Numero uno?

Carter: “How do you know which leaders to submit to? How do Christian leaders know who should submit to them? And how do we know who such leaders are? How do the leaders know for which people God will hold them responsible?
“The answer is that we freely choose to submit to a specific group of believers and leaders by making a public commitment. And we do all of that by becoming members of a church.”

I thought maybe the first two questions would receive an answer in terms of how to tell which ones were qualified for stewardship positions. But instead, it’s about assigning personal leaders to people? And again, where is any hedge related to the consequences of choosing to submit to specific people and signing whatever agreement they choose to put in front of you? Where is any of that made a priority or a “Mark“ of how to do things prudently and advisedly? (Of course, when the response to things going horribly wrong is often “Oopsie, mistakes were made, yay forgiveness, we good?” with the well-compensated offender returning after a “season”, the general priorities appear to be evident time and again.)

The disconnect is so unreal, with all of these reasons offered not to go to this church or that church or this denomination or that, but just trust someone who calls themselves “the local church“ and make a binding commitment that apparently can go beyond letting your yes be yes and your no be no. As has been said, where else are you gonna go?

Ignore all the scandals and “moral failing” in churches involved with the SBC , TGC, and so forth, and just lead with submission without a priority on a grievous wolf or hireling check, is that it? Don’t sweat the concentration of power under a few people or some guy who’s had a “vision“ and sets up the power and financial structure for him, his wife and family, and people who he generally selects — often thanks to what he has been “shown“ in the “vision“ — because he and his selections are to be ceded submission and authority, is that it?

Nevermind that people who need funding for their enterprises often bristle at the possibility that the support will not sustain itself, yet binding agreements — including spiritual blackmail —have been used and abused, specifically in religious contexts, for how long? Given the track records, it seems that may not be one of the marks they evidently want to concentrate on and prioritize as much in order to be evaluated as stewards — which is quite biblical — as much as turning the focus around to the “sheep” who too often are primarily seen as a means to a financial end.

In some of those liturgical churches, babies are baptized. They grow up in the church. Such people are sometimes referred to as communicants because they receive Communion during the liturgy.

They are members because they belong. They are never not members. No contract required.

And yes, they can resign at will, or just not attend any more.

(Having written all this wild radical stuff, I will now retreat to my fainting couch.)

Thought this may be of interest to the readership here.

Hosted by a guy who is an ex-Calvinist.
He calls his position now “Provisionism.”

“What Should SBC Churches Do To Combat Calvinism?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhKMYudb6yE

I’m currently reading James Durham’s sermons on “Keeping a good conscience”, recently published by RHB & Naphtali Press and Durham defines, examines and illustrates what the conscience is in relation to God our Creator.
One of the problems with Jonathan Leeman is that he seems to think that a person (and his conscience) is subject to the dictates of the church elders who can in their declarations consign one’s future condition to heaven or hell.

The following are excerpts from a review of Leeman’s position by Joseph Minich which can be found in full here – https://mereorthodoxy.com/reviewing-jonathan-leemans-political-church-pt-1/

“The embassy does not stand “in-between” the host nation and the citizen. Rather, the relationship of the citizen or of the would-be citizen to both is immediate. And so, the authority of the embassy is exercised in the very presence of the King who works above and alongside it. If the embassy says one is not a citizen, but the Bible says one is, the embassy does not speak for the King. What is more, the world can, in principle, evaluate the veracity of the embassy’s claims because the word is as public as the institution which (at another level) mediates it.”

“Most immediately, the free conscience is the immediate relation that one has to God which cannot be accessed by men. This is not to say that states and despots don’t try. The history of the human race is a history of social engineers, psychological manipulation, the force of threat or persuasion to follow a certain path, etc. But ultimately, the conscience cannot be forced. It is free in relation to God, and this was brought into stark relief in the Reformation.”

This last point that the conscience is free in relation to God, is the point Durham made that n the 17th century and is as relevant today as it was then.

JDV: Ignore all the scandals and “moral failing” in churches involved with the SBC , TGC, and so forth, and just lead with submission without a priority on a grievous wolf or hireling check, is that it? Don’t sweat the concentration of power under a few people or some guy who’s had a “vision“ and sets up the power and financial structure for him, his wife and family, and people who he generally selects — often thanks to what he has been “shown“ in the “vision“ — because he and his selections are to be ceded submission and authority, is that it?

