[Updated 9/29/20]First Baptist Church, Cutler Ridge, and Pastor Joe Mira Threw Out Members, Showing That Their Theology Trumps Love.

Recovery of the Test Orion Capsule in the Pacific Ocean-NASA

“God whispered, “You endured a lot. For that I am truly sorry, but grateful. I needed you to struggle to help so many. Through that process, you would grow into who you have now become. Didn’t you know that I gave all my struggles to my favorite children? One only needs to look at the struggles given to your older brother Jesus to know how important you have been to me.”
Shannon L. Alder


Update 9/29/20:  Today I contacted Joe Mira who appeared to be a bit put out that I posted this without speaking with him first. I offered to post a statement for him. He didn’t take me up on the offer. He said, “I don’t give you permission to post what I said.” This conversation only reinforces my opinion that, in this church, love really doesn’t matter.  It’s all about theology and control. This post brings some control back to the Hubbardas who I believe were unjustly *dismembered.* I stand with them.

The next three statements are Dee’s observations over the last 11 1/2 years which figure into the following tragic story.

  • Churches that have paid for infrastructure are often takeover targets by pastors who have been unable to get sufficient funds to have *really nice digs.*
  • be very cautious when a new pastor convinces you to join his church. Membership is one way the pastor can control a member.
  • Hardcore Calvinistas are amongst the most controlling, ungraceful pastors that I have observed.

This sort of story is getting told so frequently that it is beginning to weigh on my spirit. It appears that for some pastors, the TULIP is far more important than love. As my good friend (and Reformed SBC pastor) Wade Burleson often warns: ” Don’t let your theology trump your love.” Sadly, the trumping of love played out at First Baptist Church, Cutler Ridge. Joe Mira is a graduate of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary which is well known for its support for Reformed Baptist theology. Of course, there are many Reformed churches that claim that one cannot be both Reformed and Baptist. Reformed Baptists ardently disagree.

Natalia is an Hispanic woman who has attended this church since she married her husband, Clayton. Clayton has been a member of this traditional Baptist church since he was a young teen. Joe Mira served in this church a number of years ago as an assistant pastor/youth pastor. H left.because, as he himself said *I was a bird too big for my cage.* (!). He planted another church that had a modest number of members. When Mira once again applied for the lead pastor’s job, he got it. His tenure on 6/2/19. He also brought a small group of members from his former church who supported him and his theology

Did the people of the church understand what he meant when he said he was Calvinist?

Joe said he was a Calvinist during the search. He got 90% of the vote. Does that mean the people of the church truly understand what the meant? There is no question that some did. There is also evidence that many did not. Unfortunately, this is something that many Calvinists, who are trained in the usual Reformed Baptist seminaries, count on. Sadly, many search committees are complicit in downplaying the Calvinism angle. In so doing, they are setting these churches up for heartache down the road. However, these Calvinist pastors don’t really care. They appear to relish the inevitable conflict.

Joe Mira began immediately to change the bylaws and constitution.

Recently I wrote Did You Ever Wonder Why Church Takeovers Begin With Changing the Bylaws? Bylaws Are a Contract Between Members. The bylaws change is often done to protect the pastor and the church from lawsuits. The lowly church member doesn’t figure into this equation. So, it is no surprise to discover that Mira began changing the bylaws and constitution on his very first day. He even changed the FBCCR website. He was moving quickly to take over the control of the church.  On 10/16/19 he bypassed the usual process and asked the members for approval for his changes. In a moment of brilliance, the members didn’t agree. Here is one example of his changes. Mira did post his articles of faith online even though those changes have not been approved

Calvinism begins to make an appearance throughout the church.

Natalia began to notice something was off in the sermons. She began to research what she was hearing and discovered a debate that Joe Mira had with a non-Calvinist: Braxton Hunter vs. Joe Mira – Is Calvinism True? Natalia emailed the pastor in order to confirm that he was still a Calvinist. After Joe claimed that the church knew he was a Calvinist, Natalia fact-checked this statement with serveral female members. Clayton also fact-checked this with two deacons. Surprisingly, none of them knew that Joe was a Calvinist and didn’t really understand what that meant.

The following are some snippets from Natalia’s and Joe’s email exchange.

Joe:

“the debate, that’s an older conference that I was spontaneously invited to participate in bc the person who was supposed to debate Braxton backed out. So, the format was prepared beforehand by Braxton (who had been speaking at the church for a few days already) and the debate was the climax, which meant I was in the dark re its setting and was essentially brought in to unravel 4 days of anti-Calvinistic verbiage. But yes, I am thoroughly Calvinistic, but there is more to it”

Natalia:

“It comes to mind right now, in the debate, you said the doctrine in which you subscribe and defend is Calvinism. Today you say you’re thoroughly Calvinistic. But I have not heard you say “Calvinism” at FBCCR. Perhaps I missed it on a Sunday or Wednesday, but I don’t recall a straightforward reference to Calvinist doctrine in which I heard “Calvinism.” I assume it informs your evangelism and pastoring per the debate I heard. Has this been communicated to the body at FBCCR? ” Please note that I am thoroughly NOT Calvinistic.

Joe:

“But you will hear me quote from Calvin regularly (as well as other non-Calvinistic authors, pastors, theologians). I choose not to use the term “Calvinist” because there are amateurs who think they know something about topics when in fact all they know is what someone else has told them about it. Therefore, I stay away from terms and simply preach the Word line by line. Incidentally, the doctrines that I hold to (and the theology that I espouse) is the result of studying, preaching, and teaching line by line. I could not in good conscience be anything but a Calvinist, although I don’t care what it’s called.

And finally, yes, my theology informs everything for me. So does yours. So does everyone else’s. It’s important to note that you have never heard me defend “Calvinism” from the pulpit and yet I teach what falls under that heading (with no objection from you thus far, mind you). This means that the name or the person associated with it isn’t what’s relevant. It could just as well be called Augustinianism (4th century). The important point is that I’m teaching the Bible and delivering messages that are exegetical and expositional.

Now, since I’ve answered your questions, let me ask you to answer mine. Have you ever been taught Calvinism by a Calvinist? Or are you “thoroughly NOT Calvinist” because of what some non-Calvinist has taught you? Or what you’ve gleaned on your own?  (I don’t mean this w a condescending tone…they are genuine questions.)”

Natalia:

“My question wasn’t “if you have debated, or will debate Calvinism from the pulpit” but “has the body of believers at FBCCR been informed that you are a Calvinist and told so directly by you?” FBCCR’s body is not equal to a pastor-search committee. What the committee saw and read probably didn’t get communicated to the rest of the body. If it did, I missed that probably because I wasn’t a member and not privy to member info.

I listened to your debate and heard your side and Hunter’s side. I’m informed of Calvinism by you in that debate. I did not hear any other previous debates. Also, I’m reading up on the argument against Calvinism through David Padfield’s 6 part breakdown on Calvinism. I’m not going to debate Calvinism or learn it from beyond these 2 sources. Yes, I am an amateur but I have the Holy Spirit guiding and I’m beyond troubled with Calvinism. I’d like to leave it at that.”

Joe:

“I think your distinction is one of polity—the search committee is formed for the purpose it serves on behalf of the church. And at no point have I ever shied away from referring to myself as a Calvinist or describing my position on theological tenets associated with it. During the Q&A time on Sunday afternoon,

I was elected, for example, I addressed this topic through Eph. 1. I don’t recall everyone who was there (therefore I don’t recall if you and Clayton were there). Honestly, I don’t appreciate the insinuation of impropriety or coverup on my part.

One debate, the circumstances of which were already described, is insufficient for hundreds of years of theological development. This is why I asked if you had ever sat with a Calvinist…not a series of preloaded arguments. It might be worthwhile. Yes, you do have the Holy Spirit, and John Calvin had the Holy Spirit, too. If that is your barometer, then you might consider reading him instead of what someone else says about him (myself including). By the way, no one is “untroubled” by Calvinism…maybe for different reasons, though.

I don’t expect anyone to agree with everything I say or every position I hold. I don’t know anyone who agrees with someone else 100% of the time. But my Calvinist foundation (as you refer to it) should be redacted. I already mentioned that I’m going through the Bible, not Calvin’s Institutes. I’m not building Calvinists. I’m building Bible-believing Christians.

An interesting note to end on. Frankly, even if you did want to do something with this conversation, you have no grounds on which to do so, Natalia. I haven’t spoken falsely, I haven’t misrepresented the Lord or myself, and the fact that you would even suggest such is disheartening. ”

Joe (At this point, Mira showed proof that he said he was a Calvinist when he appeared before the church prior to his hire.)

Natalia

“Based on what you said earlier in this thread, I conclude that 5 minutes and 44 seconds is insufficient time to clearly explain what Calvinism is and what “I am a Calvinist” means to FBCCR members and guests. Simply put, I don’t think that the church body is fully aware of what Calvinism is and “it as a scaffold” really means. The amount of time and directness you spoke in the debate, which you called insufficient, did a much better job in my understanding than the 5 minute Q&A answer. I would like to see an answer given to the church body in such a way so that we fully understand Calvinism and the direction you are moving that church, at the level of quality like I heard in the debate.”

My thoughts on the above emails

Arrogance speaks loudly in Joe Mira.

It is evident to me that Mira believes he is a bit smarter than the average church goes. However, this is a common characteristic for those who have found *the truth.* That truth is Calvinism. If you notice, he is so *brilliant* that he cannot believe that a real Christian would have to believe Calvinism if it was explained to them by a Calvinist instead of a dumb non-Calvinist.

…Now, since I’ve answered your questions, let me ask you to answer mine. Have you ever been taught Calvinism by a Calvinist? Or are you “thoroughly NOT Calvinist” because of what some non-Calvinist has taught you? Or what you’ve gleaned on your own?

… I choose not to use the term “Calvinist” because there are amateurs who think they know something about topics when in fact all they know is what someone else has told them about it.

… He originally ledft the church because, in his own words *I was a bird too big for my cage.* (!)

It gets worse in this next statement. He MUST be a Calvinist due to his good conscience.

I stay away from terms and simply preach the Word line by line. Incidentally, the doctrines that I hold to (and the theology that I espouse) is the result of studying, preaching, and teaching line by line. I could not in good conscience be anything but a Calvinist, although I don’t care what it’s called.

Verbally disagreeing with Calvinism is anti-Calvinistic verbiage

This is silly… There are brilliant Arminian theologians who can winsomely describe why they are not Calvinists. Calvinists in some circles are known for their derogatory verbiage.

(I) was essentially brought in to unravel 4 days of anti-Calvinistic verbiage. But yes, I am thoroughly Calvinistic, but there is more to it”

How many people have Joe told about RC Sproul’s famous statement?”c Christians who are not Calvinists are Christian but barely?” Here is the link.

Sadly, it is evident to me that Joe Mira knew exactly what he was doing when he came to the church. he is using the typical methods of the takeover of a church as taught by many of today’s Reformed Baptist seminaries. That includes getting rid of those who disagree with him. They are willing to lose several members to have those who are *yes* men or those who will “love their pastor, no matter what.

Natalia and Clayton asked for the deacons to hear their grievance.

Their current church bylaws allow for a grievance hearing before the deacons. However, the deacons, acting as apparent *yes* men for the pastor (which is a universally recognized problem with deacons and elders) refused to hear this as a group. Natalia and Clayton then sent their grievance to their church body which averages around 100 members. In such a small church, a family atmosphere used to exist. They asked to meet with the church to air out their concerns.

