The Latest From Mark’s Hill (aka Mars Hill Church)

"This [Mars Hill] is without a doubt, the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with."

Paul Tripp

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mars_Hill_Church,_downtown_Seattle_WA.jpgMars Hill Church, downtown Seattle

Where to begin???  Before we get into the latest news regarding Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church, please allow me a moment of reflection.  It was six years ago that Dee and I began conducting internet research on Christian trends.  Dee had been suggesting to me for several years that she and I should start a blog.  My biggest concern about embarking on such an endeavor was simply that I didn't believe there would be enough Christian news to discuss on a regular basis.  What in the world would we write about several times a week? 

We finally took the plunge in March 2009 and launched The Wartburg Watch.  Since that time we have been covering Christian trends and news stories that have peeked our interest.  As empty nesters, we voluntarily keep up with what is going on in Christianity and blog about it.

Mark Driscoll came onto our radar screen even before we started blogging.  He was garnering quite a following in our area, as he conducted boot camps and made appearances at conferences and the local seminary.  He was even scheduled to do a 'Song of Solomon' event at a Raleigh church in early June 2009, but it was suddenly and mysteriously postponed and never rescheduled.  We have chalked it up to divine providence.

Since that time, Mark Driscoll has not only reached the pinnacle of Christendom but has fallen from grace.  Much has happened this week following his announcement last Sunday that he was taking a six-week leave of absence.  Events are swiftly unfolding, and this post is our best attempt to keep you up-to-date on all things Driscoll. 

Let's start with this report aired last evening by KOMO 4 News.

In case you haven't heard, nine current Mars Hill church elders published a letter last Friday, August 22, calling for significant changes in the church structure.  According to a Religious News Service post,

The letter, distributed just two days before Driscoll stepped down for at least six weeks, was posted on an internal church network and provided to Warren Throckmorton, a Grove City College psychology professor who has been blogging updates about Mars Hill, who then provided the letter to Religion News Service.

Warren Throckmorton has saved that letter into a PDF file, which you can view here.  Religion News Service featured another post providing updates to the situation. 

The names of those nine brave Mars Hill leaders who dared to challenge Driscoll are featured in the screen shot below (sorry about the large print). 

Screen Shot 2014-08-29 at 1.58.03 PM

In his excellent post, Warren Throckmorton includes excerpts from the letter along with his commentary.  He begins his assessment as follows:

nine current elders called on the church to change the governance and for Mark Driscoll to submit to a restoration plan. They also raised significant questions regarding the veracity of information which has come from the Mars Hill Church Board of Advisors and Accountability.

The letter indicates that the charges brought against Mark Driscoll to the Mars Hill Board of Advisors and Accountability (BOAA) last year were not taken as seriously as the BOAA had claimed.  According to Throckmorton, no one was interviewed.  Not only that, these current elders indicate that the Mars Hill BOAA was aware that Acts 29 had concerns about Mark Driscoll, even though he claims he was never contacted by them.

Furthermore, Paul Tripp (who joined the BOAA last November and then resigned earlier this month), had this to say regarding the BoAA 

But it became clear to me that a distant, external accountability board can never work well because it isn't a firsthand witness to the ongoing life and ministry of the church.

Such a board at best can provide financial accountability, but it will find it very difficult to provide the kind of hands-on spiritual direction and protection that every Christian pastor needs. Unwittingly what happens is that the external accountability board becomes an inadequate replacement for a biblically functioning internal elder board that is the way God designed his church to be lead and pastors to be guided and protected.

So, since I knew that I could not be the kind of help that I would like to be through the vehicle of the BoAA, I resigned from that position.

I would still love to see the leadership community of Mars Hill Church become itself a culture of grace and I am still willing to help, but not through the means of a board that will never be able to do what it was designed to do.

And therein lies one of the major flaws on Mark's Hill (err Mars Hill).  Once the Mars Hill by-laws were changed, despite protests from Paul Petry and Bent Meyer, Mark Driscoll became King of the Hill.  That was in 2007.  In seven short years, major cracks in Mars Hill's foundation are being exposed for all the world to see.  Here is an excerpt from the August 22 letter:

All nine elders who were on the phone call were floored by the depth and clarity of the understanding that Paul had of the culture of Mars Hill and its leadership from his short time on the board. Below are some samples from our conversation:
—–
When asked about speculations that he might have resigned to protect the reputation of his ministry, Paul said this:  “I am not worried at all at burning my integrity for the real deal, but I won’t burn it for something that’s not the real deal. I don’t think even now that there is the recognition of the depth of what Mars Hill Church and Mark is actually dealing with. This is without a doubt, the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with." He continued on to communicate that Mars Hill’s leadership culture was not shaped by the same grace that it says it believes.

Please take the time to read the entire letter which was written by those who are the most knowledgeable about the internal conflict.  As indicated in the previous video, one of the nine pastors has just been terminated for "rebellious behavior against the church".  And apparently that's how it's done at Mars Hill.  Here is how the news broke yesterday on King 5 News.

According to the King 5 News report,

One of the pastors who signed the letter, Pastor Mark Dunford, was terminated on August 27, five days after the letter was submitted, sources tell KING 5. Dunford was an unpaid lay pastor at Mars Hill Portland.

Sources tell KING 5 the reason for his termination was "rebellion against the church."

Here is another report that aired on King 5 News.

On another note, one of the pastors Driscoll fired back in 2007 – Bent Meyer – broke his silence here at TWW.  We couldn't believe our eyes when he commented back in 2012 under one of our Driscoll posts.  It was so profound that I immediately wrote a post highlighting it — Fired Mars Hill Elder Breaks His Silence

Well, Bent is speaking out once again.  Yesterday Joyful Exiles, a website hosted by Paul Petry's wife Jonna, published a fascinating post — New Disclosures by Former MH Pastor/Elder Bent Meyer.  In it, Bent links to some documentation that I have not yet had the chance to read since it has just come to my attention.  Obviously, your humble blog queens will have much more to discuss…  And to think that at one time I didn't think there would be enough to write about on a regular basis.  We cannot emphasize enough our tremendous respect for Bent Meyer and Paul Petry as well as their families.  They put their reputations and livelihoods on the line and have suffered for the last seven years as a result.

Finally, Janet Mefferd, the Christian broadcaster who brought plagiarism charges against Mark Driscoll during an interview, has written an excellent article entitled The Driscoll Case: Now in the Jury's Hands.  She recounts what happened during that fateful interview and afterwards in case you're not aware of what happened.

Janet Mefferd's post struck such a chord with us that we are featuring the portion we especially appreciated below.

I’m all for grace and forgiveness, but let’s not be foolish here. Mark Driscoll shouldn’t be a pastor. And we didn’t need all these scandals from the last nine months to figure that out. Because the truth is that any intelligent Christian with the ability to read and understand the Bible could have and should have discerned who this man was years ago and abandoned ship.

Pick your moment of revelation: Should it have been when Mark Driscoll claimed that God called him to be a pastor in a “weird charismatic moment?” How about when Donald Miller dubbed him “the cussing pastor?” Or maybe when he started having “pornovisions” or angrily screamed, “How dare you? Who the (blank) do you think you are?” at his church members? How about when he referenced the “pile of dead bodies behind the Mars Hill bus” that would result from people not getting on board with his “vision?” The pile that “by God’s grace … will be a mountain by the time we’re done?” Or the Elephant Room 2 debacle — might that have been a good time to abandon support for Pastor Mark and his cult of personality?

I simply don’t get it. Why didn’t the entire membership of Mars Hill get up and head for the exits at any of those points? Why didn’t his Christian fans unfollow him on social media, stop reading him, stop watching him and stop listening to him?

More significantly: Why didn’t any of Driscoll’s Big Name enablers — and you know who you are — look past his doctrinal statement to the man’s obvious character, ponder I Timothy 3 for a nanosecond, and think, “Hmm. Something’s off here?” And assuming some of them did have that thought at some point, why didn’t they get up and head for the exits before recommending this man to anybody in the church at large? And why didn’t any of them stand up months ago and apologize to the church for previously endorsing this man?

Why didn’t the Christian publishing world, the Christian big names, the Mars Hill membership and the church at large head for the church/social media/conference exits when they found out Mark Driscoll plagiarized a number of his books? Was that just … all right with you guys?

Why have so many Christians — in so many different pockets of the church, for so long — defended him, enabled him, oozed gushy love statements about him and continued to prop him up, against all evidence, against clear biblical admonitions and against all common sense?

Some did it, I am sure, because they value money more than ethics. Some did it because they value coolness more than godliness. Some did it because they value being part of the Evangelical Club more than being godly men. Some probably were clueless. And some just value celebrity over everything.

But I think the real reason it’s happened is because much of the church today has just stopped caring what the Lord thinks.

We know He is holy and that He admonishes us to pursue godliness, as new creatures in Jesus Christ. We know that. We know He doesn’t approve of lying, stealing, hypocrisy, cussing, fraud or spiritual abuse. Not just “doesn’t approve.” The Lord hates it. It’s sin.

We also know that the ministry is supposed to be a high and holy calling. The Bible is crystal clear about the qualifications for ministers of the gospel, and they’re sobering to consider. Read I Timothy 3. Read Titus 1. Read I Corinthians 5. Do you believe those verses there? Given what he’s done, do you believe Mark Driscoll is “above reproach?” That he has a “good reputation with those outside the church?” That the church should tolerate an ungodly, unrepentant pastor? Would any of us tolerate this sort of behavior in a pastor of a 100-member church? If not, why the different standard for Driscoll? Is he above the Bible? If not, why is he still in the ministry?

You know why, and so do I. Because he’s famous and has a big audience. And after all, the show must go on, baby!

Or must it?

I firmly believe Mark Driscoll will not leave Mars Hill Church. He regards it as his crowning achievement (unbiblical ecclesiology notwithstanding). He’s dug in, he’s resisted all calls to true repentance, he’s stacked the deck, he’s hired the PR firm. And he’s counting on a core group of ignorant non-discerners and celebrity-worshipers to keep him going and help him rise from the ashes of scandal. He’ll probably get it, too.

That’s why, Mars Hill friends, I am appealing now to you. Those of you who are true Christians, who understand the Word of God, who love the Lord Jesus, who have kept hoping in vain for change at the top for so long — it’s now your move.

Everything you ever needed to know about Mark Driscoll that would help you make a decision about how to think about him and his ministry is patently obvious and exhaustively documented. You don’t need one more bombshell letter or insider document to tell you what you already know. You don’t need me or anyone else to expose anything more about this man. You know who he is. You know how he’s reacted. And I assume you know what the Lord thinks about the high calling of the ministry.

If your disqualified pastor won’t hit the exits, then you need to do it.

And if you decide not to hit the exits, then you’ll have to accept the consequences.

Because while I have cared deeply about telling the truth regarding this story and about standing with those who have been hurt, there is nothing left to say anymore. It’s all been said.

So that is why I have to say, “I’m done.” And that’s why I am praying that, by God’s grace, so are you.

No doubt there will be much more to discuss next week; however, this is our feeble attempt to get you up to speed over the holiday weekend.  Happy Labor Day everyone! 

Lydia's Corner:   Zechariah 2:1-3:10   Revelation 13:1-18   Psalm 141:1-10   Proverbs 30:18-20

Comments

The Latest From Mark’s Hill (aka Mars Hill Church) — 509 Comments

  1. I’ve been wondering why just the one guy was dismissed. Although it does explain the curious lack of “all youse guys sayin bad things about my pastor make me want to PUNCH YOU IN THE NECK” in my Facebook feed.

  2. Aaaand–just that fast– this OP is no longer the latest!
    The authoritays have responded (this being the Friday Afternoon before a there say weekend and all.
    See Throckmorton for more.

  3. “Everything you ever needed to know about Mark Driscoll that would help you make a decision about how to think about him and his ministry is patently obvious and exhaustively documented. You don’t need one more bombshell letter or insider document to tell you what you already know. You don’t need me or anyone else to expose anything more about this man. You know who he is. You know how he’s reacted. And I assume you know what the Lord thinks about the high calling of the ministry.

    If your disqualified pastor won’t hit the exits, then you need to do it.”

    Ditto for those in Mahaney’s so-called denomination.

    “Why have so many Christians — in so many different pockets of the church, for so long — defended him, enabled him, oozed gushy love statements about him and continued to prop him up, against all evidence, against clear biblical admonitions and against all common sense?”

    Ditto for the Mahaney enablers.

  4. Hmm “there say” ” just maybe should have been 3 day,
    Driscoll has 18 signees to the response– to double the 9 complainants. One, pastor Drew Hensley, has signed off on BOTH!
    Bottom line– TRUST US!!!
    Also a new board has been appointed to investigate the charges, headed up by Mr Rogers himself!

  5. Mars Hill~~….the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with…”–Paul Tripp..

    Please PLEASE someone who is in Mars Hill do what you need to do to find out the living conditions of Grace Driscoll and their children!!!!

    I have worked with many victims of abuse of various kinds and have never personally known any abuser who has this kind of public control and anger to not have OUTBURST OF VIOLENCE at home….

    This scares me to death. Only God knows what is happening in the Driscoll household but I very much fear that it is not a good place to be.

    As an outsider I can’t do very much to help but I will continue to raise this issued for the sake of the most vulnerable people–those who are forced to live in dependence with an abuser.

  6. Those documents of Bent’s on JE – wow. If not done already, I’d be most interested in a critique by brad/futurist guy, being into organisational dynamics and all. So many things to raise, and perhaps this has already been said ad infinitum, but systemically I’m seeing a confused unconsolidated ‘Christian’ business. The mention of performance reviews and 360 degree feedback of the pastors on page 16 – ouch. I’m up to page 21 at the moment, these definitions in the by-laws (pp. 20-21) stood out strongly (which I hope is ok to repost here):

    Relation to God
    o A man – masculine leader
    o Above reproach – without any character defect
    o Able to teach – effective Bible communicator
    o Not a new convert – mature Christian

    Relation to Family
    o Husband of one wife – one-woman man, sexually pure
    o Has obedient children – successful father
    o Manages family well – provides for, leads, organizes, loves

    Relation to Self
    o Temperate – mentally and emotionally stable
    o Self -controlled –disciplined life of sound decision-making
    o Not given to drunkenness -without addictions
    o Not a lover of money – financially content and upright, not greedy

    Relation to Others
    o Respectable – worth following and imitating
    o Hospitable – welcomes strangers, especially non-Christians for evangelism
    o Not violent – even-tempered
    o Gentle – kind, gracious, loving
    o Not contentious – peaceable, not quarrelsome/divisive
    o Good reputation with outsiders – respected by non-Christians
    o Mutually submissive to the other elders

    Additionally, he must competently and consistently accomplish the biblical duties of an elder/pastor which include… (see page 21)

  7. This quote from Bent Myers at joyful exiles merely underscores my previous comments on the potential for domestic violence at the Driscoll home.

    Here are Bent’s words: ” Shame is too much for him to experience without employing minimization
    and denial. He cannot be in a position of power, since for him, it is an elixir to fuel his fantasies
    of grandiosity. He cannot be in a position which places him in authority, since his firm stance on
    entitlement will emerge again. In such an environment, everyone in his surroundings will be
    beneath him.’ (This is found on page 3 on this link: https://joyfulexiles.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/bent-meyer-written-record-8-28-14-letter-combined-document-set.pdf)

    Being ‘beneath’ Mark Driscoll would be a scary place indeed if you were a child or his submissive wife. And I am NOT making any sexual innuendos here!
    These poor people are very possibly in danger.

  8. I knew so very little about Mark Driscoll until I read this blog. His modus operandi is nothing new, unfortunately. I’ve had my share of experiences sitting under toxic teachers. There is a point when the people need to open their eyes up, trust the Lord and beat feet.

  9. molly245 wrote:

    Mars Hill~~….the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with…”–Paul Tripp..
    Please PLEASE someone who is in Mars Hill do what you need to do to find out the living conditions of Grace Driscoll and their children!!!!
    I have worked with many victims of abuse of various kinds and have never personally known any abuser who has this kind of public control and anger to not have OUTBURST OF VIOLENCE at home….
    This scares me to death. Only God knows what is happening in the Driscoll household but I very much fear that it is not a good place to be.
    As an outsider I can’t do very much to help but I will continue to raise this issued for the sake of the most vulnerable people–those who are forced to live in dependence with an abuser.

    I have wondered about this many times. . .

  10. The only word at The Gospel (TM) Coalition is that Mars Hill Seattle, under Pastor Mark Driscoll, is still listed as a “gospel-centered church.”

  11. Yes Molly245. MD reminds me of my father, I hated for him to come home and loved for him to leave.

  12. My biggest concern about embarking on such an endeavor was simply that I didn’t believe there would be enough Christian news to discuss on a regular basis.

    How silly and naive you were. 😉

  13. Guest wrote:

    Yes Molly245. MD reminds me of my father, I hated for him to come home and loved for him to leave.

    I had one of those, too! It takes a lifetime to heal….and even then…not so much. I am sorry you had kind of family life.

  14. elizabetta carrera wrote:

    molly245 wrote:
    Mars Hill~~….the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with…”–Paul Tripp..
    Please PLEASE someone who is in Mars Hill do what you need to do to find out the living conditions of Grace Driscoll and their children!!!!
    I have worked with many victims of abuse of various kinds and have never personally known any abuser who has this kind of public control and anger to not have OUTBURST OF VIOLENCE at home….
    This scares me to death. Only God knows what is happening in the Driscoll household but I very much fear that it is not a good place to be.
    As an outsider I can’t do very much to help but I will continue to raise this issued for the sake of the most vulnerable people–those who are forced to live in dependence with an abuser.
    I have wondered about this many times. . .

    I’m glad you’ve though of it too! Let’s commit to both pray for their safety and deliverance.

  15. @ Hester:

    Yep. It’s now hard for me to remember when I didn’t know anything about Mark Driscoll, C.J. Mahaney, etc.

    Maybe ignorance (not knowing anything about these guys) really is bliss. 😉

  16. People with integrity are very attractive. People who will stand up all by themselves, completely alone to the big shots, the powerful, rich, famous. These are the people I admire. It is very hard to stand up to a group all by your self, and the very few who do it are so impressive. People who will not stand up to this abusive vile man value money and power over people.

  17. @ molly245:
    Molly, I think a whole lot of regular readers/commenters share your concerns. There are so many red flags – his ongoing public verbal humiliation of his wife being one of them.

    I really find it hard to believe that someone so openly misogynistic has gotten so much praise from so many for this long.

  18. @ molly245:
    Unfortunately, Driscoll is hiding in a large house with a big fence and elaborate security. When KOMO (a Seattle TV station) arrived at the house and tried to contact him, the police were called, though there were no arrests. It has been extremely difficult for most people to find out where he is living, never mind attempt to evaluate his family life.

  19. If you read Bent Meyer’s document it really is like someone transcribed some of my experiences working with a Narcissistic pastor. I remember the good ole, “Resign or be fired in disgrace” moment where the threat of “thick folders” was used. But similarly, there was actually no ever thickening documentation off gross malfeasance.

    The key operational paradigm for a NP is to isolate isolate isolate the target. I was preceded by others who just didn’t have the desire to stand up to him and quietly left instead of dealing with it. After leaving, the history of that person was twisted in the retelling to make those unfamiliar with the facts think that these former people most have been just the worst people alive….until it starts to happen to you.

    While I am personally of a reformed leaning, I do recognize that reformed theology is more accessible in some ways to be used by those who want to abuse power. This is why strong checks and balances and lines of accountability are essential non-negotiable structures that need to exist.

    Obviously MD has internal problems that exist outside of the lack of accountability, but the timeline indicates that things really started to go off the rails on each step of the consolidation of power. When there was strong accountability they could “control” his more outrageous behavior and harness his strong skill sets. Accountability gets jettisoned and the behavior quickly outpaced the skills. Not that it would be ok to have the bad behavior existing even in a “controlled” setting.