I mean, all I have to do is think about one of the local New Cal churches here, whose pastor is telling everyone they aren’t affiliated with anyone, but they are SBC and 9 Marks. It’s just one flat-out lie, so what else are they lying about? And we’ve seen hundreds of pastors like that on TWW, including the president of the SBC who conveniently forgot to tell the Summit they were SBC until he ran for president (thinking back to all those angry Summit members attacking people talking about it on Twitter insisting they were nondenom).

If I can’t even trust that what they say about their church membership is true, why would I believe them about theology?

Great post. I especially approve of holding “leaders” to account. If they want to be “leaders”, then we should “test” what they say.
Another concept that I agree with: How we “do church” should NOT be just “appealing” to our 21st century culture. Another concept that I find “appealing” with liturgy and tradition is the very fact that it has been done “this way” for a VERY long time….. i.e. there is something “there” that transcends the “shallowness” of our current culture….
I have had the privilege of visiting a number of European cities, starting in my 30’s. Since I like history, I was drawn to the old buildings, especially the cathedrals…. they inspire awe in me…. I can not even image what they did to, at least some, peasants in 12-18 century… while the cathedrals can turn into idolatry, like any man made effort, they do not to me…. they do just the opposite…. unlike the Walmart like warehouse churches of today with the fog machines and “worship leaders” gyrating to the beat in skinny jeans..

My sense is that the churches in US have not done a great job of adapting to the loss of their cultural hegemony, that has taken place in recent centuries, the eras of “modernity” and “post-modernity” (though, paradoxically, the use of biblical texts for the purposes of exercise of power reflects, I think, a fundamentally post-modern approach. Perhaps the churches were actually already post-modern long ago).

There are times in the history of the people of God in which it’s hard to discern what God is “up to.” I suspect that we are in such a period now, analogous to the uncertainty of the inter-testamental period (a period in which, I believe, there was a proliferation of mutually incompatible religious ideologies within Old Israel). That period ended in the 2nd half of the first Century with the overthrow of the old religious order.

I suspect that the theology, and especially the ecclesiology and eschatology, that seemed “fit for purpose” during the long era of christian hegemony in Europe may not work as well in different circumstances.

Perhaps a rethink is in order. NT Wright has proposed an approach that, as I understand it, reads the Scriptures first as history and only then as theological source material. A more radical approach is that of Andrew Perriman, who sees the eschatological horizons of the NT as being mostly in the early centuries of the AD era, encompassing the downfall of Old Israel and the subsequent downfall of Roman paganism. Wright, for the most part, not too radically adjusts prior thinking; Perriman does extensive remodeling.

The churches are certainly in crisis. Perhaps theology will ride to the rescue, but I suspect that it will not be precisely the theology or theologies that served the churches well during the period of their supremacy.

Lowlandseer: One of the problems with Jonathan Leeman is that he seems to think that a person (and his conscience) is subject to the dictates of the church elders who can in their declarations consign one’s future condition to heaven or hell.

The following are excerpts from a review of Leeman’s position by Joseph Minich which can be found in full here – https://mereorthodoxy.com/reviewing-jonathan-leemans-political-church-pt-1/

“… If the embassy says one is not a citizen, but the Bible says one is, the embassy does not speak for the King. …”

It’s one thing for church folks to describe actions that will send someone to hell, but another entirely for them to believe they can send them.

Personally I prefer churches that encourage faith, hope, and love. One can live a full Christian life without terror of hell. In all the hours not spent preaching about SINNNNNNNNNN and THE DEVILLLLLLLL, pastors can teach an awful lot about surviving hardship, feeding the hungry, deepening one’s love for spouse and children and neighbor, being good stewards, and all manner of other topics covered in the Bible.

Michael in UK: Submit means at most coordinate and not outmanoeuvre (like gears in an old fashioned car making lovely crunching noises). When the “leaders” are outmanoeuvring their inferiors, as if themselves exempt from that rule, it’s time for those inferiors to do likewise.

One doesn’t need painting into any corner by strongarmers / henchpeople when they aren’t honest about what the package deal is (mission creeps), or when it is absurd. Go cafeteria I say: eat everything on the (real) menu, but not all at once. “Love believes all things”. Meantime we can use our nous for ourselves. Real truthfulness is not only cumulative but speaks for itself as soon as it gets started: because logic is about honesty.

Thank you for this.