Sadly, they have had little experience with hard-driving Calvinist pastors who I have named *Calvinistas.* There was not a chance he would let such a meeting happen since he is the controlling authority. And that is exactly what happened. Pastor Joe had other plans for this couple and it didn’t involve lovingly sitting down with them and hashing it out. Being a Calvinista means never having to act in humility. Such a pastor gets to act just like John Calvin who took care of the Servetus problem, toot suite.

Pastor Joe canceled any hope of an *all church meeting* and hints that he’s planning something else.

A meeting was convened to remove the Hubbards from church membership.

In advance of this meeting,  a ballot was made up. *Yes* or *no.* That’s it. There was some time set aside to allow members to have two minutes each (rigidly enforced) to discuss what was happening. If one listens carefully to this lengthy meeting, one will hear Pastor Joe getting angry. (What a surprise.)

There were some good people who showed up to defend the Hubbards. One man said of the pastor *You are a control freak.* That was probably the most succinct evaluation of this entire situation.

However, there were some people who were less than helpful. Some of the sillier comments were:

  • “You are trying to destroy him”
  • “These are attacks on Joe.”
  • ” He doesn’t teach Calvinism.”
  • “All that comes out of his mouth is the Bible.”
  • “John MacArthur (a Calvinist on the West Coast) is one of the greatest theological minds in the world. “This gentleman is not well-read. Link and Link.

There is more and church members can check with one another to see who recorded this.

Sadly, they were voted out of church membership but there was some significant pushback. Several people present asked if this decision could be postponed and have the deacons meet with the couple but this suggestion was studiously ignored. They were there to vote out the Hubbards. End of story. I can assure you that Natalia finally understood why the pastor wanted her to join *his* local church. That is the only way he could control here. If she had not been a member, there would have been no meeting. Folks, this is why I recommend that you never, ever join a church until you get to know the lead pastor over a prolonged period.

A story for Pastor Joe and his followers

Years ago, Wade Burleson (Reformed Baptist), senior pastor of Emmanuel Enid, a large SBC church in Enid, OK. (about 3,000 members) discovered that a small group of people, who disagreed with him, was meeting behind his back. Wade found out about it. Did he call a meeting to get rid of those awful people? Did he throw them out of the church? Did he yell at them and tell them to *stop it?”

No. Wade is a loving man of God and he lives that will his people. He contacted the man running the group and told him he supported them gathering to figure out things. He said if they ever wanted him to come to a meeting to answer questions, he would. He even offered them places to meet. Guess what? In a short period, these dissatisfied folks became big supporters of Wade and the church. They experienced the love of a humble pastor. That is not what happened here.

Maybe its time for Joe to rethink his paradigm.

While he does that, here are two resources for those of you who want to hear another point of view.

  1. Dr. Roger Olson is a well-known professor at Baylor, a theologian, and an Arminian.
  2. The Society of Evangelical Arminians

These folks are really smart and, *in good conscience,* could not be Calvinists.

Comments

[Updated 9/29/20]First Baptist Church, Cutler Ridge, and Pastor Joe Mira Threw Out Members, Showing That Their Theology Trumps Love. — 180 Comments

  1. “‘Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me.'” Rev. 3.20

    Jesus is soooo not about control. He turned over tables, though.

  2. Folks, this is why I recommend that you never, ever join a church until you get to know the lead pastor over a prolonged period.

    And I would avoid SBC churches now along with autonomous nondenom churches, because eventually the New Cals will go after them if they have sufficient resources.

    I still have friends in more traditional Baptist churches who think this could never happen to them, because “they wouldn’t let it”, but they don’t want to learn anything about what the New Cals believe or the deceptive strategies they use. One I’m thinking of has tremendous resources, is fairly large, not that far away from NAMB, and the pastor is near retirement. Also–what about FBC Atlanta? You bet your buttons the New Cals have already put people in place to take that over now that Charles Stanley has stepped down. The traditional Baptists not only have avoided being intentional about preventing their denomination from being taken over, but they pretend like it hasn’t been already.

  3. They are willing to lose several members to have those who are *yes* men or those who will “love their pastor, no matter what.

    Sadly, this is not a Calvinist thing at all, it’s true of many (most?) churches – even in my own church, solidly nested in a highly tolerant denomination, this is true. In the honeymoon period of a new pastor – roughly 18 months – the governing board (elders, deacons, etc.) will have been flooded 2/3 with ‘yes’ members (including FOTPs from a previous tenure).

    Does Mira have Institutes of the Christian Religion on his shelf? Does the spine show a scintilla of evidence that any of the volumes have been opened?

    In the beginning was Logos… was Calvin there?

  4. Those who simply preach the word “line by line” should read Isaiah 28 to see what it says about this approach:
    Verse 13: “And the word of the Lord will be to them
    precept upon precept, precept upon precept,
    line upon line, line upon line,
    here a little, there a little,
    that they may go, and fall backward,
    and be broken, and snared, and taken.”

    Maybe this is why the NT has no examples of expository sermons.

  5. “Mira did post his articles of faith online even though those changes have not been approved”

    Here are the purported “First Baptist Cutler Ridge Articles of Faith” that were put up on the church’s website:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20200412205402/https://www.fbccr.com/

    scroll down a bit and click “What We Believe” (pdf)

    [note: if you check the live website, the link has now been changed to the SBC’s Baptist Faith & Message(2000)]

  6. Ken F (aka Tweed),

    Sir, that is something I have often wondered about, as I hear or read comments that offer “verse by verse expositional preaching” as the standard of a “Biblical” church.

    If I understand correctly, this is a procedure in which a pastor goes through a book of the Bible, verse by verse, explaining to the congregation what each verse means. (My pastor, a bookish, rather vague gentleman, usually begins a sermon, “I’ve been reading this really interesting book!” and finishes with, “Love your families, try to help others, have faith in God. God loves you!”)

    Back when I listened to Mortification of Spin, I heard Rev. Todd Pruitt explaining that, when he taught books of the Bible in Sunday School, he taught with “authority” because of his ordination. This sounded to me like old-fashioned clericalism: an ordained man, simply by virtue of his ordination, having special abilities to understand the Word of God.

    Is this really what is going on? If so, as you observe, Ken F, it’s not a model of “preaching” that the New Testament records as having been used by Jesus or by the Apostles. Admittedly, Jesus was in a unique position to “teach with authority, and not as the Scribes,” but there are recorded sermons by Peter, Paul, Stephen, and Philip, and none of these is going line-by-line through a section of Scripture.

  7. Cynthia W.: as you observe, Ken F, it’s not a model of “preaching” that the New Testament records as having been used by Jesus or by the Apostles.

    I’m not Ken F, but I can think of one where it’s sort of implied. But I’m not sure it’s not one that the New Cals would ever bring up. When Philip meets the Ethiopian eunuch, they don’t have much time, so Philip basically gives him a rundown. The eunuch was already reading the Scriptures when Philip found him, so I feel like it might be implied that they go through some things line-by-line. The kicker is that the eunuch specifically wants to know about Jesus and the Scripture does say Jesus is the focus of this exposition of Scripture.

    The eunuch replied to Philip, “I ask you, who is the prophet saying this about—himself or another person?” 35 So Philip proceeded[j] to tell him the good news about Jesus, beginning from that Scripture.

    They usually are lying when they say they preach line by line from the Bible. Because they don’t usually use the whole Bible. They avoid talking about Jesus almost entirely, unless it’s in reference to the atonement. Or if they do use a part of the gospels, they don’t talk about Jesus in reference to it (remembering an article by Matt Chandler about using Matthew 18 in church discipline, but there was no context to the verse at all).

    The whole “we’re more biblical than you” is just a ruse, and a common one used by cults to separate their followers from others.

  8. I would like to hear this “pastor” go line-by-line through 1 Corinthians 13:1-3, and then go through several Gospel parables, such as the good shepard leaving his 99 sheep for the one that is lost.

    The arrogance of these “preachers” knows no bounds….

  9. Ken F (aka Tweed): Those who simply preach the word “line by line” should read Isaiah 28 to see what it says about this approach:

    I think you need to study this a bit deeper. Isaiah is confronting Judah because they had rejected God’s truth (v 12 “but they would not listen”). God had sought to teach them “order on order, line on line (v 10) but that was rejected so they will now be taught through “stammering lips and a foreign tongue” (v 11). God had offered to them rest to the weary (v 12) but they had rejected the “… line upon line…” instruction so they are going off into captivity. It is similar to what we find in Romans 1 where God has given forth His revelation and it has been rejected, so He gives them over to what they have rejected. The Assyrians are going to teach Judah that what God said is true through the “line upon line…” but this “teaching” will be experiential through the discipline that God is going to bring on them by the Assyrians. If the Judah won’t learn through the “easy way of faith, then they must learn the hard way of experience” (Isaiah – NIV Commentary)

    This is not a rejection of “expository preaching” nor is it an argument against the validity of “expository preaching.”

  10. ishy,

    Thank you, ishy. I agree about Philip and Ethiopian eunuch: Philip’s “preaching the Gospel” in that situation is definitely based on the Isaiah text, for the purpose of proclaiming salvation through Jesus the Messiah.

    Re the situation in the main article, it just confuses me because it’s not the religious milieu I’m familiar with. If, as a congregant is quoted saying, “Every word that comes out of [Pastor Mira’s] mouth is the Bible,” does that mean that all he does is read from the Bible or recite from memory? If he says other stuff, such as what he believes text from the Bible mean, or how they apply to the lives of the congregation, isn’t that “the Bible plus a bunch of other stuff”?

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that. In my church, there are readings from the Bible, and our pastor or deacon explains it a little, discusses the immediate applicability, or tells us about the book he’s reading. (I don’t think the Spanish congregation got much out of the review of “Moby Dick,” but you never know.)

    It just seems that it’s not really accurate to say, “It’s the Bible,” when it’s “the Bible and what I think it means, based on the sources I consider authoritative.”

  11. “It appears that for some pastors, the TULIP is far more important than love.”

    From my personal observations of NeoCal activity in my area, a greater truth was never spoken. “Love” is not the first word that comes to mind regarding the new reformers … “arrogance” is.

    Jesus gave us a clue for determining genuine vs. counterfeit church leaders: “This is how all men will know that you are my disciples, because you have such love for one another.” (John 13:35)

    These are not disciples … they are deceivers.

  12. “… many search committees are complicit in downplaying the Calvinism angle …” (Dee)

    … to their downfall. The YRR are not your run of the mill Calvinists. They are mean-spirited, militant, and aggressive. The classical Calvinists I have known have been civil in their discourse and respectful of other expressions of faith … they do not carry “We alone hold truth” as their smug mantle. The reformed boys taking over churches across America should not be confused with real Calvinists … their message and method are distinctly different. While I may not agree with the underlying theology of either, I’m not concerned about the “Old” Calvinists … it’s the young reformed whippersnappers wreaking havoc in the American church that bothers me greatly … TWW documents their misbehaving frequently.

  13. “I choose not to use the term “Calvinist” because there are amateurs who think they know something about topics …” (Pastor Joe)

    This is the typical “You don’t understand Calvinism” response from these guys. Everyone who opposes their message and method are thrown into the stupid amateurs box. They pull out “The pulpit is superior to the pew” argument to deflect criticism. All NeoCal “pastors” use the same us vs. them playbook; stealth and deception comprise their modus operandi. As members shrink back, these deceivers work their dastardly deeds to takeover churches and change the default theology to New Calvinism belief and practice.

