorce!” thing, etc.)”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It is hard to explain, and the pastors were never able to explain it because the explanation doesn’t exist. it is as untrue and fake as the face of the Great and Powerful Oz being projected for the trembling citizens of The Emerald City to see.

    talk about fake news.

    **PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT — attention all meme starters — please start these memes:

    “FAKE NEWS: Divorce will send you to hell.”

    “FAKE NEWS: If you don’t practice gender roles you are in sin.”

    “FAKE NEWS: no male headship = sin”

    “FAKE NEWS: egalitarian = sin”

    “FAKE NEWS: complementarian = un-sin”

    i dunno, i could keep going on and on here. kinda fun. but i am TOTALLY FED UP, SICK TO MY STOMACHE, AND TOTALLY PISSED OFF WITH ALL THE FAKE NEWS SPOUTED BY PROFESSIONAL CHRISTIANS AND THEIR NON-THINKING AUDIENCE.

    yes, you were brainwashed, Talmidah. I was brainwashed. even in my most recent of churches which was the best of churches — i think we all were brainwashed, even the wonderful pastors, to some extent.

    i know, because now i’m sober. the fog of lack of objectivity and critical thinking is quite easy to see now.

  291. Amy wrote:

    I would be glad to offer recommendations. After a lot of prayer and research, my husband were able to discern which churches to avoid during our search. I can provide you my email if you’d like. I hope they enjoy the area! Lots of great things to see and do. Blessings, Amy

    Amy, I would be interested in corresponding with you by email, but don’t know how to exchange addresses in a private way ;-(.

  292. Gram3 wrote:

    It is because female and deacon do not go together in the PCA because deacons are ordained and women may not be ordained. Obviously, there were female deacons in the NT but for some reason not now.

    It’s more nuanced than that. Only men can be ordained deacons in the PCA, but Keller (and others in the PCA) have also commissioned non-ordained female deacons, called deaconesses. It all comes down to the normative use of the word “deaconess.” In any event, this was resolved in 2011 (or maybe 2010) when the PCA General Assembly passed an overture that effectively allows non-ordained female deacons to be called deaconesses.

  293. @ Nancy2

    (My power just came back on – what a day)

    I read your post about your husband’s accident and it was just horrible. I’m so sorry you had to go through that. It is heartbreaking.

    I also remember Dee’s posts about her daughter’s illness. That’s heartbreaking too…I just can’t imagine the pain. Both of you are great warriors of faith and help give me strength to carry on. I mean that sincerely.

    Thanks to all who are unafraid to share their stories.

  294. @ elastigirl

    Fake news is a great way to put it. I just hope people will someday wake up and stop believing everything that springs forth from a pulpit without diligently checking out scripture. We should all be Bereans.

  295. Velour wrote:

    @ Talmidah:

    I looked up your screen name too. It means “disciple” in Hebrew. Correct?

    Yes, that’s right. Talmidah is the feminine, talmid the masculine, and talmidim is plural. I have a Jewish soul and have loved learning a bit of Hebrew and Yiddish.

  296. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Yes you were. By God’s Predestined Omnipotence:
    Rule #1: It’s ALWAYS the woman’s fault.
    Rule #2: See Rule #1.
    Rule #3: See Rule #1.
    Rule #4: See Rule #1.
    Rule #5: See Rule #1.

    I was mostly thinking he should have listened to me the first time. I shouldn’t have to repeat myself!

  297. Nancy2 wrote:

    On his way to work one morning, he got off of the shoulder of the road at about 60 to 65 mph, hit a culvert, his Toyota – with a sunroof – flipped 4 times, nose-over-end. He was thrown through the sunroof and the car landed on top of him.

    Presumably with fatal results.

    I’ve always been a little absent-minded myself, and absent-mindedness plus risk-taking and/or thrillseeking can be a deadly combination. It’s why I have the rep for being very risk-averse. There’s a saying among aircraft pilots:

    “There are old pilots and there are bold pilots; but there are NO Old Bold Pilots.”

  298. A@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Yes, The trooper and the coroner said that he was dead before he had a chance to realize what was happening.
    It was hard on us, my daughter, especially. But, we are stronger for it, and have been able to use our experiences to help others. When my daughter was 17, one of my students lost her father in a farming accident. After a couple of weeks, my daughter went to visit the student. The two had a private convo. The student’s demeanor changed almost instantly. Just knowing that there was another girl within reach who had been through the same thing made a world of difference with her.