Godith: Uh oh. This guy now suggests all the simplistic and mostly wrong and ineffective advice from that discredited book and you are expected to agree.

The choice of book does give clues about a church. Simplistic books appeal to shallow people. Counseling should never be shallow. Churches should encourage depth of faith and of understanding. Shallow people do not know how to do that.

Telling shallow church leaders about marital woes can lead to headaches inside and outside the home. They might dispense unworkable advice, or even give orders. They might take sides, exacerbating the problem instead of looking for the best solution. They might also “dutifully” make sure that all the leaders know, along with the leaders’ wives and anyone else they think should be monitoring the situation in the marriage.

Therapy is a better bet, if only because the therapist has to protect confidentiality and will therefore not broadcast the couple’s business to the church. Seeking counsel outside the church also lets the couple continue to use the church as a place of comfort during a time of private hardship.

Friend,

Yup…

Heather: I don’t know of any example of this in the New Testament.

There is no example in the New Testament. It is extra bricks added to your backpack.

Really good post and analysis. Most of the language they use to describe their theology and their membership and discipline is vague and malleable. When that happens, when people are deliberately not straight with you, there is almost always some level of deception and dishonesty going on. Count on it.

I’m shopping for a car right now, and I think the only people who are better at obfuscation and evasion and mushy language than these church leaders are probably car sales people.

My goal in finding a car is much the same as it would be in finding a church. Find the person who is open, honest and gives you straightforward answers to your questions, and who listens to and cares about your needs. It’s shocking how few people in the world — whether church leaders or car dealers — will actually do those things and behave decently.

Non-mainline Protestants have NEVER cared that much for rituals.

Fundamentalists tie them to Catholicism (which is at a minimum considered the “whore of Babylon” in Revelation 17, and whoever is the sitting Pope at the Rapture will reveal himself to be the Antichrist). Evangelicals express concern that the rituals replace a true relationship with Christ, and creeds replace the Bible itself. Pentecostals don’t want anything that might hinder “the work of the Holy Ghost”.

It is largely a 180-degree reaction in opposition. No Advent services. No responsive readings or doxologies (even traditional hymns are going away, never mind that Carrie Underwood’s latest album of 13 traditional songs hit #1 on the Christian album chart). Forget calling any of the apostles “saints”. Stained glass may be found in older buildings but almost never in the newer ones. Seeker churches won’t have nativity scenes at Christmas and may not even have a cross at all.

“surge of Reformed theology has divided Southern Baptist churches and raised questions about the future of missions. Its exuberant young advocates reject generic evangelicalism and tout the benefits of in-depth biblical doctrine”

Good Lord, the American church can’t take much more of this “in-depth biblical doctrine”! The nation needs the Gospel, not ‘their’ gospel.

Ava Aaronson: Beginning: “and a strong coxswain to guide them.” William H. McRaven

Having a son who rows (HS and college), I liked this imagery. The coxswain is not physically strong (in fact they look for small people who don’t weigh much!) but good ones have intelligence, confidence and authority. Rowers are taught not to move an oar w/o the coxswain’s command; they supervise the shells (boats) both on land and in the water, help steer the shell, avoid obstacles, keep it within the racing lane, and also heartily encourage the rowers to put forth their best effort individually and as a team (to row well, all rowers need to be in sync with their strokes).
Seems a fitting image.

“Joe Carter claims that we, the ones who are church-goers, must submit to the authority of the leaders”

Whereas, the Biblical model indicates that church-goers choose leaders who are in submission to them under congregational governance. The Kingdom of God on earth is activated in a community when both clergy & laity work together in love to fulfill the Great Commission, submitting to the authority of Christ. New Calvinism has supplanted the authority of Christ and substituted their own leadership scheme to manipulate, intimidate, and dominate the pew.

John: Find the person who is open, honest and gives you straightforward answers to your questions, and who listens to and cares about your needs. It’s shocking how few people in the world — whether church leaders or car dealers — will actually do those things and behave decently.

You would expect Xtians to be way better at this. My personal experience is that there is not much difference between non-believers and believers.

Heather: Maybe this has been covered somewhere already, but does anyone know when membership contracts started? I don’t know of any example of this in the New Testament.