  14. Serendipitously, I came across this abstract of a published paper in my preferred daily news aggregator/analysis ‘blog to which I resort for a quick “scan” of the latest discouragements.

    “[H]ierarchical power is sought for its own sake; that building and sustaining this power demands strategic sabotage; and that sabotage absorbs a significant proportion of the energy captured by society. From this standpoint, [a hierarchical power system] grows, at least in part, not despite but because of – and indeed through – sabotage.”

    The original reference was to the economy and the power of giant enterprises in it, but I think it’s probably relevant to all kinds of human organizations.

    What’s happening in the churches is not unique; it’s just the agendas of “the world”, cherished in the hearts of fallen image-bearers, working themselves out in a context that ought to be different.

    This isn’t to excuse the problems. But IMO it does cast doubt on the legitimacy of the whole enterprise. When “the world” has so thoroughly seeped into the mentality of “the church”, does “the church” lose its right to claim to be what it claims to be?

  15. “a debate that Joe Mira had with a non-Calvinist: Braxton Hunter vs. Joe Mira – Is Calvinism True?”

    Those were the days when “grassroots” Southern Baptists made a feeble attempt to stay the tide of New Calvinism in the SBC. Braxton Hunter was one of the good guys and tried his best, IMO. Unfortunately, this campaign was too little, too late. New Calvinism now controls all SBC denominational entities and a growing number of churches, while the majority of Southern Baptists (numbering in the millions) would still consider themselves non-Calvinists. It’s the darnedest thing I’ve ever seen! Like most Christians, Southern Baptists trust the pulpit … you simply can’t afford to do that these days!

  16. Samuel Conner: When “the world” has so thoroughly seeped into the mentality of “the church”, does “the church” lose its right to claim to be what it claims to be?

    Indeed. The “church” (with a little “c”) has forfeited its right to claim the name of Christ since it no longer resembles Him. Indeed, the authority of Jesus is waning in the American church; He has little influence in the affairs of the organized church. The “world” and “theologians” have done a number on it!

  17. Cynthia W.: It just seems that it’s not really accurate to say, “It’s the Bible,” when it’s “the Bible and what I think it means, based on the sources I consider authoritative.”

    But that would destroy their entire premise, which is not really that the Bible is authoritative, but that they are. They present themselves as the only authorities on Scripture, church, life, and God. You can’t get to God but through what they say and by their allowance of you into their church.

    Now, they aren’t the only ones that do this. It’s very common and is even common among cults and sects of other religions.

    I have gotten to the point where I pretty much completely lose trust in anyone that says they are completely biblical. Because no human beside Jesus is even capable of that. And those people don’t even know why it would be a problem for them to claim that.

  18. Max: They pull out “The pulpit is superior to the pew” argument to deflect criticism.

    Isn’t that the Heresy of Clericalism?
    That only Clergy count in the sight of God, Laity can go to Hell?

  19. Max: The YRR are not your run of the mill Calvinists. They are mean-spirited, militant, and aggressive.

    They are the Taliban of Calvinism, Chairman Calvin’s Red Guard Changing the Face of The World.

  20. Don Jones: This is not a rejection of “expository preaching” nor is it an argument against the validity of “expository preaching.”

    When I read through Isaiah 28 line by line I don’t see anything in it that suports expository preaching. While I agree that it likewise does not condemn it, I still think it serves as a caution. That combined with the fact that there is not even one positive example of expository preaching anywhere in the Bible makes me thinks that there is no rationale for elevating it as the best way to preach.

    Very early this morning I found this interesting article on that passage:
    https://redeeminggod.com/line-by-line-preaching-biblical/

    Do these verses provide a good explanation of how God wants His Scriptures to be taught? Not even close. The statement about “precept upon precept, line upon line” is first of all a mocking statement by drunkards about the teaching of Isaiah, and then becomes a mocking statement by God as He turns their words back upon them. God tells them that if they don’t like what Isaiah says, they really won’t like what they hear from the Assyrians.

    There is almost nothing in this text about how to preach and teach the Word of God. If there is anything here at all, we might be able to glimpse Isaiah’s teaching method behind the mocking words of the leaders. It seems that Isaiah taught the same thing over and over and over in very simple words and ideas to the drunken leaders of Israel in hopes that through repetition and simplicity, they might understand his words and repent of their ways.

    I also found it interesting that those words in Hebrew sound a lot like someone saying the equivalent of blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada.

  21. Cynthia W.: none of these is going line-by-line through a section of Scripture.

    I think the reason “line by line” gets traction is because it has an element of truth in that there is no way to read anything without reading line by line. But the emphasis gets distorted, almost like trying to comprehend a forest leaf by leaf, tree by tree.

  22. Jerome,

    As usual, you are way oin top of this stuff. I wonder if the pushback at the meeting had something to do with this. I’ll find out.

  23. Cynthia W.: If he says other stuff, such as what he believes text from the Bible mean, or how they apply to the lives of the congregation, isn’t that “the Bible plus a bunch of other stuff”?

    You are not confused in the least. What you say is true. However, the Calvinista set will claim that whatever they interpret is the correct interpretation because they always quote the Bible. It’s a circular argument.

  24. ishy: They present themselves as the only authorities on Scripture, church, life, and God. You can’t get to God but through what they say and by their allowance of you into their church.

    It’s Jn 1:18, re-contextualized for modern America:

    “No-one has ever seen God, but the senior pastor makes Him known.”

  25. dee: However, the Calvinista set will claim that whatever they interpret is the correct interpretation because they always quote the Bible. It’s a circular argument.

    Like “The Bible is True Because The Bible Says So!”?

  26. ishy,

    Thank you again. I does seem that I have a handle on the main point, then. I have been puzzled for a long time by those who say “the Bible alone” has authority, but then either have a person, such as their pastor, telling them what the Bible means, or simply decide their personal idea is the one correct understanding.

    To be clear, I am not saying it’s wrong to accept an authority: it’s inconsistent to do so but claim you’re not doing it.

  27. “I’m not building Calvinists. I’m building Bible-believing Christians.” (Pastor Joe)

    Baloney! He knows exactly what he is doing. He has taken over a non-Calvinist Bible-believing church for the New Calvinist movement. That’s what he came there for … he is one of thousands of “Pastor Joes” doing the same thing in churches across America.

  28. Ken F (aka Tweed): That combined with the fact that there is not even one positive example of expository preaching anywhere in the Bible makes me thinks that there is no rationale for elevating it as the best way to preach.

    I have often thought that the churches find themselves in a situation reminiscent of Old Israel in exile, or even the Rabbinic Judaism that developed after the destruction of the 2nd Temple. The organizing center of the practices of the religion is inaccessible in the first case, and irretrievable lost in the 2nd. What do you do in such a case? You meditate on the thing that you still have, which is the Writings. And there is some warrant for that, for example in the commands to write the Law on your doorposts and bind it to forehead and wrist.

    A lot of the preaching that we see in the NT is aimed at outsiders, and so it arguably not a much of a glimpse into what the churches were doing in their “for insiders” meetings. The little bit that we see in terms of practical example, Paul’s brief mentions of the practices of the Corinthian church, suggests that it was much more participatory, with many speakers contributing smaller bits, and the contributions were regarded to be manifestations in the work of the Holy Spirit in the group.

    As the churches became more hierarchical, the practices (assuming that Corinth gives us a glimpse of then-standard practice; perhaps a debatable assumption, though Paul does not criticize the basic meeting format) changed and the “diffused throughout the group” work of the Holy Spirit was, one might say, “corralled” and channeled through the priestly hierarchy.
    Eventually, the whole concept of prophecy under the influence of the Holy Spirit was formally suppressed.

    Perhaps this was a kind of “sabotage” in the interest of hierarchical power.

  29. “Maybe it’s time for Joe to rethink his paradigm.” (Dee)

    But where else will he go, Dee?

    As one of his heroes, Al Mohler says:

    “Where else are they going to go? If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going 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, and that’s something that frustrates some people, but when I’m asked about the New Calvinism—where else are they going to go, who else is going to answer the questions, where else are they going to find the resources they going to need and where else are they going to connect. This is a generation that understands, they want to say the same thing that Paul said, they want to stand with the apostles, they want to stand with old dead people, and they know that they are going to have to, if they are going to preach and teach the truth.”

    Whew! That exclude 90+ of Christendom!

  30. Cynthia W.: I have been puzzled for a long time by those who say “the Bible alone” has authority, but then either have a person, such as their pastor, telling them what the Bible means, or simply decide their personal idea is the one correct understanding.

    They don’t want people to go elsewhere. They want people to feed into their church alone. So they make themselves the authority instead of an authority.

    One of the things I liked about the “old” Baptist tradition was that it was open and for everybody. If you wanted to go to another church, they’d usually wish you well. They might be sad you are leaving, but they wouldn’t try to stop you. In my experience, the New Calvinists do everything possible to keep people from going elsewhere, even to other churches that share their beliefs. Which means it’s not really about the belief, but about what you are giving them (and that’s usually power + money).

    For a long time, I’ve said that New Calvinism isn’t really about theology, but about power. Gaining power, using power, and keeping power…

  31. from the OP:

    “Of course, there are many Reformed churches that claim that one cannot be both Reformed and Baptist.”

    I’m inclined to agree that “Reformed Baptist” is an oxymoron. The independence of local congregations from any higher visible church authority is a core “Baptist” principle, and it is in major tension with a core concern that present-day Reformed inherit from the early Reformers — the arbitrary power of unaccountable hierarchies — which informs the ecclesial structures (for example, session/presbytery/general assembly) of Reformed denominations.

    The Reformation was a lot bigger than fixing the theology of justification. Independent congregations may reckon that they have broken the power of unaccountable hierarchies by refusing external oversight, but all that they have done is to multiply the number, while shrinking the size, of the unaccountable hierarchies, which are now reduced to the size of individual congregations with unaccountable internal power hierarchies.

    Like Ishy says, find a denomination (which will have some degree of accountability above the level of the individual congregation) that you can fit in to. Flee independent churches, and be deeply cautious of “branded” churches that sound like denominations but in fact are independent at the local congregational level.

  32. Samuel Conner,

    You seem to be a very knowledgeable person. Can you explain the difference between “Reformed” and “Protestant”?

    Is it accurate to say that “Reformed” is a subset of “Protestant”? Or if one doesn’t like the term “Protestant,” then “non-Catholic, non-Orthodox Christian congregations/denominations with their sources in Western Europe or North America.”

  33. Max,

    I had a version of “you do not understand Calvinism” played on me over 40 years ago… it was BS then, and it is BS now

  34. Headless Unicorn Guy,

    The irony of your statement is that Papa Chuck from Calvary Chapel fame played that line, and he was AGAINST Calvinism… and he also used the “line by line” argument… hummmm….

  35. Max: he is one of thousands of “Pastor Joes” doing the same thing in churches across America.

    That may be true for the ‘independents’ like say, Billy Bob’s Bible Church down the road a piece, but the ancient liturgical traditions (Catholicism, Lutheranism, etc.) will hold fast and their walls (so to speak) will not be breached, no matter how many siege engines they bring against them.
    I’m giving serious thought to returning to Lutheranism, the faith of my childhood.