  299. @ Talmidah:

    “…and stop believing everything that springs forth from a pulpit without diligently checking out scripture. We should all be Bereans.”
    ++++++++++++

    and common senseans. common sense, my go to word for everything this week. i’d be getting tired of hearing myself say it (or type it) were it not for the fact that i consider it one of the most important survival instincts.

    truth be told, i find the writings ascribed to Paul to be conducive to fake news. i find them to be conceptual and abstract enough to provoke more questions than they do supply answers. however, someone looking for black and white answers and rules will be able to formulate them, even if they don’t exist.

    sigh…. informed common sense is a more reliable compass for me. i sigh because to some degree i feel i’ve been sold a bill of goods in this religion of mine. can’t help but feel a bit crestfallen.

  300. elastigirl wrote:

    truth be told, i find the writings ascribed to Paul to be conducive to fake news. i find them to be conceptual and abstract enough to provoke more questions than they do supply answers.

    Someone in sunday school talked about how the letters go through a specific pattern (This isn’t it but something like: greetings and salutations, here’s all the things you’re doing well, here are some issues I’ve heard about, here are some thoughts I’m thinking and I’m going to think them in a circle until I get to the end, etc). They make so much more sense if you see them as an actual letter that sort of meanders to the point.

  301. @ Lea:

    “I was mostly thinking he should have listened to me the first time. I shouldn’t have to repeat myself!”
    +++++++++++

    ah, but you see his pen|$ compass was spinning, so his thoughts were scrambling. that might have been more than one thing to do at the same time. actually hearing you was out of the question.

    as my mother-in-law says, ‘don’t give him any gum’.

  302. @ Lea:

    that’s helpful, actually. (kind of miffed that i have to admit that — ‘Paul’ has caused enough trouble already. or at least his audience that he never expected has).

    “here are some thoughts I’m thinking and I’m going to think them in a circle until I get to the end,”

    –that’s kind of funny. i think i live with someone who does that. except mission aborted before he gets to the end.

  303. elastigirl wrote:

    as my mother-in-law says, ‘don’t give him any gum’.

    BWAH! That’s great.

    I was probably pretty chill about telling him the first time, mostly because I didn’t have a car so I was trying to filter road directions through walking directions…

  304. elastigirl wrote:

    kind of miffed that i have to admit that — ‘Paul’ has caused enough trouble already

    I honestly thought so much better of Paul after that class!

    And then also how complementary he was of the women who helped him in ministry is a good counterbalance to the way his words are so often used. You have to read them together.

    Also the thought that Titus probably wasn’t Paul writing anyways.

  305. @ elastigirl

    I hear ya – I really do, and feel much the same way.

    God blessed me with strong discernment which I’ve been aware of since childhood. Even while I was being told all this stuff regarding submission, no divorce, and so on it was quietly telling me *this is wrong*. However, I basically ignored it because I didn’t think it could be real. I mean, I was just a simple woman (and ::: gasp ::: a blonde!), and those guys had studied the bible for years, so they should know lots more than I ever could. Yeah. Right.

    Thank God for the internet. Now most anyone can dig deeper into scripture than they ever dreamed and break the bondage of fear, or whatever they need to do. I agree that much of Paul’s writings are really difficult to deal with and that’s why I pretty much ignore the celebrity/mainstream preachers and teachers and stick to the scholarly stuff. You probably do the same. It’s tough to do at times but so worth the time and effort.

  306. Hi Folks,

    Just a note to thank the donor who just donated $100 to the GoFundMe campaign that Dee set up for Shauna and Billy in Texas. (Dee wrote about their story here on TWW.)
    With this latest donation it will cover the 8% that GoFundme charges for a fundraiser.

    We have raised the $700 to pay for Shauna and Billy’s monthly rent.
    They have been in a tight financial situation. Shauna’s part-time job at a grocery store was reduced to 13 hours a week.

    I think that about $200 would help them in the interim with food, some household items, and gasoline for their car.

    Thank you!

    Please keep them in prayer. They have been discouraged of late.

    https://www.gofundme.com/pxs5dk

    Regards,

    Velour in California

  307. @ Mason:
    Could you explain something to me? There are ordained male deacons and unordained female deacons. What difference does the ordination make in their actual duties?

  308. @ dee:

    I wonder if the unordained deacons cant give communion. Maybe that’s the difference? (but I’m not PCA so not sure)

  309. Mason wrote:

    when the PCA General Assembly passed an overture that effectively allows non-ordained female deacons to be called deaconesses.

    Wow! “Allows” women functioning in roles similar to men to be called deaconesses! I am so glad to be out of the religiosity of the institutional​ church.

    To all the men and women, inside and outside, the institutionalized​ church, who function in the kingdom of God without a man given title, keep up the good work. You are no less or better than those with titles. From what I have seen, your work and service is more sincere than many who sport titles and incomes. God sees your humble service.

  310. Off-topic. Prayer request.

    Shauna (Billy’s mom in Texas) is meeting with human resources today about problems at her job. Please pray for her.

    Thank you!