    A couple of broad thoughts that these events give me;

    1- I have been interested by the rise of the non-denominational church model over the last few decades. And this has been coupled by less strong denominational ties and accountability as well. Could the MH/MD saga be the parakeet in the mineshaft to more potential blow ups involving unaccountable church leaders in these churches and organizations.

    2- While it is easy to throw stones at the large and obvious public failures on display here, it should cause us to re-evaluate are PERSONAL systems. What has happened here is true in a million little ways with a million “little” people. When we disconnect from healthy spiritual accountability in our own lives in our own lives we prepare the kindling for our own potential burn out. This doesn’t mean get in more accountability “sin sniffing” groups, but the general concept that we aren’t meant to be untethered from Christian community and willing to deal with what can happen in each of our own lives.

  20. It is totally beyond my understanding how so many people have been OK with ths for so long. When we become Christians we are empowered by thr Holy Spirit and are given much discernment. Narrow us the road. How could so many be lead astray. Grieving for the sheeple. And scared that it is so easy to fool so many

  21. mimesis wrote:

    @ molly245:
    Unfortunately, Driscoll is hiding in a large house with a big fence and elaborate security. When KOMO (a Seattle TV station) arrived at the house and tried to contact him, the police were called, though there were no arrests. It has been extremely difficult for most people to find out where he is living, never mind attempt to evaluate his family life.

    Yeah, I’ve seen the blogs too. However, there must be someone who physically sees those kids. Praying that whoever that is takes the opportunity and responsibility seriously.

  22. I don’t really think he fooled so many. I think they just like the power, or they like the gross things he says. It is obvious this man is polar opposite of Jesus Christ. MD presents himself like a creepy vulgar misogynist who would lurk around strip clubs or porn stores. Nothing like sweet Jesus.

  23. Haitch wrote:

    If not done already, I’d be most interested in a critique by brad/futurist guy, being into organisational dynamics and all.

    Hi Haitch. I’ve been posting segments in a “Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church Research Guide” and Part 2B likely goes up tomorrow (Saturday). It may have a section with my overall opinion on the extent of “toxic troubles” and why, or that may go in Part 3 if I get to that.

    The outline below is what I’ll tentatively cover — though will definitely be taking a break before posting Part 3 to finish up prior series dealing with the “Pyramid of Responsibility” and my take on “Commenders” and others who are culpable for directly helping Dictators maintain control, and those who are complicit for more indirectly helping the toxic system stay afloat. After that, don’t know yet. Have already done a lot of posts of repentance, restitution, rehabilitation, restoration. Search my blog in the “Recovery from Spiritual Abuse” category

    Trying to provide an all-in-one-place reference so we don’t have to click all over creation to find all this technical stuff. Hope it’s of help.

    Part 1. Research Guide to Mark Driscoll’s Personal Issues

    Part 2. Mars Hill Church Organizational/Institutional Issues

    * Part 2A. Four types of organizational forms found in “Mars Hill.” Official source links and summary profiles.
    * Part 2B. Five potential legal/ethical problems: inurement; misappropriation of funds solicited with a specified designation; spoliation of evidence; constitution, bylaws, and board structure; and conflicts of interest.

    IF/WHEN I HAVE TIME …

    Part 3. Recommendations for Public Remediation by Mark Driscoll, Other Mars Hill Leaders, and Mars Hill Church

    Part 4. Research Guide and Recommendations for Issues Related to “Commenders” of Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church

  24.   __

    “Rebellion Against The MH “Bus Wheels”, Perhaps?”

    hmmm…

      When this Mars Hill revolution getz ta critical mass, …you’re gonna see some pretty serious stuff…

    Take your silver tong, and dig your proverbial grave?

    huh?

    …And the Ancient of Days took His seat ; His vesture was like white snow and the hair of His head like pure wool ; His throne was ablaze with flames, its wheels were a burning fire. A river of fire was flowing and coming out from before Him; thousands upon thousands were attending Him, and myriads upon myriads were standing before Him…

    What?

     Will Mark Driscoll’s Mars Hill pulpit soon become an insignificant footstool for Jesus’ blood stained feet?

    __
    Intermission: ZZ Top – “Jesus Just Left…”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai-aLzd5imI

    ;~)

  25. This whole thing is so hideous. I feel bad for all the people this is going to hurt, there’s going to be so many by the end.

    Can I bring a small observation to the table? I’ve been seeing a lot of armchair diagnoses of Narcissistic Personality disorder, but I doubt most of any of us have been trained counselors or psychiatrists who have had a chance to actually examine Pastor Driscoll. As someone who’s spouse has bipolar disorder, and who is lucky enough to have the same condition as her, it drives me batty (well battier…) to see everyone calling him out for a personality disorder. I get the temptation, heck I can see it as a possibility as well. But we haven’t had a chance to analyze him in a one on one.

    It could just be Driscoll who bears primary responsibility, but I don’t think it can just be put on his shoulders. This didn’t happen in a vacuum. His support staff, his handpicked elders, his peers, his fellow believers and most of all his church watched, supported and enabled all of this, not just recently but for years. There is a vast amount of responsibility to share on this whole debacle, and I think in the end that’s what is going to hurt the most people. And it’ll keep echoing for years.

  26. molly245 wrote:

    Mars Hill~~….the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with…”–Paul Tripp..

    Please PLEASE someone who is in Mars Hill do what you need to do to find out the living conditions of Grace Driscoll and their children!!!!

    I have worked with many victims of abuse of various kinds and have never personally known any abuser who has this kind of public control and anger to not have OUTBURST OF VIOLENCE at home….

    This scares me to death. Only God knows what is happening in the Driscoll household but I very much fear that it is not a good place to be.

    As an outsider I can’t do very much to help but I will continue to raise this issued for the sake of the most vulnerable people–those who are forced to live in dependence with an abuser.

    Thank you for saying this. I have been scared to death for Grace & the kids for months now, & think are getting worse by the minute.
    Lord, hear our prayer.

  27. Haitch wrote:

    Those documents of Bent’s on JE – wow. If not done already, I’d be most interested in a critique by brad/futurist guy, being into organisational dynamics and all. So many things to raise, and perhaps this has already been said ad infinitum, but systemically I’m seeing a confused unconsolidated ‘Christian’ business. The mention of performance reviews and 360 degree feedback of the pastors on page 16 – ouch. I’m up to page 21 at the moment, these definitions in the by-laws (pp. 20-21) stood out strongly (which I hope is ok to repost here):

    Relation to God
    o A man – masculine leader
    o Above reproach – without any character defect
    o Able to teach – effective Bible communicator
    o Not a new convert – mature Christian

    Relation to Family
    o Husband of one wife – one-woman man, sexually pure
    o Has obedient children – successful father
    o Manages family well – provides for, leads, organizes, loves

    Relation to Self
    o Temperate – mentally and emotionally stable
    o Self -controlled –disciplined life of sound decision-making
    o Not given to drunkenness -without addictions
    o Not a lover of money – financially content and upright, not greedy

    Relation to Others
    o Respectable – worth following and imitating
    o Hospitable – welcomes strangers, especially non-Christians for evangelism
    o Not violent – even-tempered
    o Gentle – kind, gracious, loving
    o Not contentious – peaceable, not quarrelsome/divisive
    o Good reputation with outsiders – respected by non-Christians
    o Mutually submissive to the other elders

    Additionally, he must competently and consistently accomplish the biblical duties of an elder/pastor which include… (see page 21)

    Well, so far he IS male.
    Otherwise–total wash.

  28. molly245 wrote:

    elizabetta carrera wrote:

    molly245 wrote:
    Mars Hill~~….the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with…”–Paul Tripp..
    Please PLEASE someone who is in Mars Hill do what you need to do to find out the living conditions of Grace Driscoll and their children!!!!
    I have worked with many victims of abuse of various kinds and have never personally known any abuser who has this kind of public control and anger to not have OUTBURST OF VIOLENCE at home….
    This scares me to death. Only God knows what is happening in the Driscoll household but I very much fear that it is not a good place to be.
    As an outsider I can’t do very much to help but I will continue to raise this issued for the sake of the most vulnerable people–those who are forced to live in dependence with an abuser.
    I have wondered about this many times. . .

    I’m glad you’ve though of it too! Let’s commit to both pray for their safety and deliverance.

    I’m also with you on this. Lord Jesus Christ, help Grace & her children. Surround them with your love & power; defend them & keep them safe.

  29. “Why have so many Christians — in so many different pockets of the church, for so long — defended him, enabled him, oozed gushy love statements about him and continued to prop him up, against all evidence, against clear biblical admonitions and against all common sense?”

    Because they are like him. Kindred spirits. You-scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch yours.

    If you are an arrogant, egotistical, power-hungry man who wants to be a pastor, Mark is your biggest advocate. For these guys, to attack Mark and the foundations of his power and position is to attack their own.

  30. TWW pinpointed the problem in a previous post. There is no accountability for Protestant churches. This is why celebrity pastors have flourished in the last 30 years. Mega-bucks are at stake and when the doe starts rolling in, there’s a feeling of invincibility.

    Don’t kid yourself, ALL celebrity pastors are marketing a BRAND. Truthfully, the pastor IS that brand, but the attendees (and many Christians outside) think it is, or should be something more. Wake up and quit drinking the Kool-Aide.

    The truth is, we don’t need reform of these churches, they need to end. I personally believe the Protestant rebellion that started in the 1600s will end to a large measure by the end of this century. It is unsustainable and untenable.

  31. @ Guest:

    “People with integrity are very attractive. People who will stand up all by themselves, completely alone to the big shots, the powerful, rich, famous.”
    ++++++++++++++

    Indeed. contrast that with the Christian big shots/powerful/rich/famous who could have easily used their influential platform to stand up for the bulldozed mars hill members….

    who could have easily stood up for more than half the planet as they were insulted, humiliated, mocked and ridiculed by MD….

    who could have stood up for mere kindness alone (among other things)

    BUT who couldn’t be bothered.

    And as they stand there coiffed & smiling, letting their image be polished by all those who use them for their own personal profit, and the stinky smell of hypocrisy, favoritism, self-interest, & cowardice mingle amongst us all, they can’t hide the fact that they are the ones who farted.

    we heard it.

    it was you.

    the king farts in the elevator.

  32. @ elastigirl
    Mark Mullery, Vince Hinders, Dave Hinders, Frank Ecelbarger, Lou Gallo all currently or formerly of Sovereign Grace of Fairfax

  33.   __

    “Reset to Jesus?”  ™

      “I sat silently by as people were treated in ways that robbed them of dignity.” ~Luke Abrams, Mars Hill worship leader

    *

    “Robbed Of Dignity?”

    hmmm…

      Christian religious education should be a transitional program that gives people the time, and where-with-all ta becoming spiritually self-sufficient. 

    “Where a greater ‘part’ means a greater ‘whole’ ” ™

      However, for the better part, 501(c)3  Christian religious education has become a two-bit bankrupt, enslaving religious system that keeps people in spiritual poverty. 

    huh?

      The current Christian religious system many times doesn’t encourage people to be spiritually ‘aware’ & ‘self-sufficient’.

    What?

    “Raising The Spiritual Bar…” (c)

      The kind folks here at Wartburg Watch can & do help people find a way out of this spiritually impoverish proverbial religious enslavement system –by making their reader(s) more knowledgeable of what religious do-do, they ‘can’ invariably get themselves into, and thus possibly beeeeeee all the more responsible for their ‘own’ spiritual lives. 

    Yep.

    Awesome !

      I should make it clear that those who refuse to listen–to be spiritually responsible–to be spiritually aware–will lose the benefit(s) this blog has to offer.

    (sadface)

      Religious Trending Awareness Education (RTAE) is a key to becoming spiritually independent and self-sufficient.

    *

    “Reset To Spiritual Health” ™

      This Blog provides a fair amount of ‘religious and trending environmental warning’ (RTEW) based upon reliable references, solid facts and applicable testimony, 

    …because it doesn’t make any sense to continue sêêing  kind folk (God’s lit’l children) week after week walk into what could invariably beeeeeee  a very toxic and explosive religious experience…AND DO NOTHING!

    *

    (–> this has been an unauthorized ‘concerned’ public service announcement, and I now return you to your regularly scheduled program…)

    (grin)

    ATB

    Sopy
    __
    Intermission: The FIXX – “Saved By Zero?”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPr7DwOXOtY

    ;~)

  34. @ Mr.H:

    “If you are an arrogant, egotistical, power-hungry man who wants to be a pastor, Mark is your biggest advocate. For these guys, to attack Mark and the foundations of his power and position is to attack their own.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++

    and how easy it is to cloak these things with an innocent happy face, humble demeanor, & the right language.

  35. THC wrote:

    TWW pinpointed the problem in a previous post. There is no accountability for Protestant churches. This is why celebrity pastors have flourished in the last 30 years. Mega-bucks are at stake and when the doe starts rolling in, there’s a feeling of invincibility.

    I think us pew sitters must be accountable for what we believe and support. The question is why we don’t recognize the red flags that are surrounding us? Such as listening to a guy on stage as the expert every week teaching us and we do not know him personally? Often he is “set apart” and insulated from the peasants. And as to what he teaches, do we spend our valuable time testing it? Do we have the Holy Spirit or is the leader being our Holy Spirit for us?

    How come the pew sitters will go to a church where they are taught to tithe but are not allowed to see a budget? Why do they put up with that? There will always be charlatans. The question is why educated people believe them and follow them.

    IMO, accountability starts with us as individuals.

  36. I’ve been wishing Grace Driscoll would take the children and leave for their sake.

    But also when a wife has left her abusive husband it helps him to realize things aren’t as ducky as he thought and maybe then he’ll seek help.

  37. molly245 wrote:

    elizabetta carrera wrote:
    molly245 wrote:
    Mars Hill~~….the most abusive, coercive ministry culture I’ve ever been involved with…”–Paul Tripp..
    Please PLEASE someone who is in Mars Hill do what you need to do to find out the living conditions of Grace Driscoll and their children!!!!
    I have worked with many victims of abuse of various kinds and have never personally known any abuser who has this kind of public control and anger to not have OUTBURST OF VIOLENCE at home….
    This scares me to death. Only God knows what is happening in the Driscoll household but I very much fear that it is not a good place to be.
    As an outsider I can’t do very much to help but I will continue to raise this issued for the sake of the most vulnerable people–those who are forced to live in dependence with an abuser.
    I have wondered about this many times. . .

    I’m glad you’ve though of it too! Let’s commit to both pray for their safety and deliverance.

    I’ll join you in prayer for Grace and the children. Mark Driscoll reminds me of my ex-husband. My ex was considered “a fine, Christian businessman” in our community.

  38. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    This whole thing is so hideous. I feel bad for all the people this is going to hurt, there’s going to be so many by the end.
    Can I bring a small observation to the table? I’ve been seeing a lot of armchair diagnoses of Narcissistic Personality disorder, but I doubt most of any of us have been trained counselors or psychiatrists who have had a chance to actually examine Pastor Driscoll. As someone who’s spouse has bipolar disorder, and who is lucky enough to have the same condition as her, it drives me batty (well battier…) to see everyone calling him out for a personality disorder. I get the temptation, heck I can see it as a possibility as well. But we haven’t had a chance to analyze him in a one on one.
    It could just be Driscoll who bears primary responsibility, but I don’t think it can just be put on his shoulders. This didn’t happen in a vacuum. His support staff, his handpicked elders, his peers, his fellow believers and most of all his church watched, supported and enabled all of this, not just recently but for years. There is a vast amount of responsibility to share on this whole debacle, and I think in the end that’s what is going to hurt the most people. And it’ll keep echoing for years.

    TOTALLY AGREE !!!

  39. THC wrote:

    TWW pinpointed the problem in a previous post. There is no accountability for Protestant churches. This is why celebrity pastors have flourished in the last 30 years. Mega-bucks are at stake and when the doe starts rolling in, there’s a feeling of invincibility.
    </blockquote
    Not true. The mainstream protestant churches are denominations with hierarchy and accountability. I grew up Methodist and I know from personal experience that the UMC can and will remove a pastor. These independent, evangelical churches that claim to NOT be denominations have no outside accountability.

  40. Should someone who is local to the area call Social Services and ask for a welfare check on the children?

  41. Adam Borsay wrote:

    Obviously MD has internal problems that exist outside of the lack of accountability, but the timeline indicates that things really started to go off the rails on each step of the consolidation of power.

    I’m thinking aloud here more than taking issue with you, Adam, because my ideas are a long way from being fully formed. But I don’t think things were ever really on the rails to start with. Moreover, at every point at which Fiscal consolidated power in his own hands, adequate systems of accountability were in place to stop him. But they didn’t function; enough watch-dogs didn’t bark that the few who did could be isolated and thrown under the bus. So maybe the body of Christ generally needs to examine the following for potential accuracy:

    Accountability is over-rated

    Meaning: accountability is a good idea, but it doesn’t work. Systems of accountability – even large denominational ones – can always be circumvented if you’re clever enough, or completely subverted and turned into sock-puppets if you’re ruthless enough. “Being accountable” is a state of mind and heart, not a place in an org chart. And in any case a denomination is always to some extent – by its very nature – deliberately isolated from all the other denominations in the body of Christ.

    Perhaps it’s time for as many as are willing to pause and say:
     Although we talk about accountability, and we’ve put a lot of thought and experience into creating systems of accountability, experience continues to show us that we don’t understand what we’re doing quite as well as we like to think.
     We’ve tried very hard for many generations, but we’ve never quite succeeded in legislating sin away.
    “We need God”… but for that statement to mean anything useful we all need to refrain from jumping to conclusions – private or denominational – about what God feels like.

  42. THC wrote:

    I personally believe the Protestant rebellion that started in the 1600s will end to a large measure by the end of this century. It is unsustainable and untenable.

    Two things: Christianity has never been monolithic, regardless of how much verbiage and ink has been applied to trying to convince people otherwise. This is easy enough to demonstrate. Why the incessant decrying of heresy and schism and apostasy and rebellion, and at times actually taking up arms (North Africa and Provence come to mind) if every body had always been neatly on board and lined up, so to speak? The current “protestant” thing is only one such thing in a long history of such things.

    Secondly: If one examines the alternatives, there is nothing perfect out there. There are numerous people who think they have aligned themselves with “the one true church” but notice that they do not agree with each other as to which of the options is actually the-one-true-church. And then look at the numerous people who have dissociated themselves from their particular brand of the-one-true-church and listen to what they say was their reasons, and oh my mercy me. Then seriously and with as much of an open mind as possible personally investigate a few of the options, which is what I did, and my thinking is that maybe “protestant” is not going to disappear any ways soon, because there are an awful lot of road bumps to get past in every direction and down every road.

  43. Dee and Deb, get some rest this weekend. Thank you for your efforts.

    TWW: the soulless jackals of the Internet. (The insults on social media have been incredible.)

    I haven’t seen all the insults on social media, which is probably just as well. If it’s of any comfort to you, I got called something a lot worse than “soulless jackals” yesterday at work. However, the customer who cussed me out didn’t claim to be defending the church; she was simply unhappy that what she wanted to do was prohibited.

  44. @ Nancy:

    To your first point, it is actually quite easy to demonstrate. For 1600 years there was only one Church. Actually, there still is only one today. Denominationalism didn’t exist even through the rebellion of the 16th century. It was a 19th century novum, propagated during the “second great awakening”.

    While it is true that many schismatics propogate themselves as the one true church, history doesn’t support that claim. Through history there have been groups who disagreed with the Church over doctrine, but they ALL have died out, as I believe Protestantism will as well. It’s dying now. Just look at Driscoll. Better yet, look at all the denominations that permit and encourage sin as something to celebrate. Homosexual marriage comes to mind. To think that Protestants are “united” under some vague umbrella of understanding is just wrong.
    This relates to Driscoll this way: He can say whatever he wants as a preacher and, honestly, nobody here can say he is wrong. Your opinions of his teachings are just that, opinions. There is no authority to base your opinions. The Bible? Do we need to talk about how many denominations use the Bible as their authority?
    I prefer to talk about root cause, not symptoms. You need to take care of the root cause. Driscoll is just a symptom of a much, much deeper issue.