  36. Cynthia W.: Is it accurate to say that “Reformed” is a subset of “Protestant”?

    Yes, I think this is exactly right. But there is massive diversity within Protestantism. England and continental Europe went different routes in their breakaway from Rome and the strands of later church that descend from these are distinctive.

    The “classical Reformed” denominations (along with, of course, the Lutheran churches) IMO can claim the most direct descent from the continental Reformation, and one sees evidence of this in the fact that in some respects they look a great deal like the older — Catholic — tradition that the Reformers were seeking to reform. For example, they have a supra-congregational authority structure and “church courts” for resolving disputes that arise within and between congregations. They baptize young children (though their understanding of the meaning of this practice differs from the older tradition). They retain the language of “Sacraments” (though they reduce the number and reinterpret the meaning of these practices). Not all denominations that share these properties, however, call themselves “Reformed”. Churches that descend from the English Reformation, such as, Anglicans and Episcopal and Methodist (Episcopal) share these resemblances but are distinctly different in other ways from self-described “Reformed”. And the baptist movement is a gigantic thing that I won’t attempt to summarize.

    But I’m no church historian — that is a gigantic and bewildering field. Mostly I’ve closely observed what I’ve been exposed to, along with inquisitive reading about things outside my experience.

  37. I have spoken with the pastor. He blessed me out. I have placed this information at the top of the post as an update.

  38. “I don’t give you permission to post what I said.”

    Does he have a copywrite on what he said?

  39. Opinions needed: Why is he wearing a thick sweater in an office in Florida in the middle of the summer. Dudebro thing?

  40. Muff Potter: I’m giving serious thought to returning to Lutheranism, the faith of my childhood.

    I am, too, but I have some problems returning to the LCMS because they don’t support the ordination of women. I visited the ELCA church in town and all 8 people didn’t speak to me, so I didn’t really get a good impression of them. That included the two pastors…

    There’s a big LCMS church across town, but I just haven’t been able to visit there. I like one of the Anglican churches. It has a wonderful pastor and I have friends that attend there. But I was so confused every time I went there. I also have some PTSD regarding church in general. I sought therapy for it, but it’s kind of a specialty that most therapists don’t know how to address.

  41. dee: Why is he wearing a thick sweater in an office in Florida in the middle of the summer. Dudebro thing?

    That’s a thing here in the South where it’s some requirement somewhere that it has to be freezing inside all the time. I don’t know how many times I have been in a movie theater with four blankets and everyone is shivering, but after people going to request a temperature change, nothing happens. I’ve never figured it out.

  42. Jeffrey Chalmers: I had a version of “you do not understand Calvinism” played on me over 40 years ago… it was BS then, and it is BS now

    In truth, no one understands Calvinism. Even Calvinists cannot agree among themselves on what Calvinism is exactly.

  43. ishy,

    I wish you well in the search. I had to compromise on some things in order to get a church which has been my greatest supporter as well as being just plain loving.

  44. Cynthia W.:
    Samuel Conner,

    some subgroups of Presbyterians are “Reformed,” but others are not, and the same with Baptists?

    I would say that all Presbyterians “descend” from the same strand of the Reformation, and might call themselves “Reformed” for that reason. But in addition to the branching of the church traditions in terms of doctrine, practices and polity, there is also a “conservative/liberal” splintering, such that there are today some very conservative denominations that call themselves presbyterian and other self-described presbyterian denominations that are more liberal or very liberal. Conservative presbyterians would not consider liberal presbyterians to be “Reformed.”

    I think that, rather that prefixing “Baptist” with “Reformed” (or even with “Calvinist”), it would be more precise to write something like “predestinarian Baptist”. Baptists disagree with historic Reformed at many points that the classical Reformed consider highly important in terms of the understanding of what the church is, what it should do and how it should be structured. The self-described “Reformed Baptists” agree with classical Reformed about God’s sovereignty over “who will be saved”. When you see the term “Reformed Baptist”, it generally means “Baptist with predestinarian understanding of salvation.”

    There also is a self-described “Reformed Baptist” association, ARBCA (which rears its head from time to time at TWW; Todd Wilhelm has done a lot of reporting on this group, which you can find archived at his “Thou Art the Man” site), which is distinguished by its adherence to a 17th Century baptist confession of faith. I have the impression that this old baptist confession of faith is not embraced by most present day predestinarian Baptist congregations.

    I suppose that it is nit-picky of me to have an issue with what other groups want to call themselves, to or be reluctant to use the labels that they prefer. But it’s important to not assume that the label means more than it means in the minds of the people who chose it.

    The adjective “Reformed” has a much broader meaning when predicated of a conservative presbyterian denomination than it has when predicated of a conservative baptist congregation or association. In the latter case, the meaning is primarily limited to “predestinarian soteriology.”

  45. Jeffrey Chalmers: you do not understand Calvinism” played on me over 40 years ago… it was BS then, and it is BS now

    That knowledge is important for those of us who write about such situations. I wasa able to coomiserate with Natalia because I’ve beem there. Myt guess is that Natalia will help many others in her life just like you do!

  46. Muff Potter: I’m giving serious thought to returning to Lutheranism, the faith of my childhood.

    I know that all churches differ in style. But I found a supportive and loving home in the LCMS. I wish you well in the journey.

  47. Cynthia W.,

    I learn so much as well. It takes time to go through documents, etc. but it helps me to figure things out. This pastor is mistaken that I needexd to speak with him from the beginning. I know what he is and I know what he would say. This is all so typical.

  48. Ken P.: “I don’t give you permission to post what I said.”

    Did you notice the tongue in cheek when I quoted him saying I couldn’t quote him?

  49. dee: Did you notice the tongue in cheek when I quoted him saying I couldn’t quote him?

    He might think you are eternally subordinate to him.

  50. Jerome: “Good-faith disagreements welcomed. Mockers, brawlers, revilers, and misrepresenters to be blocked.”

    And Commissar Leeman is the one who defines “mocking, brawling, revliling, and misrepresenting”.

    “There are those who say what we do is illegal. Before that can happen, make sure WE are the ones who define what is Legal and what is not.”
    — L Ron Hubbard

  51. Howdy, everyone! I’m Natalia. Can’t express enough how thankful I am for Dee, for the Guy behind the Curtain, and the TWW community. It’s my prayer that this story helps others that find themselves in this situation.

    I knew nothing of Calvinistas until I discovered that online debate and experienced THE shutdown. Since mid-June 2020, its been a very sharp learning curve where I found TWW somewhere in my desperate internet searches for understanding.

    It’s surreal. Clayton and I are the first members voted out of FBCCR. I had no idea of the wave that was to wash over us: misquoted scripture, quasi-scripture statements, accusations that discussion is a threat to “unity,” threat to “peace,” going against God’s chosen pastor, this is gossiping/slandering, unhearing ears, character assassinations, false reports, encouragement to leave and so on. It’s discouraging that the church family that knew Clayton (5, 10, 15 years) couldn’t be bothered, or for some reason couldn’t speak up. Encouragingly, not everyone participated in this behavior.

    It seems like a whole lot of commotion to block a discussion where everyone ends up confused and/or hurt. Why couldn’t all that energy go into coming together as a family and discuss findings with full disclosure and clarity? It just does not make sense for God’s house! Despite the lack of love, I still love that church (pastor included) and pray for opened eyes. My relationship with God has deepened from this.

  52. ishy: I’m not Ken F, but I can think of one where it’s sort of implied. But I’m not sure it’s not one that the New Cals would ever bring up. When Philip meets the Ethiopian eunuch, they don’t have much time, so Philip basically gives him a rundown. The eunuch was already reading the Scriptures when Philip found him, so I feel like it might be implied that they go through some things line-by-line. The kicker is that the eunuch specifically wants to know about Jesus and the Scripture does say Jesus is the focus of this exposition of Scripture.

    They usually are lying when they say they preach line by line from the Bible. Because they don’t usually use the whole Bible. They avoid talking about Jesus almost entirely, unless it’s in reference to the atonement. Or if they do use a part of the gospels, they don’t talk about Jesus in reference to it (remembering an article by Matt Chandler about using Matthew 18 in church discipline, but there was no context to the verse at all).

    The whole “we’re more biblical than you” is just a ruse, and a common one used by cults to separate their followers from others.

    Cynthia W. and Ishy:

    Couldn’t the expositional teaching of Scripture have come out of the reformation?

  53. dee: Did you notice the tongue in cheek when I quoted him saying I couldn’t quote him?

    When I worked as a small town newspaper photographer, I would get a similar response in regards to taking ones photograph in a public setting.

  54. Brian: Couldn’t the expositional teaching of Scripture have come out of the reformation?

    There’s actually a whole lot of preaching styles defined as “expositional”, but I think most of them have in common the belief that their way is the only good or biblical way to preach.

    I don’t think any of them are older than the Reformation, but most are more modern than that. For example, my preaching professor defined the three point method as expositional and “from the Bible”, but never did explain that very well even though everyone asked about it. I think line-by-line was made popular by Calvary Chapel in the 80’s. We do have some from the Bible, but most are in Greek oratorial style, which probably wouldn’t fly very well now with most people.

  55. No news to regulars here, but I feel compelled to remind readers that trying to force people out of church is not just the province of Calvinist churches. It happens all the time in supposedly liberal, affirming churches.

    In fact, when I ran a post about shunning on Episcopal Cafe, dozens of folks reported similar experiences.

    So, if you are looking at a new church, bide your time. Look around. Wait at least a year before doing any major volunteer work. Listen to see if people treat others with respect.

    If nothing else, five years later I’m still in litigation, and I still have people going around claiming I embezzled, am a terrorist, you name it.

    Don’t get hurt like I did.

  56. Muff Potter: That may be true for the ‘independents’ like say, Billy Bob’s Bible Church down the road a piece

    Besides independent churches, the New Calvinists have penetrated the Southern Baptist Convention, Evangelical Free Church of America, and Assemblies of God in my area. I’m not familiar with other denominations they may be targeting, but I suspect they are trying to “harvest” churches (not souls) wherever they can slither into.

  57. Jeffrey Chalmers: I had a version of “you do not understand Calvinism” played on me over 40 years ago… it was BS then, and it is BS now

    Ahhh, but we do understand … that’s why we stand!

  58. ishy,

    This “legal waver” and good old Johnny Mac’s “messages” is disgusting.. Johnny Mac portrays i am the “tough warrior for G$d” , mocks COVID warnings, then “hides” behind a legal release!!! I have words for this, but it is at least “R” rated, and would probably put me in the penalty box..
    The more I think about this, the more angry I get

  59. Brian: Couldn’t the expositional teaching of Scripture have come out of the reformation?

    If it is just explaining what a passage means it has been around from the beginning. But the current emphasis does seem to be a product of the reformation. The Wikipedia article on expository preaching is detailed and interesting.

  60. Jerome: “Good-faith disagreements welcomed.# (Dever)

    I’m guessing this means only true Scottsman are allowed to disagree.

  61. dee: Opinions needed: Why is he wearing a thick sweater in an office in Florida in the middle of the summer. Dudebro thing?

