Francis Chan: Was It Truly Division or Simply a Lack of Belief?


Image by Ryan Ashton

__________

Let’s pray that the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its iniquity elsewhere. C. S. Lewis

__________

Francis Chan decided to go after Christians who he claims are destroying the church.

Apparently, he claims his talk was based on 1 Corinthians 3:17

If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple.

This sermon was covered by the Christian Post in Francis Chan warns against division in the Church. 

“There is this terrifying verse in 1 Timothy where Paul talked about two men who rejected the faith. Paul said that he had handed them over to Satan, by which he meant that he’d put them outside of the church (1:20).

Basically, these men were actively opposing the works of God, so rather than pretending everything was fine, Paul removed them from the safety and blessings of the fellowship of believers. He was hoping that the misery of being separated from the church would lead them to repent.

Are you catching the weight of this? Paul equated removal from the church with being handed over to Satan! It is crazy to me that we live in a time when people are voluntarily doing this to themselves! No church has placed them outside of the fellowship; instead, they’ve handed themselves over to Satan!”

Let’s take a look at the verse from 1 Timothy 1:20:

Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.

Are these verses referring to actual divisions in the church or something else entirely.

  • These two men had rejected the faith.
  • Members of a church are those who accept the faith along with a series of statements that outline that faith such as The Apostles Creed.
  • If these two men did not accept the faith, then they were already unsaved.
  • One would assume that these two men were not members of the church since they were not believers. Obviously, unbelievers are welcome to attend church so long as they are not being disruptive. It appears these men were not playing nice and were causing headaches, so they were asked to leave.
  • Therefore, they never had the safety and blessings of the fellowship of believers.

Divisions in the church are another thing altogether

Assuming that a church is made up of believers, division would arise over points of disagreement of interpretation or on how to administer a church.

Divisions in a church can be caused by members or by leaders. Some examples:

  • Calvinism versus Arminiaism
  • Young earth creationism versus old earth creationism
  • Salaries and benefits to be paid to church workers
  • Traditional music versus contemporary music

True story:

I attended a Reformed (that was kept a secret as well) Baptist church in which there was a secret that was never to be told potential members. This church only taught young earth creationism. In fact, 6 weeks out of every year this was taught to grade K-12. In addition, similar classes for adults were held every year.The church also hosted a young earth creations club which met 1-2 x month at the church.

An adult class decided to have a debate on the issue in which equal time would be given to both sides to present their point of view. The young earth cavalry arrived and disrupted the class-hooting at those who held to an old earth perspective. I went to the senior pastor and asked what was going on. He claimed that the church only taught young earth. I asked why this was not stated in the resources because I would never have joined the church if I had known they did that. He said that they didn’t tell people because they didn’t want people not to come to the church!

So, in this instance, who was causing the division?

Does leaving a church with which you disagree rise to the level of *being turned over to Satan?”

There are a number of churches who would say so. 9 Marks churches will put you on a *care list* if you do not leave in a manner that they deem worthy. Todd Wilhelm left a 9 Marks church-UCCD because they sold CJ Mahaney books. He did not immediately join a 9 Marks *approved* church. That means he was retroactively disciplined. Discipline in their world means being turned over to Satan.

So, is that what Paul meant? Anytime someone disagrees with the leaders, he is to be turned over to Satan? Many churches practice this nonsense and cause unbelievable pain in the body of Christ in the misapplication of these verses. Francis Chan is a church leader. He has never been at the mercy of power hungry men who cannot wait to catch the next little guy who disagrees with them so they can turn over another one to Satan.

In the end, I’m not sure that these verses are saying what Chan and others want them to say. Either these men were not believers or they had been believers but had left the faith-something that Calvinists say cannot happen.

Comments

Francis Chan: Was It Truly Division or Simply a Lack of Belief? — 101 Comments

  1. The problem is, this deeply flawed, possibly destructive man has confused an institutional thing that he calls “church” with the reality of the true Church as defined by everyone who loves Jesus and follows Him. Of course, there are times where being put out of the institutional thing or leaving it willingly might be the way one prevents their family from “being handed over to Satan.” I’ve been there, let me tell you, and the last time, the straw that broke the camel’s back, was at a church where the pastor was (I think) had a full blown case of NPD and showed the men’s group weekly Francis Chan videos (birds of a feather, perhaps). My first impression of Chan was that he was all about promoting the brand of Francis Chan. His attitude fairly screamed it. Chan just sounds like another person wanting to cling to his power and prestige and livelihood and willing to twist any scripture to support his ends.

    Sometimes Satan—or those serving him—are the ones in the pulpit. Otherwise, Jesus sure had it wrong in calling some of the church leaders of the day “sons of hell.”

  2. Law Prof,
    riiiiight – he cares so much about power that he walked away from it all to work a secular job while working to establish home groups.

    You people are ridiculous. You take a general sermon point from Chan and project your own insecurities. The point Chan is making is known as a GENERALITY for Pete’s sake. It’s not 100% normative. Of course there are exceptions and edge cases.

    Stop being so butt hurt over everything that people say. I swear you’re looking for stuff to whine about.

    MOD: Tone it down. GBTC

  3. He said: “The Lord has been teaching me”. Unlikely. It is much more likely that someone else has been feeding him these lies.

  4. I wouldn’t put much stock in anything Chan has to say. He’s been trying to find himself for years, continually reinventing his message and mission. At one time, he was a golden boy in the New Calvinist movement and disappeared for a while to rethink things. I’m not sure how one would describe his theological leaning now. Trying to scare folks into staying in church because they don’t agree with church leaders is an awful form of manipulation and intimidation. There is no doubt that Satan is active in the American church, but he most often pops up in the pulpit rather than the pew.

  5. …”Over 3 years ago, God started to speak to me deeply on the great sin of division, slander, and gossip in the body of Christ. God started to have me in situations where great hurt was being done and I saw first hand the way the enemy used these tactics to destroy and hurt the testimony of Jesus Christ in others lives…”..

    That would be approximately during the GFA scandal.

    FC has been appearing lately the the Christian Post. Ironicly, so has a GFA and campaign, or so I’ve noticed.

    I consider the CP to be the Evangelical rag of record. Christianity Today seems to be falling by the wayside. I also think the GFA / SBC connections never where explained.