  45. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    I agree in this sense….Without a personal desire for holiness accountability has little effect. My point isn’t that there were no “problems” before the consolidation of power, but the effects of losing accountability exponentially increased the exposure to harmful behavior. Accountability doesn’t MAKE someone holy, but it can protect others from someones lack of holiness. If we confuse these two issues; legislating away sin(impossible) with legislating to mitigate the fallout of sin(possible) we can have problems.

  46. Adam Borsay wrote:

    My point isn’t that there were no “problems” before the consolidation of power…

    Indeed not, and your point is well worth making. (Actually, I think you’ve got several worthy sub-points in there.)

    FWIW, I’m finding this conversation very useful…

  47. THC wrote:

    To your first point, it is actually quite easy to demonstrate. For 1600 years there was only one Church. Actually, there still is only one today. Denominationalism didn’t exist even through the rebellion of the 16th century. It was a 19th century novum, propagated during the “second great awakening”.

    While it is true that many schismatics propogate themselves as the one true church, history doesn’t support that claim. Through history there have been groups who disagreed with the Church over doctrine, but they ALL have died out, as I believe Protestantism will as well. It’s dying now.

    Your statements seem to be ignoring a lot of history outside of western Europe. And much of that of western Europe also.

  48. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    adequate systems of accountability were in place to stop him. But they didn’t function;

    How were they “adequate” if the “didn’t function?”

  49. THC wrote:

    TWW pinpointed the problem in a previous post. There is no accountability for Protestant churches. This is why celebrity pastors have flourished in the last 30 years. Mega-bucks are at stake and when the doe starts rolling in, there’s a feeling of invincibility.

    And if things get too hot for you (or you get caught, like Ted Haggard & Jimmy Swaggart), just skip out, Plant a New Church, and start the comeback trail.

  50. @ Nancy:

    “they” not “the”

    We just sent somebody out for genuine NC barbecue and my mind wanders with anticipation of such awesomeness as is about to pass my lips.

  51. Sopwith wrote:

    …And the Ancient of Days took His seat ; His vesture was like white snow and the hair of His head like pure wool ; His throne was ablaze with flames, its wheels were a burning fire. A river of fire was flowing and coming out from before Him; thousands upon thousands were attending Him, and myriads upon myriads were standing before Him…

    What?

    Will Mark Driscoll’s Mars Hill pulpit soon become an insignificant footstool for Jesus’ blood stained feet?

    Soppy, are you sure MD’s not quoting the same thing, except with HIMSELF as the Ancient of Days and Mark’s Hill as His seat?

  52. zooey111 wrote:

    Thank you for saying this. I have been scared to death for Grace & the kids for months now, & think are getting worse by the minute.

    Especially as the abuser turns inward and takes it out on closer targets like the Little Woman and Mini-MEs. “Kick the Dog” Syndrome.

  53. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    Can I bring a small observation to the table? I’ve been seeing a lot of armchair diagnoses of Narcissistic Personality disorder, but I doubt most of any of us have been trained counselors or psychiatrists who have had a chance to actually examine Pastor Driscoll.

    Just some thoughts: NPD is rarely diagnosed for many reasons. Mainly someone with NPD tendencies is not going to agree to be evaluated and even if they agreed, often charm/ bluff their way out of it. They tend to mirror people at first to gain credibility/compatability.

    I don’t see anything wrong with saying someone exhibits narcissistic tendencies using the definition of narcissism. Often the very thing we eventually abhor in a person are similar to the very things that won us over in the first place. But they are twisted and used against us. That is why loyal followers can turn into eventual victims.

    A great resource on this problem of diagnosing narcissism is a self professed narcissist: Sam Vaknin.

  54. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Adam Borsay wrote:
    Obviously MD has internal problems that exist outside of the lack of accountability, but the timeline indicates that things really started to go off the rails on each step of the consolidation of power.
    I’m thinking aloud here more than taking issue with you, Adam, because my ideas are a long way from being fully formed. But I don’t think things were ever really on the rails to start with. Moreover, at every point at which Fiscal consolidated power in his own hands, adequate systems of accountability were in place to stop him. But they didn’t function; enough watch-dogs didn’t bark that the few who did could be isolated and thrown under the bus. So maybe the body of Christ generally needs to examine the following for potential accuracy:
    Accountability is over-rated
    Meaning: accountability is a good idea, but it doesn’t work. Systems of accountability – even large denominational ones – can always be circumvented if you’re clever enough, or completely subverted and turned into sock-puppets if you’re ruthless enough. “Being accountable” is a state of mind and heart, not a place in an org chart. And in any case a denomination is always to some extent – by its very nature – deliberately isolated from all the other denominations in the body of Christ.
    Perhaps it’s time for as many as are willing to pause and say:
     Although we talk about accountability, and we’ve put a lot of thought and experience into creating systems of accountability, experience continues to show us that we don’t understand what we’re doing quite as well as we like to think.
     We’ve tried very hard for many generations, but we’ve never quite succeeded in legislating sin away.
     “We need God”… but for that statement to mean anything useful we all need to refrain from jumping to conclusions – private or denominational – about what God feels like.

    I agree with you, if leaders aren’t willing to follow rules and overseers aren’t willing to enforce them, then no system of accountability can ever have any effect.

    However, we strive to develop good systems and polity because some groups of overseers are willing to stand up, and we at least want to give them the tools to fight a leader unwilling to follow rules.

    By analogy, if everyone stopped caring about the rule of law tomorrow, civilization would crumble, no formal law could put it back together. But not everyone is apathetic about the rule of law, most acknowledge it, by Hobbes’s definition, most people are not “fools”. T

    We do not create law to reign in the lawless, we create law to enable the lawful to reign in the lawless.

  55. @ THC:

    Unusually for a rebellious protestant, I kind of agree with your earlier comment that the 16th century reformation neither reformed Rome nor established any blueprint for the true church. The Protestant (as it soon become known) Thing has always had something of the rebellion about it.

    However, that doesn’t mean I’m going to rush off and join the One True Rebellion just yet.

    You’re quite right in that there has – in the fundamental sense that there is only one Head – only ever been one church. At the same time, in a different sense that same Head has always recognised more than one church, at least on geographical grounds if on no other. In other words, His Church has never been the property of one committee, nor subordinate to one headquarters, nor garrisoned primarily in one geographical location. His Kingdom is not of this world, and neither is his governmental council (a somewhat clumsy and far-from-perfect phrase, but possibly a better translation of ἐκκλησία than is “church”).

    I consider it a privilege to worship, pray, break bread, or just plain live and work alongside anyone who follows Jesus as King (and the preceding is just a description, not a definition, of a Christian). That most certainly includes members of all kinds of visible constituted bodies and the like, ancient or modern.

  56. @ Nancy:

    Possibly in the same way that a surgeon who has impeccable training and skills yet chooses to show up at the state-of-the-art OR drunk as a skunk. Structures and means are intact, but character or will is lacking.

    I’m shocked at the magnitude of Mars Hill, but honestly I’ve seen the same things on a smaller scale lots of times. It comes down to individual conviction and courage.

  57. Phoenix wrote:

    Meanwhile, on the other coast, more revelations about MD’s mentor, CJM.
    http://abrentdetwiler.squarespace.com/brentdetwilercom/ken-sande-counseled-cj-mahaney-to-confess-he-was-so-very-gui.html
    I can’t help but think how what a difference it might have made if some SGM pastors had stood together as these MH pastors have. SGM (and formerly SGM pastors)–I’m looking at you MM, VH, DH, FE, LG– should be ashamed.

    I had to skim over most of the article– I just can’t handle the way they talk(ed) to each other. 3 thoughts:
    1: What a great difference it might have made if CJ had begun by really apologizing to Brent in the way Sande recommended. Similarly, if Pastormark had begun by really apologizing to Bent et al.
    2: Bent has now released over 100 pages of documents. Only a few thousand pages to go to catch up with Brent!
    3: A few years back, a very handsome commenter told the story of SGM’s SRC using nothing but initials!
    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2011/11/18/sgm-and-confusion-in-the-camp/
    ————–
    Appalled on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:53 PM said:
    I’ve been trying to become less confused over this. I’m only a facebook friend of one person involved, and bought a book by the wife of another, so I can’t corroborate anything. I could find FriendlyFire’s real name through a simple online search, so someone who wished could corroborate his side. Where one CANNOT find his name is on the website of the church he founded and gave himself to for 14 years. Similarly, in the ICOC mentioned previously, they no longer mention their founder. Now that the top dog who deposed him has likewise been deposed, they don’t talk about him either.
    Let me try, just using initials, get this straight. Consider I’m writing a novel and asking, “would this be believable?”. FF founds SRC. He brings up MC in the faith and makes him his young protege. In a nearby city, LT and CJ found CLC and later PDI, which would become SGM. They bring BD and JL in as young proteges (amongst others). FF thinks they’re his friends, and joins in. Instead, BD degifts him, makes him janitor, rustles the mutton, and installs MC as FF’s boss. FF goes away quietly, but now sometimes wishes he’d blown the whole thing up. Eventually CJ degifts LT, JL takes over at SRC, JH becomes CJ’s young protege and eventually boss at CLC, MC degifts BD, who does NOT go away quietly, JH states this may be God’s discipline, and now may leave SGM and take CLC with him, CJ goes away briefly but may well end up at SRC, CJ invites, then disinvites, LT to a reconciliation conference, gives a speech there to say he was wrong to say he was wrong, and to publicly mark divisors like BD, and MC unfriends BD. Last and least, I friend BD, just to be contrary. Wow! I’m more confused, now that I’ve got it straight. Except for one thing of which I’m sure: God is not the God of “the junk that has taken place as the result of these misguided ‘godplayers’”, but of peace.
    ———–
    Wow– that commenter, the aPostle Appalled– could really clear up the SGM confusion! Maybe he could write something now using initials to clear up this Martian mess!

  58. NC Now wrote:

    THC wrote:
    To your first point, it is actually quite easy to demonstrate. For 1600 years there was only one Church. Actually, there still is only one today. Denominationalism didn’t exist even through the rebellion of the 16th century. It was a 19th century novum, propagated during the “second great awakening”.
    While it is true that many schismatics propogate themselves as the one true church, history doesn’t support that claim. Through history there have been groups who disagreed with the Church over doctrine, but they ALL have died out, as I believe Protestantism will as well. It’s dying now.

    Your statements seem to be ignoring a lot of history outside of western Europe. And much of that of western Europe also.

    A couple of WILD assumptions are made here. First is the assumption that the church was “one” from the very beginning. We can tell from various New Testament documents that there was a lot of friction between various church leaders. Paul called out Peter in Galatians because the latter stopped eating with Gentiles. Second Peter says that Paul wrote things that were hard to understand. The *Jerusalem Council*? Come ON.

    There were centuries with no official “leader” of the church; it took a long time for the Popes to consolidate their power. And in the middle of that consolidation, the Eastern/Western church schism started in 1053.

    Seriously, this reads like uncritical propaganda from an unthinking Roman Catholic perspective. (My boyfriend is Catholic and he’d be *appalled* at this attempt to snow people.) The reality is that many Protestant denominations exert a fair bit of control over their pastors. They can be and are removed for bad actions. However, there are organizations (like the SBC) where there’s next to no control over pastors by the organization. And then there are people like Mark Driscoll, who has his own church with no oversight whatsoever except what he’s put in place, and pulled down over the years.

    I might also note that simply having a church hierarchy is not a guarantee that great abuses won’t take place. Just to use the Catholic church as an example, the hierarchy covered up child sexual abuse for a very long time to protect the organization. Having a 1600 year history is no indicator that the organization isn’t as corrupt and dangerous to one’s spiritual health as the mega that sprung up around the corner 15 years ago.

  59. @ NC Now:

    Not writing a treatise on the history of world religions, so I am not “ignoring” anything as a mater of course.
    I crossed the Tiber this year because I am a seeker of truth. The evidence was overwhelming and crushing to my Protestant traditions.
    I view this issue with Driscoll as an intra-denominational squabble. In my opinion, Driscoll has no authority other than what the people who believe him have given him.

  60. @ numo:
    I find it interesting how complementarians simultaneously limit women’s full participation within the church on such things as their insistence that women are more likely to be deceived and therefore prevented from teaching or having any authority, and their propendency to exonerate women from possessing any responsibility in cases such as these. Therefore Grace Driscoll becomes the victim of “ongoing public humiliation.”

    I’m not saying all who hold to this view are necessarily complementarians, but I find it degrading to women in the same sense. Grace Driscoll is a victim? How so, I ask.

    Has Grace Driscoll not been at the forefront of all those who have enabled Mark Driscoll and supported his behavior? Where for example do we find in scripture where a noble wife stands by a man while she has sees first hand his deceptive plans and practices, yet finds sympathy in the sight of God and others for her role in supporting her husband because it’s a woman’s role to obey and submit? Sapphira perhaps??

    Remind of when Grace Driscoll, who’s name is on the NYT’s “best seller”, issued a personal apology acknowledging her culpability in that whole deal. Or, maybe she’s just so good, staying “quiet” in the way a biblical woman should.

    Grace Driscoll has enjoyed all the comforts of her position as a “Pastor’s wife”, appearing alongside her husband in her sexy outfits, personifying what she together what her husband preach: women are to sexually satisfy their husbands and focus all their energy on providing his needs, raising children, and staying in the background by fulfilling her “role” at home.

    And I guess it’s even easier to believe Grace Driscoll is just a nitwit because she dyes her hair blond.

    Personally, I believe she deserves equal censure.

    And if you have any doubts regarding her attitude in all this, just watch the video in which her husband announces his paid leave of absence from Mars Hill (for very, very serious reasons all of which she is aware of). Watch her take the stage without acknowledging anyone, but instead makes a beeline into the arms of her man whom she glues herself to in an extended hug, all the while with her back turned to everyone. And she keeps her back turned the whole time, as do all the children, to everyone, never turning to acknowledge them or show it any sense her love and appreciation for all the many kindnesses that have been showered upon her and her children over the years, including all the financial donations that have sustained their family and provided very well for all her wants and needs. Where was there any indication of her recognition that she is part of the church to serve like Christ, rather than being served? Or did her skinny jeans body language communicate that all that matters to her is her husband, and she will turn her back on any and all who she feels is responsible for this humiliating turn of events?

    I don’t know the woman, but I’d guess within her comfortable, accepting church environment she was coddled and treated like a queen, just like her husband has been treated like a king.

    And I’d wager she was in complete agreement when Mark Dunford was fired for “rebellion”. I’d guess she’s as difficult and impenetrable as the hero she serves, who likewise uses her support as “evidence” of his fitness for ministry.

    I nominate her and Carolyn Mahaney for Sapphira reward because of their unquestioning obedience and submission to their husbands, even in the face of their horrible and deceptive leadership practices!

    Poor Sapphira. How unjust it was that she too was punished. And unfair it is that Grace Driscoll suffer any public censure for her agreement with her husband!

  61. Nancy wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    adequate systems of accountability were in place to stop him. But they didn’t function;
    How were they “adequate” if the “didn’t function?”

    Good spot! 😉 However, that’s easy to answer.

    The systems were adequate. They didn’t function because the people tasked with implementing them, refused to do so. Your fire extinguisher can be in perfect working order, but it won’t put out so much as a cigarette-end if nobody actually operates it.

    I suppose to refine my original thought, I’d put it thus. By “accountability”, we usually mean regulatory systems. And @ Law Prof is absolutely right in saying that laws exist for a good reason. But in church circles, ISTM that we haven’t looked closely enough at the people behind the systems. To so do would involve, of course, grappling with the problem that giving a person authority to hold someone else accountable, will in itself affect that person… But in general, the Protestant Rebellion (great phrase – I hereby announce that I’m going to steal it) needs to converse much more about what it looks like for a person to be “trustworthy”.

    More could be said, but tea is ready…

  62. @ mirele:

    I think this would be a good discussion between you and your boyfriend.

    What is difficult about Paul’s writings is about law v. grace, NOT the Jerusalem council. Remember, Acts was written by Luke, not Paul.

    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

  63. Throckmorton has opened a tip line so that readers can submit tips to help MHC overcome their financial deficit due to, as the elders describe it, a season of “negative media attention.”

  64. THC wrote:

    @ mirele:

    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

    You lost me. Who was “Pope” after Peter died.

  65. @ Paula:

    I agree with your points. But to them I would add that, in my non-professional but old and experienced opinion, Driscoll exhibits dangerous, impulsive, and angry characteristics. Grace and the children are closest to that danger, regardless of how complicit she has been. I can envision him doing more blame-shifting to her. So, it’s both/and. We don’t let her off the hook for her part in this, but we also pray for her safety, for the kids’ safety, and for God to do a miraculous work in the lives of many people and churches.

    If you are the same Paula as on Throckmorton, then I want to award you my comment of the day award for the concise “Mark is the Reason for the Season.”

  66. @ Gram3:

    I echo your views on Grace. She has many years of something akin to co dependency going back to High School with this guy. If what he says is true in how he related to her going off to college, she had real warning signs she did not understand enough to take seriously. Many of us have been there in smaller degrees. The guy you could not break up with and had to call in reinforcements.

    Once in, and in that world of patriarchy defined as “love”, it is harder to see anything else as normal as the years roll on. My biggest concern is what this models for their daughters.

  67. THC wrote:

    To your first point, it is actually quite easy to demonstrate. For 1600 years there was only one Church. Actually, there still is only one today. Denominationalism didn’t exist even through the rebellion of the 16th century. It was a 19th century novum, propagated during the “second great awakening”.

    The Orthodox churches would beg to differ.

  68. And by the way, the East-West schism that gave us both the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox happened in the 11th century, not the 17th, when the Reformation occurred. And the Orthodox would argue that the Catholics are the schismatics.

  69. Darcyjo wrote:

    And by the way, the East-West schism that gave us both the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox happened in the 11th century, not the 17th, when the Reformation occurred. And the Orthodox would argue that the Catholics are the schismatics.

    Well, if you want to be part of the Apostolic Church, take your pick between Orthodox or Roman Catholic.

  70. Janet Mefferd’s post is brilliant.

    This part is such an important question: ‘Why have so many Christians — in so many different pockets of the church, for so long — defended him, enabled him, oozed gushy love statements about him and continued to prop him up, against all evidence, against clear biblical admonitions and against all common sense?’

    The only answer – as has been mentioned already – is that church leaders must be far less concerned with the gospel of Jesus that they claim to be. To my mind, Piper is chief among those who have ‘oozed gushy statements’. And as has been said, C.J. Mahaney is a close parallel. We’ve seen this all played out before.

    I’ve another question. Why is it mainly women that are pointing to the evidence and calling out charlatans and false teaching in the church today? Mefferd, Deebs, Rachel Held Evans. Why would – shock horror – God use women to bring his church to account?

  71. I am not going to continue arguing Catholic v. Protestant here. I cannot convince anyone to overcome personal bias or inculcated teachings against “Romanism”. I personally believe everyone should seriously look at the claims of Catholicism. I believe it holds up to any criticism for those who explore it using faith and reason.

  72. @ THC:

    The main problem with your argument is it boils down to “I’m right and everyone else is wrong, not matter what facts you bring up.”

  73. @ May:
    Matt Redmond calls them out, too.
    http://mattbredmond.com/2014/08/30/mark-driscoll-high-profile-pastors-and-credibility/

    A quote from the above referenced post:

    The credibility of the church will rise and fall on how it treats the weak and wounded. Mark Driscoll called former friends and former pastors “bodies under the bus” and was hoping for a mountain of them. I know of no high-profile pastor who has publicly called for prayer for those bodies.

  74. @ Jenny:

    Great post from Matt Redmond. I respect him. He is correct to point out that ALL we have heard from these Big Dog Church Leaders is ‘Pray for Mark’. That’s it.

  75. May wrote:

    . Why would – shock horror – God use women to bring his church to account?

    Because the men with the microphones are benefiting from the corrupt system?

  76. May wrote:

    ALL we have heard from these Big Dog Church Leaders is ‘Pray for Mark’. That’s it.

    Which makes no sense if one takes a pastoral approach like Matt Redmond. But if your view of the church is divided into “us” and “them” and you assume that “they” are always trying to usurp “our” position, then their otherwise odd silence and/or weird tweets and posts make much more sense.

    It is all subjective to them. No possibility exists for others to be right and one of their heroes or colleagues to be wrong.

  77. @ May:
    The leaders no longer identify with the weak, wounded, marginalized and despised. They have become what Jesus came to tear down and replace with the kingdom of God.

  78. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t see anything wrong with saying someone exhibits narcissistic tendencies using the definition of narcissism.

    I agree with you here. I would definitely say Pastor Driscoll has narcissistic tendencies. I just don’t agree with diagnosing him with a full blown personality disorder based on the very controlled and specific interactions most of us as public spectators have. Dude’s a jerk, but I think sadly he’s a very common jerk who was enabled by others to do what he did as he did on his own.

    Like Like I said, it’s a pet peeve of mine.

  79. And the few who do identify with the weak, wounded and marginalised, e.g. Tullian and Boz Tchividjian, are cold shouldered or turfed out of the camp. By their actions you will know them.

  80. @ THC:

    It is definitely a black hole to go down. I don’t identify with either. Our Savior came as a Jew and I am a Christian (Christ follower) so perhaps I am a “Chew”? :o)

  81. All this talk about the one true whatever. When Branch Rickey was asked why he selected Jackie Robinson from among all the talented black players to break the color barrier in Major League Baseball, he said…

    “He’s a Methodist. I’m a Methodist. God’s a Methodist.”

    So that’s settled, then.

    🙂

  82. @ roebuck:

    That reminds me of a friend who said the following from the pulpit at a gathering of mixed denominations:

    ‘There’ll be total unity in heaven, no doctrinal division or disagreements.’ As everyone nodded sagely, he added: ‘We’ll all be Baptists.’

  83. When you watch MD’s famous “bus” speech, there ain’t no Jesus there. It’s, in fact, the opposite of Jesus. It’s amazing how such public displays of arrogance, power, and downright uncaring don’t seem to matter to those who could use their influence to stop it. They have been willing to sully themselves with their support or silence (silence it the same thing as support…just more political and cowardly).

  84. @ Bunsen Honeydew:

    Yes, they have sullied themselves. But will the lay people sit up and take note? Or will they continue to take their cue from the Reformed gurus and merrily continue to retweet Piper, DeYoung et al?

    The recent post by Charlie about Mark

  85. Sorry, posted too soon.

    The recent blog post by Challies on Mark Driffield was astounding in its nonchalance. Yet again, no concern for victims. No, Tim was more concerned that he hadn’t realised how wrong cussing was. Because that was the only sin of Mark’s that he seemed to be able to recognise.

  86. Lydia wrote:

    THC wrote:

    @ mirele:

    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

    You lost me. Who was “Pope” after Peter died.

    Linus, then Clement.

  87. Paula wrote:

    …personifying what she together what her husband preach: women are to sexually satisfy their husbands and focus all their energy on providing his needs, raising children, and staying in the background by fulfilling her “role” at home.

    Outside Mark’s Hill, isn’t that definition more of “sex slave/living blow-up doll” than “wife”?

  88. Dave A A wrote:

    Let me try, just using initials, get this straight. Consider I’m writing a novel and asking, “would this be believable?”. FF founds SRC. He brings up MC in the faith and makes him his young protege. In a nearby city, LT and CJ found CLC and later PDI, which would become SGM. They bring BD and JL in as young proteges (amongst others). FF thinks they’re his friends, and joins in. Instead, BD degifts him, makes him janitor, rustles the mutton, and installs MC as FF’s boss. FF goes away quietly, but now sometimes wishes he’d blown the whole thing up. Eventually CJ degifts LT, JL takes over at SRC, JH becomes CJ’s young protege and eventually boss at CLC, MC degifts BD, who does NOT go away quietly, JH states this may be God’s discipline, and now may leave SGM and take CLC with him, CJ goes away briefly but may well end up at SRC, CJ invites, then disinvites, LT to a reconciliation conference, gives a speech there to say he was wrong to say he was wrong, and to publicly mark divisors like BD, and MC unfriends BD. Last and least, I friend BD, just to be contrary. Wow!

    Game of Thrones without the juicy scenes.

  89. In view of the financial crisis at Mars Hill, I visited their online giving page and found a quote which is very puzzling doctrinally:

    “Your generous gift allows more people to be saved by Jesus Christ.”

    That is an interesting pitch coming from a Calvinist church. Or actually from any church with a decent Christology. You stingy people are responsible for sending people to hell. Come one, Jesus can’t do it without your help. Will someone please set up a Gofundme account for Jesus?

    This disturbing quote reminded me of an old altar call song: (maybe Sopy has a link)

    The Savior is waiting to enter your card.
    Why won’t you give us your PIN?
    There’s nothing in this world you need from your card.
    What is your answer, your PIN.

    Time after time
    We have waited before
    Now we are waiting again,
    To see if you’re willing
    To give us the store.
    Oh, how we so want your PIN.

  90. Gram3 wrote:

    “Your generous gift allows more people to be saved by Jesus Christ.”

    Maybe they have gift cards and you can buy an indulgence as a gift for somebody else.

  91. @ Gram3:
    I’m certainly no Mark Driscoll fan and, granted, given his controlling, domineering behavior I can see why one may imagine he is the type of individual who would extend his bullying tactics into his relationships with his wife and children.

    But I have problems with these kinds of insinuations. Driscoll may deserve our ire for his well documented missteps and for the shamefulness of his unbiblical conduct. But where there exists no evidence he has ever been physically abusive toward his wife or children places such assertions straight into the category of malicious speculation, to put it kindly.

    I mean, if you wish to imagine Grace Driscoll a fearful, retiring kind of woman who has been beaten into submission against her will, then have at it. And this isn’t to say women, who yield themselves to complementarian brainwashing, don’t end up victims of their own deceptions. But Grace Driscoll has done more than simply been a follower in accordance with what Mars Hill teaches what women should do and be, she has actively exported the ideas through her own leadership initiatives within the church, including her forays into book writing, as well as hundreds of public appearances in which she, no doubt, has benefitted financially from.

    I observe it’s just as easy for complementarian women to assume the false impression of the mindless, obsequious servant as it is for complementarian men to assume the false role of the boss who’s always stronger, better, wiser and more capable than his wife and all women in general. I’ve also come to realize many women who teach complementarianism like Grace Driscoll, enjoy the kind of freedom themselves that they seek to deny other women. While they enjoy dual roles, they tell Christian women they must have only one.

    I’ve also lived long enough to know what women like Grace Driscoll are like. They know how to play dumb, like it’s not their responsibility. Even though they were well aware of everything going on all the time, they act like they didn’t know, weren’t involved, and were just minding their own business of keeping house. Yet there they were, just as involved as anyone with a front row seat, and did nothing to intervene when they should have and could have yet didn’t. Do we assume they’re unwitting victims? Don’t we all have a responsibility to walk in faithfulness to the will of God above all else?

    I mean, seriously. Carolyn Mahaney didn’t make a peep when her husband took her along with him to Capital Hill Baptist Church while he (they) were being examined. And she happily ran away with him to Louisville and encouraged her children to follow her in her disgraceful behavior, and to this days she shows no evidence of shame or repentance. None of the Mahaney clan does. And it will be my guess Grace Driscoll and the Driscoll clan will end up the same way: blaming everyone else while acting as though everyone owes them their respect and allegiance.

    Saying you’re concerned for Grace and the Driscoll children may seem like a godly sentiment. I don’t see, personally, how that’s going to do them or anyone else any good if it’s not rooted in the truth.

    Heck, next thing we may hear is that Mark and Grace have packed up their things, sold their house, and moved the family to a new location along with their sycophants to begin a new church and have relocated the headquarters of Mars Hill!

    Then CJ Mahaney will probably attempt, once again, to mentor and disciple Driscoll after seeing Mark take a play from his pastor/athlete playbook.

    And together they’ll dream up a new Conference and imagine themselves relevant, somehow, to what God is doing in and through the true Church.

  92. Nancy wrote:

    Maybe they have gift cards and you can buy an indulgence as a gift for somebody else.

    That’s a great idea! I wonder why no one ever thought of it before! 🙂

  93. @ May:

    Interesting how all the so called theological powerhouses won’t act on what’s clearly before them. They either see and ignore or chose not to see. Funny how many of these guys consider themselves so Biblically knowledgable and value precision in doctrine. This issue is not Biblical rocket science. The acts of MD have been recorded and well documented. The parameters of what makes someone fit for ministry are pretty easy to understand Biblically. It also shouldn’t matter how big your church is or how much a celebrity you are. When you consider how Jesus cares for the least of these and how the last will be first, this is all so sickly backwards.

    When you consider recent scandals of Bill Gothard and Doug Philips, it seems to me that the guys heavy on top-down authority, man-power, and no grace extended to the “little people”, eventually go down at their own hands. Those types of ideologies seem to draw the abusive, the dysfunctional, and the pathological. Yes, it seems that for now the Mars Hill bus continues to roll. This will likely only serve to embolden MD in his pathologies and a big, tragic “end”. I don’t wish that on MD or his family. I just have seen this all too often and it seems to always have a similar result.

  94. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    Thanks.Nancy wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    “Your generous gift allows more people to be saved by Jesus Christ.”

    Maybe they have gift cards and you can buy an indulgence as a gift for somebody else.

    Calling Mr. Tetzel!

  95. @ Gram3:
    Btw, to avoid further confusion I’ve added my last name to my username.

    And thank you, Gram3, you’re very kind although, I’ll have you know, I can tend toward the ascerbic when discussing some of the issues addressed here!

  96. In other news, I’ve just done a quick run through of Rachmaninov’s Bb Minor Prelude. There is a recording by Vladimir Horowitz of the G Minor Prelude on facetube with at least as many wrong notes as I just played.

    (I suspect he, too, had imbibed a glass or three before playing it.)

    To be scrupulously fair, the G Minor is a grade harder than the Bb Minor.

    I hope this is helpful.

  97. @ Gram3:

    And Jesus couldn’t possibly redeem someone without MH using your money! (Makes MH and you seem indispensable to the cause of Jesus.)

    Repulsive!

  98. THC wrote:

    I think this would be a good discussion between you and your boyfriend.
    What is difficult about Paul’s writings is about law v. grace, NOT the Jerusalem council. Remember, Acts was written by Luke, not Paul.
    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

    *snort*

    1) Ignoring your suggestion about what my boyfriend and I should discuss. For us, “law v. grace” is simply not that pressing of an issue.

    2) (asking sweetly) So who was the real Pope during the “Babylonian Captivity”? (also known as the Avignon Papacy, from 1309 to 1377) Seriously, the idea that every century has at least had one pope is just ahistorical twaddle.

  99. THC wrote:

    I crossed the Tiber this year because I am a seeker of truth.

    THCAnd then went on to write:

    I cannot convince anyone to overcome personal bias or inculcated teachings against “Romanism”. I personally believe everyone should seriously look at the claims of Catholicism. I believe it holds up to any criticism for those who explore it using faith and reason.

    That first comment explains a lot: you’re new to Roman Catholicism.

    The second, if I may apply a little educated guesswork, suggests a working hypothesis. Namely, in the claims of Catholicism, you found a system of belief that looked to you the way you thought truth should look. But… you’re new to it, and it shows.

    If I might so observe, the manner in which you have brandished the claims of Catholicism on this thread is precisely one of those things that has prompted many to reject them. Personally, I am much more interested in the treasures of Catholicism. Rome numbers far more people than the inquisitors, and has produced far more than just political intrigue and suffering. It has also nurtured men and women of great Christlike character, compassion, honesty, wisdom and love (and more). I hope that, in due course, you will be influenced more by them than by Rome’s own share of Fiscals.

    It’s the same challenge we all face in the outward-spiralling search for truth…

  100. Mefferd’s comment and thinking is spot on and unusually insightful. While those in and near Mars Hill certainly bear a great deal of responsibility, particularly the leaders, so do those in the pews and those farther away, particularly in positions of power, who enabled this to continue. American evangelicalism as a whole has a dismal track record of keeping its own leaders accountable, and this is just the latest and possibly one of the largest examples. There’s a lot of blame to go around.

    In my experience, there’s a widespread and considerable lack of discernment from average churchgoers when it comes to assessing leaders. For example, I recently saw Philippians 3:13-14 posted in reference to Driscoll and the latest fiasco. A complete misapplication of the verse, but there you have it.

    I’ve seen plenty of evangelical churchgoers, faithful believers and nice folks, support truly deficient leaders both locally and nationally. Only thing I can conclude is that they are so hungry for leadership and so lacking in independent thought that they will follow anyone who sounds conservative and seems to espouse doctrines of which they approve. It’s a mess. And it’s a major factor in why I’m now one of the nones.

  101. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    THC wrote:

    I crossed the Tiber this year because I am a seeker of truth.

    THCAnd then went on to write:

    I cannot convince anyone to overcome personal bias or inculcated teachings against “Romanism”. I personally believe everyone should seriously look at the claims of Catholicism. I believe it holds up to any criticism for those who explore it using faith and reason.

    That first comment explains a lot: you’re new to Roman Catholicism.

    The second, if I may apply a little educated guesswork, suggests a working hypothesis. Namely, in the claims of Catholicism, you found a system of belief that looked to you the way you thought truth should look. But… you’re new to it, and it shows.

    If I might so observe, the manner in which you have brandished the claims of Catholicism on this thread is precisely one of those things that has prompted many to reject them. Personally, I am much more interested in the treasures of Catholicism. Rome numbers far more people than the inquisitors, and has produced far more than just political intrigue and suffering. It has also nurtured men and women of great Christlike character, compassion, honesty, wisdom and love (and more). I hope that, in due course, you will be influenced more by them than by Rome’s own share of Fiscals.

    It’s the same challenge we all face in the outward-spiralling search for truth…

    First, dismissing anyone as just overzealous newlyweds is just the antithesis of someone who purports to want now truth. It’s an ad hominem attack.

    Beyond that, you are also completely wrong about me looking for something I already believed. I rejected a lot of the church’s teachings at first. It was a several year journey and not a miraculous conversion this year.

  102. mirele wrote:

    THC wrote:

    I think this would be a good discussion between you and your boyfriend.
    What is difficult about Paul’s writings is about law v. grace, NOT the Jerusalem council. Remember, Acts was written by Luke, not Paul.
    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

    *snort*

    1) Ignoring your suggestion about what my boyfriend and I should discuss. For us, “law v. grace” is simply not that pressing of an issue.

    2) (asking sweetly) So who was the real Pope during the “Babylonian Captivity”? (also known as the Avignon Papacy, from 1309 to 1377) Seriously, the idea that every century has at least had one pope is just ahistorical twaddle.

    Ask your Catholic boyfriend first and if he can’t answer it then I will. (Sweetly said)

  103. John wrote:

    that they are so hungry for leadership and so lacking in independent thought that they will follow anyone who sounds conservative and seems to espouse doctrines of which they approve. It’s a mess. And it’s a major factor in why I’m now one of the nones.

    Me,too. They sound conservative, but they are nothing of the kind. They need access to conservative resources, so they adopt the pose. I think some of them may believe it, though not the Big Names. I’m right there in the None pew with you. Totally disgusted.

  104. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    :o)

    Well, rethinking…… perhaps the new name won’t work, after all. But then, lots of people will be saying “God Bless you” when I mention the name……

  105. Gram3 wrote:

    John wrote:

    that they are so hungry for leadership and so lacking in independent thought that they will follow anyone who sounds conservative and seems to espouse doctrines of which they approve. It’s a mess. And it’s a major factor in why I’m now one of the nones.

    Me,too. They sound conservative, but they are nothing of the kind. They need access to conservative resources, so they adopt the pose. I think some of them may believe it, though not the Big Names. I’m right there in the None pew with you. Totally disgusted.

    They scare me because they support a religious oligarchy. I just do not get it. They claim they want individual freedom when it comes to government but then check their brains the minute they enter church? Makes no sense to me at all.

  106. When one wonders why it seems to be a preponderance of women calling out the abusive behavior of the church leaders in question, I refer you to who went first to the tomb of Jesus. Courage–its a beautiful thing.

  107. @ Paula Rice:

    No problem with Grace’s responsibility for the harm caused to many. If you have read around here lately, I’m one of the crankiest ones about so-called complementarianism. And that’s even when I’ve had my meds. The women who promote this are putting great burdens on others that they are not willing to bear. It is shameful, and Grace is not an exception.

    I hear a lot of pain in what you wrote, and this is a great place for people who have been wounded by the church or by “pastors.” Maybe it is your pain or maybe it is the pain of someone you love. Trust me. Folks at TWW get it. This doctrine is soul acid for women *and* men, and I really don’t know what to do about it other than study and confront and fill up the combox here.

    When I have been most b*tter about the abuses due to this evil, I have to channel that the best way I can. One of those is to pray for protection from the effects of this wickedness, even for the ones who have participated in it as Grace has. Not from the Lord’s merciful discipline, but from harm from Mark or others.

    I don’t know either of them, and I honestly can’t say anything good about the whole sorry disgusting shameful mess in Seattle and throughout evangelicalism. I pray that the Driscoll kids will be protected from the deeds of their parents and that the Lord would bring healing throughout his church and sight to the many eyes that are blind to the wickedness.

    I am thankful to have a wonderful husband and to have had a wonderful Dad. I can see Jesus in them. Not everyone has, and I am so moved by their stories. There are some really great men on this blog who are supportive of the little ones, and there are some others we are hoping to bring along. Again, I appreciate your passion. More than you know.

  108. THC wrote:

    First, dismissing anyone as just overzealous newlyweds is just the antithesis of someone who purports to want now truth. It’s an ad hominem attack.

    Please just stop for a minute and look at what Nick has written. Most of us here are not overly concerned with converting one another to our particular theological systems.

    Nick has engaged you at a thoughtful level, not at an ad hom level, so I don’t know why you are so strident. Some of us here have had close encounters of the unpleasant kind with cage stage Calvinists, and it is no more attractive to be a cage stage Catholic.

    If you take a look at Called to Communion, you will see all of the back and forth between people who have made your journey and those who have not. I encourage you to participate there where I think you would be more comfortable. You might even strike up an internet friendship with TurretinFan!

  109. @ Paula:

    FWIW I noticed the same posture from Grace Driscoll (when I finally brought myself to watch the video last night). The children were used as pawns. I was disgusted with that. They shouldn’t have been there at all. When it comes to husbands, wives can be biased. I know this of myself.

  110. “This doctrine is soul acid for women”

    And no one talks about how much this hurts little girls. It very much, very much hurt me as a little girl. I felt like god was my pimp.

  111. Lydia wrote:

    They scare me because they support a religious oligarchy. I just do not get it. They claim they want individual freedom when it comes to government but then check their brains…

    What’s interesting is so many evangelicals, especially the neo-cals, just rail against Catholicism being false religion. Oh how they just hate the idea of a Pope. Yet, they effectively set up all kinds of mini-Popes across Christensdom…Mahaney, Piper, Driscoll…

    I’m sick of Fundagelicals thinking, “If so and so says it, then it must be right”. That’s exactly what they accuse Catholics of. Hypocrites. (By the way, I’m not Catholic. I have a Baptist background, have gone to a conservative non-demon for years, and feel I need to find a new church. The shift toward strict interpretation about secondary stuff is pushing me away.)