I note that for many centuries the recognized church(es) could use the power of the state to get resources (legally required tithes to the established church, direct support by the government, the current German surcharge on income tax that goes the taxpayer’s registered denomination/religion [and you are frequently in by baptism]). Some US states had established churches (New Hampshire until 1817, Connecticut 1818, Massachusetts 1833). Many of the other colonies had the Church of England as the established church but the American Revolution broke that connection and the new Episcopal Church never became established de jure.

Max:
“Joe Carter claims that we, the ones who are church-goers, must submit to the authority of the leaders”

Whereas, the Biblical model indicates that church-goers choose leaders who are in submission to them under congregational governance.The Kingdom of God on earth is activated in a community when both clergy & laity work together in love to fulfill the Great Commission, submitting to the authority of Christ.New Calvinism has supplanted the authority of Christ and substituted their own leadership scheme to manipulate, intimidate, and dominate the pew.

With all due respect and deference, I’d be careful about asserting what “the biblical model” supposedly dictates.

The earliest Church Fathers — who knew the apostles personally — describe a liturgical, hierarchical church with apostolic succession and a distinctive form of liturgy (Ministry of the Word culminating in the Celebration of the Eucharist). Ignatius of Antioch (who knew Peter), Clement of Rome (ditto), Polycarp, and Justin Martyr spring to mind. These dudes came along way, way before Constantine supposedly wrecked everything — and long before the Baptists showed up. One can write them off as proof that the early Church went off the rails right at the very outset (so much for Gates of Hell not prevailing!)…but nonetheless, it is what it is.

Friend: The church people would march in, clad in their Sunday finery, and glower at us modest shlubs in our jeans and tees; OBviously we weren’t dressed to appear before the LORD!

“Two men went up to the Temple to pray, one was a Pharisee, the other was a tax-collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed like this with himself, ‘O God, I do thank you that I am not like the rest of mankind, greedy, dishonest, impure, or even like that tax-collector over there. I fast twice every week; I give away a tenth-part of all my income.’ But the tax-collector stood in a distant corner, scarcely daring to look up to Heaven, and with a gesture of despair, said, ‘God, have mercy on a sinner like me.’ I assure you that he was the man who went home justified in God’s sight, rather than the other one. For everyone who sets himself up as somebody will become a nobody, and the man who makes himself nobody will become somebody.” (Luke 18 Phillips)

Dan: Kierkegaard: … academic treatment of the Bible is just another way of avoiding dealing with Jesus.

Lot of that going on in Jesus’ day, too, as that demographic would pick verbal/semantic fights with the Son of God. Pathetic. Teeny tiny hearts, ginormous brains.

Erp,

Pew rents.

Then along came the Evangelical FREE. (And guys like George Müller.)

So we regress.

Friend: I don’t know the man’s religion, but found him humble and generous.

Some of the most humble and generous folks I know ain’t got no religion.
I’ve even known a few of those who found Christ and simply extended their existing humility and generosity to the work of the Lord – they made great Christians!

Max: My waitress friend said some of them cuss like sailors!

And stiff the servers … in Jesus’ name.

I have to tell a story about my daughter who was 18 at the time. She was serving at a local restaurant where really the kitchen was too small to keep up with the orders plus a cook was out that day. She serves this table of Christians and notices that where you place a tip one of the adults is writing a Bible verse in place of money. My daughter asks what is going on and the lady commences to tell her the service was slow so no tip, my daughter then lol commences to tell the lady in no uncertain terms that if Jesus was sitting at her table he would say “ tip her.” Well that sets them off back and forth which finally ends when my daughter tells the lady do what you want but in my opinion , people that don’t tip go to hell. Then all hell really broke loose, the manager was called over and apologized and she was sent to to the back to wait till those customers left ( manager ask her to please not get into it with the customers). Christians create more atheists on Sunday than any other day. I tip well, thank them and write on the receipt “ thanks for the good service.” Love my daughters spunk!!! Tip well in place of a cheap tip and a Bible tract!

Friend: clad in their Sunday finery,

I think of this as “fear of man” clothing. It’s what you wear when you are worried about what other people will think of your appearance.

I confess to doing this myself at times, but I try to limit it to appointments at banks or courts.

Justice has been served.

Mark R: Non-mainline Protestants have NEVER cared that much for rituals.

Oh, but from an anthropological perspective, non-mainline Protestants have ritual, it’s just not immediately obvious because they don’t hand out an order of service. But non-mainline Protestants have rituals around everything that is said and done in the church, from who does certain things, to the language used, to how people dress…I could go on and on. It just looks unscripted. But the services are just as planned out and ritualized as if one were going to mass. You’d see it if you went a half dozen Sundays and kept careful notes.