    I don’t know that invoking Satan is advisable for Mr. Chan. Sometimes, when you call people, they hear you, and decide to show up

  6. So gossip = anything negative. OK.

    I’ve listened to some Chan talks, and I appreciate that when he questioned whether a weekly church production was actually “making disciples,” he left a cushy position at Cornerstone. That’s gutsy. And I appreciate that he’s trying to figure out how to make disciples outside of the institutional church context. That’s hard.

    I remember him saying that in this form of church, your main job as a leader is to find and nurture new leaders, so you have some leadership when a home church grows to a point where it should split into 2. But I also realized that his vision of leadership is still man only. And I’m sure there are other things that carry over from his years at McArthur’s school.

    The video… I’m still processing. I don’t really find fear and guilt that motivating.

  7. Law Prof:
    The problem is, this deeply flawed, possibly destructive man has confused an institutional thing that he calls “church” with the reality of the true Church as defined by everyone who loves Jesus and follows Him.Of course, there are times where being put out of the institutional thing or leaving it willingly might be the way one prevents their family from “being handed over to Satan.”I’ve been there, let me tell you, and the last time, the straw that broke the camel’s back, was at a church where the pastor was (I think) had a full blown case of NPD and showed the men’s group weekly Francis Chan videos (birds of a feather, perhaps).My first impression of Chan was that he was all about promoting the brand of Francis Chan.His attitude fairly screamed it. Chan just sounds like another person wanting to cling to his power and prestige and livelihood and willing to twist any scripture to support his ends.

    Sometimes Satan—or those serving him—are the ones in the pulpit.Otherwise, Jesus sure had it wrong in calling some of the church leaders of the day “sons of hell.”

    Sadly, Pastors can cause lots of division and truly expect to never be called out about it.

  8. I find myself mildly encouraged that Mr Chan is noticing the exodus from the churches. At the moment, he interprets it to be flawed thinking on the part of those leaving. His warnings are not going to have much effect, IMO. People are generally able to distinguish blessings from curses.

    At some point, the problem will become sufficiently acute that the leaders will become more open to self-examination.

  9. a new problem,

    Funny how that happens only AFTER people vote with their feet (and their wallet).

    MOD: Sorry. This now makes no sense after I removed the above comment per request. This is why we normally don’t do this and I’ll be VERY reluctant to do it again.
    GBTC

  10. OK folks. We’ve said it before.

    Don’t post what you don’t want to stay up forever. Asking us to delete a comment creates extra work and our paid staff hates extra work. And if it has references a lot of hassle for us and readers.

    GBTC
    (For those who don’t realize it, there is sarcasm in the above statement.)

  11. It’s been awhile since I’ve read Francis Chan’s story but something seems inconsistent here. He mentions people who voluntarily remove themselves from church as essentially handing themselves over to Satan. Not sure what that has to do with salvation; there are various reasons why people remove themselves, especially for a season.

    Didn’t he walk away from the ministry for awhile…and need time to “find himself” of whatever ? But yet we better not do a similar thing as lay people?

  12. __

    501c3 Deception, Lies & Silencing Continues: “I Can See For Miles, And Miles…”

    hmmm…

    Surfing The 501c3 Church Social Media Apocalypse –

    —> Don’t need no crystal ball to see through the haze,

    501c3 Pastoral deception rampantly rules the day…

    Yet, I know there is ‘hope’ ™ in Jesus’ Name…

    ♪♩♪♩hum, hum, hum,…by the Spirit Of God, “I can see for miles, and miles, and miles and miles…”

    Oh, Yeah!

    Intermission:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ipaISfDhESg

    ;~)

    – –

  13. I’m not sure from one of the above (deleted) comments if everyone is following Chan’s train of thought.

    1. I can only assume from the time frame that GFA is the initiation event of God communicating with Chan. Chan does identify the specific sin is verbalizing a complaint. If the complaint had not been spoken, death would have been avoided.
    2. God is now afflicting specific persons with destruction of their health. However, it does not appear that God is communicating any warning to the stricken.
    3. God is obligated to destroy specific people.
    4. The possibility is raised that destruction will begin within several weeks. So, I interpret this to be mid-Jan onward.

    This could be taken as offensive by identifiable persons who publicly stated a belief that K.P. Yohanan targeted Christians for charity fraud.

    He should never have invoked Satan as the mechanism of death. I really think he will regret this. He will get a really simple question in the next life.

    -Did God communicate to you in 2016 that certain people would be killed and removed from the Kingdom of God?-

    He’s screwed no matter what he says. He should have thought it through, invoking Satan makes Satan a witness. Satan has been named, that makes him admissible. Who would actualy pick Satan as your corroborating witness?

    What’s wrong with picking the Tooth Fairy? What about Sasquatch? Michael Cohen? He picks Satan?

  14. From the video: “Consider this your first warning!” (Chan)

    To quell the “gossip” about him in and outside his church, Chan has turned to the ultimate clobber verse “I’m going to turn you over to Satan!” Reminds me of Robert Morris calling blogs “Satan’s Hit List.” Next, as his paranoia deepens, we will see him using “Touch not my anointed!” and rambling through sermons which slap the psyche rather than minister to the spirit. When a pulpit drifts to the strange side, it’s only natural for the pew to express concerns about them. Chan has been all over the map, still trying to reinvent himself by stretching Scripture beyond its bounds. These guys depend on the sensational to keep them afloat; otherwise, they will fade into obscurity. When they get too controversial, they disappear and no one will talk about them anymore. Remember Rob Bell? Remember Mark Driscoll? Remember Bill Hybels? etc. In cults of personality driven by narcissism, that’s like being turned over to Satan!

    The blogosphere is shouting to Chan today “Consider this your first warning!”

  15. Nick Bulbeck,

    RUHRO, I think my kid used to play that. Behind our backs, of course, because I assure you we were much too righteous to allow our children to play video games. 😉

  16. Law Prof: has confused an institutional thing that he calls “church” with the reality of the true Church

    The Christian Industrial Complex depends on the institutional church, rather than the Church, to finance it. Its leaders are in the business to keep the church in the pews, not the Church. The Church has too much spiritual sense to get anywhere near it, but the rank and file gullibles in institutional church will fund the rebels and their movements of aberrant faith. You can shame a church into submission, but not the Church.