  311. dee wrote:

    @ Mason:
    Could you explain something to me? There are ordained male deacons and unordained female deacons. What difference does the ordination make in their actual duties?

    I’m not a member of the diaconate, so I can’t give you an informed answer on this. There probably isn’t a significant difference in terms of actual duties performed, but again, I’m not certain of this.

  312. @ Mason:
    Thank you for responding. Since I am not complementation, I am usually trying to figure out the terminology and what it all means. Things like this confuse me.

  313. Bridget wrote:

    To all the men and women, inside and outside, the institutionalized​ church, who function in the kingdom of God without a man given title, keep up the good work. You are no less or better than those with titles. From what I have seen, your work and service is more sincere than many who sport titles and incomes. God sees your humble service.

    Really ……. A doctoress, a pilotless, a police officeress, a CEOess, a reporteress…….

  314. @ Bridget, Nancy2, and elastigirl:

    Mrs. Muff knows just such a living and breathing saint walking this Earth.
    She’s the real deal, the real McCoy, she’s one of the stars of heaven; spoken of by the Prophet Daniel.

  315. Talmidah wrote:

    @ Darlene

    Thank you so much, Darlene – you’re so sweet. I enjoy your posts very much – God bless!

    You’re welcome, Talmidah.

  316. elastigirl wrote:

    mrs. muff, i presume. i have no doubt she’s all ‘dat.

    The reference is to mrs. muff’s hair dresser. She (mrs. muff’s hairdresser) is one of those rare souls in whom the ‘gospel’ has taken root in good soil (parable of the sower) and is producing real fruit, in real time. Not just bigger and ever more grandiose “harvest crusades” put on by Greg Laurie.

  317. Hello Max!
    I was raised in the Quaker denomination and graduated from an SBC affiliated college in KY. (My college roomate’s dad was a professor at SBTS before the Calvinization). My husband was raised in the IFB church. When we married and moved to the Hoosier capital a few years later, we joined an unaffiliated general baptist church as kind of a good blend of our backgrounds. (The one that was later taken over). Ironically, the pastor who came and Calvinized it, lead our church into joining the SBC during the gradual takeover process. I read between the lines though as it became clear the pastor and elders wanted to join because 1-they wanted access to the bigger war chest of funds for missions (I could buy that), 2 – they wanted the 50% tuition discount offered at SBC seminaries for two of the pastors on staff that were working on doctorates and or other degrees, 3- The pastor was a big fan of Al Mohler and crew and was most likely in “the know” about the Calvinization efforts on the SBC. Looking back both then and now, I feel like it was sneaky and insincere for them to join the SBC. Last year, my former church dropped the Baptist name from their church name on all signs, media, etc. To me, it seems that if you are so proud to be affiliated with the great SBC, then why would you no longer identify as baptist? Anyway, after a lot of prayer and research, we found our non affiliated Baptist church. We have gotten to know the pastor and he is sincere and a humble, servant leader. He is definitely not part of the Calvinist/authoritarian mindset. He is old school SBC minded and still gives altar calls and allows children who profess faith in Christ to be baptized. We did not see this happening at our old church. Also, there is a commitment to the congregational polity model. I feel badly for the long time SBC members. The denomination truly is being hijacked. All I can do is lift this up in prayer and inform people.
    Blessings, Max wrote:

    Amy wrote:
    “sneaking it in the back door” … The hardest part was uprooting our kids and also leaving behind our long time friends who stayed … Many of the long time mature members have since left, especially after a constitutional change too. Our story has a happy ending though. God led us to a wonderful Christ centered church …
    Sadly, your experience with an SBC-YRR pastor is far too common in the traditional churches they are taking over. They lie their way past the pastor search committee regarding their theological leaning and then progressively begin to Calvinize the church, eventually leading to elder church governance and preaching/teaching reformed theology. Sadder still, many long-time SBC non-Calvinist members who were uprooted have not yet found another place to worship (Praise God that you have!). They desire to stay with the SBC as they search for another church, but have learned they can’t trust just any pastor these days – particularly, if the “lead pastor” is in his 20s-30s and a recent SBC seminary graduate. Within a few years, after older traditional members leave or die, SBC Calvinization by Al Mohler and his YRR army will be fully accomplished. But God …

  318. Hi Mary, I will try to send you my secondary email account soon as I don’t mind it being seen. That way, I can make recommendations based on which side of town your kids are on. When we searched, we definitely stayed away from any churches listed on the 9 Marks website. Will be in touch soon! Blessings, Mary27 wrote:

    Amy wrote:
    I would be glad to offer recommendations. After a lot of prayer and research, my husband were able to discern which churches to avoid during our search. I can provide you my email if you’d like. I hope they enjoy the area! Lots of great things to see and do. Blessings, Amy
    Amy, I would be interested in corresponding with you by email, but don’t know how to exchange addresses in a private way ;-(.