Sòpwyth,

Sòp, you’ve summed it up entirely (allowing for disguised copycats also). A major and old denomination effectively abolished belief and prayer circa 1959 (caution: this is not simplistic), undermining the position of other churches and of elements with integrity in the world.

Sadly, bitter grapes in the shape of the evils of British and Spanish Empires and their successor regimes / commercial systems they prompted, plus the bad rule promoted by de la Berulle in France, has set the teeth of the whole world’s children on edge.

Church leaders’ wrongly excluding from our activities all pleading with God about past wrongs in our nations, has denied and removed one of our main purposes and tasks asked by God, which it would be the equal and priestly privilege of us each to fruitfully join in. I am astounded how many people still comment that Manifest Destiny Falwell Senior was genuine.

I’ve just finished the powerful “Day Of The Wolf” and Coleman Luck says one of his other books is about combining faith and politics uncritically. “Pray for your rule-ers” means that as they are agents of rule we should plead and advocate with God about quality of rule (things that come through people are not being ad hominised). God’s ordinances are permissive.

Most of Jeremiah & Lamentations is about God’s critique of the false revivalism in Josiah’s time. “Put your face in the dust, there may yet be hope”.

I don’t think the decline is due to just sexual abuse, though it is certainly a factor. It’s due to psychological and theological abuse as well, thoroughly documented on this website – and in this very post.

Life in the Calvinesta church fast lane?

hmmm…

Follow these Calvinist 501c3 church leaders, and your bound to loose your mind in short order?

(gump)

Could b.

Be careful out there…

The light is flashing red.
..

Max,

Wonderful comment.

Just because there is a church membership decline in America, doesn’t mean that the Church is on the decline. The organized church in many places with diverse expressions of faith is not necessarily the Church. I personally know many real-deal believers who are done with church, but not done with Jesus. (New Calvinism ran most of them off)

Max: A believer has the freedom to go and give as the Spirit leads.

“Stand fast therefore in your liberty, wherefore Christ has set us free, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage.” – from the book of Galatians

Muslin, fka Dee Holmes: Oh, but from an anthropological perspective, non-mainline Protestants have ritual, it’s just not immediately obvious

Thank you for this comment and Oh! how true this is! I used to play acoustic guitar in our contemporary worship service team. Nothing was left to chance. The order of the service (the welcome, the songs, any prayers, the sermon, the invitation, etc.), verses of song sung, when to instruct the congregation to stand, when to sit, when to raise their hands, what comments the singers were to say between songs and verses, when to pray, what to pray, how to smile, when to smile, when to be serious, the food on the breakfast table, the position of the chairs and tables, the clothes we wore, and on it went. Everything was ritualistically choreographed. We attended (I suppose still are) big seminars to teach you how to choreograph the contemporary service.

But reciting the Lord’s prayer was banned because that was defined as “liturgical”.

This was part of my disillusionment with contemporary worship services. Today I welcome the traditional Methodist liturgy. Other denominations have very rich liturgies as well. The irony is that liturgy can free the soul to center oneself in Christ and receive grace and peace and hope.

Max: the yoke of bondage of New Calvinist

IMHO, any spiritual path that follows a man/woman who is not Jesus is a dead end and a yoke of bondage, be it Calvin, Moore, Schaeffer, Nouwen, Wright, McKnight, neo-Calvin, Luther, Peter, Lewis, Campbell, Barth, Piper, Paul, Hybels, Warren, popes, pastors, book writers, bakers, candlestick makers. Good, bad, mediocre, but none to follow.

The wonderful experience of TWW is that there is no one here to follow, no collection, no contract. Read the post, savor the comments, add something or not. It’s community. Non-authoritarian. Foot of the cross. Level ground. Sharing the journey. Side-by-side. Together. Listening. Seeing things. The revelation of (not I know more & better than you so purcha$e my book, pay for my conference, sign my covenant) sharing what folks are experiencing, here, there, everywhere. The mosaic comes together and that’s the revelation. The Body of Christ where all faithful followers are equally needed and valued to create the picture, the 1008+ puzzle.

I feel since reading TWW, my vision has improved. How’s that for the aging process!

elastigirl: (i really need a word for campy-without-realizing it. anyone got one?)

Lots:
Piper, Wilson, Hybels, to name a few.

The long urban dictionary version:
Camp (n.) and Campy (adj.): Being so extreme that it has an amusing and sometimes perversely sophisticated appeal. Over the top and farcical, intentionally exaggerated so as not to be taken seriously. Found primarily in television, theatre and motion pictures, camp endeavors for satire and, for those who fully understand and appreciate the risible or easy-to-make-laugh nature of its material; it’s not surprising when it develops a cult following.

IOW, ridiculous.

As in Psalm 2 when God sees the “leaders” of this Earth, and from His Heavens, our Lord laughs, at the pathetically laughable fake leaders. (In Psalm 1, we are warned not to mock others, so apparently in Psalm 2, God reserves that right for Himself.)

elastigirl: costumes

Costuming for Christianity. Chollywood, chollywood, Sunday morning Hollywood.

Have you ever tuned in to all of the local churches online, multiple screens or tabs, and compared their attire? And hair get-up? Then their sermons? Their canned videos? And their appeals (money, contracts, attendance, volunteerism, voting – yes, politics from the pulpit)?

There’s a playbook someplace. Marketing. Branding.

Ava Aaronson: There’s a playbook someplace. Marketing. Branding.

New Calvinism would not exist without the Internet; cyberspace is the playbook. The young reformers mimic each other in method, message, and modus operandi, borrowing sermons and ministry gimmicks as needed. They wake up each morning to tweet and retweet Piper Points, Mohler Moments, Dever Drivel, etc. They certainly don’t go to their prayer closet to linger before God for a fresh word from Him for their church.

Ava Aaronson,

“There’s a playbook someplace. Marketing. Branding.”
++++++++++++++++

i see it as a vortex they all get caught up in, surrounded by some kind of forcefield so all they have are inbred ideas and all they know is what they see everyone else doing, all of which become ‘biblical’.

i’m sure someone has a word for that….

I just came across a story of an ex-cop with 122 child molestation charges against him and more victims coming out of the woodwork likely leading to even more charges. Talk about evil in a place of power!

Q. Your doubts about how Christianity is now being practiced in various 501c3 churches is warranted?

elastigirl,

Here are the points of servant leadership. It’s a business thing from 1970
https://www.teamgantt.com/blog/servant-leadership

Max: elastigirl: all of which become ‘biblical’ …

… with Gospel-centered music, Gospel-centered marriages, Gospel-centered books, Gospel-centered lattes, Gospel-centered this, Gospel-centered that.

And after 20+ years living in such a Gospel-Centered Existence, “Gospel” will acquire the baggage “GOD’s Boot, My Face, STOMP! STOMP! STOMP!”.

MaxThey certainly don’t go to their prayer closet to linger before God for a fresh word from Him for their church.

“Who needs God when WE Have Calvin’s Institutes, Piper’s Points, Mohler’s Moments, Dever’s Drivels! WE Have God All Figured Out!”

Muslin, fka Dee Holmes: But non-mainline Protestants have rituals around everything that is said and done in the church, from who does certain things, to the language used, to how people dress…I could go on and on. It just looks unscripted. But the services are just as planned out and ritualized as if one were going to mass. You’d see it if you went a half dozen Sundays and kept careful notes.

A friend of mine pointed this out years ago and it is certainly true. Some churches have everyone speaking out loud in tongues every service and others have this happen absolutely never. Try to find one in the middle, I am not aware of any. Try having one service with no announcements, or no musical instruments, or instruments of any kind in certain churches or no organ and see what happens. Try having a service of quiet in anything but a Quaker church. Try turning off the smoke machines or not singing a top 40 worship tune in other churches for just one service. Have no coffee. Have no sermon. Have no liturgy for just one week or try having it just once in another. Everywhere you go we are all stuck in a ruck. This is an argument that the Holy Spirit is not truly free to do in our churches what it wants. Let God break our traditions just once and see the level of complaining and belly aching that it produces in us. Some take pride in being non-traditional and yet it is just pride in newer traditions as if things inherently old are more evil than new. Yet the Bible appears to suggest that we should mix the two, but who wants to follow that?

EricL: The excerpts feel distant and cold toward Jesus. The terms “Christ” and “Jesus” are mentioned but He is held at arm’s length.

He is their Celebrity Endorsement, nothing more.

He is their professed reason for rules and rituals but I hear nothing about a relationship, of drawing near to Him in devotion or liturgy or prayer.

Watch out about going down the “Religion vs Relationship” road. I’ve been on the receiving end of the Weaponized version.

“For in the Devil’s theology, the most important thing is to Be Absolutely Right and to prove everyone else to Be Absolutely Wrong. This does not lead to peace between men.”
— Thomas Merton

One thing I’ve struggled with regarding Calvinism (and I’m not a Calvinist) is that it seems to be a bait-and-switch. In the Calvinist church that I recently left, the gospel was presented as if it was the free and open invitation of God to all men to put their faith in Christ and be justified. But when I began finding out about Calvinism and what the pastors and many members believed, it seemed to me to contradict the way in which the gospel was presented. This also showed up in the membership documents – there was a membership statement that was a simple evangelical statement of faith (which didn’t mention Calvinism) but then a teaching statement which described the pastors’ convictions (which was Calvinistic). So, I joined under the membership statement and then realized that to really “belong” I needed to subscribe to the teaching statement as well. This was a real bummer because I simply couldn’t do that in good conscience. I’d imagine this might be how a new convert in a Calvinist church might feel after learning more about Calvinism. Does anyone else have experience with dual statements of faith?

Paul K,

Very much so….

Paul K: there was a membership statement that was a simple evangelical statement of faith (which didn’t mention Calvinism) but then a teaching statement which described the pastors’ convictions (which was Calvinistic). So, I joined under the membership statement and then realized that to really “belong” I needed to subscribe to the teaching statement as well.

Was that the Westminster Confession of Faith?

Max,

It wasn’t the WCF. It was a statement of faith copied and pasted from MacArthur’s Grace Community Church – I found that out when I was researching it. The pastors had changed one or two things about it – such as de-emphasizing a commitment to pre-trib rapture. I appreciate the WCF’s commitment to emphasizing that God is not the author of sin – language that I didn’t see as explicit in GCC’s statement (feel free to fact check me on this).

Headless Unicorn Guy: Weaponized

The “relationship” (TM) has to revolve around the self-imported interlopers, and whatever interests they represent (which they might ambiguously dangle in front of you eventually), otherwise they don’t lift the cuss word “religion” from you. Worn the overgrown T shirt (minus pointy hood).

dee: It happened at a wonderful church that I attended.

Formerly wonderful. Formerly attended.

A lot of this going around. Sometimes voting with one’s feet, pocketbook, time & talents in hand, is the only solution. Their loss.

Are there seminaries that teach bait-and-switch? Why did this become a thing? It’s like a … pandemic. Seeker sensitive, Mega, Personality Cults – each had their run as a popular formula. Now bait-and-switch is in vogue.

Paul K: information control – withholding or not being forthright

= New Calvinism (stealth and deception are modus operandi)

Mr. Jesperson: Not an attitude that quickly justifies our actions but one that searches the deep things of God to see if we really are as righteous as we think?

So long as I’m kind and don’t do the kinds of things to others I wouldn’t want done to me, I have all the righteousness I need.
Real world practice and real world results.

Mr. Jesperson: There is an important distinction to be made between having the Holy Spirit present in members and having it free to do whatever it wants with a meeting.

I’m having trouble imagining what the Holy Spirit would do if we all got together for worship and simply discarded the form. Then again, as an adult I have mainly attended churches where the person (not an “it”) of the Holy Spirit, or Inner Light as the Quakers believe, was active in worship, in minds, hearts, lives, families, and therefore in communities.

What do you think would happen if people somehow freed the Holy Spirit to do more?

Max,

I agree with what you said though I would add I’m currently a member of a Methodist church which is required to become part of the lay leadership. It is important to note that many denominations have membership protocols but in our case people have never been pushed to join, its their choice. And it is more about the commitment to love and pray for each other and nothing about submission or authority or needing permission to leave. In this case it is a minor issue and not a first order doctrine. People do need to understand what type of membership they are signing up for.

Dear, Muff Potter,

Hea,

I prefer to be covered in the righteous of Jesus, and His blood while His is at it. Being overshadow indwelled) by His Holy Spirit is marvelous…

All of heaven is available…ask for it,

*grin

ATB

Sòpy

Ava Aaronson: bait-and-switch

A local New Calvinist church plant was criticized for not talking much about Jesus. To counter that, the whippersnapper lead pastor erected in-your-face 10-foot tall letters of “JESUS” in front of the church at Easter. But you will never hear the Gospel preached there (the real one).

Sòpwyth: You are presently aware of two gospels wading with one another.

I don’t think it’s “another gospel”, but I do think Calvinism is a very specific soteriology that should be clearly communicated to potential church members if this is what the leadership of the church believes.

If it was “another gospel”, I’d have to classify Presbyterians as heretics or at least heretic-adjacent. No way!

Leighton Flowers does a good job explaining why Calvinists are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Calvinists may have a very strange soteriology (strange to some) but they still believe in a kind and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, who saves those who put their faith in Christ. Flowers can’t logically get from point A (Calvinist soteriology) to point B (God is good), but he allows that Calvinists can somehow.

I think Calvinism is a 3rd-rank doctrine (important to Christian theology and practice but not essential to the gospel). The problem comes when Calvinists seem to elevate it to a 1st-rank doctrine (essential to the gospel).

Dear, Paul K,

Hello,

I have left it to Jesus, not John Calvin, …what it is to, and who it is, that may dine at His table. May it be as He so wishes, greatly overflowing…

Pass da sali (grin)

ATB

Sòpy

…

Several years ago, my encounter with an new local church plant that was both Baptist and Calvinist, after an inquiry, discovered that very few if any knew they were attending a baptist church. Absolutely none of the parishioners I encountered knew that the church was Calvinist. No form of TULIP was discussed.

Paul K: The problem comes when Calvinists seem to elevate it to a 1st-rank doctrine (essential to the gospel).

To New Calvinists, Calvinism = Gospel … there is no other way, truth, and life but through them.

elastigirl: my perception is that calvinists have difficulty seeing people of other christian persuasions as their brothers and sisters

That’s because they believe that they are the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through them. Non-Calvinists of other Christian persuasions are not of the elect, and therefore not their brothers and sisters. I know some hardcore New Calvinists who actually believe this!

Max:
“Matt Chandler, a Calvinist Southern Baptist … now beginning to embrace liturgical practices”

Chandler ain’t no dummy.He sees that SBC’s Conservative (aka Calvinist) Resurgence is in trouble, so he’s reinventing himself … whatever is necessary to keep his megachurch afloat.Besides, a little liturgy never hurt anybody!

It might be more that his church is in trouble. They’ve had numerous scandals and it’s likely affecting attendance (and the budget).

Mark R,

hmmm…

Church insurance policy?

Good luck with that…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uffHb6JgoiQ

…

What Love is This? – Dave Hunt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8rVNF-e7rI

The jig is up?

hmmm…

The core of Calvinism and the core of Catholicism, is one and the same, AKA the writings of Augustine. Augustines mind was corrupted by his former lifestyle, and his former education. He corrupted his use of the scriptures, consequent, his writings were misleading, his understanding of God darkened. It was the false premaces of Augustine that John Calvin utilized to pen his Institutes. Calvin quoted Augustine almost eight hundred times. Martin Luther failed to a lesser degree, in the same regard, being trained as an Augustinian monk. In essence, the reformation stalled, once the many peoples were forced to embrace man made religious falsehood, once again, the die was cast. The light partially put out. Religious deception runes deep. Search the scriptures. If you will read the scriptures you will fine it so easy a child can understand it. Don’t accept a substitute.

..

“What replaces the gospel will never promote a mission-hearted faith anchored in enduring truth working itself out in unashamed discipleship eager to stand the tests of kingdom-calling and sacrifice.
We want to generate a unified effort among all peoples—an effort that is zealous to honor Christ and multiply his disciples, joining in a true coalition for Jesus.”

In other words, they want submissive followers who are eager to hand over their money “sacrifice” and submit to humiliating “unashamed discipleship” tests, so they can rule the world.

For Jesus.

It all sounds so pretty. What a lovely way to disguise their cult.

For Jesus.

Sowre-Sweet Dayes: “Servant Leadership”

I’ve known several pastors and their elder/deacon boards who used that term to describe their ministries … who proved not to be servants and leaders! They sounded good, but didn’t walk the talk. “Servant leaders” is a new catchy descriptor that usually goes along with “Gospel-centered” and “Christ Follower” to paint a picture of a healthy church which is not. Buyer beware! The enemy of God resides in certain corners of the American church, offering a counterfeit to the consumer (you) … it’s close but not close enough. Pray for discernment.