    New Calvinist dudebros like to dress cool whether it’s cool or not! Fashion is one of the ways they use to deliver their message … a cold subject over cyberspace demands a sweater … a hot sermon on stage demands a Mickey Mouse t-shirt. Being hip is not accidental, it’s purposeful. Driscoll started it with his spiky hairdo and potty-mouth; others perfected it with tight jeans and expensive kicks.

  62. Max,

    Calvinism infiltrating Assemblies of God churches is pretty surprising – where is that happening? I can somewhat understand Calvinist theology getting into Baptist churches, since those have typically believed “once-saved, always-saved” even before Calvinism. But having grown up in the AoG, they’re strongly wrapped up in Arminian-type thought (backsliding, coming back down for an altar call, backsliding again, rinse-repeat, etc).

  63. It also happened in my city in the deep South. I think it’s strange, too. But the pastor here became a Gospel Coalition fanboy and then started changing longtime AoG traditions like allowing women in the ministry. He’s also put in yes-men elders, though I don’t think he’s gotten a full elder-only polity yet. I know some people in that church who left when he kicked the wife out of a ministry position for being female.

    New Cals are just happy to take over already developed resources and think they can change the theology by force once they get in there.

  64. Rich: Calvinism infiltrating Assemblies of God churches is pretty surprising – where is that happening?

    A surprising development indeed … AoG are primarily whosoever-will-may-come folks, but some younger members lean Calvinistic. I could provide a name of a mega AoG church in my area which has an ESV-toting reformed pastor who has had Mark Driscoll speak there, but that would reveal where I live and the New Calvinists who troll TWW would dearly love to know that 🙂 So, I’ll ask you to trust me – New Calvinism has its tentacles in AoG ranks. A diligent search of the church directories of Acts 29 and The Gospel Coalition would most likely identify AoG member churches.

  65. Max,

    We just left a Conservative Baptist that is in the middle of a take-over. Allegedly.

    Ironically, my husband identifies as Reformed. But we’re done with one-way “accountability.”

  66. ishy: New Cals are just happy to take over already developed resources and think they can change the theology by force once they get in there.

    Yes, they like to loot existing stuff for the glory of New Calvinism.

  67. Max: Evangelical Free Church of America,

    There’s an Evangelical Free Church in my town close by where I live.
    I’ll have to go over there and find out if they’ve gone neo-cal.

  68. Question for all:

    How do otherwise rational and intelligent adults allow themselves to be enslaved by these despotic religious regimes?

  69. Muff Potter: How do otherwise rational and intelligent adults allow themselves to be enslaved by these despotic religious regimes?

    Observers of various religious cults in America have been asking that for years. I was young and now am old … during my journey, I’ve met a lot of very intelligent people who weren’t very smart. The average churchgoer is a trusting soul, but without much discernment, and can easily fall victim to a charismatic leader with a gift of gab and a bag of gimmicks. They don’t pray as they ought, nor read the Bible themselves much, so they swallow as truth what they hear coming from the pulpit. Easy targets.

  70. Max,

    I might add, growing up under fundamentalist/evangelicals, the emphasis on reading and knowing your Bible was to make you more “pious”…… which always “bothered me”…(i.e. it also seemed to be a point of pride.j but, because it was a school, I was a “good student”, and I did learn allot of what is in the Bible..
    Now, as I grow old, what knowing, a “moderate” level of the Bible, helps me stay away from false teachers…. what Max keeps saying….

  71. Just want to throw my 2 cents in for discussion. All preaching should be expository – that is, flow from the text of the Scriptures so that the meaning of the text is clearly identified and applied to our lives. With this in mind, whether the preaching style and format is line-by-line or more topical in its approach, the goal should be expository preaching. Two often a search committee will ask if the preacher is expository when they mean to ask does the preacher use a line-by-line approach.

  72. Muff Potter:
    Question for all:

    How do otherwise rational and intelligent adults allow themselves to be enslaved by these despotic religious regimes?

    There may be an element of circularity to this suggestion, but there may be some merit to it. I see two sides to the problem: leaders who believe that they possess God’s authority in a derivative way, and followers who agree with them.

    My perception from a variety of sources is that vocational christian workers tend to have a very strong subjective sense of call to ministry. A “sense of call” is a dangerous thing, because it has the force of “the will of God” for a person’s life and that tends to control one’s conscience. I have seen multiple instances in which vocational ministry workers had such strong senses of “God’s will” toward a specific line of action that they pursued objectively unwise or even (IMO) unethical courses of action with a conscience that evidently felt “clear” to them.

    Candidates for ministry (at least back in the ’80s when I had some observation of recruitment) are urged to pursue a religious vocation only if they are absolutely certain that God is calling them. At the same time, career ministry workers are generally recruited from among the young. People become persuaded (or they persuade themselves) of their calling as a prerequisite to training for the work.

    (As an aside, I think it’s a bad system. The young, who are typically the ones being recruited into ministry, are generally not wise enough to know if they are a good candidates for ministry. Yet they are encouraged to form the conviction that God wants them to pursue that as a life work. It would be better IMO to ordinarily limit ministry candidates to older people. This would also allow character issues to become more manifest before people and churches made large investments in a ministry candidate’s training. And “calling” should not be a subjective decision of the individual, on the model of spectacular Biblical examples of calling, such as Moses in the OT or Paul in the NT; it should be a more collective process of the group recognizing gifting in individuals who are well known to the group.)

    So I think that part of the equation is that you have leaders who believe they are under “God’s orders” to lead other people, and who may have a ministry “vision” that they believe they have received from God.

    Why do other people take this seriously?

    My belief is that there is a misunderstanding of the meaning of “authority” in the churches. People think of “authority” as if it were a substance that starts with God and automatically drips down into the churches via the leaders that God puts in control. You know who has authority by noting who is in charge. They wouldn’t be in charge if God hadn’t set them there, and so one has to regard them as having authority from God.

    Hang around an Evangelical church long enough, and when there is a controversy in which the leaders and the flock do not see eye-to-eye, you will hear things like “we have to obey the leaders that God has set over us”. The idea seems to be that one honors God in such obedience even if the leaders are leading badly — they will give account to God for their bad leadership, but the flock is supposed to simply do what the God-appointed leaders say, whatever that may be. The flock obeys God by obeying the leaders. In this way, people suspend their consciences and their own good sense, believing that they are being obedient to God.

    That didn’t fly at Nuremberg and I doubt that it will be persuasive at the Last Day.

    I think that the strong subjective sense of “call” in leaders and the strong cultural interpretation of “God’s authority” as inhering in church offices or in the occupants of those offices are kind of mirror images of each other. If you believe a person has a specific “call” from God, and you have hired that person into leadership of a congregation, you will tend to believe that the person has “authority” from God as part of the equipment to fulfill his “call” and you will tend to feel obligated to the leader to obey him as if his commands were God’s.

    (This is not to say that I think there is no authority associated with church offices. Obviously there is — it’s a corporation with officers and the officers have duties do the corporation and a measure of authority to carry out their duties. But all this is man-made. Whether God is in it or not cannot be known beforehand, IMO)

    I’ve come to the view (which I think might resemble Wade Burleson’s view) that in the churches, “authority” should be regarded as something that is demonstrated over time through performance, rather than imputed on the basis of office or subjective claims of divine call.

    Jesus and the apostles didn’t simply claim authority, they demonstrated that God was with them through mighty works. Paul demonstrated his authority not with persuasive speech, but with the power of the Holy Spirit.

    That kind of demonstration of authority doesn’t happen very much in our day, as far as I can tell (and I would be very happy if were to happen more often, but it doesn’t seem to). I think that one can argue that spiritual authority in the church can still be demonstrated performatively, in less spectacular ways. A pastor who shepherds his flock with integrity and care will come to be trusted by the flock — that trust endows him with a measure of earned authority. People will gladly follow someone who has earned their trust and confidence.

    When a new hire comes in and basically changes everything, and feels justified doing that because he’s in charge, he is acting on a theory of “office-based” authority. He doesn’t feel the need to earn the trust of the group, and perhaps doesn’t even care if he is trusted, as long as he is obeyed. And the flock may docilely obey, if it shares the new hire’s mistaken belief that he has an authority that he has not yet earned.

    perhaps there is some mileage in this meditation.

  73. Bill Kynes, Mike Andrus, Tom Nelson, Colin Smith — comprise the contingent of Evangelical Free ministers on the Council of The Gospel Coalition. All four have been with the outfit since its inception (originally, TGC’s leaders were called “Stakeholders”).

    TGC was founded by Don Carson, professor at Trinity International University’s Divinity School (Deerfield, Illinois). Trinity is the flagship school of the Evangelical Free Churches of America.

    And in fact, this Pastor Joe Mira got his bachelor’s degree at Trinity’s branch campus in Miami, before going on to a Baptist seminary.

  74. Eric Bonetti: Wait at least a year before doing any major volunteer work. Listen to see if people treat others with respect … have people going around claiming I embezzled, am a terrorist,

    I am amazed who would consider doing “major volunteering” anywhere except after about 10 years. My friend (a preacher’s kid himself) and I arrived at a certain church and I said to the vicar “don’t burn my friend out” and my friend escaped lightly when the entire congregation plus vicar had their collective breakdown.

  75. Jeffrey Chalmers: knowing, a “moderate” level of the Bible, helps me stay away from false teachers

    The more you know what the genuine looks like, the counterfeit becomes easier to spot.

  76. Way back in 1994, Kynes and Carson appeared at a sort of proto-9Marks/TGC forum at CHBC with Dever and Mohler:

    From the Washington Post archives, Sept. 24, 1994:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1994/09/24/upcoming-events/bf38e688-c885-499e-89ed-2decd726faa7/?utm_term=.fe36cbeb37bf

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

    [Carson and Dever had served together in the UK under Roy Clements at Eden Chapel:
    https://www.stevemaughan.com/sermons/roy-clements/
    & Kynes would have been getting a Cambridge Phd. about the same time]

  77. Jeffrey Chalmers,

    I bet if you were to stand in the average American church as an invited speaker and asked the congregation to turn to the book of 2nd Thomas, most would flip through their Bibles anxiously looking for it. 🙂

  78. “They appear to relish the inevitable conflict.”

    Pincer movement (which is never about what it is about) and counter pincer movement (which isn’t either) (dialectic). The virtual circle of dragons eating their own (and every body else’s) tails. The eternal pressing of the button. The Lemony Snicket style Series Of Unfortunate Events. They say it’s God’s Swill to “allow” this for our conversion, and that perhaps He must think we are too stupid in understanding Him to not need it. (Such churches don’t teach real prayer.)

  79. Muff Potter:
    Question for all:

    How do otherwise rational and intelligent adults allow themselves to be enslaved by these despotic religious regimes?

    Only one thing to add to other people’s already insightful comments.

    I think people generally want to feel like they belong to something (such as community) and that they belong in particular to something special. And they’ll be willing to overlook a lot of warning signs because of a fear of loosing that community/belonging and because of a sense of pride in how much “better” their church or pastor is than all the others out there.

    And it’s just really hard to admit when we’re wrong.

  80. Max:
    Jeffrey Chalmers,

    I bet if you were to stand in the average American church as an invited speaker and asked the congregation to turn to the book of 2nd Thomas, most would flip through their Bibles anxiously looking for it.

    I’m guessing you’ve actually seen a form of this happen before?