  319. Thank you Root66. I am happy to help educate people on this movement. Many people are in the dark. My experience was that many of these YRR pastors are big on “head knowledge” but lacking in “heart knowledge.” Many of the long time members left. My husband and I are in the younger category of those who left and we are Gen Xers born in the mid to late 70’s. Any new members our old church draws after losing the long time folks is mostly the millennial crowd for some reason. I don’t know if this is typical of other YRR converted churches. People who left have scattered to a variety of different congregations. Thankful for the One true Shepherd though! I’m sure your church is a blessing to those coming to it as a safe haven. It is sad that there has to be safe havens from this, but God bless you all who can comfort others! We are definitely comforted. Root 66 wrote:

    @ Amy:
    Amy,
    So sorry to hear about your ordeal. But make sure you tell your story to anyone who will listen! The more people that can sound the alarm, the fewer places these snake oil salesman will have to hide! We must become the ever-vigilant watchmen on the wall. If nothing else, going through all of this galvanized what I already knew to be true and made me and several others in our church all the more resolute in our faith. In fact, our church is beginning to get a reputation as a safe-harbor from this movement. I hope that is a trend that continues.

  320. elastigirl wrote:

    can you describe the real fruit?

    Said person is a none and a done after spending 10 years at a mega-church in our area. She said she could no longer stand the emptiness and the cognitive dissonance along with the high dollar lifestyles of the head honcho and his inner cadre.

    Over the last several years she has been involved with an inter-faith outreach program for the down-strata in our area. Homeless people, teens at risk, that kind of thing.

    She took in two homeless women who now have 1 year of sobriety, are gainfully employed, and going to night school. She also took in two elderly dogs their previous ‘owners’ threw away because they did not want to care for their special needs.

    Like I said, her faith is real, and it’s backed up with deeds.

  321. Nancy2 wrote:

    Really ……. A doctoress, a pilotless, a police officeress, a CEOess, a reporteress…….

    That’s “doctress”, “aviatrix”, “policewoman”…
    English already has feminine forms of masculine nouns, just they’re hardly ever used.

    What English lacks is a gender-inclusive or gender-indeterminate animate personal pronoun. (Classically, it used the masculine.)

  322. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Nancy2:

    …a human beingess, a christianess…

    Though that sounds like the flip side of “global replace string ‘man’ by string ‘person'” school of “gender-neutral language”. A One True Way of secular Moral Righteousness that ended up as stilted as Marxspeak and spawned a pushback.

  323. If anyone would like to tell their story of a church *takeover* please email us. Yu can tell the story anonymously.

  324. Bridget wrote:

    Wow! “Allows” women functioning in roles similar to men to be called deaconesses! I am so glad to be out of the religiosity of the institutional​ church.
    To all the men and women, inside and outside, the institutionalized​ church, who function in the kingdom of God without a man given title, keep up the good work. You are no less or better than those with titles. From what I have seen, your work and service is more sincere than many who sport titles and incomes. God sees your humble service.

    The term deaconess comes directly from Romans 16:1, when it is applied to a woman in the early church named Phoebe. The crux of the matter is whether or not referring to her as a deaconess implies a church title, or is simply calling her a “servant,” which is the literal meaning of the term deacon/deaconess.

    You are correct that all Christians should labor in the church, title or not, but the deacons have very specific functions in most denominations, which is why they have a special title.

  325. Mason wrote:

    You are correct that all Christians should labor in the church, title or not, but the deacons have very specific functions in most denominations, which is why they have a special title.

    I am well aware of special titles that go with specific functions. I’ve been in institutional churches for over 40 years. I’m not much for titles any more, as I’ve seen the inside of church I stories upfront and personnel. I have no more respect for a pastor than for any other Christian living out his/her life in Christ.

  326. @ Velour:
    Velour wrote:

    Hats off to the Deebs (Dee and Deb here) for being two ladies with spunk. They take comments on their articles. On the Billy Graham Rule article we’ve just exceeded 850 comments in a couple of days.
    And the boys over at T4G are such cowards they don’t permit comments on their articles.
    Women: Lead the way!

    NOT TRUE. Deebs are also known to have blocked others from commenting here. One example is Paul M. Dohse Sr. who has his own blog at “https://paulspassingthoughts.com”

  327. Martin wrote:

    NOT TRUE. Deebs are also known to have blocked others from commenting here. One example is Paul M. Dohse Sr. who has his own blog at “https://paulspassingthoughts.com”

    If you in any way think that his conversation over here was one that was in any way acceptable, then we have nothing to discuss. I warned him to cut it out. He didn’t. I hate to block anyone. The ones who are blocked are usually extremely difficult. He has his own blog and he can speak to his heart’s content over there.

    We do not discuss moderation so this conversation ends now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *