Mohler, Mahaney and Their Fanboys – The LoveFest Continues

"I could say to you we’ve not been given Dr. Mohler’s gifts, and it would be useless for me to encourage anyone to imitate Dr. Mohler’s mental ability.”

C.J. Mahaney

http://www.christianbook.com/conviction-lead-principles-leadership-that-matters/r-mohler/9780764210044/pd/210044Al Mohler's Latest Offering

In the wake of a mass exodus of congregations from Sovereign Grace Ministries (including its flagship church where C.J. Mahaney pastored for 27 years), it appears those in leadership are holding out hope that they can re-group and reinvent themselves.  The annual SGM Pastors Conference called Hope Abounding took place several weeks ago.  Interestingly, Ray Orlund (one of the three "objective" men who concluded that Mahaney was fit for ministry) and his wife were speakers at the conference.  It appears that C.J. did not take the stage at this event.

Last week, however, another leadership conference took place at Cornerstone Church of Knoxville, which still belongs to the SGM 'family of churches'.  The name of that conference was Conviction to Lead.  Where have we heard that phrase before?  Oh yes, it's the title of Al Mohler's latest book.  As you might imagine, the conference centered around R. Albert Mohler Jr., who celebrated his 20th anniversary as president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary earlier this year.  To highlight his achievements, a video was released a month ago entitled Recovering a Vision: The Presidency of R. Albert Mohler Jr.  It certainly appears that the release of Mohler's book, the video, and the conference were part of a devised plan.

Not surprisingly, the conference appears to have been a MEN ONLY event based on Mohler's recorded remarks.  You can listen to all the messages here.  And it shouldn't surprise anyone that it was a Mohler LoveFest.  After all, Mahaney owes his buddy big time for praising him so lavishly back in 2004.  Take a look…

Is it any wonder that Mahaney forked over big bucks to Southern Seminary after such praise by its president.  Unfortunately, quite a few SGMers have revealed that they had no idea their "family of churches" was giving money to a Southern Baptist seminary. 

Mohler is in large part responsible for promoting Mahaney among the Neo-Cals, and C.J. has always gone overboard with his praise of Mohler.  For example, here is what Mahaney had to say at the conference about his buddy's reading prowess.

“I’ve seen his stack of books,” Mahaney said. “If you have a stack of books, I’m saying there’s quite a difference, pretty obvious difference, between your stack and his stack of books. So if you are comforting yourself, ‘I have a stack,’ well you might have a stack, but if we consider the nature and content of your stack as opposed to his stack, well, your stack looks pretty sorry and pathetic.”

“And it isn’t just that your stack is sorry and pathetic in relation to his stack, when he’s done reading his stack he retains all he reads from his stack,” Mahaney continued. “He remembers it, and he can access it and access it well into the future.”

“Whereas for most of us, not only is our stack of books not as impressive as his, but once we are done reading even a single copy or the entire stack, we have a hard time remembering much of anything we read in the stack. And so if we’re just thinking about gifts and mental capacity, and stacks and the ability to retain and remember, it’s hopeless. We haven’t been given these world-class gifts.”

Yep, Mahaney believes Al is the "smartest man on the planet", as uttered several years ago at the Resolved conference. 

What's really interesting is that it's not just the Neo-Cals that network.  We are establishing quite a network of friends here at TWW, and for that we are extremely grateful! 

Our friend in Dubai, Todd Wilhelm, has done an excellent job keeping his readers apprised of what is going on in the Mohler-Mahaney universe.  Leading up to the conference, Todd featured this post on his Thou Art The Man website:  Mohler Attempts to Resuscitate Mahaney's Conference Career

Is there any doubt that the 9Marks guys have awakened a sleeping giant?

And we were quite impressed with Todd's recent post Gospel Centered Brown Nosing.  

Here is what Todd had to say:

It would seem that one of the ways to gain access into the “good old boys” network of celebrity conference speakers is to shamelessly flatter one of the “big dogs” in attendance while speaking to the masses of conference attendees.  C.J. Mahaney has fine-tuned this technique to perfection and never fails to utilize it.   Amazingly it seems to work wonderfully.  These celebrity preachers all love to have praise lavished on them publicly.  This past weekend Al Mohler, in an attempt to revive C. J. Mahaney’s floundering conference ministry, shared the speaking venue at a conference on leadership. Below is a four minute excerpt from Mahaney’s message on the subject “The Leader and his Home.” Loosely based on Ephesians 5 it is a wandering oratory having little to do with the text.  I think his schtick is getting old, but I guess there are still enough devotees willing to fork over the necessary cash to hear Mahaney’s wisdom “live.”  Personally I think one practical way you could lead your home is to quit shelling out the cash for these conferences and instead give the money to your wife to spend on whatever she would like.

Great suggestion, Todd!   To hear Mahaney talking about Mohler's impressive 'stack of books', go here and click on the audio just below the above excerpt. 

The day after the conference, C.J. Mahaney preached another one of his canned sermons, which focused on Psalm 100. 

We can understand why Mahaney is mesmerized by Mohler, but we cannot for the life of us comprehend why the president of the SBC's flagship seminary allows such excessive adoration.  How embarrassing!   

We leave you with an endorsement of Al Mohler's leadership book from a not so surprising ally…

"For any one currently in a position of leadership, or anyone who aspires to a position of leadership, this book is a necessity." Douglas Wilson, author and blogger. 

Lydia's Corner:    Isaiah 1:1-2:22   2 Corinthians 10:1-18   Psalm 52:1-9   Proverbs 22:26-27

Comments

Mohler, Mahaney and Their Fanboys – The LoveFest Continues — 213 Comments

  1. A confederacy of dunces. One encouraging trend, it seems, is that the circle of those willing to share a stage with these men is getting smaller and smaller, hence their traveling road show with the same basic line-up in city after city. Mohler, Mahaney, Ortlund (who appears to have split at least two churches where he pastored), Wilson, etc.

    Paul did say, “Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry….proclaim(ing) Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely….What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.” Paul is a better man than I, because I just wish these men would go away.

  2. So if you are comforting yourself, ‘I have a stack,’ well you might have a stack, but if we consider the nature and content of your stack as opposed to his stack, well, your stack looks pretty sorry and pathetic.

    Is this really about stacks of books? 😉

    They’re pathetic, all of them!

  3. Sure…. books….. (hope to never see anyone’s stack of books….) (…will probably regret making this comment after some sleep….)

  4. Gosh, another post about C.J. Mahaney. He DOES live rent free in the hearts and minds of Wartburg and their commentors. Just can’t get him out of your mind.

  5.   __

    Causing God’s Precious Children To  Stumble : “Heard It Through Da Gripe-Vine?”

    hmmm…

    …For this reason, and this reason alone ‘we’, ** along with many others, refused to step away from C. J. Mahaney in any way: his SGM money.  

    -snark-

    As for Mahaney: brown-nose is as brown-nose does.

    http://www.abpnews.com/ministry/people/item/9029-mahaney-mohler-share-speaker-platform#.UouwW6XbIcg

    Arranging the deck-chairs again I see…

    and da proverbial Al Buddy band played on.

    glug, glug

    -grin-

    hahahahahaha

    *

    Better ta hug a millstone, huh?

    “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me (Jesus) —to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”.  ◄ Matthew 18:6 ► see also: ◄ Luke 17:2 ►

    (sadface)

    Sopy
    ____
    Notes:
    **where ‘we’ = his supporters…
    Comic relief: Blood Sweat & Tears – ‘Ride captain ride…’
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52A_M1At1A&feature=youtube_gdata_player
    Bonus: The Blues Brothers- ‘Mall Scene’
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTRXnuoK1ss&feature=youtube_gdata_player
    Added for good measure: Steffany Karback : American Pie” Don Mclean –  Cover
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JH4Hu6fZEsU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

  6. Interestingly, Ray Orlund … and his wife were speakers at the conference.

    Not surprisingly, the conference appears to have been a MEN ONLY event based on Mohler’s recorded remarks.

    Couldn’t resist! 🙂

  7. As a student at SWBTS I never got the “Mohler is smart” thing that seemed to be aggressively promoted at every possible turn. Maybe it is because I come from a very educated family, or maybe it is my innate skepticism, but to me this is just another version of the “I can beat you up” mentality we see in immature men. And the frustrating thing is that if Mohler is so brilliant, he certainly doesn’t possess the ability to communicate it in any meaningful way. Read his blog, and you will see a string of superlatives (his incessant use of the words “breathtaking” and “astonishing” are nauseating), with very little actual argument or critical thinking. And his books are not written to thinkers, or even those with a reading comprehension level above maybe 4th grade. I am not judging him for this, only pointing out that I have yet to see any evidence that Mohler has any kind of special mental capacity.

  8.   __

    “Da Goal?”

    “Honor and majesty are before Him: strength and beauty are in His sanctuary.”

    hmmm…

    …da proverbial Ceege is a confidence man, plain and simple; he however does not share the American religious 501c3 center-stage alone, as there are many others. Now there is both good and bad. the good: religious men like him have been exposed for what they are. The bad: religious men like him may never be brought to justice.

    What?

    We are very far away from our goal, if ‘Justice’ is our cause.

    Huh?

    However, if the ‘Truth’ is our goal, we have to date, brought a great victory to these 501c3  professional  religious men’s ‘victims’ :

    …SOMEONE is listening!

    *

    ..this intrinsic sense pervades the whole Epistle to the New Testament of book Romans: a ‘Divine righteousness’ is imputed to the individual who’s trust is in Christ, Jesus.

    Trust Him (Jesus) today. 

    You will be glad you did.

    *

    Stand Easy: a millstone awaits these nefarious religious frauds.

    Be Assured: The Stone hew’d without hands, will see it established.

    Gloria in excelsis Deo !

    Sopy
    ___
    Inspirational relief: Hillsong – ‘Glory!’
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiHZz7LqTA0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Follow along with the words of this song:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9FxiFlUXfw&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    blessings!

    ;~)

  9. @ Ken:

    For clarification, the Ortlunds spoke at the SGM Pastors Conference, and there were women in attendance. Jani Ortlund probably did a break-out session with the women.

    The leadership event at SGM's Knoxville church sounded like a men only kind of conference. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

  10. Best way to start the day is with comedy. Thanks Deb! These guys are a combination of late-night advertising shtick (“And not only that, there’s more!”) and SNL sketch.

    And anyway, my stacks are bigger and better than their stacks (Are too!….Uh uhhhh!….No, mine are!….No, theirs aren’t!….I’m telling my mom on you….)

  11. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:

    Mohler worked hard at branding himself brilliantly. It was necessary since he was given that powerful job at 33. He knew where the wind was blowing, so briiliance had to make up for lack of experience. The whole book thing is great lore here. He reads all day? Most SBTS guys salivate over him. Thing is, when you compare his writings with guys such as N.T. Wright, he sounds more like a community college grad. At least Wright wants us to think. Mohler only wants to indoctrinate.

  12. And it isn’t just that your stack is sorry and pathetic in relation to his stack, when he’s done reading his stack he retains all he reads from his stack

    C. J., it’s called underlining the important stuff and actually dealing with the information on the page. Not rocket science.

  13. I wonder whether God's book is in Mohler's 'stack of books'…

    Why do they need so many books when the inspired book is all sufficient?

  14. Session 4: The Leader and His Home | CJ Mahaney

    The only leg Mahaney has left to stand on is his family, which he has spent years and years and years promoting as the qualification for his ministry, and which he has used as a basis for ‘degifting’ others.

    I, for one, find it hard to discover much to praise within his family. For starters, how much integrity does it take for his wife, daughters, son and sons-in-law to remain “followers” of Mahaney to the extent that they have? Rather, they simply stand as examples of the kind of unquestioning loyalty & submission Mahaney demands from those close to him. And what has their contribution been outside of their own lives and the confines of serving within SGM? Are any of them actively involved in any larger efforts outside the realm of CJ & Carolyn Mahaney?

    If you’re going to base on message on ‘The Leader and His Home,’ is it fair to ask why it is your grown, adult children are still attached to the apron strings?

    Is Chad Mahaney still in college at Cedarville?

    Does the fact Mahaney provides financial security to the lives of his adult children, as well as a standard of living they haven’t earned, themselves proof of his successful leadership as a parent?

    It’s obvious to me that Mahaney’s little SGM kingdom was to be a lucrative place for his family to live unfettered from jobs, so what need was there for the kids to be trained, educated or to aspire to anything other than modeling the SGM lifestyle. Nicole Whitacre shares how her mother actually prevented her from developing her ambitions, and instead instructed her to limit her dreams to getting married and having a family, an endeavor that nearly killed her. (But of course Mrs. Whitacre speaks of having her brain washed in glowing terms, as though her mother’s instructions directed into the Way of True Fulfillment and away from other, unbiblical womanhood endeavors.

    But as long as none of Mahaney’s children come out against him, he takes the stage thinking he still has a dog in this fight. And woe be to any of the kids if they distanced themselves from Dear Old Moneybags. They’d be excommunicated, and this Christmas – degifted!

    Mahaney’s leadership is definitely evidenced within his family – his Cult Leadership that is.

  15. Mohler IS brilliant as a politician. 20 years later his power is so complete…. no SBC leader would dare stand up to him.

  16. @ Deb:
    Note How he thinks in terms of all adults need to be led. And only a few are chosen to lead them. His Plato slip is showing.

    I guess this means a great leader would be one who promotes and defends a child molester protector and blackmailer.

  17. @ formerly anonymous:

    Oh. C S Lewis says why:

    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.

  18. pcapastor wrote:

    Ortlund (who appears to have split at least two churches where he pastored),

    We are working on a fascinating post about a guy who destroyed an Acts 29 church and is still out there as a “certified” Acts 29 church planter. We know that Ed Stetzer’s last plant (which involved churches) went down in flames.

    Could you point me to some stuff on Ortlund? It would be fascinating to look at this in light of what we are planning to do in the near future.

  19. gus wrote:

    Is this really about stacks of books?

    These guys are really interesting. They publish the list of books that they are supposedly reading. CJ’s list is now out over at GirlTalk.

    Forgive me for thinking that a lot of this is window dressing. If you listen to CJ’s sermons, there is little evidence as to the deep reading going on.

  20. Seneca wrote:

    Just can’t get him out of your mind.

    And for some reason, you can’t get us out of yours. Deep down inside, you are fascinated by us.

  21. I posted a comment at ABP when the article there first came out; it was not put up on the site! It was to the effect that Mohler cannot be that intelligent, he cannot figure out a way to stay away from Mahaney!

  22. Ken wrote:

    Not surprisingly, the conference appears to have been a MEN ONLY event based on Mohler’s recorded remarks.

    There is always that absolutely nonsensical Christianese term. She was functioning “under his covering.” This is the way the comps side step and sashay around their own “rules.”

    When my husband and I were teaching, someone made the comment to him that I was teaching under his covering. He retorted that he felt I was the one who had him covered! He often says I’ve got his back.

  23. anon 1 wrote:

    Thing is, when you compare his writings with guys such as N.T. Wright, he sounds more like a community college grad. At least Wright wants us to think. Mohler only wants to indoctrinate.

    I agree.

    Talking about our stacks not being like Mohler’s stacks – actually C.J. Mahaney’s stack is quite similar to Mohler’s stack. Compare the duo’s recommended reading lists, Mohler’s published about 6 months earlier, has many of the same books as Mahaney’s:

    http://www.albertmohler.com/2013/06/07/books-for-a-summer-season-some-recommended-reading/

    http://www.girltalkhome.com/blog/cjs-christmas-book-list1

    So when the King of Humility claims that he has not had an original thought in his entire life (as he frequently does) I believe him.

  24. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    my innate skepticism

    Me, too. I think he keeps Mahaney around because Mahaney is one of the most ridiculous brown noses in evangelical history. He has, during conferences, said that Mohler is the “smartest man on the planet” and in this one he said that Mohler is the “modern day Jonathan Edwards” (which means something to this crowd.)

    People who actually have some humility would have told him to cut the nonsense a long time ago. But this crowd appears to bask in each other’s accolades.

    Seriously-think about Mahaney and then think about these statements… I would be inclined to slap him upside the head.

  25. Clay Crouch wrote:

    @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    Well, it’s obvious you haven’t seen his stack of books or the personal library in the basement of the president’s home in Louisville. Please join in a breathtaking tour of an astonishingly humble study: http://vimeo.com/groups/27420/videos/8693850

    I made the mistake of snarking about this when the blog first started. i was told that Mohler has been reading these tomes since he came out of the womb.

    This all reminds me of my neighbor’s house which is very pretty. Her front porch is so inviting. Rocking chairs with soft pillows and throws, lovely tables covered in whimsical objects with pretty flowers. It is the perfect place to while away the afternoon in sweet conversation with dear friends. Except no one ever sits there and they are never home and no neighbors sit and talk on anyone’s porch.

  26. So Deb, what kind of message do you think Mohler is sending, sent as it were, wrapped up in this SGM sponsored ‘Conviction to Lead’ conference where he shared the stage with his fellow leader CJ?

    In the video you provided the link to Mohler says, “I think we want to be and to follow convictions leadership.”

    He must view Mahaney as the kind of convictional leader he can stand by. Why is that? Because Mahaney shares Mohler’s core convictions? And what might those be? Is the fact this was a “men’s only” leadership themed conference a clue? Surely his pal CJ is all about that, that’s for sure. Is that, maybe, a core component of what Mohler means by having conviction? If so, could that possibly be the ‘virtue’ by which he continues to support Mahaney, believing, as it were, that Mahaney is a solid guy because of his strict complementarian ‘convictions’?

    I know, from my years in SGM, that Mahaney views barring women from positions of leadership in the church and in the home as a hill to die on, and he has measured his strength and effectiveness as a leader, to a large degree, on keeping it male dominated. He blames the presence of women in leadership to the effects of feminism, which he repeatedly likened to air pollution, that he and his wife were determined to eliminate from the atmosphere within the bubble of SGM. Ironically, Mahaney got his start within a group that was led by a woman, Lydia Little, whom he supplanted.

    It just seems to me that Mohler continues to share a bed with Mahaney primarily because neither of them wants to share it with a woman.

  27. I haven’t been able to find excerpts from Dr. Mohler’s latest book, but the table of contents is available at Amazon. All 25 chapters are titled with a non-biblical or twisted biblical belief Dr. Mohler has about leadership. (Eg, Leaders are Readers, Leaders are Managers, The Leader’s Legacy is to Leave a Lasting Imprint, etc). Not one chapter is entitled “Leaders are Servants” (although one chapter is titled Leadership as Stewardship…I seriously doubt it involves the leader laying down his life for his flock). Stuff like this has been fueling my desire to find out all I can about Antipas, the faithful witness of the church at Pergamum. He appears to have been within the church leadership (maybe a bishop) and likely someone prominent within the church that the flock would look up to, such that the horrific death he suffered (according to tradition) would serve as a warning to the remaining believers of the potential cost of continuing in their faith. This leadership business is serious, serious stuff. I can understand the hireling focusing on mastering digital media (chapter 21). Al, I mean Dr. Mohler, point your followers to the Great Shepherd, not to the hirelings.

  28. Evie…the only woman in SGM that can give orders and be the man of the house is Carolyn Mahaney. 😛

    Dee, Deb…I was thinking…..I can really see why SGM appeals to upper middle class individuals. When you have a privillege of owning a house, and having a family I can understand a little bit more why people are attratced to it. You have a theology system for every room of the house! From the kitchen to the bedroom…to the living room. Its a false sense of security. What does true faith have to do with television wathcing or keeping kitchen counters clean anyway?

  29. Leadership . . . I believe Jesus referred to it as being a servant . . . I think this concept was lost in translation somewhere.

  30. @ pcapastor:

    You sound like a nice man. Articulate, well spoken, ready to endure, probably kind and courageous. But I want to take issue with you. IMO paragraph one is right on. Paragraph two? Maybe not so much so. Let me pat you on your left forearm (learned that from the aforementioned malpractice carrier) while I maybe disagree a bit. This is an important, if perhaps erroneous idea, and as an informed outsider I can address the issue, leaving the rest of you able to sound nicer than I do.

    Sermon of the day, maybe. Forgive me folks. I will have no peace of heart until I say this.

    I am not a pastor or a theologian or anything of the sort. But let me tell where I am coming from to lend some level of credence to what I am about to say. This is a close up outsider’s view which, I trust, will end in a believable statement. Understand, I am a thinker. Sometimes what I think is good stuff, sometimes it misses the boat. But it comes from thinking. And I am not a professional religious thinker. There is a certain advantage to that.

    Louisville was my home town. The early years of my life were at Walnut Street Baptist Church and from childhood I listened as SBTS professor after professor would “fill the pulpit” over the years. This was way before the conservative resurgence. Then when I was in nurse’s training, still in Louisville we “mingled” with the seminary boys–who were looking for wives with, I think, an earning capacity in an approved occupation to take care of them and admire them and not rock the boat. Then when I was at the university after that I was a member of Crescent Hill Baptist Church, which was the “seminary church” at that time, while I also attended part time a school affiliated with SBTS. Still before the resurgence. During this time I went to West Africa for a short time for what the catholics would have called a time for discernment of a possible vocation in medical missions. (I am mixing baptist and catholic terminology here for the sake of clarity.)

    So, been there, seen a lot up really close, but never was comfortable with a lot of what I saw.

    Then came the resurgence. Both Walnut Street and Crescent Hill were “rejected” by the resurgence. Why? Too moderate. Too independent thinking. Fired seminary professors were thick on the ground about then. Mohler cleaned house. Restaffed the seminary. “New” churches were planted and grew. Some people flocked to the resurgence and some did not. Why? What had happened? Well, look closely at what these folks are preaching, and it just might break your heart.

    Are you so sure, pca pastor, that the biblical statement applies here? Are you sure that they are preaching Christ?

    I heard the rhetoric ad nauseum both before and after these guys seized power, and they preach a partial and watered down and almost powerless “gospel.” For example, I was 10 or 11 before I ever heard the term “Holy Spirit” (“Ghost in those days) and that was not from any Baptist. The Baptist talked about the Father and the Son and the bible, but that was it. That is still it. This is a huge omission in doctrine. I hear people on this blog say that the laity have the Holy Spirit and that somehow ought to be taken into account. That is a useless argument with these guys. That is not how they think. Ignore the occasional comment that would seem otherwise.

    I sat at the dinner table over the years and listened to my father (a lawyer and a lay bible teacher proficient in NT greek) explain and demonstrate the logical and linguistic errors of a significant amount of what was then preaching, and they are worse now than then. Forget trying to reason with these folks. They have rejected reason. And NT Wright and his kind can talk all day about what some statement in scripture actually meant at the time it was said; they don’t care what it meant. They only know what they themselves mean, and that is what counts for them.

    I heard for literally decades the scripture discussed in part (the part that they wanted to talk about) and avoided in part as though there was nothing else to be said. Never mind telling them that we all learned to read about the time our baby teeth were falling out, and we have read it for ourselves. They don’t care about any of that. It is useless argument with them. You are a threat to them when you say that.

    I saw the superficiality and self-importance of the seminary students and saw that their leaders did nothing to change that. I listened to “the boys” have long and animated discussions as to what should one do when “the Lord” furnished them with some new revelation previously not revealed to humanity. I listened to the parlor game of lets criticize and damn everything we can about all other denominations except out own (pedobaptism, liturgy, attitude, “standards”-too many or too few, clergy/lay relative position, women and work, prayer styles, how to “get saved,” everything imaginable)–if it was not their style of being baptist then it was what they felt they needed to change about the body of Christ. Is this ignorance or pride or unfair business practices? Who cares, it is damaging to other people and lethal to the practitioners of this garbage.

    They do not seem to me to be about preaching Christ. Not then and not now This is about building a business, being distinctive enough to have a unique product to sell, climbing ladders by stepping on people’s faces on the way up, “feeding” the sheep just enough to keep them alive but not enough to let them think for themselves, playing to the crowds with a really entertaining show, and as D&D continue to point out it is always and always and always about money.

    This is not about preaching Christ, pca pastor. I am sorry. They do not preach Christ out of envy–they fail to preach Christ. “The gospel” is not Christ himself, it is something about Christ, an explanation if understood correctly, but is not the very God Himself. Paul also talked to one group about his preaching in that he intended to know nothing among them except Christ and Him crucified. Paul was not dumb. We know his sermons were complicated; Peter said that Paul was sometimes difficult to understand. He was talking about priority. About nothing trumps Jesus Himself. They do not do this. To do that one cannot omit the parts of the message that one does not want to hear. To do this one cannot re-prioritize the success of the mission, if you please, to a set of numbers or an amount of money. One cannot leave people in ignorance and weakness and despair, wandering around endlessly looking for something better than cold doctrine/theology when in fact Christ himself is available and they hide Him amid their cultural this and political that and pseudo-psych whatever and simplistic the other and man-made ideas and programs and book sales.

    Listen to me. This is a heartbreaker. I think they know better and do not care. I think they have looked the very Christ in the face and said, “I don’t want to hear it. This is my show.” And one’s heart must break for the crowds, His sheep, who are still without the Shepherd’s grass and fresh water.

    OK, boys (Mohler, Mahaney et al) here is my conclusion. Bah. Humbug. God have mercy on you.

  31. “So if you are comforting yourself, ‘I have a stack,’ well you might have a stack, but if we consider the nature and content of your stack as opposed to his stack, well, your stack looks pretty sorry and pathetic.”

    This is the first time in my life where a stack of books was made to sound so pseudo-phallic. His stack is bigger than anyone’s stack?

  32. dee wrote:

    pcapastor wrote:
    Ortlund (who appears to have split at least two churches where he pastored),
    We are working on a fascinating post about a guy who destroyed an Acts 29 church and is still out there as a “certified” Acts 29 church planter. We know that Ed Stetzer’s last plant (which involved churches) went down in flames.
    Could you point me to some stuff on Ortlund? It would be fascinating to look at this in light of what we are planning to do in the near future.

    I doubt that there is any information available online, although googling just now leads to a link to a now-private video where he was asked at an Acts29 boot camp why he chose to plant with Acts29 “after having being asked to resign at a previous church.” That appears to be a reference to his tenure at Christ Presbyterian Church in Nashville, TN.

    What I do know — the neutral facts — is that he was Sr. Pastor of First Presbyterian in Augusta, GA for only a short time, and that his leadership there led to division within the church and official complaints filed against him with the presbytery by some of his own elders (that fact alone says nothing one way or the other about whether his leadership was problematic, by the way; still, it is noteworthy), before he left to become the Sr. Pastor of Christ Presbyterian in Nashville, TN. He left that pastorate, again after only a short time, to plant a new church in a different denomination IN THE SAME TOWN. Okay, putting that in all caps was not very “neutral” of me.

    I have heard the term “church splanting” (i.e. a church publicly spun as a “church plant” that is in reality a church SPLIT); and his current church appears to be a dictionary definition of a “church splant.” I do admit that I have a friend who was at Christ Presbyterian, who called Ortlund’s presence there “a disaster.”

    That being said, I would not have added Ortlund to the Confederacy of Dunces on those facts alone (being a pastor is pretty hard and we all make many mistakes that we later regret); it was his godless and public support of Mahaney that made him forever suspect in my eyes (until he publicly retracts and apologizes, that is).

  33. Mark Baker-Wright wrote:

    These no doubt won’t demonstrate me to be worthy of being president of a prominent seminary (and I’m fine with that!), but I’ll take my stack of books over Mohler’s any day.

    Hah! I like your selections. I find it very interesting to see what an individual reads.

  34. pcapastor wrote:

    I have heard the term “church splanting” (i.e. a church publicly spun as a “church plant” that is in reality a church SPLIT)

    Darn, that’s good. I know a local church in which it was a split and they billed at as a church plant.

  35. pcapastor wrote:

    it was his godless and public support of Mahaney that made him forever suspect in my eyes (until he publicly retracts and apologizes, that is).

    He won’t. Being a pastor means you never have to say that you are sorry. I know, I have seen it personally.

    None of these guys demonstrate any sort of real concern for children who are victims of child abuse. They just mouth platitudes. There is no heart behind it. And Mahaney’s “emotionalism” which he can turn on at a flash is almost laughable.

    I watched in old Law and Order last night in which an actress did the same thing. All sorts of great expressions and lots of tears. She was guilty of ordering the death of husband.

  36. @ Mark Baker-Wright: I judge you to be a prophet worthy of double honor. I love Star Trek (became a Christian during an episode) and have read every mystery ever written by Agatha Christie. You have the qualifications for being my pastor.

  37. anon 1 wrote:

    Mohler IS brilliant as a politician. 20 years later his power is so complete…. no SBC leader would dare stand up to him.

    Based on how thoroughly Mohler conducted his scorched earth purges of women and ‘liberals’, I’ll bet there’s a number of books on Stalin in that stack – and few, if any, on Christian love.

  38. Eagle wrote:

    Evie…the only woman in SGM that can give orders and be the man of the house is Carolyn Mahaney.
    Dee, Deb…I was thinking…..I can really see why SGM appeals to upper middle class individuals. When you have a privillege of owning a house, and having a family I can understand a little bit more why people are attratced to it. You have a theology system for every room of the house! From the kitchen to the bedroom…to the living room. Its a false sense of security. What does true faith have to do with television wathcing or keeping kitchen counters clean anyway?

    Wow….did you really write “what does true faith have to do with TV watching?” Sure, I mean Heaven forbid, we wouldn’t want our faith to ever interfere with our quest for entertainment (tv watching), right?

  39. @ Evie:

    “Nicole Whitacre shares how her mother actually prevented her from developing her ambitions, and instead instructed her to limit her dreams to getting married and having a family, an endeavor that nearly killed her.”
    ++++++++++++++

    sounds like a substantial story awaiting a headline.

  40. Seneca wrote:

    Gosh, another post about C.J. Mahaney. He DOES live rent free in the hearts and minds of Wartburg and their commentors. Just can’t get him out of your mind.

    The post is actually more about Mohler, but we’re all aware of your preference when it comes to leaders.

  41. @ Nancy:
    Oh my goodness Nancy you have nailed it totally. I have often thought of it as having a form of godliness with no power of the Holy Spirit. It is empty and meaningless when you cut through the veneer and celebrity.

  42. Bridget wrote:

    Seneca wrote:
    Gosh, another post about C.J. Mahaney. He DOES live rent free in the hearts and minds of Wartburg and their commentors. Just can’t get him out of your mind.

    The post is actually more about Mohler, but we’re all aware of your preference when it comes to leaders.

    Does Seneca want to have Cee Jay’s Child? (HUMBLY, of course.)

  43. dee wrote:

    I watched in old Law and Order last night in which an actress did the same thing. All sorts of great expressions and lots of tears. She was guilty of ordering the death of husband.

    Isn’t the Greek word for actor “Hypokritoi”?

  44. Steve Dawson wrote:

    This is the first time in my life where a stack of books was made to sound so pseudo-phallic. His stack is bigger than anyone’s stack?

    My stack’s probably bigger than both of theirs, but you don’t see me bragging about it. (F&SF fans tend to acquire books like you wouldn’t believe — every shelf overflowing plus stacks on the floor like we’re auditioning for Hoarders — it’s a sure sign of a fannish household.)

  45. pcapastor wrote:

    I have heard the term “church splanting” (i.e. a church publicly spun as a “church plant” that is in reality a church SPLIT);

    Regarding church splits, a Wiccan once told me that the reason covens are limited to 13 members is more than that and the coven becomes unstable; factions form, a power struggle begins between the factions and their leaders, and the coven splits. Conspiracy Theories and Secret Societies for Dummies (actual book, good read) calls this “Ten guys in socks chanting in someone’s living room syndrome”.

  46. Ken wrote:

    Not surprisingly, the conference appears to have been a MEN ONLY event based on Mohler’s recorded remarks.

    Don’t go into the women’s restrooms…

  47. Nancy wrote:

    Listen to me. This is a heartbreaker. I think they know better and do not care. I think they have looked the very Christ in the face and said, “I don’t want to hear it. This is my show.”

    Many years ago, one of my writing partners gave me a book titled Antichrist, about the archetype(s) of Antichrist through Christian history.

    Nancy, what you just stated above fits one of the archetypes EXACTLY. This archetype was Antichrist as a tragic figure, one who does much good in the world but is then confronted by Christ and says in return “GET LOST! MY WILL BE DONE!” And it is at that point that he becomes THE Antichrist.

  48. Eagle wrote:

    What does true faith have to do with television wathcing or keeping kitchen counters clean anyway?

    “What does God need with a starship?”
    — Mr Spock

  49. dee wrote:

    I made the mistake of snarking about this when the blog first started. i was told that Mohler has been reading these tomes since he came out of the womb.

    I thought only Dear Leader Comrade Kim-Jong Il (or Beloved Leader Comrade Kim Jong-Un) could do things like that right out of the womb…

  50. @ pcapastor:

    LOL…small world!!! First Presybyterian of Augusta?!?

    http://firstpresaugusta.org/

    I have a close friend who goes there, when I’ve visited him I’ve attended there. Been there twice. I attended a wedding there. LOL

    How do these things cross my path I must ask?!?

  51. Though to be fair…if I was going to be reformed…I'd go to a Presbyterian Church over an Acts 29/SGM church anyday. To play on what CS Lewis has said about playing with puddles when you could swim in the ocean.

    Why go to a fast food (Acts29/SGM) when you could go to a steakhouse (Ruth Chris 😛 )?

  52. @ Alan:

    Going forward I think I'll call CJ Mahaney "The Humble One who Blackmails". Going forward "The Humble One who Blackmails" has issued guidance on the Biblical way to hold a TV remote. His wife (Carolyn) who I would suggest is the real man of the house has issued guidance on what the counters should look like.

    Gospel Living eh?

  53. __

    Yes!…this sounds like a fumble at the short end of a religious 501c3 bathtub, if you ask me:

    http://vimeo.com/groups/27420/videos/8693850

    huh?

    knowledge puffs up; love edifies?

    hmmm…

    …change you’re coffee beans C.J., your ‘library space’ is beginning to smell.

    (grin)

    hahahahahaha 

    *

    …it’s not the books that worry the religious downtrodden, it is the individual actions of unscrupulous 501c3 religious men.

    (sadface)

    …always learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth?

    From such hypocrites, should real Christians withdraw?

    could b.

    Sopy

  54. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Mine is too. Mostly about faith, the Bible (2 complete sets of commentaries by baptist/evangelical scholars, plus hundreds of other commentaries and analyses), etc. A little study of Hebrew and more of Greek and I have both on my computer, including one dictionary that lists various time periods of Greek use of various words. And all read. However, I do not retain what I consider to repetitive, trite, inane, etc., which covers most of the books by the people we discuss here. Mohler’s writing is a textbook case of how to talk down to people, which he does when speaking.

  55. @ Janet Varin:

    “All 25 chapters are titled with a non-biblical or twisted biblical belief Dr. Mohler has about leadership.”
    +++++++++++++++++

    leadership schmeadership… to me, this is as mindlessly trendy as the boys in my jr. high, circa 1979, and their feathered hair, comb in their back pocket (daywear), and the shiny big collared shirts unbuttoned a few times with cuffs turned up once or twice, and angels’ flight pants with the seam down the middle of each pant leg they all wore to the school dances (scared out of their wits, but trying desperately to be relevant).

    (anyone willing to admit they wore these back in the day? or a scarier question: in powder blue???)

    actually, I feel a good deal of compassion for my 12-year old male peers from so long ago.

    but not so much for this modern-day adult male version. in my view, it began as a tactic for selling the idea of female submission and calming (or suppressing) resistance to it.

    in time, it has become something of a tactic for those with culturally christian power for suppressing all resistance to themselves from their underlings. and now the conforming pastor masses are mindlessly copying the trend, language & all. (just the culturally Christian version of “excellent!” [1976], “cool” [all eras], “rad” [1981], “she’s hella fine” [1983], [“totally” [1984], “‘tsup?” [1987], “not” [1987], things like “gromit” and “skank” …..at that point i think i got too busy to notice these things)
    —–

    having said that, skilled leadership is necessary. but being a servant won’t lead anyone. i dare say the bible is no guidebook on leadership.

    and having said that… I’ve lost my train of thought.

  56. This post prompted a couple of thoughts. My husband often refers to me as smarter than him because I have college degrees and he doesn't. I remind him that I am not smarter — just more educated. Just because Al Mohler is educated and reads alot doesn't mean he's smart…

    This fall I started attending a small United Methodist church in our community. The church had Trunk or Treat on Trick or Treat night as a way to serve the community. The pastor was there — directing the traffic. Now that's a real pastor! So different than SGM where I never saw a pastor serve in any capacity other than "teaching"

  57.   __

    “Dog Pile?”

    hmmm…

    @ formerly anonymous

    Tha’s it !  …with these proverbial professional 501c3 religious rabid righteous ‘rukussters’…all others have been classified with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.

    Pick up da pieces?

    Ahhah…

    -snort-

    ;~)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tHov269Ky0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    But you shall receive power, after the Holy Ghost has come upon you: and you shall be witnesses unto me…unto the uttermost part of the earth! ~Jesus

    …wait. for it!

    Yehaaaaaaa!

    Sopy
    ___
    Intermission: Candy Dulfer – “Pick Up The Pieces” (Parts 1 & 2)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgQQ7k30Ti4&feature=youtube_gdata_player
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tnnfo8hPwok&feature=youtube_gdata_player

  58. Deb wrote:

    Why do they need so many books when the inspired book is all sufficient?

    Great point Deb! And it begs an inconvenient question. If Scripture is as perspicuous as claimed by the reformers (Luther, Calvin, et. al.), why then is so much currency given to an army of preachers and theologians over the last 500 years or so for telling us what they say it means?

  59. OK, OK, OK. What does a former SG pastor’s stack look like? Here’s mine:

    21-Day Weight Loss Kickstart – Neal Barnard
    Star Spangled Buddhist – Jeff Ourvan
    The Dresden Files Collection 1 – Jim Butcher
    The Heart of the Revolution – Noah Levine
    This Machine Kills Secrets – Andy Greenberg
    Tinkering – Curt Gabrielson
    BLS for Healthcare Proviers – American Heart Association
    Eagle Against the Sun – Ronald Spector
    Just One Thing – Rick Hanson
    Buddha’s Brain – Rick Hanson
    The Great Divorce – CS Lewis
    Inferno – Max Hastings
    Junk Yard Dogs – Craig Johnson
    Let’s Explore Diabetes with Owls – David Sederis

    Let the psychoanalysis begin!

    You can see I was an odd-shaped peg they couldn’t fit into their square box,
    Former SG Pastor

  60. @ Evie:

    Your comment immediately brought to mind those remarks by Mohler in that first Courier-Journal article:

    Mohler added: “Any time you’re going to take on the role of leadership, you’re going to have critics.”

    Mohler also supported Sovereign Grace’s highly centralized leadership structure in its churches, with “very strong pastoral direction” and internal discipline.

    “It’s something clearly called for in the New Testament,” he said.

    Mohler said he knew this practice has had online critics for years.

    “Basically there are people who are very uncomfortable with the strong kind of spiritual direction that comes through the Sovereign Grace Ministries,” Mohler said. “It’s very hard to criticize it on biblical terms, as you’ll see on most of those Web sites. It basically comes down to the criticism, ‘I don’t like that.’”

    Mohler and Mahaney must be cut from the same cloth.

     

  61. __

    “Stale-Mate: When Living Water Goes Rancid?”

    hmmm…

    SGM has proverbially stated ad nauseam, that anyone who reads the bible needs a spiritual bib, which, by the way, they are more than happy to provide. (why am I not surprised)

    What?

    FROM THE PULPIT, SGM has instructed its members that they need leadership to interpret the Bible for them…

    (So scary)

    wake me up when dis proverbial horror ‘movie’ is over…

    hum, hum, hum…

    We all live in a yellow SGM submarine…a yellow SGM submarine…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqx2KG_kIX4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Lego of my faith, Eh?

    (Sadface)

    Sopy
    ___
    Comic relief: ‘Huey Lewis and the News’ – I want a new SGM?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1ku4QUhoXk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

  62. @ Evie:

    Carolyn’s brother, Grant Layman, did not join the team going to Louisville and is still at CLC (correct me if wrong). Carolyn’s sister Janice Dillon and her husband are no longer part of SGM. And didn’t CJ’s brother attend CLC for a time, then leave?

    I am not part of the inner circle. But these situations make me wonder about the real Mahaney family dynamics. Are they really strong and close????

  63. @ elizabeth: There are some secondary issues lurking in the background that most likely have something to do with the lawsuit.

    The kids and spouses are all together with the Mahaney’s and they do take advantage of trips to DisneyWorld. I tend to keep an eye on Girltalk and they are very, very supportive of dad.

  64. FSGP wrote:

    Let’s Explore Diabetes with Owls – David Sederis

    That is too funny! I loved The Great Divorce.FSGP wrote:

    21-Day Weight Loss Kickstart – Neal Barnard

    Let me know if this works.

  65. @ dee

      __

    “Tears For Religious Fears – Should We Shout?”

    hmmm…

    Dee,

    HowDee!

    (ditto!)

    http://www.ftdimg.com/pics/products/GE80_330x370.jpg

    “Kick the Tires Light the Fires…”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F1bMG9wzXY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    *

    Skreeeeeeetch! Bump!

    Crash!

    (sadface)

    One shouldn’t have to protect an  impoverished soul in a church pew from pastorally checkered minds, huh?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI9lo5BRJmg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Shout, shout, people let it all out, 

    SGM is one of the things we can certainly do without…

    Come on – I’m talking to you!

    Come on 

    (X 2)

    Jesus gave us  life, and in return SGM gave them Hell; I hope we live to tell the tale…

    (sadface)

    *

    Mucho Blessings, Dee!

    Sopy
    ___
    Bonus: Wartburg Blackbirds Fly!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZIGKwhQ8dw&feature=youtube_gdata_player

  66. FSGP wrote:

    Let’s Explore Diabetes with Owls – David Sederis

    Did that contain any useful info, or is it just a surrealist title? Eg, was he talking about overweight owls at increased risk of Type 2, or owls with the auto-immune Type 1 (like me)?

    In other news, I may need some jelly-babies in 10 minutes or so (it’s difficult to gauge the glycaemic load of home-made pizza, so I may have overdone the insulin).

  67. Deb wrote:

    Basically there are people who are very uncomfortable with the strong kind of spiritual direction that comes through the Sovereign Grace Ministries,” Mohler said. “It’s very hard to criticize it on biblical terms…

    And Mahaney thinks this chappie has unprecedented intellectual ability?

    Odds bodkins.

    In other news, the earth is flat, not spherical. It’s very hard to criticise this on biblical terms, so opposition to this ancient truth which you often find on scientific blogs just comes down to, we don’t like that.

  68. numo wrote:

    @ Nick Bulbeck: the author is a humorist, and I believe the title is a ‘misheard’ version of something quite different.

    Nick, what Numo said. I like that kind of humor on occasion. I’m listening to the audio version, which is easier to do than listening to the print version.

    Regards,
    FSGP

  69. dee wrote:

    FSGP wrote:
    Let’s Explore Diabetes with Owls – David Sederis
    That is too funny! I loved The Great Divorce.FSGP wrote:
    21-Day Weight Loss Kickstart – Neal Barnard
    Let me know if this works.

    Dee – Yeah, I’m doing a close reading of GD/CSL with a good friend. We just finished Brian McLaren’s latest, which was almost as fun as a root canal without pain relief. CSL is a welcome relief (BTW, the anniversary of Lewis’s death is tomorrow, the same day as JFK and Alduous Huxley).

    The 21-Day-er so far seems to be “Don’t do animal products but do everything else”. If that is the direction after a few more pages, the book will be a quick scan and then off the stack.

    So many books, so little time,
    Former SG Pastor

  70. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    t’s difficult to gauge the glycaemic load of home-made pizza, so I may have overdone the insulin).

    Do I need to contact the medical authorities. That is all TWW needs. Can you imagine the Neo-Calvinist media-TWW causes diabetic coma.

  71. dee wrote:

    When my husband and I were teaching, someone made the comment to him that I was teaching under his covering.

    Were they aware that the “covering” language comes from the shepherding movement?

  72. Eagle wrote:

    @ Alan:
    Going forward I think I’ll call CJ Mahaney “The Humble One who Blackmails”. Going forward “The Humble One who Blackmails” has issued guidance on the Biblical way to hold a TV remote. His wife (Carolyn) who I would suggest is the real man of the house has issued guidance on what the counters should look like.
    Gospel Living eh?

    You might find this blog post of interest:

    http://sgmanalysis.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/c-j-mahaney-teaches-on-the-priority-of-gospel-unity-a-priority-for-only-for-others-but-not-c-j-mahaney/

    Interesting how C.J. Mahaney has the audacity to teach on humility such as Phil 2 but has practiced it so little.

  73. (off topic)

    Driscoll seems to have gotten angry at Christian radio host Janet Mefferd in today’s show.

    Driscoll got very, very testy with Mefferd and hung up on Mefferd.

    Mefferd pressed Driscoll on his lack of citation in one of his new books, and he got highly snotty with her, you could hear it in his voice. He was condescending to Mefferd.

    I don’t think Driscoll is accustomed to people standing up to him as Mefferd was doing to him.

    Mefferd mentioned after the show break that she got hate mail from Driscoll fans about how she was supposedly “rude” to Driscoll.

    Mefferd read one of her hate mails, and the person made a point of telling her she is an “arrogant female.”

    She also took a phone call from an irate Driscoll fan named Mike who is chewing her out pretty passionately, saying she was rude to Driscoll. Mike says she should not criticize a “national pastor” like that, not on a radio show.

    Mefferd said she was approached by Driscoll’s people about him being on her show, she did not invite him.

    I’m puzzled by Driscoll’s habit of creating controversy regularly, he tries (he seeks after riling people up) to get people angry at him, but when he gets blow back or opposition, he has a hissy fit and hangs up on people.

    What’s that expression about ‘he can dish it out but he can’t take it.’

    Driscoll is such a baby. Goodness. For someone who goes on and on about being a “real man” he acts like a petulant child. He cannot take questioning or criticism from a grown woman.

    You can listen to Driscoll’s tantrum and snit fit here:
    Janet Mefferd Show-11/21/2013 – Driscoll has hissy fit hangs up on Mefferd after she questions him

    Aw, I’ve listened to more and Mefferd is starting to break up and cry on air (her voice is breaking up). Aw. She’s very upset about all this 🙁

    I don’t always agree with Mefferd on everything, but she seems like a very nice lady and a sincere Christian, so I don’t like hearing her upset.

    (Mefferd is saying Driscoll quoted some guy she knows for fourteen pages of Driscoll’s book, without crediting the guy.)

    I am on Team Mefferd on this one. Driscoll is an egotistical bully, and that came across in the interview. She did get one or two callers who supported her.

  74. elizabeth wrote:

    @ Evie:

    Carolyn’s brother, Grant Layman, did not join the team going to Louisville and is still at CLC (correct me if wrong). Carolyn’s sister Janice Dillon and her husband are no longer part of SGM. And didn’t CJ’s brother attend CLC for a time, then leave?

    I am not part of the inner circle. But these situations make me wonder about the real Mahaney family dynamics. Are they really strong and close????

    That’s true Elizabeth, Grant remained with CLC. Carolyn has several siblings and Grant & Janice both used to be loyal to CJ & SGM, but not anymore. I’m not sure where Grant is in terms of his thinking, but I’m guessing some things have changed. Grant is a nice guy, but he was definitely a heavy kool-aid drinker as well as a dispenser. His wife was a POD Person, too. Janice and her husband who used to live next door to CJ & Carolyn moved on long ago. They were affected by the CJ/Larry split, and I don’t think Roger Dillon thought too much of CJ after that.

    I’d say CJ is more protective of the relationships he has with his siblings and Carolyn probably didn’t raise any objections to her siblings getting the shaft. If they weren’t going to follow and support her husband 100% then what good were they anyway? Poor Carolyn has dutifully followed CJ as though he were Jesus Christ. Now she’s got hell to pay.

  75. Nicholas wrote:

    WOW. Driscoll also complained after being interviewed by Justin Brierly of Unbelievable? as well.

    It did occur to me after I made my post about Driscoll appearing on Mefferd’s show that yes, he acted poorly towards the British radio host, too.

    Driscoll did tell Mefferd twice in the interview that he has the flu. If his rude behavior towards Mefferd can be contributed at all to having a fever sore throat or whatever, he should have not done the interview. He should have asked if he could reschedule.

    But I’m inclined to believe he was being rude to Mefferd because that is just his personality, because he’s been that way towards other radio hosts and other people.

  76. Daisy wrote:

    But I’m inclined to believe he was being rude to Mefferd because that is just his personality, because he’s been that way towards other radio hosts and other people.

    Just Driscoll being Driscoll, as usual. 🙁

  77. Daisy wrote:

    She also took a phone call from an irate Driscoll fan named Mike who is chewing her out pretty passionately, saying she was rude to Driscoll. Mike says she should not criticize a “national pastor” like that, not on a radio show.

    Personality cult. Emphasis on the word “cult.”

    Btw, what on earth is a “national pastor?” Is Driscoll a pastor to the nation?

  78. @ Daisy:

    He was rude! He personally attacked her saying she was accusatory and unkind, and childishly suggested she was having a bad day. He continued to obfuscate everything she asked him a question and changed the subject suggestion his agenda was far superior and more spiritual than hers. Rude and condescending. And I got the feeling he wasn’t being honest about the Strange Fire event. She asked if Driscoll had contacted them beforehand. He answers by saying he put something out on social media, so of course they would have known. But that’s not the same thing. He showed up. Unannounced. And was rude. Isn’t there a verse that says they’ll know we are Christians by our love, and that love is not rude? Ugh, that guy is a MENACE!

  79. @ Daisy:

    Daisy it seems she was breaking app over the fact that a man that she highly revers…. called a great gentleman and a scholar…. had his intellectual property stolen by Mark Driscoll for 14 pages. She made the point and I so agree withthis…….. we simply must stand up for people. Mark called her some things that were totally inappropriate. He called her rude and and Christ like

  80. @ pcapastor:

    Well he got nailed in one lie. He told her he was trying to do her a favor by being on her show. But she said his publicist called to ask for him to be on the show.. he is not aging gracefully or with more wisdom
    .. his bad boy act not playing as well in his forties is it

  81. Daisy wrote:

    You can listen to Driscoll’s tantrum and snit fit here:
    Janet Mefferd Show-11/21/2013 – Driscoll has hissy fit hangs up on Mefferd after she questions him

    Wow, I just listened to a strong, articulate man of great conviction and his name is Janet Mefferd.

  82. Daisy wrote:

    Mefferd read one of her hate mails, and the person made a point of telling her she is an “arrogant female.”

    Call her what you want, I am a huge fan of hers. I wish more Christians would start confronting these “leaders” on their unethical practices. Clearly they can’t handle criticism. They (authoritative Christian leaders) surround themselves with fawning yes-men, so are unaccustomed to it.

  83. The first caller after the interview compares it to Christ (apparently represented by Driscoll) being “attacked by a Pharisee” (referring to Janet Mefferd). Then he refers to the “enemy” as “people who hate Mark Driscoll.”

  84. Nicholas wrote:

    Were they aware that the “covering” language comes from the shepherding movement?

    I once heard a Bible teacher declare that the only way Esther could do what she did was because she was under Mordecai’s “covering”.

  85. Nicholas wrote:

    Btw, what on earth is a “national pastor?”

    I’m pretty sure the caller used the term “national pastor,” but if not, he was at least conveying the idea that because Driscoll is super, super famous, and a preacher, that he should not be under public scrutiny or should not be criticized.

    Rosebrough discussed the Driscoll-Mefferd incident, and he replayed portions of their exchange:
    Allegations That Mark Driscoll Plagiarized Dr. Peter Jones

    Upon hearing the interview again, I noticed that Driscoll likes to refer to himself in the third person a lot…

    “Mark Driscoll loves Jesus! Mark Driscoll loves you! Mark Driscoll loves the Gospel! Mark Driscoll lives in Seattle! Mark Driscoll eats peanut butter sandwiches!”

  86. WenatcheeTheHatchet wrote:

    Haven’t heard the entire audio just yet, is the publicist named?

    I don’t believe the P.R. person was named.

    I listened to the interview several times on Mefferd’s site – mostly because my internet connection is “iffy” this evening, forcing me to listen and re-listen to it over and over until I got through the whole thing.

    I don’t remember Mefferd giving a specific name, I think she just said something like, “Driscoll’s people contacted me,” or “Driscoll’s team,” or “Driscoll’s PR” -some generic phrase.

    After having read through other people’s posts above, I agree with you all. I thought Driscoll was rude to her.

    My theory is that Driscoll he was rude because he does not like being confronted or corrected by anyone.

    I think Driscoll is used to getting unquestioned compliance at his church all the time. If you usually do not run into criticism from those in your daily life, it’s harder to take criticism when you do get it elsewhere.

    Well, he’s also just usually rude and arrogant anyway, there is that factor.

  87. Daisy wrote:

    I’ve listened to more and Mefferd is starting to break up and cry on air (her voice is breaking up). Aw. She’s very upset about all this

    Really?

    She let that bully get under her skin?

    Well, I hope she doesn’t let it bother her for too long. I hope she analyzes what happened and will come to terms with the fact that you can’t reason with a bully who thinks he is wise when he is not.

    Proverbs 29:9 When a wise man has a controversy with a foolish man, The foolish man either rages or laughs, and there is no rest.

  88. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Evie:

    “Nicole Whitacre shares how her mother actually prevented her from developing her ambitions, and instead instructed her to limit her dreams to getting married and having a family, an endeavor that nearly killed her.”
    ++++++++++++++

    sounds like a substantial story awaiting a headline.

    Here’s an excerpt from an article Nicole Whitacre wrote for CBMW: http://cbmw.org/uncategorized/future-homemakers/

    Sure, I wanted to get married and have kids someday and have a home of my own, but I lacked a biblical understanding and vision of the importance and priority of my future calling. However, Mom did not allow me to remain ignorant for long. Through Scripture, hours of conversations, and helpful books, she presented to me the noble calling of a homemaker and its powerful effect in the world.

    And then there’s this…
    http://www.girltalkhome.com/blog/Extraordinary_For_Its_Ordinariness
    …and this…
    http://www.girltalkhome.com/blog/Tori_Me

    After complications after her first pregnancy, her second one was high risk and life threatening. So that’s why they ended up adopting. Now all the Mahaney girls have the same number of children their mother had. Wonder if any of them will attempt to best her? I’m sure Carolyn would discourage that as best she could using “scripture and long hours of conversation…”

  89. @ Mara:

    I’m not exactly sure what caused her to tear up.

    Mefferd later went on to explain to the audience (after Driscoll hung up) that the guy who was seemingly ripped off by Driscoll is a good friend of hers (or she respects the guy a lot), and it really bothers her that he was being not getting the credit due him.

    I think maybe she was upset on her friend’s behalf and not necessarily because Driscoll was being a bully.

    I’m not clear on how much, if any, his bullying played in the matter.

    She rebounded pretty fast, though. When rude people called her shortly after defending Driscoll, she stood up to them.

  90. All in all, the interview was pretty hilarious. Classic Driscoll name dropping. “Peter Jones is actually a friend of mine” and then he threw in, “his wife is really great too.” So that justifies plagiarizing 13 or 14 pages worth of stuff.

    That ‘ol Mefferd gal just doesn’t get it. Doesn’t she realize it’s all about Jesus? And Driscoll only did her the favor of the interview so they could talk about the gospel?

  91. well, it looks like Justin Dean is still at the top for communications and PR but it’s not certain he was the one who brokered the interview.

  92. I pinned a term of what is being taught most often now, postmodern patriarchialism. Basically submit to the elders in your church in response to postmodernism in the culture. I was reading Daniel Juster’s article in the newsletter Tikkun on about how “touch not thy anointed” can be so misused.

  93. TW wrote:

    … I am a huge fan of [Janet Mefferd]. I wish more Christians would start confronting these “leaders” on their unethical practices. Clearly they can’t handle criticism. They (authoritative Christian leaders) surround themselves with fawning yes-men, so are unaccustomed to it.

    I’ve not listed to enough of Mefferd’s shows to be a huge fan, but I’ve a lot of time for the stuff I have heard.

    Be which as it may, TW’s point is a very good one. The fans of celebrity (or “national”) pastors are actually among their greatest liabilities when you view it from an eternal perspective. They think they’re being loyal, but actually they’re depriving their heroes of the very thing that might save them in the [infinitely] long run!

    Humour me for a second here. Let’s suppose, just for a minute, that we actually believed all that **** in the Bible about God, heaven, eternal life and so on. That would mean that the first really would be last and the last first, like Jesus said. So those who gorge themselves on the good things of this life at the expense of others really will catch it, like the fool in Proverbs who reflects despairingly on his hatred of correction and discipline in his youth.

    Now, of course, if Fiscal and his ilk are unrepentant narcissists then obviously they would not listen to correction in any realistic circumstances. But their fans are trying to deny them the chance.

  94.   __

    “Ride the SBC Sea-Saw?”

    hmmm…

    Utilizing The Highest Sense Of Discernment When Affiliating With Groups And Or Individuals That Possess Questionable Policies And Practices In Protecting Our Children From Criminal Abuse?

    What?

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zMiJ3bVnxk4/UTfC3RyKz1I/AAAAAAAABi4/TxtuzGetB_Y/s1600/Cute-Chimpanzees.jpg

    Stephanie: “I’m not familiar with resolutions… are they binding when they’re passed by the SBC?”
    ~ Stephanie Usrey 20-11-2013, 23:56

    Max: “…SBC resolutions are only binding if Southern Baptists are bound and determined for them to be so. For example: at this year’s 2013 annual convention, the messengers passed a resolution “On Sexual Abuse Of Children”. 

        That resolution encouraged “all denominational leaders and employees of the Southern Baptist Convention to utilize the highest sense of discernment in affiliating with groups and or individuals that possess questionable policies and practices in protecting our children from criminal abuse…” 

        In the ensuing months, certain SBC leaders have maintained an active affiliation with a non-SBC ministry head under legal scrutiny for unproven allegations of covering up sexual abuse of children by members of his ministry…”
    ~ Max 21-11-2013, 10:57

    *

    Listen to the religious tide slowly turning,
    Jesus, wash all our heartaches away!
    We’re part of the Holy Spirit’s fire that is burning deep within us,
    And from His renewal we can build another day? **

    hmmm…

    Has the SBC sunshine we’ve been waiting for, turn’d ta rain?

    (sadface)

    “My hope is deferred, my heart is faint, yet when Jesus comes, the tree of life, He will bring!

    In that day,

    …fainting of the heart,

    will be no more!

    (grin)

    Yehaaaaaaaa!

    Shine! Jesus, Shine!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDpzzqhBcCM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Sopy 
    ___
    Reference(s):
    Quotes: http://sbctoday.com/2013/11/19/preaching-at-southern-seminary-by-dr-eric-hankins/

    Comic relief: The Moody Blues – Ride My See-Saw  (Nokia Theatre, Los Angeles CA 11/1/13)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYJL1dofGT0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    **Moody Blues, ‘Story In Your Eyes’ Lyrics © : EMI Music Publishing, Cheshire Music ; Songwriter: Justin Hayward. All rights reserved. (lyrics reflect parody adaptation, disclaimer: U.S. Title 17 infringement unintended.)

    The Moody Blues – The Story In Your Eyes (Nokia Theatre, Los Angeles CA 11/1/13)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZS__1m9P9ZY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    ;~)

  95. @ Daisy:

    I noticed that Driscoll likes to refer to himself in the third person a lot

    Mark Driscoll wants the Precious! We hates the Blog Queens! We hates them FOREVER! Gollum! Gollum!

  96. Listening to the Mefford show, if she is right, it is plagiarism (even if unintentional – but 14 pages?) and he should have owned up to it.

    Mark Driscoll should have owned up to this. He could easily have thanked her and said it looked like a mistake and he would look into it.

    Where I work, somebody was doing something similar and was struck off from his clinical practice. It’s a serious issue – why should a secular organisation have higher standards than a Christian leader?

    I can see why Janet Mefford was upset about this – we all should be.

  97. Daisy wrote:

    If his rude behavior towards Mefferd can be contributed at all to having a fever sore throat or whatever, he should have not done the interview.

    One more excuse for acting like a jerk. A real man in his definition should be a stand up guy but poor little Markie can’t because he is Markie.

  98. Wow, that guy is about the farthest example from Christian humility and graciousness I’ve ever seen.

    I’m hoping Peter Jones will chime in. Curious to see if he echoes the same degree of closeness and friendship as MD implied.

    I’m also wondering what Tyndale House Publishing will have to say, as MD basically threw that editorial staff under (off?) the bus in blaming them for dropping a footnote.

  99. Daisy wrote:

    My theory is that Driscoll he was rude because he does not like being confronted or corrected by anyone.

    This one is potentially more than that. This could be a legal situation.

  100. TW wrote:

    Call her what you want, I am a huge fan of hers. I wish more Christians would start confronting these “leaders” on their unethical practices. Clearly they can’t handle criticism. They (authoritative Christian leaders) surround themselves with fawning yes-men, so are unaccustomed to it.

    Guys like Driscoll cannot handle criticism. They live in their own fiefdom where their word is law and anyone who disagrees is bullied into submission or kicked out and the rest of the sheeple support whatever their Fearless Leader says and does. The result is that these guys inevitably end up preaching a gospel that is so far from the Gospel that it is unrecognizable because there is no one in their little world that dares raise any questions.

    But that doesn’t work in the wider world where you will get questions and you will need to defend your actions and beliefs to people who don’t think you walk on water and who you can’t bully into submission. And when these bullying tactics don’t work in the real world they are dumbfounded to discover the rest of the world doesn’t believe their every word is equivalent to the word of God (as befits a ‘national pastor’) so they hang up and pout like a five year old. Then they go on to pronounce to their dupes that it’s the word of God that’s under attack and he is suffering for the faith just like Jesus, and their followers buy it hook, line, and sinker because they’re so deluded they can’t see that it’s actually their Fearless Leader who’s the ‘Pharisee’.

  101. Lucy Pevensie wrote:

    I’m also wondering what Tyndale House Publishing will have to say, as MD basically threw that editorial staff under (off?) the bus in blaming them for dropping a footnote.

    Note to Driscoll: Taking 14 pages of someone else’s work requires more than a footnote.

  102. Haven’t yet listened to the Driscoll’s drama on Janet Mefferd’s show. Will try to do so while doing the dishes tomorrow.

    Janet Varin wrote:

    Wow, I just listened to a strong, articulate man of great conviction and his name is Janet Mefferd.

    …. I wonder whether Janet would consider that a compliment. I can’t help but think back to Tony Miano’s appearance on her show. She seemed awfully sympathetic to him, and his notion that women shouldn’t be allowed to teach men at all. That doing so “sacrifices their God-given femininity”. What would Tony say now, I wonder? Would he call Janet a “manly woman”, as he did to Julie Anne Smith?

    (Apologies in advance if any consider this a topic derail. I don’t mean to slag Janet Mefferd, either. I respect her very much for bringing attention to sexual abuse in the church. Still, her agreement with Miano’s chauvinism baffles me. Especially when she’s obviously willing to stand up to men who are in the wrong.)

  103. Hester wrote:

    @ Daisy:
    I noticed that Driscoll likes to refer to himself in the third person a lot
    Mark Driscoll wants the Precious! We hates the Blog Queens! We hates them FOREVER! Gollum! Gollum!

    Lord Voldemort is merciful…

  104. @ Daisy:

    You are right, Daisy, her tearing up had nothing to do with Driscoll’s bulliness. It had to do with his sin of theft of intellectual property and the hurt it may have caused her friend. I should have known she was way tough enough to deal with Driscoll’s shenanigans.

    Btw, both Mefferd and Driscoll claim Dr. Jones as a friend.
    Will the real friend of Dr. Jones please stand up?

  105. Plagiarism is grounds for dismissal from enrollment in some universities today. I’m the parent of two college students and of one concurrent high school/college student. The “no plagiarism” policy is clearly laid out and emphasized at the beginning of classes, as well as stated in the student handbooks. Many high schools have their own strict policies. The composition class my middle school student is taking also has clear policies, although not as strict, since children at that age are still learning what constitutes plagiarism, and how to properly cite sources, credit quotations, and even give due credit for an idea that they are presenting that is not original to them. Mark Driscoll apparently did not benefit from basic research skills and composition classes in school, or he would have gotten permission from the other author and correctly given credit to him within the text, as well as stating that the ideas were used with his permission. He should have also included the complete publishing information of the original work which contained the idea. I didn’t grasp if the fourteen pages were a direct quote, or a clear communication of someone else’s idea, but it should be credited, regardless. Driscoll’s publisher should be livid with him for non-disclosure, as this could be a legal issue for them. Driscoll should have taken ownership of the decision to not properly give credit and he at least would look like an adult in this instance. Instead, he acted more immature than a middle school student.

  106. @ Daisy:

    Thanks for posting that interview, Daisy. I just finished listening. It’s amazing…I feel beat up by Driscoll just listening to how he interfaced with Ms. Mefferd.

    I wonder if this is a taste of the kind of “biblical and pastoral” counseling one would likely receive from him (or the elders at his church) if one should do the unthinkable–question a pastor’s behavior?

  107. I’m just wondering how much the gender of the interviewer played into the responses and results of the interview between Janet and Mark. Janet was persistent with her agenda. Mark had his own agenda. The two agendas didn’t mingle well.

    I have to say that it was the first time I experienced a pastor hanging up on someone. I wonder what Driscoll’s reaction would be if the table had been turned and someone hung up on him . . . say a member or elder? I don’t think this is the end of this episode.

    On another note, now we have pastors AND National Pastors? Is every believer to submit to the National Pastor as well? When will the fame seeking end?

  108. Bridget wrote:

    On another note, now we have pastors AND National Pastors? Is every believer to submit to the National Pastor as well?

    Well, Commanders of Gilead have to have a Supreme Commander of Gilead on a Supreme Throne giving orders directly from GAWD. The Universe Cannot Have Two Centers; let the Game of Thrones begin…

  109. Steve240 wrote:

    Interesting how C.J. Mahaney has the audacity to teach on humility such as Phil 2 but has practiced it so little.

    Rank Hath Its Privileges.

    Just ask the Pigs of Animal Farm.

  110. Nancy wrote:

    @ pcapastor:
    You sound like a nice man. Articulate, well spoken, ready to endure, probably kind and courageous. But I want to take issue with you. IMO paragraph one is right on. Paragraph two? Maybe not so much so. Let me pat you on your left forearm (learned that from the aforementioned malpractice carrier) while I maybe disagree a bit. This is an important, if perhaps erroneous idea, and as an informed outsider I can address the issue, leaving the rest of you able to sound nicer than I do.
    Sermon of the day, maybe. Forgive me folks. I will have no peace of heart until I say this.
    I am not a pastor or a theologian or anything of the sort. But let me tell where I am coming from to lend some level of credence to what I am about to say. This is a close up outsider’s view which, I trust, will end in a believable statement. Understand, I am a thinker. Sometimes what I think is good stuff, sometimes it misses the boat. But it comes from thinking. And I am not a professional religious thinker. There is a certain advantage to that.
    Louisville was my home town. The early years of my life were at Walnut Street Baptist Church and from childhood I listened as SBTS professor after professor would “fill the pulpit” over the years. This was way before the conservative resurgence. Then when I was in nurse’s training, still in Louisville we “mingled” with the seminary boys–who were looking for wives with, I think, an earning capacity in an approved occupation to take care of them and admire them and not rock the boat. Then when I was at the university after that I was a member of Crescent Hill Baptist Church, which was the “seminary church” at that time, while I also attended part time a school affiliated with SBTS. Still before the resurgence. During this time I went to West Africa for a short time for what the catholics would have called a time for discernment of a possible vocation in medical missions. (I am mixing baptist and catholic terminology here for the sake of clarity.)
    So, been there, seen a lot up really close, but never was comfortable with a lot of what I saw.
    Then came the resurgence. Both Walnut Street and Crescent Hill were “rejected” by the resurgence. Why? Too moderate. Too independent thinking. Fired seminary professors were thick on the ground about then. Mohler cleaned house. Restaffed the seminary. “New” churches were planted and grew. Some people flocked to the resurgence and some did not. Why? What had happened? Well, look closely at what these folks are preaching, and it just might break your heart.
    Are you so sure, pca pastor, that the biblical statement applies here? Are you sure that they are preaching Christ?
    I heard the rhetoric ad nauseum both before and after these guys seized power, and they preach a partial and watered down and almost powerless “gospel.” For example, I was 10 or 11 before I ever heard the term “Holy Spirit” (“Ghost in those days) and that was not from any Baptist. The Baptist talked about the Father and the Son and the bible, but that was it. That is still it. This is a huge omission in doctrine. I hear people on this blog say that the laity have the Holy Spirit and that somehow ought to be taken into account. That is a useless argument with these guys. That is not how they think. Ignore the occasional comment that would seem otherwise.
    I sat at the dinner table over the years and listened to my father (a lawyer and a lay bible teacher proficient in NT greek) explain and demonstrate the logical and linguistic errors of a significant amount of what was then preaching, and they are worse now than then. Forget trying to reason with these folks. They have rejected reason. And NT Wright and his kind can talk all day about what some statement in scripture actually meant at the time it was said; they don’t care what it meant. They only know what they themselves mean, and that is what counts for them.
    I heard for literally decades the scripture discussed in part (the part that they wanted to talk about) and avoided in part as though there was nothing else to be said. Never mind telling them that we all learned to read about the time our baby teeth were falling out, and we have read it for ourselves. They don’t care about any of that. It is useless argument with them. You are a threat to them when you say that.
    I saw the superficiality and self-importance of the seminary students and saw that their leaders did nothing to change that. I listened to “the boys” have long and animated discussions as to what should one do when “the Lord” furnished them with some new revelation previously not revealed to humanity. I listened to the parlor game of lets criticize and damn everything we can about all other denominations except out own (pedobaptism, liturgy, attitude, “standards”-too many or too few, clergy/lay relative position, women and work, prayer styles, how to “get saved,” everything imaginable)–if it was not their style of being baptist then it was what they felt they needed to change about the body of Christ. Is this ignorance or pride or unfair business practices? Who cares, it is damaging to other people and lethal to the practitioners of this garbage.
    They do not seem to me to be about preaching Christ. Not then and not now This is about building a business, being distinctive enough to have a unique product to sell, climbing ladders by stepping on people’s faces on the way up, “feeding” the sheep just enough to keep them alive but not enough to let them think for themselves, playing to the crowds with a really entertaining show, and as D&D continue to point out it is always and always and always about money.
    This is not about preaching Christ, pca pastor. I am sorry. They do not preach Christ out of envy–they fail to preach Christ. “The gospel” is not Christ himself, it is something about Christ, an explanation if understood correctly, but is not the very God Himself. Paul also talked to one group about his preaching in that he intended to know nothing among them except Christ and Him crucified. Paul was not dumb. We know his sermons were complicated; Peter said that Paul was sometimes difficult to understand. He was talking about priority. About nothing trumps Jesus Himself. They do not do this. To do that one cannot omit the parts of the message that one does not want to hear. To do this one cannot re-prioritize the success of the mission, if you please, to a set of numbers or an amount of money. One cannot leave people in ignorance and weakness and despair, wandering around endlessly looking for something better than cold doctrine/theology when in fact Christ himself is available and they hide Him amid their cultural this and political that and pseudo-psych whatever and simplistic the other and man-made ideas and programs and book sales.
    Listen to me. This is a heartbreaker. I think they know better and do not care. I think they have looked the very Christ in the face and said, “I don’t want to hear it. This is my show.” And one’s heart must break for the crowds, His sheep, who are still without the Shepherd’s grass and fresh water.
    OK, boys (Mohler, Mahaney et al) here is my conclusion. Bah. Humbug. God have mercy on you.

    Nancy, I don’t know what to say. Your comment is breathtaking. I’ll try to cobble a few thoughts together in response.

    Dee and Deb, I think you should seriously consider featuring Nancy’s comment as its own post, an eyewitness and dissenting account to the “official history” that most everyone in my denomination believes (we invited Al Mohler to preach at our General Assembly one year) — that godly Al Mohler saved SBTS from the godless. I do admit that I myself believed it (I am not a Baptist and so knew only the bare outlines of the story as it had been told to me by others) until three Summers ago. But when Mohler came out publicly (and viciously) defending C. J. Mahaney for the indefensible, I began to rethink everything I had ever heard or read about Al Mohler (and I began to think very differently about the “culture war” sermon he had preached to the choir at our General Assembly).

  111. @ Bridget:

    I would be curious to know if either party tried to reconnect. That’s usually what happens when a call is accidentally dropped during and interview.

    In any case, the free promotion of the book didn’t seem to go as Driscoll expected.

  112. @ Serving Kids in Japan: No disrespect to Ms. Mefferd was intended on this end. I find her intellect, courage and resolve to be the loveliest of feminine virtues, maybe because these are the very qualities that the fundygelicals (first time I’ve use that!) try to squelch. My radar is becoming very sensitive to these qualities (and others, like justice) in women, especially when they’re tempered with grace and kindness. Turns out that’s the woman I was meant to be (not there by a long shot), not the pathetic caricature modeled for me by the neo-reformed church. Go Janet! Hmmm…Janets?

  113. @ Amy Smith:

    Here we go, and I told you so, folks.

    Russ Moore is “preaching” complementarianism as an essential part of the true “gospel'” and as opposed to a “false gospel”. Good boy, Russ. I remember when Jesus said to go into all the world and preach your view of marriage, sure do. That’s OK, You can get there in your thinking by simply defining “gospel” any way you want to. Bet that drew a crowd back in the day. Shoot, it was worth martyrdom at least.

    And he places enough emphasis on it that one could assume that he believes that those who never marry at all are somehow missing out on the opportunity to understand God. I remember that too. I note that neither Jesus nor Paul ever addressed the issue of refraining from marriage, maintaining celibacy or that widows might just be happier if they do not marry again. Somebody correct me if I am wrong about that. If you can find where either Jesus or Paul said anything about acceptance of or recommendations about refraining from marriage then you are steps ahead of Russ Moore.

    And he checks out the moderates/liberals with a do-them-in attitude but only regrets the alleged damage it did to him “spiritually” so best to do-them-in another way. Wouldn’t want to get hurt in the battle you know, no matter how incredibly right one might be. Don’t worry. Nobody is going to hang a V for valor on you, Russ. Not like this.

    And Jesus sidesteps a trap, says pay your taxes, decks his adversaries right there, and Russ concludes from that the idea that the american concept of separation of church and state is scriptural and apparently established by Jesus, but only as Russ sees it, not as some other guy may see it. Special revelation, Russ?

    I don’t know what to say to all the people who have to find Christ through marriage, and marriage of a certain kind. Didn’t happen for you? I guess you are just not one of the chosen. This is LDS doctrine! LDS! Well, all I can say is, just don’t hurt poor ole Russ there when you fight back.

    I really don’t much care one way or the other about this man. Maybe should, but I don’t. But I care if the gospel of Christ is misrepresented. That is heavy stuff. I care if the sheep follow the wrong shepherd and end up in the wrong pasture., if people get hurt, if anybody thinks they have to conform to such as this or else forever be outside the secret circle of real believers.

    He is mistaken about the reality of the gospel news about Jesus. His attitude is lousy. He thinks more highly of himself than is warranted. He is a verbal bully who, by his own admission, rather enjoys it. Enough said.

  114. Janet Varin wrote:

    Daisy wrote:

    You can listen to Driscoll’s tantrum and snit fit here:
    Janet Mefferd Show-11/21/2013 – Driscoll has hissy fit hangs up on Mefferd after she questions him

    Wow, I just listened to a strong, articulate man of great conviction and his name is Janet Mefferd.

    Hee Hee. Love it.

  115. “He should have also included the complete publishing information of the original work which contained the idea. I didn’t grasp if the fourteen pages were a direct quote, or a clear communication of someone else’s idea, but it should be credited”

    Every single time he quoted him or used his “idea”, even if in the middle of a sentence, it should be referened completely include page.

    I loved it whn Janet read Driscoll’s rules for quoting his sermons which is on his website. What a hypocrite. Makes you wonder what else he and his followers are ripping off.

  116. @ Serving Kids in Japan:

    Comps like Janet live in constant cognitive dissonance. I often wonder how they do it. She is independent, articulate, writer, etc, radio personality.

    (Did you guys hear Driscoll try to claim she “teaches”. Hee Hee. She said she “interviews”. Driscoll reminds me of some narcissists I knows and Mefford was actually pretty good at dealing with his ridiculous deflections.

  117. “I don’t know what to say to all the people who have to find Christ through marriage, and marriage of a certain kind. Didn’t happen for you?”

    Actually Russ has to find “authority” in marriage. Complete with elevator shoes. Now for those who think that is mean then go listen to the tiny Russ in his elevator shoes extolling Gospel Patriarchy for you women. It is downright hilarious. I think always look for the fire exists in case I have to carry him out

  118. formerly anonymous wrote:

    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.

    +1! Can someone tell me where to find this quote? I’ve loved CS Lewis for years. 🙂

  119. @ Janet Varin:

    And whether she admits it or not, and whether Driscoll receives it or not, Mefferd is teaching Driscoll something about ethics and being a Christian.

  120. @ Serving Kids in Japan:

    I wondered the same thing.

    I like Mefferd as a person, but I do disagree with her on a topic or two. She does support biblilca gender complementarianism, and I do not.

    Mefferd, like a lot of conservative Christians, views feminism as one of the ultimate threats to Christianity or to American culture, and I do not.

    (Not saying I fully embrace all of feminism myself, but I do not believe it to be the total boogey man other conservative Christians make it out to be).

    On a show a couple of days before the Driscoll appearance, Mefferd talked about her admiration for the Duggar family having for having 19, 20 kids.

    I cringed when she said that, because I don’t think Mefferd understands about the fecundity cultic aspects of some Christian groups that give rise to the idea that Christian families should have 100 kids apiece, or Christ’s admonition not to place childbearing/family/ marriage above Him and spiritual family.

    Nor do I think Mefferd is aware how both those concepts negatively impact people, such as the church/ Christian tendency to ignore widows, the unmarried, divorced, and childless.

    I don’t think Mefferd realizes things, such as some of the so-called Christian ‘have 100 kids’ groups also teach things like females should not receive a college education, their parents should choose their spouse for them, etc.

    While Mefferd is a complementarian, I don’t think she is totally out in left field on the topic, and I assume would likely be horrified to discover they encourage such extreme views about females.

    I too found it funny that although she is complementarian that she was very bold with Driscoll.

    Mefferd, later in the show, justified her questioning and challenge of Driscoll to saying (I am paraphrasing her comments) that following Jesus comes first, standing for truth is above coddling a famous preacher, etc.

    -Which is a component of what gender egalitarians say as to why they reject a lot of complementarianism. She was basically appealing to gender egalitarian- flavored arguments to explain her actions with Driscoll. 😆

  121. @ Mara:

    Her breaking up could have been due to both – she was upset on behalf of her friend plus Driscoll’s behavior got to her. But something about that exchange did bother her, that was clear. You could hear her start to break down and cry. I felt bad for her.

  122. @ Tree:

    Even funnier is that during the interview, Mefferd told Driscoll that she was looking at a page on one of Driscoll’s web sites that said that Driscoll and his church will not tolerate anyone plagiarizing Driscoll.

    Mefferd also aired a short clip of some sermon Driscoll gave (or was this on the Rosebrough show?) about how stealing is wrong. 😆

    Driscoll will have your head put on a stick if you use his work without permission, but he appears to be fine with using other people’s work without permission or without giving credit.

  123. @ Bridget:

    “I’m just wondering how much the gender of the interviewer played into the responses and results of the interview between Janet and Mark. Janet was persistent with her agenda. Mark had his own agenda. The two agendas didn’t mingle well.”
    +++++++++++++++++

    to me, the interview rang & jangled like many sets of church bells in England on Christmas morning, clear and beautiful yet jarring & startling (to a California girl’s ears, at least) — a woman’s voice confronting MD with wondrous directness, and MD’s shaken responses.

    there’s only ONE thing to do: make her the problem.

    Also, in my observation, for interviews it is customary and good manners for the guest to defer to the interviewer and let them guide things. Can’t imagine this is even possible for MD at this stage in the game.

  124. Serving Kids in Japan wrote:

    I wonder whether Janet would consider that a compliment. I can’t help but think back to Tony Miano’s appearance on her show. She seemed awfully sympathetic to him, and his notion that women shouldn’t be allowed to teach men at all. That doing so “sacrifices their God-given femininity”.

    Thanks for bringing this up, Serving. I had similar thoughts. A simple 5-minute Google search on Miano would yield plenty of examples of bad public behavior by this “godly” street evangelist. I wish she would have researched him as she obviously did for the Driscoll interview.

    I might be the odd one out here and I’m sure people know I have issues with Driscoll up front. However, I was left with mixed feelings after the Driscoll interview. I heard the dropped call, but can’t be certain that it was intentional. I also wonder what Mefferd told Driscoll in advance of the interview as to the direction of the show. Interviewers always have an advantage because they do the questioning, have the direction they want to go, etc. She certainly had her ducks in a row from the details of the Strange Fire escapade, the book he failed to give proper citing, referred to a specific sermon Driscoll spoke on “do not steal,” etc. Those details did not come out of a hat. It seemed there were jabs going both directions and I don’t think that all of his jabs were inappropriate considering the level of hounding she did since she had the upper hand with the interview’s agenda.

  125. @ Nancy:

    I very much enjoyed reading your thinking. I have always struggled with an unsettling feeling when over and over again some meaning well Christian says to me “well at least you were fortunate to have been raised learning about Jesus” after I share with them the things I endured growing up under the heavy handed Baptist non Calvinist school and growing up in an ultra Calvinist church. Hmmmm, maybe you are right, I rejected anything Christian until I was 30, maybe they never did actually preach Christ to me.

  126. @ Anon 1:

    OK, so he is short. I am sure that is difficult. Probably some part of me ought to feel sorry for that. But short or not he can do better than that link showed. I read both his books, Adopted for Life and Tempted and Tried. He can do really good work. He needs to do that and quit this other ridiculous thinking. In the meantime, I don’t plan to get waylaid by “poor pitiful him” feelings. Everybody has problems. Not everybody redefines the gospel and then tries to get other people to do so too. He has just gone way too far over the line.

  127. Anon 1 wrote:

    (Did you guys hear Driscoll try to claim she “teaches”. Hee Hee. She said she “interviews”. Driscoll reminds me of some narcissists I knows and Mefford was actually pretty good at dealing with his ridiculous deflections.

    I did pick up on that. According to Mefferd, Team Driscoll approached her about appearing on her show, she did not invite him.

    So, if Driscoll really thinks she is a teacher and that female teachers is wrong, why did he agree to be on her show?

    Could it be that getting promotion for his new book on a nationally broadcast radio show is more important to Driscoll than standing by his belief in gender complementarianism?

    If that is so, it’s just another piece of evidence pointing to what a total sham and joke gender complementarianism is.

    If you don’t believe a female should teach or lead a male, then do not go on to a program with a female host/teacher.

  128. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    in other news….

    nick, I have a friend (American by many generations, Christian, European ancestry) who is having some relational conflict with someone (who happens to be from Scotland). I’m guessing cultural differences & communication gaps play a part. I was wondering if you could shed a little light on Scottish culture, ways of communicating, ways of relating, values, etc. I suppose generalizing isn’t necessarily a good thing, but I think it can be somewhat helpful here.

  129. @ Anon 1:
    I have reflected on that about several female leaders that I have learned from good stuff from. I have had a hard time figuring out how they can be so smart and educated in some areas of theology and doctrine yet refuse to dissect the comp/ egal issue. If you know of one who has written theology and doctrine papers supporting their comp views I would like to know. I’ve only heard them repeat men who say they have studied it until they are sure compism is the rule.

  130. elastigirl wrote:

    there’s only ONE thing to do: make her the problem.

    I’m not entirely sure gender had everything to do with it, because if you listened to the interview Driscoll gave to the Christian, British gentleman Brierly of “Unbelieveable,” a year or two ago, he acted in the same smug, arrogant, rude, controlling, manner.

    Driscoll accused Brierly of some of the same things (or similar things) he did Mefferd.

    But then….
    Driscoll knew that Brierly is married to a woman who works as clergy, considering Driscoll’s other comments, he feels British people are wimpy, cissy and feminine overall, so maybe Driscoll views Brierly as being an effeminate man, and in Driscoll’s mind, that is the same thing as being a woman, so it’s okay to give Brierly a dressing down?

    In other words, if Driscoll were confronted by a stereotypical, American, manly man conducting the interview, (a 6 foot 4 inch tall, cage fighting, muscular, ex Navy Seal who crushes beer cans in one hand), would Driscoll react in the same way? It’s hard to say.

    I notice in both situations (Mefferd and Brierly), when the interviewer simply asks a question and then tries for more follow up, even if it’s not critical (or even when it is politely critical), Driscoll recoils and has a hissy fit.

    Driscoll appears to view any and all questioning as being an all-out attack, even though it’s not.

    I believe Driscoll misconstrues the motives of the interviewer. He assumes they are “out to get him,” or have a personal vendetta against him, and it smacks of paranoia.

    I have seen media personalities go after a person, and it was unfair and unbecoming, but I don’t believe Brierly or Mefferd were doing that.

    Driscoll simply does not like being questioned at all about anything, and he is a super control freak who equates the interviewer handling the direction of the interview to be an attack of some sort.

  131. Julie Anne wrote:

    I also wonder what Mefferd told Driscoll in advance of the interview as to the direction of the show.

    Mefferd said in the show (after Driscoll hung up) that she told his people before he went on the show that the questions would be tough.

  132. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Why don’t we have a LoveFest? Most of us blog and I’m certainly vain and self-fancying. It would make a great Poe-ing competition…

    HA – I’ve actually thought about this very thing – – what it would look like if Dee and I started a Twitter loveFest with each other like the rest of the “famous” gospel men do. After the first thought came in my mind, I laughed myself silly.

  133. @ Nancy:
    Short man syndrome: Man has to find a way to dominate someone to compensate for his short stature, e.g., be a patriarchalist and subjugate women.

  134. Daisy wrote:

    So, if Driscoll really thinks she is a teacher and that female teachers is wrong, why did he agree to be on her show?

    Besides the free publicity for his latest book, maybe Manly ManoGawd figured his sheer cage-fight-watching Manliness would overwhelm the mere woman. After all, he’s a MAN!

  135. An Attorney wrote:

    @ Nancy:
    Short man syndrome: Man has to find a way to dominate someone to compensate for his short stature, e.g., be a patriarchalist and subjugate women.

    Think Lord Farquar from Shrek decreeing that all subjects in his kingdom must have their legs amputated so NOBODY can stand taller than Lord Farquar.

  136. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Nick Bulbeck:
    in other news….

    That’s a really good phrase – more people should use it!

    As regards the communication issue across the pond; it’s difficult to know what might be cultural without knowing more specifics. The only (probable) difference that immediately comes to mind is the fact that Blighty generally, and Scotland in particular, remains atavistically class-ridden. This means that social mobility is resisted from both ends of the social/income scale: rich communities want to keep “poor people” out, and poor communities want to keep everyone in so they don’t get ideas that “he’s too good for us”.

    That’s probably not very informative, though. By all means get in touch privately – Deebs have my email address (this being, I believe, a WordPress blog) which I’m sure they would pass on if you asked them nicely, or you can get in touch via my world-changing etc etc blog’s contact page – that’ll give me, but no-one else, your email address.

  137. @ Daisy: I suspect MD would be very intimidated by the kind of person you describe. So there would be a lot of blustering and, likely, out of hand dismissal – as with Brierly and Mefferd.

    I think he really believes that other people are the problem, never him.

  138. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    hmmmm, yes, atavistically. I was just saying yesterday how class-riddenness is so atavistic.

    seriously, thanks, nick, for your response and willingness to chat over email. may take you up on it.

  139. AN HISTORICAL NOTE: November 22, 2013
    A TRULY GREAT MAN died 50 years ago today. His impact upon millions of people has continued and will continue thru the coming years. Every book he ever wrote is still in print. C.S. Lewis died 50 years ago today but his death has been, ironically, overshadowed by the death of a vain womanizer, mediocre politician, John F. Kennedy. I suspect C.S. “Jack” Lewis might find it amusing if he was able to observe this day in history.
    If you’re near a pub, this is a good day to hoist a “pint” to the British Isles’ most influential resident of the 20th century ( including Winston himself).
    “Here’s to you Jack. It’s an amazing legacy you left.”

  140. @ TedS.:

    Exactly TedS. It was cringeworthy hearing Driscoll change subjects, use ad hominem, call her un-Christlike and all manner of insulting descriptors and, for the most part, try to put it all back on her as if she was the one whose ethics were in question. I have read here and at sgmsurvivors about how a favorite tactic of some kinds of pastors is to turn things around so the person bringing the question/concern becomes the focus and is blamed/insulted. Now I have heard how that works and experienced it for myself via Ms. Mefferd- directly from his own mouth.

  141. Pingback: Did Mark Driscoll really hang up on Janet Mefferd? | Spiritual Sounding Board

  142. @ Deb:

    Hearing the things he was saying to her and how he twisted it right back on her…it was just…sad. It’s one thing to read about how pastors do this…it was quite another thing for me to hear it coming out of his mouth. I was very impressed with how calm, focused and on topic she remained as he insulted her.

  143. So what’s up with pastors plagarizing their sermons? I was in a church for a short while that hired a new pastor, and I got progressively less out of his highly alliterated sermons. Just as I was leaving the church, they booted him for plagarizing the sermons from the internet.

    Later, at another church (not CLC), the pastor used a whole sermon series from another church – the church that his mentor headed. I just happened to know some folks from there, and when hanging out, one of them mentioned the sermon series by name. That led to a very interesting conversation with the pastor. He said the mentor had given him permission, and because the church was a little ways away, he didn’t give credit. Makes you wonder how common this is. And this is the pastor who went off the deep end about a year later. Or we just saw what was really there.

  144. Darcyjo wrote:

    formerly anonymous wrote:
    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.
    +1! Can someone tell me where to find this quote? I’ve loved CS Lewis for years.

    Darcyjo, I think it may be from ‘Mere Christianity.’ Long time since I read that book and I don’t have a copy but I seem to recall something like that from it.

  145. Diane wrote:

    I have read here and at sgmsurvivors about how a favorite tactic of some kinds of pastors is to turn things around so the person bringing the question/concern becomes the focus and is blamed/insulted. Now I have heard how that works and experienced it for myself via Ms. Mefferd- directly from his own mouth.

    It’s called “blame shifting” and is a classic shtick of a sociopath and/or manipulator.

  146. @ Diane:

    The CEO of the church we attended in Glasgow had a clever way of doing this. He spoke in terms of “if you have an issue with someone”. If you questioned his behaviour, then that meant that you had an issue with him. Notice: who has the issue? You do. But then, if you pressed the question, the vocabulary would change: now you are “carrying” an issue. You must go away and resolve or deal with the “issue” that you are “carrying” so that it doesn’t affect you. It goes without saying that you must stop blaming him for your issue.

    And if he had an issue? Well, he never did. Rather, he would notice things in you and seek to “bring an adjustment” in your life.

  147. @ Diane:

    Nothing a believer can’t handle, though thank you for asking.

    A minority of up-themselves celebrity church CEO’s are wont to claim that leaders will suffer persecution. But as Paul put it: all who desire to live godly in Christ will suffer persecution. Being attacked from within the professing church goes with the territory.

  148. Diane wrote:

    cringeworthy hearing Driscoll change subjects

    Yes, but that’s just par for the course: just his usual entitled, immature behavior – more frat-boy than preacher. But then again, seeing the video of James MacDonald and MD at “Strange Fire”, and after viewing some of his sermons, maybe that’s what “modern preacherism” is like.

  149. Deb wrote:

    @ Diane:

    Can you imagine how many times Driscoll has used that tactic.

    I’m so glad Janet Mefferd stood her ground.

    It all becomes about how good they are at the snark. Then they trot out Jesus

  150. Diane wrote:

    @ Deb:

    Hearing the things he was saying to her and how he twisted it right back on her…it was just…sad. It’s one thing to read about how pastors do this…it was quite another thing for me to hear it coming out of his mouth. I was very impressed with how calm, focused and on topic she remained as he insulted her.

    Driscoll is not polished at all. You should hear it from someone who is slick as oil and sounds sooooooo loving. Driscoll does it like a bully on the school yard.

  151. Anon 1 wrote:

    Driscoll does it like a bully on the school yard.

    What's really scary is the army of Driscoll sycophants who mimick him. This 'resurgence' is hurting the cause of Christ BIG TIME!!!

    Wake up people…

  152. Anon 1 wrote:

    Driscoll does it like a bully on the school yard.

    And like all bullies on the schoolyard, he has an entourage of yes-men enjoying the prestige and power of being next to The Big Dog. Tabaqui the Jackals flattering Shere Khan for some crumbs from the tiger’s kill.

    Driscoll is their Personal LORD and Savior, and Their God Can Do No Wrong.

  153. @ Evie:
    What about Bill Mahaney?

    And, I am curious, did Cj’s mom ever convert from Catholicism? or is she still catholic? Just curious.

  154. Deb wrote:

    What’s really scary is the army of Driscoll sycophants who mimick him.

    And I’m not at all convinced they are all merely a mixture of the weak seeking protection, the ambitious seeking some shared glory, and the thuggish, gravitating towards a leader who could show them more refined forms of cruelty. There are some well-meaning believers among them – especially, though by no means only, young men.

  155. I haven’t read all comments so not sure if anyone else mentioned it but I have to say that CJ’s “Ode to Al’s Stacks” reads like a Dr. Seuss poem. Your stacks/His stacks/We Stacks/Sleestaks. 😉

  156. A pastor of a church I was in 30-35 years ago regularly preached using both a bible text and a teaching example out of Dr. Seuss. He described some theological disputes as being like the two yaks standing face-to-face and unable to move because of their straight-jacket self-imposed limitations, for example. Always appropriate and never over-reaching on either the scripture or the Dr. Seuss, and the youngsters paid attention.