  112. Guest wrote:

    “This doctrine is soul acid for women”
    And no one talks about how much this hurts little girls. It very much, very much hurt me as a little girl. I felt like god was my pimp.

    God loves you, and he hates what happened to you. I am so sorry that adults you should have been able to trust failed to protect you and actively abused you. There are some here and at other blogs who have suffered as little girls from this system, and I hope they will encourage you more than I can since I have not suffered what you have suffered. You are not alone.

  113. Grams3 I do adore you, you do a very good job. My mother and grandmother have been through the same things I have and they have no compassion. Obviously as you demonstrate one does not have to experience something to care about it and hate it.

  114. @ THC: hmm… I guess Anglicanism and Lutheranism aren’t in your equation, are they?

    No offense, but I would suggest a closer reading of church history. Jaroslav Pelikan would be helpful if you want to *really* dig into it.

  115. @ Guest:

    Mom and grandmother hugs coming your way. You made my day. I’ll pray for your healing–that you will see yourself as Jesus sees you–and for your mom and grandmother to see the truth.

  116. @ Gram3:
    I’ve come to my convictions regarding some of these things the difficult, hard fought way. We all have our personal experiences to be sure, and I try and avoid allowing mine to overshadow my belief that God is actively involved in these matters because his passion is for the church. But in discussing these matters I can’t help but reveal my own passions. And yes, I know through experience how damaging these things can be to individuals and to the thing we all care about: the Church.

    And thank God we are seeing a lot of the blemishes exposed and the spots revealed. The question becomes what these people do when it becomes known that they are the problem, the ones that despite numerous attempts to straighten them out, resisted the Holy Spirit and hardened their hearts.

    Everyone has their own story and no two of us are are alike, but when it comes down to issues of sin, there is a clear path that is the same for everyone.

    However, there is such a fearful thing as the hardening of the heart. If a person remains unresponsive to divine initiatives, then I think a person ends up getting what they want and it ends up being obvious to the rest of us what those things were.

    I see the Driscolls going their own way, relying upon their own resources like the Mahaneys did.

    Like Mahaney, Driscoll will no doubt entertain visions of further grandeur and will expect to come out of all this with the help of his friends. But like Mahaney, it seems highly unlikely that he will progress any further.

  117. Leslie wrote:

    @ Cousin of Eutychus:
    Like!!!

    Yes indeedy. The women would have become ritually unclean by attending to the Lord’s body, so men would not have done that work. By becoming servants of the Lord, even after he could no longer do anything for them, as far as they knew, they became the most blessed and privileged women. I can’t imagine the despair they must have felt as they stayed at the cross and watched their Lord die. But then they were the first to see him alive again! The last became first. The ones least trusted became the ones most trusted to deliver the good news to their brothers and rejoice together with them. For God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself and to one another. Hallelujah!

  118. @ Bridget:
    I’m glad to know I’m not the only one who noticed it.

    I think it was quite telling. In fact, I’d venture to say Grace Driscoll and the children’s posture on stage afterwards was a true and accurate reflection of the attitude of Mark Driscolls heart toward the church.

    I’d say it was staged and planned. And I could be wrong but my guess is the whole family exited out the backdoor immediately afterwards and avoided any further contact with the church, got in their vehicle already packed and loaded, and put as much distance as possible between them and the reality of what just happened.

  119. @ Paula:
    Neither of us knows what goes on when MD and Grace are at home.

    He certainly does have a track record of

    – blaming his own faults and problems on her

    – being openly and offensively misogynistic; often in reference to her and to all of the wives at MH.

    While I agree that there certainly must be a degree of complicity, I have no difficulty believing that such a dynamic can exist right alongside abuse (physical, sexual, emotional).

    But only God knows what happens between the two of them. I will simply state (again) that I am concerned for her well-being, and for their children’s’, and leave it there.

  120. THC wrote:

    I personally believe everyone should seriously look at the claims of Catholicism. I believe it holds up to any criticism for those who explore it using faith and reason.

    I’ve seen it all and done it all with regard to religion THC, which is why I shall remain a Jeffersonian infidel.

  121. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    Interesting how all the so called theological powerhouses won’t act on what’s clearly before them. They either see and ignore or chose not to see. Funny how many of these guys consider themselves so Biblically knowledgable and value precision in doctrine.

    No, they value Purity of Ideology.

  122. Paula Rice wrote:

    I’ve also come to realize many women who teach complementarianism like Grace Driscoll, enjoy the kind of freedom themselves that they seek to deny other women. While they enjoy dual roles, they tell Christian women they must have only one.

    There can be only one Queen Bee in the Hive.

  123. Guest wrote:

    I don’t really think he fooled so many. I think they just like the power, or they like the gross things he says. It is obvious this man is polar opposite of Jesus Christ. MD presents himself like a creepy vulgar misogynist who would lurk around strip clubs or porn stores. Nothing like sweet Jesus.

    that’s what I don’t understand, the pastors/elders didn’t complain about anything except no having equal power, and they didn’t do that even until the two got fired. no one still has said anything about elders being called by Jesus to read the private conversations of ‘sheep’ male or female. no one has said anything about the subordination of women. no one really left when MD was caught in plagurism, or profanity, no one left when MD made the bible S of S into pornfest. Now there are all these ‘charges’ about MD stepping down, why? Do the elders think its a good idea to keep the same theology/doctrine and just put a new guy in the pulpit and have him share ‘power’ with all the elders and that would make it any different?
    I liked Janet M’s post.
    it reminds me of the old fable about the guy getting ready to cross a river and a snake asks if he will carry him across and the guy says, no, you will bite me and I will die. The snake promises not to bite him and so he agrees and when they reach the other shore the snake bites the guy and the guy says how could you do that? and the snake says ‘you knew what I was when you agreed to carry me across’
    Acts 29 is so hypocritical I cant believe it also. same rule book, same doctrine, same training, (trained by the master who created Acts 29) but drops the guy when his sin gets so bad he can’t hide it. how many people are going to be soooo surprised and hurt when they see the actual implosion at Acts 29 churches and its new ‘leader.’ Is there something so wrong with people that they feel a need to be a servant to a church elder/group leader? they can’t follow Jesus or serve God without having someone tell them how they should be living? Isn’t that the very reason that the bible is written so everyone can read it, instead of having it only available to a priest who then reads it in latin? what I also don’t understand is why women would want to join Acts 29 churches. I used to just shake my head in disbelief when I would think about what woman would marry a guy from the Utah church that believes when the man dies he gets 7 wives in heaven. I mean who really wants to follow such a rigid lifestyle and not do so many things in this life just so they get to be a guys 7th wife in heaven? its great for men 🙂
    I really hope that God has mercy on all His children, its probably why Jesus had to stay on that cross so long, He knew what a huge mess we would make out of life and Holy things.

  124. Paula Rice wrote:

    However, there is such a fearful thing as the hardening of the heart. If a person remains unresponsive to divine initiatives, then I think a person ends up getting what they want and it ends up being obvious to the rest of us what those things were.

    Oh yes. I have been both places. A hardened and resentful heart. Deep in sin and denial of sin. Sure of my own righteousness at the same time despairing of my sin. My heart is an ugly mess if I’m left to my own. I want to speak out against all of these things we speak of here. And Gramp3 and I have done that and it has not been received well. Putting it mildly.

    I think we all have to be faithful witnesses of the truth. And that means calling out sin, and it also means praying for God to redeem a situation that seems hopeless. I don’t know if he will turn the Driscolls and the Mahaneys and all of their enablers and co-conspirators to repentance. But I know that he can because I know what he has done for me.

    I’m thankful people didn’t give up on me, and I’m thankful that the Lord has kept my heart soft toward people, even people I criticize harshly because they have hurt others, including me and ones I love. It sure isn’t easy, and especially when we have been hurt or betrayed by people who we should be able to trust–pastors most of all. One way we can help one another is by encouraging a posture of hopefulness and gratitude toward God in the middle of insane circumstances.

    I hope you can share more of your perspective and how it developed so that we can learn from what you have learned. We need to be as wise as serpents at the same time as we are mild as doves.

  125. Gram3 wrote:

    You might even strike up an internet friendship with TurretinFan!

    BWAHAHA! THC, Now there is a debate partner for you! (Eat your Wheaties)

  126. @ Gram3:

    No matter what the Patriarchal culture, they all fear and loathe the primal power of women. Given the numerous references in Scripture (in addition to those you’ve cited) which attest to the special place of honor the Almighty affords women, there is no excuse for any Evangelical boyz club to withhold full enfranchisement from half of their numbers based solely upon plumbing received at birth.

  127. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    Purity in Ideology is absolutely more correct. The neo-cals I’m around like to say “precision in doctrine” as much as they like say “Biblical”.

    But I find the Marxspeak version much more descriptive.

    Ask any survivor of Cambodia’s Killing Fields about Purity of Ideology and what it can justify. And HAS justified.

  128. “In Conclusion
    As we bring this letter to a close, we want to again reiterate that we are sending this as an act of love, not of defiance. Love is not compliance, but rather speaking the truth and seeking to walk in the light together. Brothers, we know that we do not stand alone in our concerns for our church. We stand as your brothers, risking our future for the sake of the bride of Christ. It is time for us as elders to “stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong,” (1 Cor 16:13) while still letting all that we do be done in love. It is time to take responsibility for our church, regardless of how much our current bylaws prevent us from exercising that authority. It grieves us that the only voice that has never been heard in all of this is the voice of the current elders.
    Lead Pastors – you can lead the way and your men will follow.
    Volunteer Pastors – you carry more weight than you know.
    Staff Pastors – Jesus is good and sovereign and he will take care of you.”
    http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/files/2014/08/Concerns-and-Critical-Information-for-the-Elders-of-Mars-Hill-Church.pdf

    that was from throckmortons file of the letter the 9 elders sent and it confirms my suspiscions that misogyny runs deep in this church, its all about the boys and their male followers. not one word about or concerning women or the effect a ministry like MH has on women or children. “…our church. We stand as your brothers, risking our future for the sake of the bride of Christ…” their future what? do they mean the well paying non disclosed salary of the pastors? the Apostle Paul had to sew tents to pay his way in life, and Paul never said it was paul’s church or the disciples church. I just get a bad feeling about both the past ministry and the hearts of all the men that were drawn to ‘serve’ in MH. Praying that they all will find Jesus in Spirit and Truth, that the motives of hearts will be turned to serving Jesus in humility, not as lords over God’s church. “Risking our future” might mean something if this happened in a small town somewhere, then they might have to move out of the area to get jobs without rumors about them. their future is not in the least jeapordized in a city the size of seattle they can get work in many places, the only future in jeapordy with this letter is their future jobs at MH. Its written like some martyrdom might follow when in reality its seattle wa not the back jungle of some remote country where their lives might be at risk. Quite to the contrary, their souls might be at risk if they don’t speak out and separate themselves from a ‘ministry’ of control and self grandiousity.

  129. ” It grieves us that the only voice that has never been heard in all of this is the voice of the current elders.” again from: http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/files/2014/08/Concerns-and-Critical-Information-for-the-Elders-of-Mars-Hill-Church.pdf

    I would risk a guess that that is not what grieves Jesus and God in this whole sordid mess. maybe the voices of the young girls that have never been heard from, probably the voice of the abused spouses and abusive husbands that never meant to take authority that far over their wives. and maybe the voice of the marginalized young men (especially effeminate seeming according to MD) and women that are still not allowed to speak at church except to other women and children. and young married couples that now have to try and get all the lust out of their marriages and make the websites that Driscoll pointed them to, stop spamming them. or the voice of those that were truly seeking Jesus and dared enter a mars hill campus on any given sunday and left never to seek Jesus again.

  130. i was reflecting on the tone of my last few posts and they weren’t very edifying, this whole MD/MH topic brings out the worst in me. my scripture verse of the day:

    So they two went until they came to Bethlehem. And it came to pass, when they were come to Bethlehem, that all the city was moved about them, and they said, Is this Naomi? 20 And she said unto them, Call me not Naomi, call me Mara: for the Almighty hath dealt very bitterly with me. 21 I went out full, and the Lord hath brought me home again empty…
    Ruth 1:19-21 (KJV)

  131. Linus.

    I have hesitated to weigh in, because this isn’t a Catholic forum, and I am just a guest here…but when I read all this stuff, I am struck by several things:

    ** Have these folks ever read the Early Church Fathers, especially the Apostolic Fathers — the earliest church leaders, who knew the apostles personally? If you want to know how the early church operated, you can’t go by the Bible alone, which was never meant to be an Encyclopedia of Everything — and which wasn’t even completely written, let alone canonized, during the first century. You also have to go by the Early Church Fathers. And what they describe bears little resemblance to Protestantism of any sort.

    *** All these competing systems of church governance based on one disputable Pauline passage or another strike me as reinventing the wheel, over and over and over again. I keep wanting to say, “Dang it, read Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome and Irenaeus!” But again, I am a Catholic interloper here, so I have been hesitant to say anything. Still ISTM a lot of the ecclesiological questions surrounding Mark Driscoll and Mahaney and their ilk could be resolved by reading how the early Church was actually organized — and you’ll find that in the ECFs.

    *** yes, THC is over-generalizing. This is a blog combox, not a peer-reviewed journal, and there are constraints on one’s time and energy. And yes, history is messy. And yes, what about the Eastern Schism? All of these issues can be addressed…but probably not in a combox! However, there are tons of resources available just a google click away, if anyone is interested.

    Earlier in this discussion someone mentioned that these self-appointed super-popes have no real authority, so how can they bind people’s consciences on any matter and in any way? That’s the key question, isn’t it? No pun intended. (Matt 16: 18-19. ;))

    Lydia wrote:

    THC wrote:

    @ mirele:

    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

    You lost me. Who was “Pope” after Peter died.

  132. Pelican is one eminently worthwhile resource. There are many others — including works of Catholic historical scholarship that you might find eye-opening. 😉

    No need to be so dismissive. If the claims of Catholicism were that easy to debunk, we would not have lasted two years, let alone 2,000.

    numo wrote:

    @ THC: hmm… I guess Anglicanism and Lutheranism aren’t in your equation, are they?

    No offense, but I would suggest a closer reading of church history. Jaroslav Pelikan would be helpful if you want to *really* dig into it.

  133. @ Catholic Homeschooler: I’m not intending to be dismissive of Catholicism, but the f THC’s more questionable assertions and drastic oversimplifications re. church history (*all* of it – Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant). Fwiw, I am Lutheran and spent most of the 1970s in the company of Catholics – I even lived in a small convent (as a guest on one hand, as a sort of junior member on the other – for a year, back when I was in undergrad). All that to say that I’ve been exposed to some of the best things about Catholicism and Catholics, though I admittedly do have difficulty with the trad people both inside and outside the RCC. (Mainly because I’ve seen bad things happening in those segments of the American church.) But then, I’m very much a child of the Vatican II era, and find many aspects of the past 30+ years/last two popes’ tenure baffling at best.

    At any rate, you’re aware that Pelikan converted to the Orthodox Church, no?

    As for how things are done, gosh – the way various rites used to be quite independent of one another plus ongoing changes (beginning very far in the past) re. ecclesiastical structure and administration (not to mention finer points of theology) make me come down firmly on the “maybe” side of things when faced with “one true church” claims from Orthodox, Catholics and other Protestants. (Please keep in mind that a lot of Protestants don’t believe Lutherans are xtians, any more than – as they see it – Catholics or the Orthodox).

  134. @ numo: and endnote: I think the church is something far bigger and, well, catholic than most of us ncan begin to grasp.

    As for my decade with Catholics, the interesting thing is that I’ve never wanted to convert. If anything, it all has made me more aware not the continuity of belief and tradition (though not necessarily what you guys view as holy tradition) and more appreciative of the unique things about where I come from. We’re not all so bad or heterodox, you know. 😉

  135. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Paula:
    I agree with your points. But to them I would add that, in my non-professional but old and experienced opinion, Driscoll exhibits dangerous, impulsive, and angry characteristics. Grace and the children are closest to that danger, regardless of how complicit she has been. I can envision him doing more blame-shifting to her. So, it’s both/and. We don’t let her off the hook for her part in this, but we also pray for her safety, for the kids’ safety, and for God to do a miraculous work in the lives of many people and churches.

    I agree.
    We want that woman safe & unharmed. Whatever she has done, or has left undone, is of no meaning meaning now, so long as she is in harm’s way. And as long as she is the only person that stands there, between him & the children.

  136. Lydia wrote:

    THC wrote:

    @ mirele:

    Every century since Peter has had a pope, so you may need to brush up on your history.

    You lost me. Who was “Pope” after Peter died.

    St Linus.

  137. numo wrote:

    @ Paula:
    Neither of us knows what goes on when MD and Grace are at home.

    He certainly does have a track record of

    – blaming his own faults and problems on her

    – being openly and offensively misogynistic; often in reference to her and to all of the wives at MH.

    While I agree that there certainly must be a degree of complicity, I have no difficulty believing that such a dynamic can exist right alongside abuse (physical, sexual, emotional).

    But only God knows what happens between the two of them. I will simply state (again) that I am concerned for her well-being, and for their children’s’, and leave it there.

    Precisely.

  138.  __

    “Give Us Seismic Religious Displacement™?”

       “Sopy, are you sure MD’s not quoting the same thing, except with HIMSELF as the Ancient of Days and Mark’s Hill as His seat?’ ~ HUG

    HUG,

    Hey,

    hmmm…

      Via inclination, impairment, illness, or illicit behavior, Mars Hill pastor Mark Driscoll has apparently ‘forgotten’ the purpose of his calling.

      The old republic having been swept away, –wether a tornado, an earthquake, or some other seismic disruptive displacement activity are tentatively scheduled for Seattle, you might refer ‘the matter’ to John Piper; since –a ‘Brother’, playing a proverbial religious empire dictatorial whirling dervish, now-a–days, might be considered acceptable behavior…in certain circles.

      For the consciousness of ‘error’ naturally produces frightened pastors, who are terrified even by the sound of a News team camera man come-a-knockin’… 

    …we all know, mega pastoral cr@p is King!

    (sadface)

    Sopy
    __
    Comic relief : The Eagles- “Dirty Laundry, Live @ Five…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzT10MSgKtU

    ;~)

  139. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    There can be only one Queen Bee in the Hive.

    At which point Magrat puts on spiky armor and goes berserk on some elves.

    Terry Pratchett, anyone?

    I’m honestly not at all surprised by leading women supporting complementarianism. Sometimes our worst enemies are ourselves. It’s part of being a member of a disadvantaged group: you fight amongst yourselves to gain the approval of those with actual power. You also see it in young women (late teens and early twenties) who start off dating profiles with “I’m not like other women,” with the implication being “Other women are all the bad parts of womanhood but I’m a cool one.” They fight for male attention because they are trapped in a system where male attention is the only thing worth fighting for.

  140. sam h wrote:

    “Risking our future” might mean something if this happened in a small town somewhere, then they might have to move out of the area to get jobs without rumors about them. their future is not in the least jeapordized in a city the size of seattle they can get work in many places, the only future in jeapordy with this letter is their future jobs at MH. Its written like some martyrdom might follow when in reality its seattle wa not the back jungle of some remote country where their lives might be at risk. Quite to the contrary, their souls might be at risk if they don’t speak out and separate themselves from a ‘ministry’ of control and self grandiousity.

    First, I think your tone is just right and agree with everything you wrote. It may be possible that these men can’t get jobs which pay a comparable salary and provide as much adulation as these jobs. I don’t know about Mars Hill pastors, but I do know that many young men are not trained to do anything else. I think it would be better for them and for the church if pastors had to deal with the lives their people live.

  141. @ zooey111:

    I guess calling him a pope throws me off a bit. I understand “Bishop of Rome” and even then not convinced every single Christian fellowship in Rome was on board with the title and a pecking order in AD 60-70’s. it is just a different way of viewing things. And I don’t come from a background that recognizes specific “saints” so that obviously does not help me either. :o)

  142. Gram3 wrote:

    First, I think your tone is just right and agree with everything you wrote. It may be possible that these men can’t get jobs which pay a comparable salary and provide as much adulation as these jobs. I don’t know about Mars Hill pastors, but I do know that many young men are not trained to do anything else. I think it would be better for them and for the church if pastors had to deal with the lives their people live.

    Yes, this is a huge problem. A few of the earlier (fired or resigned?) moved to my city to work for an Acts 29 church plant (which is now not Acts 29 but Sojourn with their own planting network). I cannot for the life of me figure out how they can pay them even comparable lifestyle salaries (for this area) considering the size of their churches. But my guess is they do and it is part of the SBC/Acts 29 financial arrangements. Driscoll DNA is all over Sojourn.

    When you go into ministry young and that is all you know, it is very hard to go any other route but ministry. If you couple that with the reputation MH has in the area with the unchurched or even other churches, it makes it an even bigger problem for the guys who hitched their star to Driscoll.And then there is Driscolls no compete contract which still cracks me up.

  143. Caitlin wrote:

    They fight for male attention because they are trapped in a system where male attention is the only thing worth fighting for.

    And men never fight for female attention. 🙂

  144. Lydia wrote:

    @ Catholic Homeschooler:
    THC, I just don’t automatically map the early church fathers to the institutional Catholic church. I would be leary of any historical source who does so.

    That’s precisely the one thing that you can be certain of. The Catholic Church has 265 popes going back to Peter.

    The Faith of the Early Fathers (three volumn set) by William Jurgens is a place for you to read what the church fathers actually said in their own words. For instance, Ignatius, third bishop of Antioch, a student of the apostle John, said “Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”

  145. He was really important – in the Internet age, Park Fiscal definitely built up the evangelical movement enormously.

    – Tim Keller

    Ironically, the Sunday before he came to Scotland he had preached a stunning sermon on humility, during which he confessed his own pride and weakness.

    – David Robertson: who, to be fair, was not fooled by Fiscal’s sermon, however much he was stunned by it.

    Either way, we have all read comments by people who admire Fiscal – and others like him, if less [in]famous – because of some particular outstanding qualities to his pulpit oratory, and his ability to draw a crowd with it.

    Point 1 of 3: False signs and wonders

    Jesus said, as we all know: For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

    Point 2 of 3: Only stupid charismatics fall for signs and wonders

    “Signs and wonders” refers exclusively to creepy outward manifestations such as miracles, claimed hearings, and crowds of people falling over and barking like fish. These things only affect charismatics, who are self-lobotomised simpletons craving emotional stimulation. We bible-believing evangelicals, on the other hand, crave the solid and sound meat of God’s word, teaching, and the feeding of our intellects. Therefore, we are immune from the seduction of false signs and wonders and do not need to concern ourselves with them. Our tests for falsehood, being doctrinal, are clear and biblically-based. Thus, when a good preacher goes off the rails, it is a complete mystery that only God can understand. It certainly isn’t our fault for doing nothing about it even though many people of course spotted his character flaws right from the outset.

    Point 3 of 3: Oh, no, they don’t

    “Signs and wonders” can be anything that grabs my attention and look wonderful. So if I’ve made doctrine and the pulpit everything, then when someone comes along who preachers for 60 minutes at a time with lots of quotes of scripture, and pushes what to me are safe, conservative doctrines, it’ll grab my attention. If he manages to pull a big crowd consistently, I’ll think it wonderful. And if I further don’t really believe I can be deceived – if, for instance, I don’t understand just how well even the devil can expound the biblescriptures – then I’m already largely deceived and the enemy can pick me off at leisure.

    Point 4 of 3: Many people fell for Fiscal’s signs and wonders

    He was important, you see, because he really launched evangelicalism into the internet age. A lot of respectable theologians who would not have let Todd Bentley preach to their dog, and who for that matter would have been deeply suspicious of anybody claiming to heal people of physical diseases, were instead seduced by Fiscal’s apparent ability to make reformed doctrine cool and popular.

  146. @ Lydia:

    Now THAT is interesting. So Protestantism has duplicated the same problem that exists in Pakistan/Afghanistan. Let me illustrate….in the Hindu-Kush mountain range on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border a lot of young people are recruited into radical Islamic madrassas. They are young, have limited or no education and are taught “faith” in these madrassas. They graduate and have no opportunities. They don’t have the education to go into a lot of professions, they get angry, frustrated, and they only have one option available to them: Insurgency against the Afghan government and American troops. Many of these people become Taliban and engage in warfare because that’s all they can do and that’s the only option available.

    So that’s the reason why many Acts 29, Josh Harris, Eric Simmons, etc… continue to do what they do. They can’t hold employment in any other avenue. They lack the education to go into other professions. Josh Harris has no certified training or experience. From my understanding Eric Simmons used to be a gas station attendant before he was a Pastor. And we all know about CJ Mahaney. He graduated high school, but my parents dog also graduated obedience school and has more education than CJ! 😛

  147. @ Eagle:

    Let me add that some of the professionally religious, whether or not they have alternative job skill, are so obnoxious on the job that they can cause disruption and distraction. We had one physician, a former missionary, who also was not particularly good at what he did, but how do you get rid of somebody like that and avoid a law suit on some trumped up charge? I am wondering if some of the professionally religious have tried other work, and/or know some of their comrades who did, and found that not to be how they think they can survive at least in part due to attitude.

  148. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Point 4 of 3: Many people fell for Fiscal’s signs and wonders

    He was important, you see, because he really launched evangelicalism into the internet age. A lot of respectable theologians who would not have let Todd Bentley preach to their dog, and who for that matter would have been detheply suspicious of anybody claiming to heal people of physical diseases, were instead seduced by Fiscal’s apparent ability to make reformed doctrine cool and popular.

    Excellent points. That’s why I think Keller’s remark was so very revealing about their complicity in Dricoll’s dysfunction. And I think it equally applies to their complicity with Mahaney. They are Gorilla-glued to the gorillas they promoted. Your last sentence was naughty. Clever but very naughty. 😉

  149. Nancy wrote:

    Let me add that some of the professionally religious, whether or not they have alternative job skill, are so obnoxious on the job that they can cause disruption and distraction. We had one physician, a former missionary, who also was not particularly good at what he did, but how do you get rid of somebody like that and avoid a law suit on some trumped up charge? I am wondering if some of the professionally religious have tried other work, and/or know some of their comrades who did, and found that not to be how they think they can survive at least in part due to attitude.

    I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. On the one hand, I think it would do these pastors a world of good if they had to work a regular working stiff job and maybe have a woman or GLBT person as a manager. On the other hand, if you were to bring a Mark Driscoll type into my group, *shudder* because he couldn’t deal with a woman manager or female team members and leads in a senior position to him.

    And then he’d probably knew more than anyone, male or female, because God gives him visions. Well, visions don’t work very well when your senior manager (also a woman) is asking pointed questions regarding why a system failed, what is being done to fix it and will that fix last a while or is it just the digital equivalent of duct tape? I can just see it now and I’d be hiding under my desk in embarrassment.

    Nope, it wouldn’t work, because, well, what’s that Bible word? Teachable. A Mark Driscoll type is not teachable. A lot of these guys aren’t teachable. IMHO, they need to get out of their ecclesiastical bubbles, start opening dialogues with both men and women and then listening without judgment.

    I see h*ll freezing over first.

  150. Lydia wrote:

    A few of the earlier (fired or resigned?) moved to my city to work for an Acts 29 church plant (which is now not Acts 29 but Sojourn with their own planting network).

    2 of those (House and Beltz) were heavily involved in the dismemberment of Myer and Petry. Down I 64 at the Journey in St Louis is Scott Thomas, a chief henchman. So just as you invented the category “aChew”, I am inventing a church for fired-or-resigned Martian pastors— Sojourney of St Louisville! (Just outsde Evansville).
    Speaking of chief henchmen, Jaimie Munson ended up at the coffee business owned by— wait for it– new BOAA member John Phelps!

  151. Paula Rice wrote:

    Saying you’re concerned for Grace and the Driscoll children may seem like a godly sentiment. I don’t see, personally, how that’s going to do them or anyone else any good if it’s not rooted in the truth.

    He’s disrespected her publicly. I greatly suspect there’s an iceberg under that tip. In other words, if a man speaks out against his wife like he did, there’s got to be other bad stuff he’s doing to her.

  152. Shannon H. wrote:

    He’s disrespected her publicly. I greatly suspect there’s an iceberg under that tip. In other words, if a man speaks out against his wife like he did, there’s got to be other bad stuff he’s doing to her.

    That’s the word I’ve been looking for all this time! He’s *disrespected* her. If Mark Driscoll respected his wife, he wouldn’t have dug up those things from early in their marriage (e.g., him being upset about her cutting her hair off, his “spectral vision” about her sex life prior to marriage) and put them in “Real Marriage.” Yep. He disrespected her. Some things were meant to be private. Mark Driscoll dragged them out into the light of day and, frankly, I’m embarrassed for Grace because of Mark’s disrespect.

  153. To weigh in on the Grace Driscoll discussion, I’ll just add my tuppenny’s worth.

    I am sure Grace is in an abusive marriage. I would put money on the fact that Mark is emotionally and sexually abusive. Given his propensity towards violent outbreaks and uncontrollable anger, I would also put money on the fact that he’s physical abusive.

    Yes, I know I’m going far here, but I have read many, many accounts from women in abusive relationships – and this one sadly bears all the hallmarks. Women are told by Women’s Aid her in the UK to look for ‘red flags’ from their partner. The fact that the general public have seen these red flags from Mark, never mind just Grace, is frankly scary.

    Not only is Mark publicly disrespectful towards her, not only does he have a track record for blaming her for his problems, but his controlling behaviour is well documented – e.g. he checks all her email correspondence before she can read it; she’s not allowed to cut her hair without his permission etc. These are classic characteristics of an abuser. Again, I refer you to Women’s Aid stuff.

    The fact that he expects [insert sexual practice] when she’s on her period, and expects and indeed tries to justify biblically [insert another sexual practice] and that everyone KNOWS about this is surely embarrassing for Grace (not that he cares) and to me, pretty horrifying. But to him, she simply exists to serve him in every way, and has little intrinsic value.

    This is a small thing, but I’ve noticed that when they’re making a joint public appearance, he is always touching her. In a televised joint interview, he kept his hand on her knee the entire time. It looked weird unnatural. Possessive and controlling.

    Another recent thing I noticed was when he publicly announced he was going to take a break from social media, he reported that Grace broke down in tears and confessed she’d been praying for a breakthrough for some time. This indicated to me that she was too nervous/ scared to actually tell him this beforehand. How awful must it be to have to be so submissive – to have to follow your husband so dejectedly – that you can’t freely and openly give him advice and warning when you feel he’s going in the wrong direction?

    So yes, I feel desperately sorry for Grace. I know all the arguments that she enables it, etc, but I feel that in this case, she is trapped in a situation and can’t get out.

  154. Let’s not forget one of the most disturbing tales of all that’s come out of Mark’s Hill.

    The demon trials.

    In which a lot of the bizarre, disturbing and leading questions posed to the demon are about sex.

    Dee & Deb covered this. Surely this is dabbling in evil practices and going WAY further than even the worst excesses of Neo-Calvinism.

    Again why has NO CHURCH LEADER called him out on this???

  155. @ Dave A A:

    Dave,

    Still trying to figure out how “Sojourney” (grin) affords all these guys. Just take a look at the staff on the local Sojourn website. Tons of “pastors”. All sorts of pastors. Elders as pastors, Lead pastors, just plain pastors, Exec pastors, etc. They have 4 locations here and not one of them bursting at the seams. I know quite a few folks who have wandered in and then out of the East locations. The one downtown is mainly seminary students from when I was paying attention to such things. Except for the original downtown location the rest were planted in decidedly middle class locations a far cry from their original declaration of going into the bad areas. One East end location is shared with an unaffiliated Christian school. That keeps overhead low to help pay for all those pastors but there was also a real effort to spread the Reformed/Acts 29 brand in the city in those early days. Sheep stealing, basically, in that world.

    They seem to be connected in many ways to Baptist21. The sons of Danny Akin, Prez of SEBTS started and run that para church SBC affiliated or and it looks like SBC funded, too. Gotta build the empire, you know. Gotta make a living in ministry off daddy’s name.

    Funny how things can change in 5 years:

    http://sojournchurch.com/2009/07/07/207300/

  156. @ Shannon H.:

    Shannon, Good words! Yes he has. The question is how much of that has become her normal? We just don’t know. When one hears for 20 years how easily deceived they are and cannot think the right things because of their gender, one might just come to believe it.

  157. mirele wrote:

    I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. On the one hand, I think it would do these pastors a world of good if they had to work a regular working stiff job and maybe have a woman or GLBT person as a manager.

    I have often mused I would pay money to watch this with John Piper.

  158. @ Eagle:

    Eagle, It is bigger problem than people think. These guys flock to SBTS and then have a hard time finding jobs they think they deserve. They expect six figure salaries by age 30 and only to “preach”. No pastoring. No messing with the peasants. And they want yes men elder boards. And worse, they have been indoctrinated to believe the pew sitters are ignorant and don’t know the true Gospel. So they expect people to pay them well to condescend to them. It really is mind boggling.

    Seminary is doing them a disservice. It is indoctrinating not educating.

  159. Eagle, SGM is a whole other kettle of fish. Did you know about the cushy deal SBTS was offering the SGM pastors college to transfer quite a few “credits” for grad work at SBTS? It was unbelievable they were not offering the same deal to actual SBC students. And when it went public the deal was rescinded quietly with NO explanation from Mohler. He just acted like it never happened. Which is what he always does.

    I think TWW did a blog post about it. I cannot believe Mohler, the “scholar”, even considered such a thing with an unaccredited 9 month “pastors college”. What is he smoking?

  160. roebuck wrote:

    And men never fight for female attention.

    Good point roebuck. It’s instructive to remember that it wasn’t a handsome Greek butt-boy who caused Menelaus to launch an armada against Priam’s Troy. Twas’ Helen, favored of Aphrodite.

  161. Lydia wrote:

    mirele wrote:

    I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. On the one hand, I think it would do these pastors a world of good if they had to work a regular working stiff job and maybe have a woman or GLBT person as a manager.

    I have often mused I would pay money to watch this with John Piper.

    Watching him Gnash His Teeth?

  162. May wrote:

    Let’s not forget one of the most disturbing tales of all that’s come out of Mark’s Hill.

    The demon trials.

    In which a lot of the bizarre, disturbing and leading questions posed to the demon are about sex.

    Just like the guy who wrote the Malleus Malefacarium. (Of which a big chunk of it is Demon/Witch Sex; that and Witches stealing men’s penises. Guy had as one-track a mind as MD.)

    On the ONE witch trial the guy was on before he went independent, all he would do was grill the accused about ALL the JUICY details of her Sex with the Devil. Got so bad the guy’s bishop threw him off the case — “I want this guy OUTA HERE!”

  163. mirele wrote:

    Nope, it wouldn’t work, because, well, what’s that Bible word? Teachable.

    Lesley and I have had a saying here for some years. Knowing how vain and self-important I am, you will not be surprised to know that I’m just a little chuffed with this little sound-bite:

    If ever it comes to a choice, I’d rather work with a person of faith than a person of sound doctrine. People full of faith can be taught doctrine. But people full of doctrine can’t be taught anything.

  164. Lydia wrote:

    mirele wrote:
    I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. On the one hand, I think it would do these pastors a world of good if they had to work a regular working stiff job and maybe have a woman or GLBT person as a manager.
    I have often mused I would pay money to watch this with John Piper.

    That presupposes that Piper has a marketable skill other than being John Piper. Trying to imagine that…

  165. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I’m just a little chuffed with this little sound-bite:

    If ever it comes to a choice, I’d rather work with a person of faith than a person of sound doctrine. People full of faith can be taught doctrine. But people full of doctrine can’t be taught anything.

    Had to look up “chuffed” because contextually I was imagining all sorts of meanings. Having now learned a new vocab word, I agree with your thoughts. Please try to keep in mind that for most of us, English is at best our second language. 😉

  166. mimesis wrote:

    @ molly245:
    Unfortunately, Driscoll is hiding in a large house with a big fence and elaborate security. When KOMO (a Seattle TV station) arrived at the house and tried to contact him, the police were called, though there were no arrests. It has been extremely difficult for most people to find out where he is living, never mind attempt to evaluate his family life.

    Does “most people” include the members of his church? I can tell you exactly where *my* preaching minister lives; in fact, I have been to his house several times!

  167.   __

    “The Spiral Of Silence?” [1]

    hmmm…

      “We have come to believe that a Power ‘greater’ than the individual in the pulpit, could and can restore us to religious sanity. ” ~ Step Two of Ten, of a Healthy Church…

    🙂

    Sopy
    __
    [1] Draw the Theory: ‘Spiral of Silence’
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq4lPwK2Yk0
    Comic relief:  “Another [Loose] Pastoral ‘Bit’ Bites Da Dust, Perhaps?”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWaMfLmF1sw

    ;~)

  168. Gram3 wrote:

    In view of the financial crisis at Mars Hill, I visited their online giving page and found a quote which is very puzzling doctrinally:
    “Your generous gift allows more people to be saved by Jesus Christ.”

    If anyone with an MDiv okayed that statement, their seminary needs to revoke their degree. 🙂

  169. THC wrote:

    To your first point, it is actually quite easy to demonstrate. For 1600 years there was only one Church. Actually, there still is only one today. Denominationalism didn’t exist even through the rebellion of the 16th century. It was a 19th century novum, propagated during the “second great awakening”.

    I’m sorry, but that is not factually correct. In fact, it is so far from factually correct, that it is not inappropriate to call it a monstrous fabrication. Many of us at TWW can read; some of us have seminary degrees; a few are history scholars. The facts of history, publicly and widely available, do not in any way support this claim. If you want to promote uniting all Christians under one denomination I suggest you find better methods, as some of us will immediately ignore opinions presented as fact that have no support among scholars of the issues.

  170. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    If you want to promote uniting all Christians under one denomination I suggest you find better methods, as some of us will immediately ignore opinions presented as fact that have no support among scholars of the issues.

    I think we have an acolyte of the Order of St Borg here:
    “YOU WILL BE CATHOLICIZED. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.”

  171. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    If ever it comes to a choice, I’d rather work with a person of faith than a person of sound doctrine. People full of faith can be taught doctrine. But people full of doctrine can’t be taught anything.

    Because they already Know It All.

  172. Lydia wrote:

    @ Gram3:
    Writing for Jack Handy? Have you read his tweets?

    I’m not on Twitter. Can’t fit into the size 140 word corset. Did Handy tweet something deeper than Piper?

  173. Tina wrote:

    mimesis wrote:

    @ molly245:
    Unfortunately, Driscoll is hiding in a large house with a big fence and elaborate security. When KOMO (a Seattle TV station) arrived at the house and tried to contact him, the police were called, though there were no arrests. It has been extremely difficult for most people to find out where he is living, never mind attempt to evaluate his family life.

    Does “most people” include the members of his church? I can tell you exactly where *my* preaching minister lives; in fact, I have been to his house several times!

    This sounds more like an evangelist, celebrity book writer, not a pastor. Oh wait…

  174.   __

    “Trasportare Su Mio Figlio Ribelle ?”

    hmmm…

    THC,

    Hey,

      All come on fella! …knock it off, you’ve giving our beloved Catholic brothers and sisters a bad name…

    🙂

    huh?

    …be on your guard precious Wartburg reader, so that you are not carried away by the error of proverbial ‘unprincipled men’ and ‘fall’ from your own steadfastness in Christ!

    YeHaaaaaaaa!

    Per Christum Dóminum nostrum. Amen!

    -snicker-

      “I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one…”  ~ Jesus

    Vous connaîtrez la vérité et la vérité vous affranchira !

    A la prochaine !

    ATB

    Sopy 
    __
    Comic relief: Taylor Davis – presents the ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ Theme…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnJ7uOK4nYg

    Inspiration interpretation: Mina Harrison: “Carry On My Wayward Son…”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Kf8a3vcjUc

    ;~)

  175. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    THC wrote:
    To your first point, it is actually quite easy to demonstrate. For 1600 years there was only one Church. Actually, there still is only one today. Denominationalism didn’t exist even through the rebellion of the 16th century. It was a 19th century novum, propagated during the “second great awakening”.
    I’m sorry, but that is not factually correct. In fact, it is so far from factually correct, that it is not inappropriate to call it a monstrous fabrication. Many of us at TWW can read; some of us have seminary degrees; a few are history scholars. The facts of history, publicly and widely available, do not in any way support this claim. If you want to promote uniting all Christians under one denomination I suggest you find better methods, as some of us will immediately ignore opinions presented as fact that have no support among scholars of the issues.

    I love your blog name, but you know proctologists are deep in you know what! Fundamentalist, nonetheless! But, you’ve stated your opinion. Thank you.

    May I recommend to you the book Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians” by Karl Keating?

    BTW, Mark Driscoll also has a seminary degree. So do most ministers called out on this blog. I have a Ph.D. Irrelevant.

  176. Haitch wrote:

    Those documents of Bent’s on JE – wow. If not done already, I’d be most interested in a critique by brad/futurist guy, being into organisational dynamics and all. So many things to raise, and perhaps this has already been said ad infinitum, but systemically I’m seeing a confused unconsolidated ‘Christian’ business. The mention of performance reviews and 360 degree feedback of the pastors on page 16 – ouch. I’m up to page 21 at the moment, these definitions in the by-laws (pp. 20-21) stood out strongly (which I hope is ok to repost here):
    Relation to God
    o A man – masculine leader
    o Above reproach – without any character defect
    o Able to teach – effective Bible communicator
    o Not a new convert – mature Christian
    Relation to Family
    o Husband of one wife – one-woman man, sexually pure
    o Has obedient children – successful father
    o Manages family well – provides for, leads, organizes, loves
    Relation to Self
    o Temperate – mentally and emotionally stable
    o Self -controlled –disciplined life of sound decision-making
    o Not given to drunkenness -without addictions
    o Not a lover of money – financially content and upright, not greedy
    Relation to Others
    o Respectable – worth following and imitating
    o Hospitable – welcomes strangers, especially non-Christians for evangelism
    o Not violent – even-tempered
    o Gentle – kind, gracious, loving
    o Not contentious – peaceable, not quarrelsome/divisive
    o Good reputation with outsiders – respected by non-Christians
    o Mutually submissive to the other elders
    Additionally, he must competently and consistently accomplish the biblical duties of an elder/pastor which include… (see page 21)

    The deprecation of holy celibacy in that list is disturbing. I’m firmly of the opinion that all bishops should be celibate, and that would include Mark Driscoll, who is effectively owing to the size of his flock the equivalent of a Metropolitan Archbishop or even a Catholicos (demi-Patriarch) in the ancient church. In fact I believe Driacoll has more in his flock than the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa did at the turn of the 20th century. Thus Driscolla books regarding his sexual attractions towards his wife, et cetera, have saddened me immensely.

  177. @ THC:
    OK, I think you’re trolling. Driscoll went to seminary where and when, exactly? As for your other misrepresentations of history, I’d suggest reading something a bit more grounded in reality than the title you’ve suggested.

  178. @ THC:
    Note: I generally like titles from Ignatius Press.

    Fwiw, Dr. Fundystan is Lutheran (as am I, though we belong to different synods). The same people who are rabidly anti-Catholic are also prejudice against the Anglican Communion and Lutheran churches, too.

  179. Darcyjo wrote:

    And by the way, the East-West schism that gave us both the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox happened in the 11th century, not the 17th, when the Reformation occurred. And the Orthodox would argue that the Catholics are the schismatics.

    They are. ( 😉 Retiring to my bunker now).

  180. Nancy wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    adequate systems of accountability were in place to stop him. But they didn’t function;

    How were they “adequate” if the “didn’t function?”

    I think that this is like the time that a group of young women were asking some of us [ahem!] older ladies about what they should have in the house for a family in the event of a natural disaster; what are the basics?
    People were checking off an elaborate list of canned, dried & bottled food items, & near the end of the talk, one of the young ones looked at me, & said, “Zooey, what have we left out? Anything?”
    I told her, as gently as I could, “It sounds like you’re getting ready for WW3, except……How are you planning to open all those cans when the electricity goes out?” Not a one of them owned a non-electric can opener. They had food for the apocalypse, though.
    I think that all kinds of preparations can be made, but it does you no good if there’s no way to make use of the safeguards, because you can’t use them unless you are the person who’s gonna start running out of control…..

  181. just pondering lots of things after reading a lot of posts today. First it never occurred to me that a woman married to an abusive man might be complicit, ie Sapphira (Acts 5:1) who was judged the same as her husband being in agreement with his sin. So the conclusion I have is that I don’t know driscolls wife’s heart and whether she is a victim of domestic violence and brainwashing who is vulnerable or if she has endorsed the lifestyle that Driscoll lives and preaches. Perhaps she treats women at MH just as badly as her husband treats them.
    that thought was followed by my thinking about what nick said about how many people were deceived by him, I could have just as easily been deceived probably. also it seems that the enemy of the church brings just the right flavor of deception to different people, ie the Todd Bentleys to deceive the flamboyant and the Driscolls to deceive those wanting calvanista legalism, and benny hinn for those others… praying I don’t fall for whatever is sent my way.
    So if the members of driscolls church were unwittingly deceived and are struggling to get untangled and returning to the True Lord, and if driscolls wife was deceived and has now to decide how to get out of the situation she and the kids are in, can’t it follow that MD was deceived and is struggling to figure out how to get out of the situation he is in and praying to be able to return to following the True Lord Jesus? I believe only God and Jesus know their hearts, I can only try to figure things out by the press releases, and pray that none of them tries to take their own lives. “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
    2 Peter 3:9”

    “In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. 2 Tim 2:25-26”

    I pray those things, but also I pray if their repentance isn’t today, or coming at all, that people will absolutely see the error of this MH ministry and not be deceived by it and that people that want to follow Jesus will leave that church at once, and get ahold of the Truth about Jesus and how to treat people.

  182. Sopwith wrote:

    __

    “For those people who felt abused and hurt by me, please let me hear you.” ~ James Noriega, Mars Hill pastor
    __
    https://www.facebook.com/jamesnoriega/posts/10204777781469290

    Hey soppy this is much like the other pastors repentance on the ‘repentant pastors’ page, don’t know if you read the others. I don’t want to get back into criticizing people when I don’t know their hearts but I really have a problem with people that get online and make ‘apologies’ that are vague and ask the people that were hurt to come to them and tell them how they hurt them. maybe im wrong but if I sin against a group of people and don’t go to them personally and apologize but instead put a ‘if I hurt you I apologize, let me know if i hurt you’ thing online I think that’s not a real apology or a real recognizing of my sin.

    here’s my version:
    by the way, i have been posting here a month or so and i have been going through a conviction of my sins that i have done here in my living room, sometimes i have typed in all caps, and sometimes i have used the b word. i may have sinned against some of the posters here at wartburg and if i have, well i combox at lots of blogs and if i have hurt any of you, please message me and i will give you my email or phone number so you can tell me how i hurt you and i will apologize, please understand that i have probably done this to thousands of people i combox with and even though i have prayed that the Holy Spirit would tell me actual instances of my sin, i haven’t heard anything specific so yeah, please if i have hurt any of you, let me know. by letting you know how many thousands of people i probably have accidently sinned against i am letting you know you are really not that important, i don’t even actually remember actual sins, just that i have had a bad attitude and i know you all probably read my combox comments from days i was having a bad day, so i am truly truly sorry for that, if it happened to you.

  183. @ sam h:

    Well, to be fair, it could have been a lot weaker. He might have said something along the lines of: A number of specific, named people have come forward and cited specific character flaws that I have ignored, with instances of specific wrongs I have committed against specific people. I have appointed a hand-picked team of friends and/or subordinates to examine these charges while I take a few weeks off for my own restoration and healing. If they do not prove to be divisive and rebellious against my senior leadership in the church, then rather than throw them under the bus – as I have done with everyone who crossed me – I will consider their verdict to be a final and independent vindication of my behaviour because I love you and I love Jesus.

    I don’t know James Noriega from Adam, frankly, but I don’t know any specific reason why what he Facetubed isn’t genuine. If you’re going to repent, you have to start somewhere, after all. Time and fruit will tell.

  184. Branching off from the idea of “If I’ve hurt you, get in touch and I’ll apologise”. There’s a difference between hurting someone, and sinning against someone. Obviously there’s a big overlap! But it’s possible to sin against someone without hurting them. You might, for instance, deliberately try to insult someone who turns out to be far too resilient and thick-skinned to be bothered; or you might steal some change from the wallet of someone who is extremely wealthy. But the person would still be right to point out your wrongdoing.

    It’s also possible to exhibit persistently wrong behaviour that hurts nobody but oneself, but that others around you can see; etc, etc, etc. My point is that a person does not have to be hurt in order to deserve a hearing. And by the same token, if someone wants to take issue with me over something, it does not follow that they must be “hurt”.

  185. Darcyjo wrote:

    And by the way, the East-West schism that gave us both the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox happened in the 11th century, not the 17th, when the Reformation occurred. And the Orthodox would argue that the Catholics are the schismatics.

    I am aware of that. But we were (and still are) united under a common understanding of the “Catholic” teachings, (i.e. Sacraments), Filoque not withstanding. Rome does acknowledge that the Eastern Orthodox are a valid apostolic Church. The great schism was more a result of cultural division (remember there were two empires) and the Filoque was a good excuse to break.

  186.  __

    Twisted Into A Penitent Pastoral Pretzel: “Be there, Beeeeeeee Square?”

    hmmm…

    …this latest ‘social media confession’ is quite possibly ‘desperation’.

    huh?

    —> no one @ Mars Hill is crediting anyone’s credit card.

    ;~)
    __
    Comic relief: “Marzhil Pastoral Used-to-Know(s)”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-rmRmm3bgY

  187. numo wrote:

    @ THC:
    Note: I generally like titles from Ignatius Press.
    Fwiw, Dr. Fundystan is Lutheran (as am I, though we belong to different synods). The same people who are rabidly anti-Catholic are also prejudice against the Anglican Communion and Lutheran churches, too.

    I guess when I read “Fundy” I assumed Fundamentalist.
    Let me state that I do believe that all who are baptized are brothers and sisters in Christ. We all have different understandings of what the church is and what is expected of us. The RCC doesn’t teach that those outside of Catholicism are damned to hell. Of course there’s probably a lot of that coming the other way from “fundys”. lol

  188. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    My point is that a person does not have to be hurt in order to deserve a hearing. And by the same token, if someone wants to take issue with me over something, it does not follow that they must be “hurt”.

    I have wanted to say something rather like that from time to time, but I have hesitated because it seems to me that sometimes there is the opinion that being “hurt” is the christian thing to do; whereas failure to be hurt is somehow a result of hard heartedness, and being actually angry over some actual wrong is a worse “sin” that the original sin/ affront itself.

    If I am correct that this attitude exists, then it is a real boon for the person who wants to manipulate and/or actually injure somebody else. All one would have to do is be minimally careless (not even actually offensive much less outright mean) and this would put the recipient of the carelessness (attack actually) in the position of having to declare themselves “hurt.” But “hurt” can appear to be a position of weakness in the eyes of the public, hence the saying “don’t let them see you cry.” Thus, in the hands of hard core believers in all this a mere minimal social slight can potentially be a “gotcha” in the hands of a bully.

    That all sounds absurd to me, but then I have been actually criticized on more than one occasion for failing to take offense about something, when the truth is that I did not even realize that anything had happened for which taking offense was even an option, the thing being too minimal to catch my attention. I wonder, therefore, if some of the “offense/ hurt/ apology” series is learned behavior to meet the expectations of a particular subculture. If so, people need to cut that out, not the least reason being that there are actual hurts out there and making a parlor game of “offense/ hurt/ apology” trivializes the actual hard realities of what some people have experienced.

  189. Nancy wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    I have wanted to say something rather like that from time to time, but I have hesitated because it seems to me that sometimes there is the opinion that being “hurt” is the christian thing to do; whereas failure to be hurt is somehow a result of hard heartedness, and being actually angry over some actual wrong is a worse “sin” that the original sin/ affront itself.
    If I am correct that this attitude exists, then it is a real boon for the person who wants to manipulate and/or actually injure somebody else. All one would have to do is be minimally careless (not even actually offensive much less outright mean) and this would put the recipient of the carelessness (attack actually) in the position of having to declare themselves “hurt.” But “hurt” can appear to be a position of weakness in the eyes of the public, hence the saying “don’t let them see you cry.” Thus, in the hands of hard core believers in all this a mere minimal social slight can potentially be a “gotcha” in the hands of a bully.
    That all sounds absurd to me, but then I have been actually criticized on more than one occasion for failing to take offense about something, when the truth is that I did not even realize that anything had happened for which taking offense was even an option, the thing being too minimal to catch my attention. I wonder, therefore, if some of the “offense/ hurt/ apology” series is learned behavior to meet the expectations of a particular subculture. If so, people need to cut that out, not the least reason being that there are actual hurts out there and making a parlor game of “offense/ hurt/ apology” trivializes the actual hard realities of what some people have experienced.

    Jesse Jackson isn’t the only Reverend who has honed “offense/hurt/apology/No! Apology!/NO! APOLOGY!” to a fine art of guilt manipulation.

    And diagnosing your opponent as “hurt(TM)” and “bitter(TM)” is just another way to blow them off, whether by Psychobabble or Theobabble.

  190. THC wrote:

    Of course there’s probably a lot of that coming the other way from “fundys”

    Yes, there is. Except for an occasional commenter whom you will quickly lear to realize, most of us are nowhere near fundamentalism in our thinking. The fundies are just as hateful to us and they are to you, and we have the scars to show for it. On the other hand, if you check some traditionalist catholic web sites (no, I am not giving a link-you can check it out yourself) there is some objection on the part of some catholics to the “liberalism” of Vatican II and the current “ecumenism” of the current pope. I am saying that there is some pretty strong stuff being said all around. To come along and say “not all protestants and/or catholics are like that” is fine, and true, but it is also true that some protestants and catholics are “true believers” even in stuff they don’t need to be putting out there for public consumption. Some things are better left unsaid.

    Example: During the time of Vatican II I was at a catholic hospital at one point and the following happened. I was walking down the hall with a department head (a rascal of a person) when coming the other way was one of the nuns of the group that helped staff but did not own the hospital. Here is the conversation: “Good morning, sister.” “Good morning.” “Sister, have you met (introduced me) she is a protestant. You know that now we have to call them separated brethren.” At which point sister whipped into an ultra rigid more or less parade ground stance and said, literally through partially clenched teeth, “I will never say it.” I was not actually surprised, because the first three decades of my life were pre-Vatican II and I had been around a lot of catholics and a lot of the older ways (some good and some not). None the less, this is still an issue in some circles. We don’t need to get into any pot calling any kettle anything.

    May I say that there are some catholics who comment here from time to time, and in my opinion they contribute significantly to the discussion. At the same time, one and all, catholic and non-catholic alike, have to portray a decent attitude to other people or discussion will deteriorate to hurling insults which is not a good thing. Notice, for example, HUG who is expert at saying things in a non-offensive manner. If you can refrain from insulting non-catholics, which means you might have to stop and think how that can be done, I see no reason why at least some of us would not be interested in your contributions to the conversation.

    Let me give you a hint to start with. There are a lot of catholics around, and most people have some prior interaction with catholics, for better or worse. That prior experience makes conversation dicey until one learns to trust the other person. I am sure that most catholics have run into some of the most obnoxious protestants on the planet, so this is a two way street. Trust takes time and caution, but it can be done.

    One more hint, if you plan to try to evangelize here. To say “the catholic church says it (or St. Whoever said it) and therefore it must be true” is useless when talking with protestants. We know that you all think that way, but I am not sure that you all understand that we do not think that way. There are other ways to communicate. “Catholic homeschooler” is pretty good at this as is “Elizabeth C” from time to time. No reason why you cannot jump right in an learn the ropes right along with the rest of us, I am thinking. I have no official position from which to say all this; this is just my opinion.

  191. Nancy wrote:

    I have wanted to say something rather like that from time to time, but I have hesitated because it seems to me that sometimes there is the opinion that being “hurt” is the christian thing to do; whereas failure to be hurt is somehow a result of hard heartedness, and being actually angry over some actual wrong is a worse “sin” that the original sin/ affront itself.

    Bingo

  192. Sopwith wrote:

     __
    “For those people who felt abused and hurt by me, please let me hear you.” ~ James Noriega, Mars Hill pastor
    __
    https://www.facebook.com/jamesnoriega/posts/10204777781469290

    @ sam h:

    @ Nick Bulbeck:

    I don’t know what to make of the social media confession dynamics currently taking place. In all fairness though, this one has more to it than the simple sentence that Sopy quoted. He has at least made himself available and people can message him privately via FB if they desire.

  193. THC wrote:

    May I recommend to you the book Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians” by Karl Keating?

    I’m going to try again. This is not an apologetics blog. This is not a blog dedicated to re-litigating the Reformation or arguing about which branch is better.

    This is Dee’s and Deb’s digital living room, and it is very rude to talk about things they don’t post about. If you want to talk about spiritual abuse or other kinds of abuse occurring in the church or supported by the church, either the Roman Catholic church or your former Protestant church, then this is the place to do that. If you want to debate the Reformation or promote Roman Catholicism, then again I invite you to check out Called to Communion and comment there, because that is the purpose of *that* blog.

    Roman Catholicism may be new to you, but it is not new to me and others. Once upon a time, I read in a book on church history the idea that God allowed the church to naturally divide *visibly* and *organizationally* to protect one part of the church from the doctrines of others. My paraphrase of the idea is that God decided to diversify his portfolio, if you will, so that the portfolio’s returns would be more stable. If someone knows which book that idea was in, I would appreciate letting us know so that he/she can be properly credited.

    And, bringing this comment back to the OP, one of the main problems with YRR theology is that it forecloses any intelligent discussion of its weaknesses and presuppositions and therefore becomes inevitably coercive. Now, you could contribute to the discussion by showing how the Roman Catholic church might display those tendencies. I’m baptisty, so that’s why I’m a bit overwrought by baptisty ignorance and arrogance and get a little wordy here about that.

  194. @ Lydia:

    yes, the Brad house and Scott Thomas characters. I’ve been especially intrigued with these 2, who featured prominently in an especially slimy way in the trial of Paul Petry. I never hear about them…it’s like they’re doing their darnedest to say below the radar, and reinvent themselves and their futures by pretending their egregious and foolish choices of the past didn’t happen.

    Have the word “apologized to the Petries” ever been linked to their names?

  195. I’m wondering if any of you have info, thoughts, or insight on something I’ve been wondering. Did MD and Rick Warren ever have any influence over each other or collaboration?

    MH was established around the time Saddleback was gaining lots of influence. Because of where I live, I experienced first hand and also know many people whose churches were “transformed” through RW’s materials. If you look at the materials that RW produced for pastors about “transforming”, there’s some pretty direct stuff about dealing with people who question and won’t submit your leadership. Basically, what RW taught was that if people weren’t with the new program (despite the fact this had been their church for 30 years) then they were an obstacle to deal with, and you marginalize them so they leave. Nevermind that many of these folks had served for years and been members of these churches for decades. You can imagine the grief that resulted. I saw it myself. These were established churches that were changed. This is much different than a guy who has a different vision and sets out to plant a new church. For many congregants, it felt like a hostile takeover. All they could do was walk away.