  81. Max: A surprising development indeed … AoG are primarily whosoever-will-may-come folks, but some younger members lean Calvinistic.I could provide a name of a mega AoG church in my area which has an ESV-toting reformed pastor who has had Mark Driscoll speak there, but that would reveal where I live and the New Calvinists who troll TWW would dearly love to know that So, I’ll ask you to trust me – New Calvinism has its tentacles in AoG ranks.A diligent search of the church directories of Acts 29 and The Gospel Coalition would most likely identify AoG member churches.

    Isn’t the AoG more of a charismatic church?

  82. Max: I bet if you were to stand in the average American church as an invited speaker and asked the congregation to turn to the book of 2nd Thomas, most would flip through their Bibles anxiously looking for it.

    That was prophesied in the book of Hezekiah.

  83. Wild Honey: And it’s just really hard to admit when we’re wrong.

    There’s a lot of people who think they can change things to be how they want them, as well (for good or for bad). Most people think their will is stronger than others, but it’s usually not. And if there’s a group with collective strong wills, then it’s really just a waste of time unless there’s some mechanism that allows diversity of choice. That’s why many New Cal pastors rush to elder-led polity. It removes the mechanism of choice, which is congregational voting.

  84. Ken F (aka Tweed): I also found it interesting that those words in Hebrew sound a lot like someone saying the equivalent of blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada.

    Actually when reading the Hebrew, it really doesn’t sound like “blah, blah, blah….” It is supporting that fact that the Jewish prophets had gone line by line, but Israel refused to pay attention to the teaching. So now there were going to experience “line by line…” the result of rejecting (v13) the “line by line” teaching they had received. To say that verse 13 is an example of the result of going line by line kind of illustrates the danger of not going “line by line” and drawing an erroneous conclusion. It was the reading of the OT law in context that brought about the revival in King Josiah’s time, also Nehemiah. We don’t have illustrations in the NT of what really took place in the church setting, though evangelistic preaching as illustrated in Acts was pretty much looking at a text and drawing out the message of that text. The letters /epistles were written to churches and they would be read in context to the church when received because there were logical statements made and conclusions drawn from the context. Hope that helps.

  85. Brian: Isn’t the AoG more of a charismatic church?

    Yes. “Charismatic Calvinism” is starting to take hold in some churches. Driscoll reinvented himself as a Charismatic Calvinist.

  86. Brian: I’m guessing you’ve actually seen a form of this happen before?

    After 70 years in SBC ranks as a Sunday School teacher and lay-preacher, I can tell you that the average churchgoer is Biblically illiterate.

  87. Don Jones: Hope that helps.

    It does. I think you and I agree more than we disagree. I agree that the only logical way to read a document is one sentence after another, which is a form of line upon line. I also agree with the importance of taking into account textual and historical context, as you did in your explanation of what that passage means. And I suspect we both agree that lines of scripture cannot be used in isolation to support a theological position.

    This discussion started with the observation that Mira claimed to simply preach the word line by line. When that is done in isolation (e.g. sola scriptura), one can prove just about anything. Historically, most of the major heresies used the sola scriptura approach (Calvinism itself was developed in isolation from historical precedence). So the problem is not expository preaching in general, but when it is used to derive and support errant teachings.

    Also, expository preaching appears to be as old as Christianity. But the emphasis on expository only using scripture only is newer.

  88. ishy,

    “I have gotten to the point where I pretty much completely lose trust in anyone that says they are completely biblical.”
    ++++++++++++

    i roll my eyes with the mere claim of “biblical”.

    i’ve lost count on how many ‘biblical’s there are, all of them contradicting each other.

    i mean, it’s just getting silly.

  89. Sounds so much like the Calvinist pastor who took over our church. I don’t ever remember hearing him use the term “Calvinist” or “Calvinism,” even though he is a dogmatic Calvinist. He just always said “I am preaching right from the Scriptures,” which lulls people into a false sense of security. I think they don’t identify themselves as Calvinist so that people don’t know how to research their theology online. If we don’t know it has a name (Calvinism), it makes it much harder to look it up. And it gives them more time to entrench themselves in the church before most people catch on.

  90. heather: He just always said “I am preaching right from the Scriptures,” which lulls people into a false sense of security.

    And to me is a major Red Warning Flag.
    Setup for a “GOD HATH SAID! SCRIPTURE! SCRIPTURE! SCRIPTURE!” beatdown.
    Abuse excused by “GOD SAITH IN HIS WORD! I AM ONLY FOLLOWING ORDERS!”
    During my time in-country, I was on the receiving end of Weaponized “SCRIPTURE! as Party Line”. Even once is one time too many.

  91. Ken F (aka Tweed): And I suspect we both agree that lines of scripture cannot be used in isolation to support a theological position.

    But it is.
    All the time.
    As One-verse Verbal Component Magick Spells. (“FIREBALL! FIREBALL! FIREBALL! FIREBALL!”)

  92. Max: Yes.“Charismatic Calvinism” is starting to take hold in some churches.Driscoll reinvented himself as a Charismatic Calvinist.

    Does that mean they’re channeling Calvin?
    A direct line to Calvin, getting marching orders through Dreams and Visions and Words of Prophecy?

  93. ishy: There’s a lot of people who think they can change things to be how they want them, as well (for good or for bad). Most people think their will is stronger than others, but it’s usually not.

    And they end up appearing in “Triumph of the Will” — the OTHER Guy’s Will.

  94. Max:
    Jeffrey Chalmers,

    I bet if you were to stand in the average American church as an invited speaker and asked the congregation to turn to the book of 2nd Thomas, most would flip through their Bibles anxiously looking for it.

    Ah, throwing them with fictional Bible books.
    Like the Book of Hezekaiah…

    (During my time hanging around Azusa Newman Center circa 1980, “Book of Hezekaiah” was a fictional Bible book used for “verses” that weren’t in the Bible but everybody thought they were. Example was some of Ben Franklin’s aphorisms that people thought were actually from the Bible.)

  95. heather: Sounds so much like the Calvinist pastor who took over our church. I don’t ever remember hearing him use the term “Calvinist” or “Calvinism,” even though he is a dogmatic Calvinist. He just always said “I am preaching right from the Scriptures,” which lulls people into a false sense of security.

    Right from the “How to Takeover a Church” playbook. They know “Calvinism” is a bad word among some religious groups … so they avoid it.

    Darn it, just tell me who you are! You will always know who I am!

  96. Max: The more you know what the genuine looks like, the counterfeit becomes easier to spot.

    I used to hear that in so many radio sermons, it was probably one of the most popular sermon illustations.
    So why after preaching it, NOBODY ACTUALLY DOES IT?

    And there is an application in another milieu: Remember all the truly awful Christianese Kitsch books, art, movies, TV? And how Christians think it’s all so Godly and Great?

    Expose larval Christians to The Real Thing. After the likes of Professor Tolkien, Robert Silverberg, and Cordwainer Smith, LaHay & Jenkins or Salem Kirban are a bad joke. After they’ve tasted The Real Thing, they’ll never go back to the Christianese knockoffs.

    Personal Experience: I am a natural-talent speedreader who discovered F&SF (and fringe literature) at age 15. I must have read HUNDREDS of SF & fantasy by some of the best storytellers in the business. Then in college I was introduced to actual pron in the form of a small paperback titled “Neighborhood B&D Party” getting passed around the dorms. I read it.

    Not Impressed. No milieu, no ideas, no characters, no events/plot, no story, just “money shots” in (literal) blow-by-blow detail. I went back to walking the stars and/or Deryni magic in Medieval Gwynnedd. My exposure to GOOD fiction had vaccinated me against the likes of NB&DP.

  97. Max: Yes.“Charismatic Calvinism” is starting to take hold in some churches.Driscoll reinvented himself as a Charismatic Calvinist.

    Does that mean they’re channeling Calvin?
    A direct line to Calvin, getting marching orders through Dreams and Visions and Words of Prophecy?

    Max: Sort of like the Gospel according to Mark Twain.

    Him, too.
    Now that guy could coin some real Zingers.

  98. Max: Because they think they are genuine enough to detect error: “Them preacher boys ain’t ever goin’ to fool me!”

    “We can spot them John Calvinists a mile away!”

  99. Max: A surprising development indeed … AoG are primarily whosoever-will-may-come folks, but some younger members lean Calvinistic.I could provide a name of a mega AoG church in my area which has an ESV-toting reformed pastor who has had Mark Driscoll speak there, but that would reveal where I live and the New Calvinists who troll TWW would dearly love to know that So, I’ll ask you to trust me – New Calvinism has its tentacles in AoG ranks.A diligent search of the church directories of Acts 29 and The Gospel Coalition would most likely identify AoG member churches.

    I believe you – it’s just odd. Heck, I googled yesterday and the AoG has a position paper up on their website stating how they’re Arminian and not Calvinist. Beyond that, my understanding is that the AoG as a denomination has more central control than the Southern Baptist churches (who are vigorously independent) – so I’m a bit surprised that sort of stuff could stand for long.

    And yeah, AoG is definitely “charismatic”. Not ‘snake-handling’ levels of charismatic. But you’ll definitely see lots of speaking in tongues, every once in a while folks getting “slain in the spirit”, lots of laying on of hands, and every so often somebody might get fired up during a sermon and start running up and down the aisles.

  100. Wild Honey: Only one thing to add to other people’s already insightful comments.

    I think people generally want to feel like they belong to something (such as community) and that they belong in particular to something special. And they’ll be willing to overlook a lot of warning signs because of a fear of loosing that community/belonging and because of a sense of pride in how much “better” their church or pastor is than all the others out there.

    And it’s just really hard to admit when we’re wrong.

    Yup, people have a big-time need for community, and churches are good at providing that. Fortunately there are lots of other ways you can get it. I have a dance community now, and that provides all of the positive connections and feelings that church ever did, and essentially none of the negative stuff. No dogma that you have to sign on for, no unquestionable leaders (except that the caller for a particular dance does get some reasonable amount of necessary authority about what’s happening). There’s some vigorous debate sometimes, but that’s usually handled pretty well by people.

  101. Rich: I believe you – it’s just odd.

    Who would have ever believed that a small band of New Calvinists could takeover the Southern Baptist Convention with its millions of non-Calvinist members?! The new reformers now control all SBC entities: seminaries, mission agencies, publishing house, and thousands of churches.

    And who would have believed that one of the largest AoG churches in the U.S. would embrace potty-mouth Mark Driscoll?! http://thewartburgwatch.com/2015/06/12/hillsong-church-disinvites-mark-driscoll-while-james-river-church-embraces-him/

    Odd days, indeed, Rich.

  102. bunny: Arrogance is not a fruit of the Spirit.

    “Everyone who is proud and arrogant in heart is disgusting and exceedingly offensive to the Lord; Be assured he will not go unpunished.” (Proverbs 16:5)

  103. Natalia Hubbard:
    Howdy, everyone! I’m Natalia. Can’t express enough how thankful I am for Dee, for the Guy behind the Curtain, and the TWW community. It’s my prayer that this story helps others that find themselves in this situation.

    I knew nothing of Calvinistas until I discovered that online debate and experienced THE shutdown. Since mid-June 2020, its been a very sharp learning curve where I found TWW somewhere in my desperate internet searches for understanding.

    A consequence of that learning curve: I feel like I’m at the edge of a pool, mulling over if i should jump into the idea of making a counter-takeover playbook from all that I’ve learned/learning from this. Don’t imagine it will go over well based on this:

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2017/05/17/how-to-spot-a-calvinista-pastor-are-these-some-of-the-clues/

  104. Side Question:

    Has anyone heard of a church creating a survivor’s of sexual and physical abuse/assault group?

  105. Natalia Hubbard: A consequence of that learning curve: I feel like I’m at the edge of a pool, mulling over if i should jump into the idea of making a counter-takeover playbook from all that I’ve learned/learning from this

    Wishing you the best in your journey and decisions!

  106. Headless Unicorn Guy: I went back to walking the stars and/or Deryni magic in Medieval Gwynnedd.

    I love Katherine Kurtz! I keep getting the idea we have similar reading tastes, wishing I could peruse your bookshelf sometime.

  107. ishy: There’s a lot of people who think they can change things to be how they want them, as well (for good or for bad).

    Yes…

    The first time we left a church under negative circumstances (I had volunteer burnout – twice), we told the pastor we were taking a break and didn’t know if we’d be back, but were willing to sit down and talk at some point. His response was all “reconciliation.”

    After taking a break, we knew we couldn’t go back into the rat race. We emailed him to let him know we were still willing to talk, but that if we stayed we knew we would want to be agents of positive change (since he kept saying from the pulpit how the church needed to do better about volunteer burnout), and we simply didn’t have the energy for that (I was pregnant and we had a 2-year-old). His response was along the lines of not seeing a point anymore to meeting. Two minutes later, we got notified we’d been kicked out of their social media platform. That stung.

    The church we just left (like three weeks ago) that is going through a Calvinist takeover… We said our piece, and now we’re leaving. One elder reached out to my husband and acknowledged that he saw a problem, too, but said his hands are tied. If even an elder can’t do anything, there’s not much of a point for us to try.

  108. Wild Honey: I love Katherine Kurtz! I keep getting the idea we have similar reading tastes, wishing I could peruse your bookshelf sometime.

    My college days, I kept the first Kelson trilogy on my dorm bookshelf right next to my D&D “weekend packet”. (I still prefer the Kelson period to the Camber. The Deryni chronicles was the first medieval fantasy I had ever come across where the Church played an important role in the narrative. When I was watching Game of Thrones I referred to King Joffrey as “The Anti-Kelson”, as the two had many parallels though completely-opposite personalities.)

    I also met Katherine Kurtz several times during that period. At the time we tended to move in the same fannish circles – same cons, same SCA revels, that sort of thing. She was cool; had a lot of personal funny stories such as how many people she knew fannishly kept pushing the Deryni books on her (they only knew her by her fan name) and how she would bust up laughing at the word “Pookie!” to the point “Pookie-ing” her became a pre-Internet challenge. The champion was someone who mailed her a “remote control pookie” postcard from overseas (this was before email came into general use).

  109. Max: Who would have ever believed that a small band of New Calvinists could takeover the Southern Baptist Convention with its millions of non-Calvinist members?!

    Who would have believed that a small cadre of Bolsheviki could take over the vast Russian Empire?

  110. “But the usual preaching of Chrysostom consisted in consecutive explanations of Holy Scripture. To that custom, unhappily no longer in use, we owe his famous and magnificent commentaries, which offer us such an inexhaustible treasure of dogmatic, moral, and historical knowledge of the transition from the fourth to the fifth century” (from New Advent, Catholic Encyclopaedia).

    So much for there not being expository preaching in the early church!

  111. Rich: Yup, people have a big-time need for community, and churches are good at providing that. Fortunately there are lots of other ways you can get it.

    Which is why abusive/control freak Pastors/Elders always try to destroy any community you might have outside the four walls of their church. 24/7/365 programs, 24/7/365 devotions, “Just like Fill-in-the-Blank, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!” knockoffs of everything on the outside you could possibly do…. All with the unspoken threat of “Making Baby Jesus Cry” or “Begone Ye Cursed, Into Everlasting Fire!” if you don’t get with the program and cut all ties to those Worldly Fleshly Heathens.

    What pulled me out of that Heavy Shepherding “Fellowship”/End of the World Not-a-Cult I got mixed up with was discovering SF fandom and Dungeons & Dragons. Both gave me anchors outside of “The Body of Christ(TM)” – environments which were much LESS abusive. Environments where I didn’t have to constantly tiptoe on eggs so God’s Hammer wouldn’t come down on me. Environments that didn’t stifle me into total conformity. A place where (unlike around Christians) I could actually be Free.

  112. Lowlandseer: So much for there not being expository preaching in the early church!

    Did someone in this thread make that claim? I seem to have missed it.

  113. Jeffrey Bryan: Two often a search committee will ask if the preacher is expository when they mean to ask does the preacher use a line-by-line approach.

    That is a good distinction that I should have made more clear when I brought this up. Some use the line by line method in a way that does not take into account textual and historical context, translation, and major historical interpretations. “Expository” is often understood in this way, but it is clearly not the only way it should be understood. There are clearly no examples in the Bible of preaching line by line, but this does not make expository preaching wrong in general.

  114. Rich,

    Natalia Hubbard: A consequence of that learning curve: I feel like I’m at the edge of a pool, mulling over if i should jump into the idea of making a counter-takeover playbook from all that I’ve learned/learning from this. Don’t imagine it will go over well based on this:

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2017/05/17/how-to-spot-a-calvinista-pastor-are-these-some-of-the-clues/

    Howdy back Natalie.
    The following is not meant to be a discouragement in any way. It’s just that you stated a possibility of some kind of endeavor based on several months of encountering a philosophical system. Here’s a couple of quick factoids to help you get a perspective of relative scale.

    “Neo-Calvinism” dates from the 1890’s. It is a “New” Dutch reaction to the effects of the Enlightenment. Effects such as increased personalfreedom, weakening of State Churches, loss of control of clergy, intelectual scrutiny of doctrine, creation of modern science especialy geology and physics,etc.

    That’s about two centuries just in one paragraph. This system has glacial speed, power and resistance to change. That’s something to consider.

  115. Nathan Priddis,

    No discouragement taken! Definitely good points. I don’t know why this is inside me, but I’m like Desmond T. Doss in Hacksaw Ridge praying to God to save just one more. Just one more. Like Dee said, these stories keep coming. I find it incredibly hard to find helpful information on this topic and have to wade through a lot of “Matthew 18 arguments” and “Calvinist takeover is a conspiracy” to get to actual helpful information. I see a need.

    In research of New Calvinism, i came across this article that claims that “few people realise that it was founded upon a fusion of Seventh Day Adventist (SDA) and calvinist beliefs.”
    https://www.hopperscrossingchristianchurch.com/portfolio-item/the-gospel-of-new-calvinism/
    I have been looking into this and into vintage Founders Ministries to see where the evidence leads.

    Just now I discovered a potential success story that could be a failed Calvinist takeover (found from scouring internet):

    First Baptist Church of Fort Smith 2019/2020
    – Pastor of 30+ years retires (Dec19)
    – New pastor (Blake Boylston) was an associate pastor at CHBC (Jan20)
    – 3 months later people realize whats happening and launch a campaign
    – Currently Blake is not listed on the church’s website and the retired pastor is back.
    – Blake is set to help lead a church plant in the area, Chaffee Crossing Baptist Church which was registered May 2020.

    Would love to learn what happened. It may great info/help for others.

  116. ‘President’s Viewpoint — In a time of transition, the mission remains unchanged‘

    https://www.liberty.edu/journal/article/season-of-renewal-new-president-upholds-his-promise-to-carry-out-the-original-goal-training-champions-for-christ/

    “Some have voiced concerns that Prevo had worked too closely with Jerry Falwell Jr. in the past to lead Liberty University well today, but it’s clear he’s his own man, and his first priority is to honor God. One of the leading forensic teams in the world has been retained by the Board of Trustees to conduct a thorough investigation into university operations during Falwell Jr.’s tenure as president. Prevo is ready for it.”

    “ TO THE EVANGELICAL COMMUNITY:
    “You might not know me. You might only know the name of Liberty University, and what you’ve seen in the news has saddened you. It’s broken any trust you may have had in a big Christian institution like ours.

    “It’s easy to make assumptions when you’re looking in from the outside. But what’s been in the spotlight is not who we really are.

    “I’ve believed in the mission and vision of this school for decades, but as I’ve gotten to know the faculty, staff, and students who are here right now, who make up the Liberty community today, I want you to know they are extraordinary. They serve one another. They pray for one another. They love the Lord Jesus Christ, and they love each other. They are the church of today becoming the church of tomorrow. And it’s such a privilege to know them.“

    “So please don’t let your assumptions about Liberty University expand to include them — they don’t deserve it.“

  117. ‘Board of Trustees News: Dr. Allen McFarland named Interim Board Chairman; Board pledges full commitment to spiritual mission, launches independent investigation’

    https://www.liberty.edu/journal/article/board-of-trustees-news-dr-allen-mcfarland-named-interim-board-chairman-board-pledges-full-commitment-to-spiritual-mission-launches-independent-investigation/


    “We are so fortunate at Liberty University to have Dr. Allen McFarland become our Interim Chairman, a man of great faith who follows God’s calling wherever it takes him,” said President Jerry Prevo. “This is a historic appointment at Liberty as Dr. McFarland is a distinguished national leader who will be particularly impactful as we continue to broaden our outreach to the African American community to join our mission in Training Champions for Christ.”

    “With this appointment, Dr. McFarland becomes the first African American to chair the Board of Trustees at Liberty University.”

  118. Headless Unicorn Guy: The Deryni chronicles was the first medieval fantasy I had ever come across where the Church played an important role in the narrative.

    Same here. Although I prefer the Camber novels, maybe because of Evaine.

    My first introductions to fantasy included Tolkien, Terry Brooks, David Eddings, and Kurtz, sometime in jr high. The “Left Behind” series came out not too much later. There was just no comparison.

  119. Ken F (aka Tweed),

    You might find this article a helpful corrective to the view that there is no expositional teaching/preaching in the New Testament -you can’t get much earlier than that.

    https://www.9marks.org/answer/do-we-see-examples-expositional-preaching-bible/

    In Schnabel’s “Early Christian Mission’ Volume.1, in reply to the idea that “the Twelve did not learn from Jesus to do missionary work, if they did not receive a missionary commission from Jesus, if most local churches came into existence without the work of missionaries, if Paul the missionary was an atypical figure…,if ‘the church’ expanded mostly through everyday private and occupational contacts of anonymous sisters and brothers, if sermons played a role only in rare cases, not even in the mission of Paul, then one may ask the question, somewhat tongue in cheek, whether the author wishes to abolish in his church or denomination, pastors, superintendents and bishops alongside missionaries and evangelists and sermons outside the Sunday worship services,,,,expecting renewed church growth only through “individual propaganda.””

    It seems to me that some people have a problem not so much with ‘sola Scriptura’ but with ‘any Scriptura’ simply because it is God’s Word.

    On an unrelated point, TWW has dropped from a high point of 695,104 in website rankings to 1,054,296 in the last ninety days, a drop of 442k. A return to original values might improve things.

  120. Lowlandseer: You might find this article a helpful corrective to the view that there is no expositional teaching/preaching in the New Testament -you can’t get much earlier than that.