  17. mot: Sadly, Pastors can cause lots of division and truly expect to never be called out about it.

    Well, you know if it’s from a pastor, it’s called “Divine vision”. If it’s from a sheeple, it’s “divisive”.

  18. Ishy: Well, you know if it’s from a pastor, it’s called “Divine vision”. If it’s from a sheeple, it’s “divisive”.

    Well, there has been nothing more divisive in the American church this century than the New Calvinist movement, which Chan was once a key member of. It has produced more victim than vision.

  19. TS00:
    Nathan Priddis,

    Please define ‘GFA’. Thanks.

    TS00:
    Nathan Priddis,

    Please define ‘GFA’. Thanks.

    Gospel for Asia.

    GFA is considered by some (Warren Throckmorton..persons such as myself..and some other people) to possibly be amoung the largest Christian frauds ever. It is currently subject to ongoing litigation.

    Francis Chan was personaly involved in some fashion, according to reports. To my knowledge, he has never detailed what any such GFA connection entailed. He would likely have benefited from Christian’s refraining in making anti-GFA statements, if such Christians had been afraid if death, at the hands of Satan.

  20. TS00: because I assure you we were much too righteous to allow our children to play video games.

    I am much too non-elect to give a sheep of height about video games… 😉

  21. Ishy: Well, you know if it’s from a pastor, it’s called “Divine vision”.

    Couldnae’ve put it better mahsel’. I haven’t handed emdy or anything over to Stan. I’ve just “felt called” to plant “a church” with only one person in it.

  22. Nick Bulbeck: I’ve just “felt called” to plant “a church” with only one person in it.

    Then you are a church planter! Given the poor condition of the institutional church in many places, believers need to take on a different perspective about the “Church”, IMO. You have touched on it. Your church is populated by one person, in which YOU are the Church. In this sense, “ekklesia” implies that an individual has been gathered to Christ to be the Church in the world, rather than a gathering of believers in a place we call church. Thus, for a believer to not go to church does not mean he isn’t ‘the’ Church.

  23. Nathan Priddis: God is now afflicting specific persons with destruction of their health. However, it does not appear that God is communicating any warning to the stricken.

    Except through Chan. And now that he’s delivered the warning, they are accountable.

    Thanks Nathan, I hadn’t made the GFA connection. That shades all of this in a different light. No ministry or minister should be beyond accountability and critique, but this seems to be what Chan is suggesting, complete with clobber verses promising divine wrath.

    By the way, the Wiki entry on Chan is worth reading. Although I’m guessing that some would consider it “gossip.”

  24. Max,

    There’s that, but I was mainly referring to the constant spinning between two meanings of the word “church” used by folk in the kind of context cited by Mr Chan above. On the one hand, it’s a cheap label for an organisation any Tom, Dick or Sally set up. Then suddenly, when it suits them, their “churches” become “a church” and then “The Church” (as in, so-and-so left “the church”), that dispenses God himself. Crivens yes – have a bit of that!

  25. There are other new testament verses about not associating with professing Christians who shame the faith by immorality. I see the current shakeup of sexual abuse by pastors/leaders to fall into that category.

  26. Max,

    I agree about Chan. When he first came to my attention, it seemed he was really focusing on the love of God and showing that to the world. Then suddenly I see him talking about how some believers are deceived and will be subject to hell. Whaaat?

  27. Abigail,

    There you go being devisive again! ( sarcasm)
    Remember, being your leader, and in some circles they consider themselves “Apostles” allows them to do what ever they want, and us pew peons can never call out their misbehavior! Rank has its privileges! RHIP..

  28. me: He said: “The Lord has been teaching me”. Unlikely. It is much more likely that someone else has been feeding him these lies.

    I watched a bit of the vid and wondered if there’s a portmanteau word for slick + sincere.

    Every day I pray. Probably not well, but it’s part of my routine. I recite a set of well-known prayers and passages, with pauses to express what’s on my mind and try to assess my own adherence to basic Christian principles. By the end, peace has settled over me, along with an insight and sometimes a new idea or decision. NEVER would I say to myself or a group, “The Lord has been teaching me.”

    This strikes me as a power move by a boastful speaker. If it’s just the lingo of his church, they should reconsider their lingo.

  29. Friend,

    Jesus Himself said he would not leave us as orphans but that the Holy Spirit would come. Of course God teaches us. You read scripture, He illuminates it, etc. He has helped me for decades and He helps you too. Only right to acknowledge it.

  30. The Bible does command the church to reject a heretic after admonishing him(her) twice. Of course not every disagreement rises to the level of heresy contrary to what 9MarksoftheBeast tells you (though if I do it in a spirit of intimidation or harassment I am a problem and need to be dealt with accordingly).

    Then again, if I were to go to a Lutheran church and demand they stop christening babies (or a Baptist church and demand they start), I would expect to be told that I need to get my theology straight, or find a church in line with what I believe.

  31. bunny: He has helped me for decades and He helps you too. Only right to acknowledge it.

    Thank you so much. I do acknowledge God’s help, but that turn of phrase suggests to me that Chan is claiming special status with God, or perfect clarity in his understanding of God. I gather that you hear such words differently, so this might be a difference in our backgrounds.

    Where does God end, and where do I begin? Maybe I’m just timid, but I don’t want to give God credit for my bad ideas. Far more comfortable thanking God for my life and everything and everyone in it, and asking for composure and strength. One of my daily prayers is known as the Breton fisherman’s prayer:

    Dear Lord, be good to me, for your sea is so wide, and my boat is so small.

  32. jeff: You people are ridiculous.

    Because I am not familiar with this case, had your comment been more prudent I would also have been more inclined to consider your point of view.

  33. About Francis Chan: I have not kept track of his ministry or sermons. If he is making errors in some way, maybe someone should write to him to point it out, so it will not become his blind point.

    I do not know Chan personally. Sometime ago I heard that he chose a humble/moderate home for his family to live in. He also gave the proceeds from his book to a children’s hunger fund ministry/charity (? I think that’s the name). And one of the reasons he left the church where he was highly esteemed was to avoid the pitfall of having everyone talk more about him than about Jesus. So I feel that he at least had pure motives in those days.

    Surely hope and pray that Francis Chan will be able to adjust his course if needed, and continue to walk with Jesus in the days ahead. Maybe we could humbly encourage this brother ?

  34. Max,

    “In this sense, “ekklesia” implies that an individual has been gathered to Christ to be the Church in the world, rather than a gathering of believers in a place we call church.”
    ++++++++++++++++++

    …which spends your hard-earned tithes on things like insurance policies, discretionary spending, and landscaping.

    (instead of cynical, i prefer realistic)

    how refreshing…

  35. Friend,

    “NEVER would I say to myself or a group, “The Lord has been teaching me.””
    +++++++++++++

    ok, had to look up ‘portmanteau’. good word.

    slick’ncere?

    i’d couldn’t bear to say “God showed me”, either. aside from cosmic name-dropping, just so happens that all these things people say “God showed” them contradict and negate each other.

    an insightful inkling? perhaps.

    “God showed me”. i don’t think so.

  36. bunny,

    “Jesus Himself said he would not leave us as orphans but that the Holy Spirit would come. Of course God teaches us. You read scripture, He illuminates it, etc. He has helped me for decades and He helps you too. Only right to acknowledge it.”
    ++++++++++++++++

    well, apparently God’s teaching illuminated to James MacDonald that he should sue fellow believers.

  37. A few observations first he said loosely quoted ” this is not just one human talking to another, this is something else…” then went on to the party line concerning how this is some Divinely inspired meeting. Arrogance much. In my line of work being able to talk is not just or merely anything it is a miracle each and every time because of how much has to happen for one to speak with some semblance of clarity and how much it takes for one to hear with clarity. I have students that struggle for decades to just learn to speak a few words or push a button to use a communication device etc.

    Second was the list of who God killed because they ticked Him off in some obscure way and how that did not seem fair. In my experience as an evangelical mainly it was always made pretty clear just how much God really wanted to take us out, individually and as the human race. It was couched in God loves U, His Son died for U but definitely God was ticked, and we are going to pay and pay dearly. So will our families, that is an entirely new post. I lack said spirituality and I never could see God like that, though the tape that pays back at times tries to remind me.

    A side note, it’s hard to watch parents pass but its harder to watch parents pass and leave adult children with developmental disabilities in my opinion. I have had to and am now having to be involved in this. Way more times than I wanted to but I remember every one. Many of them really have no one to help. But It gets hard at times and I get so disgusted with myself that I can’t meet the needs and have even toyed with the idea to ask for some help. I don’t mind asking for help for them, but for me, well that is another gift from my evangelical past.

    Trying to explain death or tell their adult child with the disability concerning the potential loss, the economic impact which plays a huge role, in some cases the only role most are concerned about, but also the spiritual and emotional hurt which is the hardest to deal with and by far the more important.

  38. “I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”

    Susan B. Anthony

  39. I certainly agree that it is important that church beliefs, doctrine, not be hidden “because people might not attend.” If those teachings are hidden there will be an opportunity for division when they sneak out. I certainly would want to know that a church is teaching “old earth creation” since it does affect a number of other biblical concepts. I could then ask how other passages of Scripture will be addressed and determine whether or not that would be the church home for our family. Obviously one’s eternal destiny is not predicated on this issue.

  40. elastigirl:
    bunny,

    “Jesus Himself said he would not leave us as orphans but that the Holy Spirit would come. Of course God teaches us. You read scripture, He illuminates it, etc. He has helped me for decades and He helps you too. Only right to acknowledge it.”
    ++++++++++++++++

    well, apparently God’s teaching illuminated to James MacDonald that he should sue fellow believers.

    Have you heard the news? Evidently God told James MacDonald to step down from all preaching and leadership positions at HBC, indefinitely. I never thought I’d see the day.

  41. birdoftheair: Surely hope and pray that Francis Chan will be able to adjust his course if needed

    Chan has been adjusting his course for a while. I have no doubt that he loves Christ and has a zeal and passion to serve Him. He definitely has a gift of communication and some charisma to go with it to attract a following. But he has a history of drifting off course trying to find himself – his years as a leader in the New Calvinist movement is an example. He left that to take a sabbatical to reinvent his message and ministry. He now believes that his home church movement is the new reformation. The church just doesn’t need folks in the pulpit who haven’t figured it out yet. It confuses folks when they are all over the map. Yes, we should pray for Chan.

  42. elastigirl:
    Friend,

    “NEVER would I say to myself or a group, “The Lord has been teaching me.””
    +++++++++++++

    ok, had to look up ‘portmanteau’.good word.

    slick’ncere?

    i’d couldn’t bear to say “God showed me”, either.aside from cosmic name-dropping, just so happens that all these things people say “God showed” them contradict and negate each other.

    an insightful inkling?perhaps.

    “God showed me”.i don’t think so.

    In an amusing way one could note that, from within the strong view of divine sovereignty that is foundational in Calvinism and all strands of the Reformation traditions, one could argue that God did decree from before the foundation of the world that they would get that particular idea while reading that particular text.

    This not the same as “what I learned is true.” Perhaps God decreed that they would misinterpret the text. As you note, this does happen a lot, given the variety of conflicting interpretations.

    And the idea that God might decree that self-conceived shepherds misinterpret the Bible should be deeply concerning to “strong sovereignty” types (among which I still count myself; I am an odd bird). It’s an invitation to humility.

  43. FW Rez: Apparently “sabbatical” means working at the branch in Florida during the winter months.

    He’s going to get hot in that black leather jacket!

    His followers in Chicago and elsewhere can watch his Naples’ performance live: https://www.harvestbiblechapel.org/campus/naples/

    Note: the Naples campus has a website link to news about the “opposition” on its ‘In The News’ page. MacDonald’s opposition might just be the best thing that ever happened to the spiritual health of HBC if members would sit back, watch and listen carefully.

  44. Max: He’s going to get hot in that black leather jacket!

    We will know that he has truly repented when he loses that jacket. What a strange affectation…

  45. roebuck: We will know that he has truly repented when he loses that jacket.

    It’s part of his tough-guy persona that got him into trouble.

  46. roebuck,
    Not so fast, he’s going to the Harvest in Naples Florida for the Summer to preach. On a “Sabbatical”, indefinitely? Things are not well at Harvest.

  47. FW Rez: roebuck: Evidently God told James MacDonald to step down from all preaching and leadership positions at HBC, indefinitely.

    Except in Naples. Apparently “sabbatical” means working at the branch in Florida during the winter months.

    Cracks me up. Taking a sabbatical from teaching and leadership means escaping the heat – and the cold – of Chicago to ‘teach’ in Florida, starting the poison where one hopes people are not familiar with one’s past, er, issues? The con man reinvents himself again, I mean, nice place to take a much needed break.

  48. brian,

    “In my experience as an evangelical mainly it was always made pretty clear just how much God really wanted to take us out, individually and as the human race.

    It was couched in God loves U, His Son died for U but definitely God was ticked, and we are going to pay and pay dearly”
    +++++++++++++++++++++

    cruelty along many lines is couched in “God loves U, His Son died for U” and words like “beautiful”. spoken smilingly by those with a “sucks to be you” gospel.

    I marvel at the extreme lack of awareness and understanding. at their brain circuitry misfires. they seem to be otherwise intelligent people.

    my guess is their faith-in-practice means not having to think through the implications and consequences of their declared faith statements.

    their faith is in the statements themselves and the printed word where they read them. (or the person of influence who told them)

    on a totally different note, i am very moved by your kindness and dedication to human beings in your line of work. you are very awesome, without trying to be or needing to be.

  49. elastigirl:
    brian,

    on a totally different note, i am very moved by your kindness and dedication to human beings in your line of work.you are very awesome, without trying to be or needing to be.

    Agreed. They that humble themselves in service to others will be seen to be the great ones of the Kingdom.

  50. Samuel Conner,

    “And the idea that God might decree that self-conceived shepherds misinterpret the Bible should be deeply concerning to “strong sovereignty” types (among which I still count myself; I am an odd bird). It’s an invitation to humility.”
    +++++++++++++++

    had to look up “strong sovereignty”, too.

    the only things that came up were political chatterings about +rump, etc.

    but i’m sure it’s a thing — does it mean “i really, really believe in God’s sovereignty”?

    (even if political sovereignty is not exactly the same as ‘God’s sovereignty’, i’m intrigued at the relationship between society and religion.)

    (**bonus idea: kind of like society & art — heavy social systems, heavy technology, heavy bric-a-brac ric-rac architecture and design, for example. but then look at the typical apple store. a white void with no lines whatsoever. simple, streamlined, minimal, light, airy. yet even more complex.)

    now, for the interesting part — you yourself believe in strong sovereignty. even down to the parking place you end up in?

    you seem like a very reasonable person (and humble). is living with ‘strong sovereignty’ in your belief tool box kind of like living with the news of black holes and string theory? the experts have worked it out sort of,…and now i’ll just put my socks on.

  51. Former CLC’er:
    I agree about Chan.When he first came to my attention, it seemed he was really focusing on the love of God and showing that to the world.Then suddenly I see him talking about how some believers are deceived and will be subject to hell.Whaaat?

    I think where a lot of these guys start going off the rails is when they start thinking they have special knowledge, or at least more knowledge than everyone else. We definitely see the theology of hierarchy in New Calvinism.

    While Chan started out well, I can’t help but wonder if that theology of hierarchy corrupts everything in someone’s personal theology. Whenever you start thinking you are better or have special knowledge of God that others don’t, it seems to make people come up with a lot of bad reasons why others are lesser than them.

    This constant harping on divisiveness by New Calvinists and others is nothing more than some people trying to discredit anyone who doesn’t think they same way they do while assigning themselves authority they do not deserve because that authority belongs to God.

    It’s definitely not just a trend in New Calvinism. Charismatic prosperity gospel definitely has a propensity to hierarchy theology, as do others. Though I actually think New Calvinism is a type of prosperity gospel–“we’re special because we’re saved and your not”, and pastors are even more special because they are the only ones truly hearing from God to teach the brainless peons. Plus they bait men into thinking they can be little gods in their homes and churches.

  52. ishy: I think where a lot of these guys start going off the rails is when they start thinking they have special knowledge, or at least more knowledge than everyone else. We definitely see the theology of hierarchy in New Calvinism.

    One can only reach mega-status if he has charisma, a gift of gab, and a gimmick. Seldom do these men draw a crowd by preaching Truth and nothing but the Truth. They have to come across “special” in some way – blessed with a new revelation, restoring the gospel that everyone has lost, leaders of a new reformation, etc. When they run out of steam, they will disappear for a season to reinvent themselves. They simply can’t sit on the pew, they have to be on stage, they are driven by ego.

  53. elastigirl: parking place

    True story. Yesterday I was running late to a medical appointment. Garage was full for the first time ever. Yes, I was praying, mostly against anxiety, but I did say, “Mother Cabrini, Mother Cabrini, please find a spot for my little machiney.” Then I gave up. Driving down the ramp toward the exit, I thought it would be Christian to warn drivers heading upward. “GARAGE IS FULL!” I shouted to four drivers. Nobody looked pleased, so I stopped yelling and resumed my descent.

    And then a spot opened up, right in front of me.

    Our religion doesn’t have a god of laughter, so I have to do the job myself.

  54. elastigirl,

    “Strong sovereignty” (I’m not sure if this term is “a thing”, or just a “me-ism” that helps me to keep the confusion of ideas in order [or in less disorder]) in my use relates to the ideas of the divine “decree”. Chapter III of the Westminster Confession, puts it:

    “God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel
    of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass”

    There follows in Chapter III an attempt to avoid attributing to God responsibility for the bad things that happen, specifically creaturely sin. Not sure how that works (and I hope that I don’t unleash an avalanche of explanations 🙂 )

    A point of interest: the “pride of place” of this Chapter of the WCF, in third place after Ch I (“the Scriptures”) and Ch II (“God”) kind of illustrates the importance of “strong sovereignty” in Reformed thinking (or at least the strands that follow Westminster)

    This is a deeply troubling idea to many (myself included) and there are a range of alternatives, which (perhaps another “me-ism”) might be called “weak(er) sovereignty”. For example, in (at least some varieties of) “Open Theism”, God knows all that is knowable, but some future things are not knowable; God’s present ignorance of these does not diminish His “omniscience”. God controls as much of the future as matters to Him, but some things (my parking space? But I generally bike!) are beneath His concern.

    I retain a basically “strong sovereignty” view, not so much from Scripture (which I am not confident is unequivocal on the subject) but from a more philosophical posture of my own inability to imagine how real autonomy is possible in a “created from nothing” world.

    This makes Calvinism, limited atonement and double predestination especially painful to contemplate. And perhaps my retreat from these has an emotional component.

    OTOH, I do think that the incoherence that I think I perceive in the traditional view can be described analytically, and David B Hart IMO does that in his “The Moral Meaning of Creatio ex Nihilo

    So my embrace of “strong sovereignty”, combined with my belief that “God is good” (not a philosophical theory, or even a biblical citation, but an intuition from the implication of the idea that “Jesus is the brightness of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being”) presses me toward the hope that Paul was writing without qualification when he wrote

    “For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all”

    Oddly, this makes me unwelcome among both Calvinists and Arminians.

  55. Chan left the church he started (resigned) to travel to South Asia and learn from their culture and the way those cultures do church. I think it’s admirable, however, that doesn’t translate well with this interpretation, does it? Since Chan left his church, does that mean that he was handed over to Satan? He left his church because he felt like American culture was doing church wrong – could that be construed as “opposing the works of God”?

  56. elastigirl: had to look up “strong sovereignty”, too.

    This whole sovereignty thing (my opinion) doesn’t ring the same connotations for us 21st century moderns as it did for Calvin and Lootair (Luther).

    Back then, there was no such thing as The Rights of Man or much less, government by consent of the governed.

    You (generic you) were at the whim and fancy of a potentate.
    Emperor, king, prince, or what have you, it didn’t matter.

    So it was only natural that their theology would reflect that model in a very real chain of hierarchy, divinely ordained and linearized, all the way up to and including the big man in the sky.

  57. Unepetiteanana: He left his church because he felt like American culture was doing church wrong – could that be construed as “opposing the works of God”?

    At one time, Chan was convinced that the New Calvinist movement was a God-thing. He was a key player in the early days of the new reformation, mixing with New Calvinist icons, serving as a conference speaker, writing books for that target audience, promoting the movement on social media, etc. I guess he decided New Calvinism wasn’t a God-thing after all since he walked away from it. While the American culture may indeed be doing church wrong, Chan didn’t need to leave his church and the country to hear God and correct his course. One can do that anywhere if you seek God with a whole heart, minus personal agenda.

  58. ___

    Channagans : “Sink, Sank, Sunk, Perhaps?”

    hmmm…

    It would be a good guess that Chan is once again having problems with the disposition of his 501c3 disposable (free) labor.

    huh?

    He would presumably find better scriptural results with the carrot rather than the stick. Threatening and not listening to free labor caused them to walk.

    What?

    He seems to think he is part of a voluntary local community of Christ believers, and Christ followers. What he really has on his hands is a failing 501c3 business which he has failed to create correctly, and maintain properly.

    And it shows.

    SKreeeeeeeeetch!

    A local community of Christ believers, and Christ followers requires mutual sustainable respect, corporation, and an free intelligently dedicated purpose.

    bump.

    People are leaving a sinking ship he commands poorly. It is time for him to come out of his presumptive prestigious pastoral self made cloud and realize that.

    KRUNCH!

    Threats, isolation, and exclusion is the last resort of a religious tyranny.

    If the shoe fits…

    hahahahahaha

    *

    ♪♩♪♩ hum, hum, hum.. . “Listen to the tide slowly turning
    Wash all our heart breaks away
    We’re part of the Holy Spirit fire that is still burning
    And from the proverbially raging faux 501c3 church circus we can build a better play…” (1)

    ***

    “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. Whoever believes in Me, as the Scripture has said: ‘Streams of living water will flow from within him.’” -Jèsus

    ATB

    Sòpy

    (1) lyrics adapted. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E07uYLMcSoc
    Exit music: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6H57pWC5rvk
    Bonus: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QfEyZH9DGGM

    ;~)

    – –

  59. HBC Update: They’ve taken a big step backwards in firing the pastor of HBC Naples. John Secrest planted that church.

    The decision to allow McD to come down happened before Roy’s article, and Seacrest wrote a letter asking the HBC elders to reverse their decision to allow McD to preach in Naples and to make HBC Naples autonomous. Today he was fired.

    And I wonder who’s gonna take his place?

    https://www.wthrockmorton.com/2019/01/18/harvest-bible-chapel-fires-pastor-of-hbc-naples/

  60. ishy: HBC Update: They’ve taken a big step backwards in firing the pastor of HBC Naples. John Secrest planted that church … Seacrest wrote a letter asking the HBC elders to reverse their decision to allow McD to preach in Naples and to make HBC Naples autonomous. Today he was fired.

    So much for HBC’s “peacekeeping process”!

    If the Naples congregation allows MacDonald to assume the pulpit there under these conditions, they deserve him. If there’s more to the story, the elders at HBC-Naples better start spinning it. The HBC/MacDonald mess just gets worse at every turn.

  61. Max,

    This reminds of a story I read about from the old SGM days; something similar in that a church that affiliated was taken over by the association and its founding pastor terminated or humiliated (IIRC, he was allowed to stay on as custodial staff)

    It might be a warning that independent churches ought not to aspire to affiliate with mini-denominations that have no appeal process.

  62. Samuel Conner: It might be a warning that independent churches ought not to aspire to affiliate with mini-denominations that have no appeal process …

    … which have a 1,000 pound gorilla sitting on the throne. (or should I say elephant)

  63. Samuel Conner:
    It might be a warning that independent churches ought not to aspire to affiliate with mini-denominations that have no appeal process.

    I think it’s a warning to any church considering an elder-led polity with no congregational input. Of course, some churches are forced into that polity through financial shenanigans, but some are just conned into it.

    The power always corrupts.

  64. ishy: And I wonder who’s gonna take his place?

    Max: The HBC/MacDonald mess just gets worse at every turn.

    It really does confound the mind as to how there are still folks who will bankroll (tithes and offerings) these mountebanks with their hard earned greenbacks.

  65. This is astounding, even for Harvest. Anyone who ever thought this was a true church should surely have their eyes open by now? Would love it if someone from the Naples church would comment. Do they even know what is going down, how they have literally had their church taken over by this group of thugs? Of course, Secrest signed on with these folks, so it’s difficult to not wonder about where his head is as well.

  66. elastigirl and Samuel Conner That was some very kind words and I truly appreciate it. Actually the reward is many folds because I have seen things, simple human interactions’ family dynamics etc which is more precious than gold. One comes to mind, one student I work/ed with was had a fever when around three she went from being vocal in several languages to being severely cognitively challenged. The father just could not be near his child for many years it just devastated him. He helped financially and did try but it just broke his heart as it was explained to him. Well I had gotten the adult child to use a computer to activate by pressing an adaptive switch it was a rudimentary communication system. His wife told him about it, and he it convinced him to go see her. He still just could not go and see her, but I was pushing her in her W/c, and she turned her head saw him and stared then smiled. Their eyes met and there was a connection. I can’t put it into words but it was transcendent. I need no other “reward”, I owe a debt I can never repay being on the same playing field with such moments.

  67. TS00:
    Of course, Secrest signed on with these folks, so it’s difficult to not wonder about where his head is as well.

    In one of the articles, Secrest implies HBC elders lied about elements of the partnership and contract, but the article didn’t say how. I wonder if the Naples congregation will pursue a lawsuit themselves?

  68. ishy,

    Right. But he did go to Chicago for ‘training’ before he came back to reinvent his church ala Harvest. And it’s not like Harvest’s issues were not pretty obvious even then. Just hard to wrap my head around any pastor wanting anything to do with JMac and Harvest, unless they shared the desire for a kingdom, power, wealth and applause. But then, I never saw anything desirable in the Megas to begin with.

  69. TS00: Secrest signed on with these folks, so it’s difficult to not wonder about where his head is as well

    Well, his beard does closely resemble MacDonald’s. But, I’ll give Pastor Secrest the benefit of the doubt at this point. When Driscoll got into a squeeze at Mars Hill, there were Acts 29 churches which started to distance themselves from the potty-mouth preacher from Seattle. We saw a similar response from some of the Willowcreek churches after Hybels fell. I’m sure some HBC campuses are having the same difficulty, given the bad-boy press about JMac. However, the HBC-Naples’ elders seem to have bowed to MacDonald rather than heeding serious concerns from their resident pastor about making room from JMac in Naples. It’s just another nasty religious mess which has caused a watching world to look at the organized church and say “See, there is nothing to it.”

  70. ishy,

    “I am grieved over my own failure of leadership to not stand firm in objections I raised during the process of making this agreement.”–John Secrest
    +++++++++++++

    (re: the agreement to be in ministry partnership with HBF) i wonder what his objections were. he didn’t know about the investigative reporting underway nor that a lawsuit was being considered at the time he agreed to be the 8th campus of Harvest Bible Chapel.
    —————–

    “I allowed my fear of man and my own insecurities to compromise my responsibility to protect our church.”
    ++++++++++++++++

    wow, that’s transparency! i don’t recall ever hearing anything this honest and unembroidered from a professional christian.

  71. TS00:
    ishy,

    Right. But he did go to Chicago for ‘training’ before he came back to reinvent his church ala Harvest. And it’s not like Harvest’s issues were not pretty obvious even then. Just hard to wrap my head around any pastor wanting anything to do with JMac and Harvest, unless they shared the desire for a kingdom, power, wealth and applause. But then, I never saw anything desirable in the Megas to begin with.

    I have vague recollections from the mid-2000s of reading that there was evidence that things were not wholesome within the Harvest “empire”; this is almost a decade before things started to get publicly distressing (the public excommunication of dissenting elders, etc).

    It looks IMO like either a significant failure of “due diligence” — not noticing the character of the enterprise that was contemplated to merge with — or compromise with what was known for the sake of a hoped-for larger good. There are more sympathetic interpretations possible, I’m sure; my fundamentally gloomy outlook (I’m that kind of ‘fundamentalist’) may be showing here.

    OTOH, one could adopt a more optimistic “strong sovereignty” posture here and interpret it as God working to reveal the character of individuals and institutions. This does have a downside, as Max has noted.

  72. Samuel Conner: compromise with what was known for the sake of a hoped-for larger good

    The Harvest brand offers “mega” potential (or used to). If more nickels and noses is your goal, then it’s worth the risk in the minds of some church leaders to affiliate with a winner. Some folks just don’t want to settle for less if it really means more … big doesn’t impress God, since He is pretty big already.

  73. Max: … big doesn’t impress God, since He is pretty big already.

    This reminds me of a memorable OT text, Is 66:2:

    Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?” declares the LORD. “These are the ones I look on with favor: those who are humble and contrite in spirit, and who tremble at my word.”

    Some translations render “look on with favor” as “esteem”, which was the connection I made with “impressed”. Humility and contrition are seemingly rather easy to fake, but YHWH searches the heart.

  74. I freely acknowledge that I have no ability to read the hearts and motives of men. Just sayin . . . when people only make moves to distance themselves from ‘hot tickets’ to fame and fortune only once the tickets prove ‘too hot to handle’ I cannot help but wonder . . .

    I would be happy to give Secrest the benefit of a doubt; but a few after the fact ‘Well, I did have reservations’ are not going to cut it. Even getting fired doesn’t prove anything, other than that he tried to bail out far too late. Let us hear exactly what his concerns were, and on what they were based, and the documentation thereof. Let us know what steps were taken to safeguard the flock and ensure that this body of believers was following the path that God cast light upon. If the ‘light’ was only numbers, wealth and success, we have our answer. I am not suggesting that my personal opinion matters – I am simply saying ‘Show us the evidence’.

    Sure, many are deceived and manipulated for a time. There is a long line of former ‘Harvesters’, many of whose stories have been told at TED; countless others simply walked away once their eyes were opened. But who can honestly suggest that the current Harvest elders are simply ignorant and deceived? Manipulated? Yes. Ignorant of what has been going on for decades? Innocent of condemning any who dared ask hard questions? Lacking in information that only they could obtain or allow to be continually withheld? I don’t think so.

  75. TS00: I freely acknowledge that I have no ability to read the hearts and motives of men. Just sayin . . . when people only make moves to distance themselves from ‘hot tickets’ to fame and fortune only once the tickets prove ‘too hot to handle’ I cannot help but wonder . . .

    I understand. I guess I just keep holding out that somewhere in the mega-mess there are a few good men who realize they have been deceived and make a noble stand by putting themselves on the line. If the institutional church is to see a turn-around, a genuine revival, a spiritual awakening it will be built on the bodies of leaders who paid the price to become a bridge away from counterfeit to genuine.

  76. Max: C.J. Mahaney wrote a book “Humility: True Greatness” … yes, the same Mahaney.

    With liveried flunkies blowing long trumpets before him to announce how HUMBLE he was.

  77. ishy: The decision to allow McD to come down happened before Roy’s article, and Seacrest wrote a letter asking the HBC elders to reverse their decision to allow McD to preach in Naples and to make HBC Naples autonomous. Today he was fired.

    And I wonder who’s gonna take his place?

    The Superapostle, of course.

    Secrest was just the caretaker for his bugout bolthole in Florida, and has outlived his usefulness so now he can be disposed of.

    It’s like that conspiracy theory about the secret Nazi base under the ice of Antarctica (never mind the Hollow Earth or Dark Side of the Moon), where Hitler fled at the end of the war and now is building flying saucers to one day strike and conquer the surface for his comeback.

  78. Max: the HBC-Naples’ elders seem to have bowed to MacDonald rather than heeding serious concerns from their resident pastor about making room from JMac in Naples.

    I wonder if they even had a say, or if the HBC Chicago elders were the ones that made the decision without consulting anyone in Naples at all. The latter makes more sense to me.

  79. Max,

    I do believe that there are a few good men . . . and would be most happy to count Secrest among them. He doesn’t have to prove anything to me . . . just reserving judgment until more information arises.

  80. So Francis, when a church is led by grievous wolves and one who has been given discernment leaves because of the whole not sparing the flock thing, what’s the deliverance order there?

  81. Dee, apparently some churches make big huge deal about young earth creationism? Why is that? I have a hard time wrapping my mind around Adam and Eve but I know God created everything; I don’t think we will ever fully understand how it took place.

    Why is it soooooo important what you believe about the age of the earth as long as you believe God created everything? Personally I think YEC seems kind of crazy but I respect someone’s right to that belief.

  82. Priscilla,

    I just got back from my two week trip to Israel. So this will be brief. Hit the category on Creationsim. We have written extensively on this topi. I am a theistic creationist which means I believe in an ancient earth and universe and believe that God used evolution as one mechanism in His creation. I believe that most of the supposed *science* surrounding a young earth is bogus. However, you ill see in the comments that their are the vocal few who defend it to the max.

  83. Priscilla: Why is it soooooo important what you believe about the age of the earth as long as you believe God created everything? Personally I think YEC seems kind of crazy but I respect someone’s right to that belief.

    The YEC advocates say it is all about biblical inerrency and biblical literalness (is that a word?). Ironically, early Christians did not appear to focus on it much, and when they did favor a young earth it was because it better fit their allegorical (not literal) interpretations. I get the impression the early Christians tended to take allegory too far – we seem to have the opposite problem today.

  84. FYI – I removed a couple of comments that just made no sense due to some technical issues with some other comments.

    GBTC

  85. jeff,

    jeff:
    Law Prof,
    riiiiight – he cares so much about power that he walked away from it all to work a secular job while working to establish home groups.

    You people are ridiculous. You take a general sermon point from Chan and project your own insecurities. The point Chan is making is known as a GENERALITY for Pete’s sake. It’s not 100% normative. Of course there are exceptions and edge cases.

    Stop being so butt hurt over everything that people say. I swear you’re looking for stuff to whine about.

    MOD: Tone it down. GBTC

    jeff:
    Law Prof,
    riiiiight – he cares so much about power that he walked away from it all to work a secular job while working to establish home groups.

    You people are ridiculous. You take a general sermon point from Chan and project your own insecurities. The point Chan is making is known as a GENERALITY for Pete’s sake. It’s not 100% normative. Of course there are exceptions and edge cases.

    Stop being so butt hurt over everything that people say. I swear you’re looking for stuff to whine about.

    MOD: Tone it down. GBTC

    jeff:
    Law Prof,
    riiiiight – he cares so much about power that he walked away from it all to work a secular job while working to establish home groups.

    You people are ridiculous. You take a general sermon point from Chan and project your own insecurities. The point Chan is making is known as a GENERALITY for Pete’s sake. It’s not 100% normative. Of course there are exceptions and edge cases.

    Stop being so butt hurt over everything that people say. I swear you’re looking for stuff to whine about.

    MOD: Tone it down. GBTC

    jeff:
    Law Prof,
    riiiiight – he cares so much about power that he walked away from it all to work a secular job while working to establish home groups.

    You people are ridiculous. You take a general sermon point from Chan and project your own insecurities. The point Chan is making is known as a GENERALITY for Pete’s sake. It’s not 100% normative. Of course there are exceptions and edge cases.

    Stop being so butt hurt over everything that people say. I swear you’re looking for stuff to whine about.

    MOD: Tone it down. GBTC

    jeff:
    Law Prof,
    riiiiight – he cares so much about power that he walked away from it all to work a secular job while working to establish home groups.

    You people are ridiculous. You take a general sermon point from Chan and project your own insecurities. The point Chan is making is known as a GENERALITY for Pete’s sake. It’s not 100% normative. Of course there are exceptions and edge cases.

    Stop being so butt hurt over everything that people say. I swear you’re looking for stuff to whine about.

    MOD: Tone it down. GBTC

    Wow, as between the two of us, I think you have me good and beaten so far as “—- hurt” goes. Goodness gracious! You know, the more the defenders of some preachers and celeb evalgelists speak, the more people realize that negative takes on them are accurate. If I ever became a celebrity pastor (as Chan still most definitely is, Jeff, regardless of what fantasy narrative you wish to create), I hopeno one ever makes a defense of me even remotely like yours. I’d hope to never inspire anyone to such blinded celeb worship—I shudder to think. Thanks for confirming my impressions about what Chan’s celebrity is doing to the minds of his followers, jeff. Duly noted.