    I see your 9marks article and raise you an additional 9marks article. 🙂
    https://www.9marks.org/article/biblical-case-expositional-preaching/

    It all depends on how one defines expository. If it means explaining a particar passage, than every sermon that explains any passage is expository. But this is not normally how that word is used. 9marks defines is very specifically. I don’t find any sermons in the Bible that teach about a particilar passage in the way this article describes. As for the examples listed in your article, those examples appear to be topical. For example, Jesus taught about himself drawing from the entire OT, not by explaining the entire OT line by line.

  121. Rich: I believe you – it’s just odd. Heck, I googled yesterday and the AoG has a position paper up on their website stating how they’re Arminian and not Calvinist.

    That may very well be because of the creeping TGC influence in the denomination.

    In the case of the pastor here, I’ve known him for some time, and he always struck me as being into fads and trends, and TGC is definitely trendy in evangelicalism. He has always been more of a complementarian in his church structure belief, so I think that also appeals to him. TGC has gone to great lengths to make their stuff clickbait to evangelical men and many probably don’t even know what they believe enough to see through it.

  122. Brian: Has anyone heard of a church creating a survivor’s of sexual and physical abuse/assault group?

    SNAP has had some in churches in the past, but I think covid stopped them. There’s a lot of secular therapy groups online right now, so those might be easier to find.

    I would like to see some groups focused on church spiritual abuse but there’s not much out there. There’s got to be way more victims of church spiritual abuse than people think.

  123. “Hardcore Calvinistas are amongst the most controlling, ungraceful pastors that I have observed.” (Dee)

    Amazing disgrace.

  124. “Churches that have paid for infrastructure are often takeover targets by pastors who have been unable to get sufficient funds to have *really nice digs.*” (Dee)

    Such behavior is called “looting” when it’s done outside the church. “Pastors” who manipulate, intimidate, and dominate church members to take the stuff that others have financed are no different. Looters will kill you if you get in their way … NeoCals “dismember” you. These are not “pastors” who have been called to that sacred office … they are thieves. Unfortunately, this is being multiplied across the American church as the new reformation, and its band of young rebels, takeover church after church which do not accept Calvinist belief and practice. Their leaders will answer to God for treating His people this way.

  125. Such a one sided story. We serve God not man.
    In the old days we met and discussed things. Now a days we give one sided views on social media and look for how many likes we can get.

  126. ishy,

    “I would like to see some groups focused on church spiritual abuse but there’s not much out there. There’s got to be way more victims of church spiritual abuse than people think.”
    ++++++++++++

    this is my support group.

  127. Lowlandseer: TWW has dropped from a high point of 695,104 in website rankings to 1,054,296 in the last ninety days, a drop of 442k. A return to original values might improve things.

    What is your source of the information, if you please? And what original values do you have in mind that disappeared 90 days ago, causing a drop in traffic?

    TWW is still covering abuse in churches—a difficult topic that many people turn away from. A few websites with higher traffic might be covering covid, politics, the economic downturn, and social upheaval. Worldwide disinformation sites have been proliferating, too.

    If high numbers signaled high quality, we’d all be happy at our megachurches. Quality matters.

    Correlation is not the same as causation.

  128. Friend: TWW is still covering abuse in churches

    TWW also covers “spiritual” abuse, such as controlling “pastors” within New Calvinism. Some folks who identify with this movement – or the theology which drives it – don’t like such posts.

  129. Al:
    Such a one sided story. We serve God not man.
    In the old days we met and discussed things. Now a days we give one sided views on social media and look for how many likes we can get.

    Yeah, in the old days, churches were able to coverup abuse. It was sooooo cool.

    I have been doing this for 11 1/2 years. Little do you know how very typical your comment is. It is ill informded. How do you knosw that I don’t serve God and not man? I disagree with you? That proves it?
    Your simplistic comment and my experience with the hot head you have for a pastor seals the deal for me.

    I am so glad that Natalia and Clayton got out of your spiritually abusive church. I suggest that you read The Sublte Power of Spiritual Abuse. Your church would benefit from it. Oh yeah, and follow Wade Burleson to see how a Reformed Baptist pastor graciously loves those who disagree with him.

    https://smile.amazon.com/Subtle-Power-Spiritual-Abuse-Manipulation/dp/0764201379/ref=sr_1_1?crid=35QEDNGN8J4J8&dchild=1&keywords=the+subtle+power+of+spiritual+abuse&qid=1601571984&sprefix=the+subtle+power%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-1

  130. ishy: But that would destroy their entire premise, which is not really that the Bible is authoritative, but that they are. They present themselves as the only authorities on Scripture, church, life, and God. You can’t get to God but through what they say and by their allowance of you into their church.

    Now, they aren’t the only ones that do this. It’s very common and is even common among cults and sects of other religions.

    I believe Dr. Robert Lifton would classify that under “Sacred Science”, one of his criteria for thought reform, AKA The Signs You’re in a Cult.

  131. Max: TWW also covers “spiritual” abuse, such as controlling “pastors” within New Calvinism. Some folks who identify with this movement – or the theology which drives it – don’t like such posts.

    Yah, how dare we notice more than one form of abuse? [eyeroll]

  132. Ken F (aka Tweed): In truth, no one understands Calvinism. Even Calvinists cannot agree among themselves on what Calvinism is exactly.

    Ha! That reminds me of a scene from the first season of “The Muppet Show”.

    In one episode, The Electric Mayhem (Dr. Teeth’s band) threatens to walk out of the show for good. Their reason is that they hate having to play the theme song, a peppy show-tune-like piece. Over the course of the episode, Kermit tries to negotiate with Floyd Pepper, the band’s lead guitarist. Eventually, Kermit agrees to let Floyd write a new opening theme for the Muppet Show, but insists on giving the song final approval. Floyd flatly refuses this offer. When Kermit asks why:

    Floyd: “I know you won’t understand my music.”
    Kermit: “Now, how do you know that?”
    Floyd: “Because I don’t understand my music. If I didn’t know I was a genius, I wouldn’t listen to the trash I write.”

    I wonder whether many of the Calvinistas secretly feel this way about their own doctrine.

  133. dee,

    Oh no, Dee! One of the Cutler Ridge faithful has shown up to set you straight!

    Not that he had much meaningful to say… I wonder if Mira promised Al a pat on the head if he came here and made at least a token effort to teach us all a lesson.

    Keep up the great work!

  134. Aaron: Baptist reformed, is by definition, Calvinist.

    I don’t think the issue is with calling themselves Calvinist (which they usually don’t), but calling themselves Reformed. Confessional Reformed say you can’t be Reformed without confessions.

    I am neither and don’t really care what they call themselves, but there are some distinct differences in the theology because they do not use confessions. One being a lack of accountability in hierarchy structures. Another is their veering into becoming more of a Judaic sect than Christians, because they don’t really like using Jesus in any of their theology except atonement.

  135. Friend: Correlation is not the same as causation.

    Unfortunately, there are far too many people have not (yet) made that connection (that correlation is not the same as causation).

  136. ishy: SNAP has had some in churches in the past, but I think covid stopped them. There’s a lot of secular therapy groups online right now, so those might be easier to find.

    I would like to see some groups focused on church spiritual abuse but there’s not much out there. There’s got to be way more victims of church spiritual abuse than people think.

    My anxiety was starting to get in the way of attending church, too large of a crowd within a certain space kicked in my childhood defense mechanism. It’s been blocking out content of the sermons I attended. I told my pastor, gave my background of being abused, he was cool with it. He suggested starting a survivors group. Ishy, thank you for the info.

  137. Rich,

    Sometimes thongs are not what they appear to be.

    AG as far as I know never retracted the condemning of Latter Rain. AG was rife with Latter Rain ideas, and doctrines decended from it.

    I know of AG churches that concealed AG status. I also know of fault lines in the AG that dont get trotted out in public.

    Reality is often complicated. So absolutely there are individuals holding Reform doctrine in AG. That doesn’t mean they identify as such. I think the important thing is individual relationships and networks formed early in life, or educational years, not the denomination.

    My image of AG is that of a city without walls.

  138. Nathan Priddis: Sometimes thongs are not what they appear to be.

    When I was a wee lass, all of the Sunday school books said that David slew Goliath with a thong.

    I don’t think they say that anymore. 😉

  139. Serving Kids in Japan: Floyd: “Because I don’t understand my music. If I didn’t know I was a genius, I wouldn’t listen to the trash I write.”

    Brilliant! Something like this should be a banner on sites like TGC.

  140. Friend: When I was a wee lass, all of the Sunday school books said that David slew Goliath with a thong.

    When I was a wee lad it’s what we called cheap flip-flops.

  141. Ken F (aka Tweed): When I was a wee lad it’s what we called cheap flip-flops.

    You wore politicians on your feet?

    I’ll be here all week… remember to tip your waitress… try the veal…

  142. Friend,

    I don’t know how to respond in a way that won’t violate the rules, so I will borrow from another comment thread and simply say, “Ni.”

  143. Wild Honey: My first introductions to fantasy included Tolkien, Terry Brooks, David Eddings, and Kurtz, sometime in jr high. The “Left Behind” series came out not too much later. There was just no comparison.

    You might wanna’ try Stephen King’s Dark Tower series.

  144. Wild Honey: My first introductions to fantasy included Tolkien, Terry Brooks, David Eddings, and Kurtz, sometime in jr high. The “Left Behind” series came out not too much later. There was just no comparison.

    Again, you were exposed to the Real Thing and it vaccinated you against The Christianese Counterfeit.

  145. Max:
    “Hardcore Calvinistas are amongst the most controlling, ungraceful pastors that I have observed.”(Dee)

    Amazing disgrace.

    “Amazing disgrace,
    How sweet the POWER
    GOD game to Elects like MEEEEEEEEEE…”

  146. Serving Kids in Japan: In one episode, The Electric Mayhem (Dr. Teeth’s band) threatens to walk out of the show for good. Their reason is that they hate having to play the theme song, a peppy show-tune-like piece.

    They could always go over to “Meet the Feebles”…

  147. Friend,

    The latest stats show that since Monday’s post on “child abuse” by parents disciplining their children according to Scripture, there has been a slight two day recovery for TWW. That suggests to me that there’s nothing like a bad story to generate interest and improve the ratings.

    The original ways were more concerned with actual child abuse in one particular church. It then spread to include the “Calvinistas” and “dudebros”, TGC, 9Marks and so on. It became an anti-Calvinist/Reformed siren, often regurgitating stories from other websites and going after the dead. It’s a pity that Deb retired.

    The terminology used to characterise these groups is derogatory and can hardly be said to edify the church, of which these people are brothers and sisters.

    Five hundred years ago William Perkins wrote in his Treatise on the Vocations “And this is the common fault of the world: men who lightly regard and slackly perform the duties of their own callings, are nevertheless very ready to talk about and inquire into the state and lives of other men; and it is food and drink to them. Let a good report be given about a man and it is not regarded; but evil reports are taken up at the first rebound — they spread like wild-fire. And all this arises from vain curiosity, which is condemned here as the bane of all societies. These busybodies are like those who read books with the intent only to discover its faults. And they are like the spider that creeps over the whole garden only to gather poison. But men that fear God must learn to know their own business, and to allow their talk and meditation to be employed in that way.”

    An apt description as it covers a number of contributors here.

  148. Lowlandseer: The latest stats show that since Monday’s post on “child abuse” by parents disciplining their children according to Scripture…

    Your RIGHTeousness has been duly noted.

    And there’s a reason the word SCRIPTURE(TM) makes me want to throw up.