    Please know I am NOT trying to compare RW and MD. I am around a number of people who have ties to Saddleback and I don’t see the evidence of an abusive church culture that is like MH, although I would never say they don’t happen. Unfortunately, it seems there are always some with a large organization. I can say that what was presented in RW’s material and the way it was implemented resulted in many wounded sheep. Was it abusive? I don’t know. What I observed sure didn’t seem Christ-like, and I will leave it at that.

    I have wondered if RW’s material, popular back then, which emphasized vision and not caring about the congregants “in the way”, had a part in MD’s evolution. Some of the words MD has used over the years is similar to Saddleback-speak. Perhaps these similarities exist between a lot of mega-churches, celebrity pastors and that’s all.

  196. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Lydia:

    yes, the Brad house and Scott Thomas characters. I’ve been especially intrigued with these 2, who featured prominently in an especially slimy way in the trial of Paul Petry. I never hear about them…it’s like they’re doing their darnedest to say below the radar, and reinvent themselves and their futures by pretending their egregious and foolish choices of the past didn’t happen.

    Have the word “apologized to the Petries” ever been linked to their names?

    I have no idea. I am not big on the “apology” bandwagon stance. As my daughter’s principal told me a few years ago, one of his biggest concerns is these teens learn to say “sorry” to get the heat off but don’t change their behavior and do the same things over and over. Apologies are the new PR. Words not actions.

    These guys went to another Acts 29 church with Driscoll DNA all over it including the horrors of the redemption groups. They stayed in the same system that not only believes the same things but operates much the same way.

    I would say their “apology” most likely would mean little but would help their PR. Right now, Sojourn’s stance is “Mark who”?

  197. @ sam h:
    I appreciate your very thoughtful comment, and I can see in you a heart that desires that there be peace.

    To bring about peace and reconciliation within the whole MH affair, Mark Driscoll needs to repent. At least that is how I see it. Not only is there a pattern of sinful conduct unbefitting a Christian nonetheless a “Bible teacher” and a “Pastor” as MD refers to himself as, but also a pattern of his conduct being challenged, and repeated attempts by Christians to make him see, take stock, and repent – and then show forth the fruits of repentance characterized by greater peace with God and a restoration of brotherly love, unity, fellowship and peace.

    However, instead of compliance and a willingness to listen and to yield, we all have seen Mark Driscoll instead throw people under the bus, drive over them, and then boast about the body count.

    We have heard him challenged by Janet Mefferd about his plagiarism on her radio program, which has since been well documented and proven – not to mention other deceptions regarding his and his wife’s book making it onto the NYT best seller list – and watched as he immediately turned against Mefferd, challenging her for asking him such questions, and throwing her under his bus.

    The manner in which Mark Driscoll has responded to the Church has revealed something about the man that goes beyond, in my belief, mere deception. I’d say at this point he fits neatly into the category of someone who has willfully rebelled and whose sins have become public knowledge. Yet, instead of responding correctly and demonstrating he knows how to “accurately handle the Word of God” as involves his own life, we see him taking the whole process of his discipline into his own hands in keeping with the documented habit the man has of manipulating people and bending God’s word to suit his own will and purposes.

    I don’t read there being a biblical precedent for what CJ Mahaney did after he was confronted and his sins were exposed. He called in an association of men from outside the church who examined the charges brought against him, who then exonerated him and declared him “fit for ministry” – all the while enjoying a voluntary leave of absence. And it would appear Mark Driscoll is doing the same type of thing, including calling in outside resources of his own.

    What I read is that if a person does not respond adequately and appropriately to charges of sin brought against them, it is the Church that is to remove them from among them. I see nothing about allowing someone under such circumstances to temporarily and voluntarily remove themselves from their relationship to the church, while being financially supported the whole time by said church, and spend time “examining themselves” and “spending time with God.”

    No. It doesn’t work that way.

    And the fact he is doing this is further evidence of his rebellion and lack of fitness for ministry. And the people who comprise the membership of Mars Hill should see their field there covered in red flags, because the rest of us certainly do.

    The power here is in the hands of the people. And it’s the people of Mars Hill that need to act, and like others here have said, they need to beat with their feet. The Driscolls, Mark and Grace, have turned their backs on well-meaning, sincere Christians who have had their best interests and the best interests of the church at heart, and made it clear that their interests are paramount which they will defend on their own terms. As if they own the terms.

    What we’re witnessing here is serious business because it involves the Church. And Jesus is, above all passionate about the Church. Despite Mark Driscolls declarations of love for the church, and the impression he gives of living within the loving servanthood of Christ, it appears to me he has used the Church, fleeced the sheep, and run off like a typical hierling when trouble strikes.

    And this whole plan his wife agrees with, and like Sapphira – who was in close communications with her husband and planned out everything together with him – has no fear of God before her eyes. If she went along with the whole “Real Marriage” deception without issuing a single statement of apology herself, what prevents her from running off with her husband in the same manner Carolyn Mahaney did?

    It’s Team Driscoll, people. And the Driscolls are for the Driscolls. They’re in it to win it! As if the whole thing is some kind of competition.

    “But pride always means enmity – it is enmity between man and man, but enmity to God.” CS Lewis

    “Now, what you want to get clear is that pride is essentially competitive – is competitive by its very nature – while the other vices are competitive, so to speak, by accident. Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only having more of it than the next man.” CS Lewis

    “Prides precedes destruction; an arrogant spirit appears before a fall.” Proverbs 16:18

  198. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    If you look at the materials that RW produced for pastors about “transforming”, there’s some pretty direct stuff about dealing with people who question and won’t submit your leadership. Basically, what RW taught was that if people weren’t with the new program (despite the fact this had been their church for 30 years) then they were an obstacle to deal with, and you marginalize them so they leave.

    I have a theory about this. The pastorsforum was eventually pass protected because it was so horrible and people were finding it on accident and were blown away these were pastors writing. This was back around 2004 or so.

    It was nothing but pastors trading ideas on getting rid of people who were not on board. They always referred to them as wolves. And those were the seeker pastors! This was all the rage in the “Transitioning the church” years.

    So, yes I think the RW strategy of church growth sort of paved the way for that sort of thinking to become the normal. I was part of that world in ways I am very ashamed of now so I know the playbook. And RW was the big guru for that movement. When the president of Rwanda announced a book that would save Rwanda and named Purpose Driven Life, then what does that tell us?

    However, it has amused me to no end that the Reformed wing of evangelicalism who has been so critical of the shallow methods of the seeker mega movement have basically adopted many of them and quite frankly, much better at it. (I got a big kick out of RW speaking at Desiring God for many reasons)

    It is weird to be old enough to see movements come and wither away and see the carnage they leave behind. I would say both movements have more in common than they don’t. For one, they make the gurus very wealthy.

  199. May wrote:

    Let’s not forget one of the most disturbing tales of all that’s come out of Mark’s Hill.

    The demon trials.

    In which a lot of the bizarre, disturbing and leading questions posed to the demon are about sex.

    Well like Cotton Mather of old, Mr. Driscoll does ‘see things’ you know.

  200. @ Paula:
    Your comments about Grace Driscoll are similar to ones I saw here or on another blog over a year ago when I first started participating on these blogs.

    As I said then, we don’t know Grace D’s motivations, and I don’t think it’s fair to assume she must be just as bad as MD is.

    If Grace D. is codependent, and usually, codependent women stay in poor marriages, I would be more lenient towards her. Codependents often do not realize they have a choice.

    Grace may not realize it’s okay for her to speak up and against Mark to his face or in public.

    Compound natural codependent habits with the gender complementarian teachings she gets inundated with by other Christians – that women should be submissive to the man, speaking up about his transgressions would be considered unchristian for a woman, etc, and it’s no puzzle to me why she may remain quiet.

    Grace D. my totally disagree with Mark and his theological views, and she may even be miserable in their marriage and want a divorce, for all we know, but she is too afraid to leave him, or believes, as many Christians do, that divorce is a sin, so she feels “stuck” with the guy.

    If she is codependent and/or has very low self esteem, she may be too afraid to leave Mark and move out on her own.

    There could be any number of reasons why Grace Driscoll has stayed with the guy that don’t necessarily make her equally culpable or a horrible person. She might be as big a victim as the church elders and Mars Hill members M. Dricoll “threw under the bus.”

  201. @ Bunsen Honeydew:

    I can’t say for certain what direct links there were, if any, between MH and Saddleback. But the idea of creating deliberate strategies for numerical church growth has been around for a while; I think there was a meme going around and a lot of people were developing these ideas simultaneously. (A bit like the cultural revolution during the 1960’s both fed, and was fed by, 60’s music.)

    To be fair to Warren, his ideas are not all bad. It’s easy to see them in the context of cynical über_calvinist ideological take-overs of established congregations. But really, Warren developed them in the context of church congregations that were dwindling numerically because they had long ceased to reach out to non-christians. We certainly have a lot of that here in the UK, and I’ve seen it personally at first hand – i.e., “dying” congregations who genuinely understand that they are going to have to change if their churches are still going to be around even in 10 years’ time. It would be disingenuous to pretend that this process is painless, but I have seen tremendous good come from congregations like that re-inventing themselves to reach out more.

    Interestingly, the occasions I’ve seen it work well have been ones in which the desire to reverse the decline came from within the congregation, and not from a parachuted-in leader. But Warren’s “purpose driven church” book doesn’t prescribe any particular doctrinal or tribal basis – actually, it doesn’t even prescribe itself as a methodology – and there I believe it differs fundamentally from the über_calvinist Borg.

    I must admit it’s a few years since I read it, but IIRC, Warren basically reiterates the importance of the great commission, and more or less stops there doctrinally. Even with his practical agenda, he basically says, this is what we did: now don’t copy us, but take whatever inspiration you can get from it and develop your own thing. Warren’s broader vision is, I believe, an honest one of fanning into flame the local church, whereas the über_calvinist Borg is about converting and assimilating the local church into itself.

  202. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Warren’s broader vision is, I believe, an honest one of fanning into flame the local church, whereas the über_calvinist Borg is about converting and assimilating the local church into itself.

    Aaaaand I forgot to close the hash-tag. 🙁

  203. zooey111 wrote:

    I told her, as gently as I could, “It sounds like you’re getting ready for WW3, except……How are you planning to open all those cans when the electricity goes out?” Not a one of them owned a non-electric can opener. They had food for the apocalypse, though.

    Very telling zooey no? But all is not lost, maybe they have an APP on their ‘smart devices’ for opening cans?

  204. THC wrote:

    I personally believe everyone should seriously look at the claims of Catholicism

    I have, years ago. Read many books and blogs by both practicing Catholics, Catholic apologists, and ones by Baptists and Protestants and Baptists critical of, and ones by ex-Catholics who became Baptist or Protestant.

    I don’t hate Catholic folk but do not agree that their positions on many a topic is correct, especially at the fundamental levels (e.g., sola scriptura, sola fide).

    There was some guy on here over a year ago, I believe his screen name was Mark?, who went on and on about how horrible Protestant churches are, he was so abused at one, that he jumped ship to the Roman Catholic Church, which was fine with me so far as it went.

    However, he went into “hyper bash Protestant” mode, which entailed claiming only the Roman Catholic church is the one true church, Protestants are blockheads, they are wrong on every thing all the time, etc, in every other post he made, which is what drove me up the wall.

    It’s as though he was trying to convert every one on the blog to becoming RC, and doing so by consistently, vehemently trashing Protestantism. That was my issue with that guy.

  205. @ mirele:

    I am certainly no fan of how Driscoll treats people, and it would be interesting and maybe amusing to have to see him report to a woman or homosexual person. I agree.

    Having said that, I have worked with homosexual men, and one lady, who was either bisexual or lesbian, and it did not change my views that homosexual behavior is not morally acceptable or condoned in the Bible. I treated those coworkers no differently than the ones who were apparently hetero.

    People who don’t support homosexuality can get along just fine with people who are homosexual, on the job, or where ever else.

    I think it’s more the Mark Driscolls, due to gender complementarian beliefs, who would likely have a harder time, in reporting to a woman.

    It depends on the type of gender comp. I have seen some gender comps who try to differentiate life outside the church from life within, so some say they are okay reporting to a woman supervisor at their place of employment.

  206. Paula Rice wrote:

    What I read is that if a person does not respond adequately and appropriately to charges of sin brought against them, it is the Church that is to remove them from among them. I see nothing about allowing someone under such circumstances to temporarily and voluntarily remove themselves from their relationship to the church, while being financially supported the whole time by said church, and spend time “examining themselves” and “spending time with God.”

    No. It doesn’t work that way.

    Yes. Thank you.

    Further, I would add that repentance is irrelevant on the issue of whether or not he is “fit” and should continue. His pattern of behavior that has existed for years, and was brought to his attention multiple times, disqualifies him. Period.

    Repentance, of course, is another issue when it comes to his own personal spiritual condition, his wife and kids’ well being, and the healing of everyone involved.

    The people he hurt are not anonymous. They were staff members and people who loved him. They are people who worked with him closely. Further, on the We Love Mars Hill website, many listed their full, real name. If he wants to walk the path of repentance, a good place to start would be state publicly about what was done to these people and a plan for restitution. Some of these folks faced incredible financial hardship after having the rug pulled out from under them. Until this starts to happen, it would appear this is all words and rebranding.

  207. mirele wrote:

    That’s the word I’ve been looking for all this time! He’s *disrespected* her. If Mark Driscoll respected his wife, he wouldn’t have dug up those things from early in their marriage (e.g., him being upset about her cutting her hair off,

    I read some excerpts from a Mark Driscoll blog or book on other sites where he mentions being angry at Grace for having had sex with one (or more?, I don’t remember the details, but there was at least one) other guys before they married, but he admitted in a blog or book that he was not a virgin when he married her.

    I can’t remember if he said he lost his virginity to Grace, or some other gal before he and Grace married.

    Regardless, it seems a double standard for him to be upset with Grace for fornication, but he did the same thing (even if it was with her only?).

  208. @ May:

    I agree with your post and your assessment.

    Don’t forget one hallmark of abusive men, as mentioned by experts who treat them, is a big sense of entitlement. From where I sit, Mark Driscoll has a very big sense of entitlement.

  209. @ Nancy:

    For the sake of full disclosure, I do personally have a dog in the fight regarding “hurt”. My reasons for being a None have been challenged (kind of) on two particular occasions that I will describe here.

     The first person suggested that I’m a None because I’m sinfully rebellious, which makes it wrong
     The second suggested that I’m a None because I’ve been “hurt”, which makes it “understandable”

    As it happens, I don’t mind any number of accusations like the first. Being a None is a decision I take responsibility for, and I must accordingly face the ongoing possibility that there is some truth in it. But the second I find truly offensive. It’s just patronising. And it’s an excuse to duck the uncomfortable theological challenges facing the Splintered Church, with which many of us are grappling.

  210. __

    ” ‘Social Media Religious Sock Pupetz’ (TM), Perhaps?”

    Apologies are the new MH ‘religious’ public relations campaign strategy ; words not actions possibly rule the day?

    hmmm…

    MD: “Send out the sock puppets…”

    🙂

    ZZZzzzzzzzzz !!!

    __
    Comic relief – MD:  “Who Can It Be Now?”   
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1gMlZHiAwI

  211. Gram3 wrote:

    I’m going to try again. This is not an apologetics blog. This is not a blog dedicated to re-litigating the Reformation or arguing about which branch is better.

    Gram3, well said.

    THC it is great that you have that passion about your Roman Catholic faith. It’s nice to see someone really get into the spirit of their interests. However, the focus of this blog really isn’t schisms in Christianity but about speaking up for the voiceless, befriending the friendless and standing up to abuse. Personally, I’m atheist. Yet you will not find me debating atheism on this blog, because if I wanted to do that, there are literally hundreds of other avenues to do that.

    Thank you for the links btw. I’ve enjoyed learning a little bit more about Roman Catholic beliefs and opinions.

  212. Paula Rice wrote:

    I see nothing about allowing someone under such circumstances to temporarily and voluntarily remove themselves from their relationship to the church, while being financially supported the whole time by said church, and spend time “examining themselves” and “spending time with God.”
    No. It doesn’t work that way.

    To pick up Bunsen’s picking up of that phrase (and btw, Paula, thank you for your kind comment):

    You might almost say that Fiscal is a None with followers.

  213. Lydia wrote:

    It is weird to be old enough to see movements come and wither away and see the carnage they leave behind. I would say both movements have more in common than they don’t. For one, they make the gurus very wealthy.

    Isn’t that the truth! Pepsi/Coke. Or crack/meth. They are in the same business, but they’re fighting for market share. And each new movement is supposed to be a new and improved product. Or maybe something that looks totally new and fresh to those who are not so old, but which looks like a re-branding of something old and familiar.

    In somewhat OT news, David Platt, has been appointed head of the IMB. Which news will no doubt be received with great joy by women in the third world who will hear the Good News of the gendered gospel that God loves men and has a great plan for men to rule over them. That is going to come as a great relief to women and girls outside the West who have been struggling under a lack of male supervision.

    I thought perhaps Platt was not a kool-aid drinker because he came from NOBTS, but after listening to his sermons on “Biblical” manhood and womanhood, it is clear that he is deep into the misogyny that is trending today. He teaches that female subordination is a picture of the gospel. Proving once again that one does not advance in the System if one does not salute the Dear Leaders and swear allegiance to the System.

    May God bless every man who stands up for the true Gospel and for his sisters in Christ against these misogynists masquerading as bearers of the Good News of Jesus Christ.

  214. @ William G.:

    Per one of Driscoll’s blog posts on the topic (when asked by a young single man if single men can serve as preachers), he falsely believes that adult celibate Christians have no sex drives, that God sprinkled magic dust on them to remove all libido, and that is how he thinks we adult celibates cope with being celibate.

    Driscoll also feels (and this also without biblical support), that adult singles are made to be single so that God can and will martyr them for sharing the Gospel in some far off land.

    (Apparently married men and/or parents are not expected to be “offed” and martyred for the faith, only singles are expected to give up their lives.)

    Driscoll’s ignorance about celibacy and adult singlehood and childlessness is extraordinary.

  215. @ Bunsen Honeydew:
    Totally agree. The names and voices of those Driscoll has sinned against are not anonymous! And we are all affected by this, of course, for where one member suffers…

    Which is why my sympathies are toward the actual victims and not toward the victimizers – those who walked off the stage with their backs turned into their paid family vacation, far removed from the names and faces of those individuals who have confronted their husband and their Dad, whose kids didn’t get to go to some resort (I’m just guessing Driscoll took his family somewhere fun in the sun; they home school, right?) but instead went through financial hardships.

    Those are the people who deserve our sympathies, our concerns and our prayers. They are the ones who have been deliberately harmed while Mark & Grace Driscoll indulgently mollycoddle their kids, and give them whatever they want – exactly the way CJ Mahaney did. As if that proves what good men they are!

    “If you then, although you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children… ” Matthew 7:11a

  216. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    Paula Rice wrote:

    What I read is that if a person does not respond adequately and appropriately to charges of sin brought against them, it is the Church that is to remove them from among them. I see nothing about allowing someone under such circumstances to temporarily and voluntarily remove themselves from their relationship to the church, while being financially supported the whole time by said church, and spend time “examining themselves” and “spending time with God.”
    No. It doesn’t work that way.

    Yes. Thank you.
    Further, I would add that repentance is irrelevant on the issue of whether or not he is “fit” and should continue. His pattern of behavior that has existed for years, and was brought to his attention multiple times, disqualifies him. Period.
    Repentance, of course, is another issue when it comes to his own personal spiritual condition, his wife and kids’ well being, and the healing of everyone involved.
    The people he hurt are not anonymous. They were staff members and people who loved him. They are people who worked with him closely. Further, on the We Love Mars Hill website, many listed their full, real name. If he wants to walk the path of repentance, a good place to start would be state publicly about what was done to these people and a plan for restitution. Some of these folks faced incredible financial hardship after having the rug pulled out from under them. Until this starts to happen, it would appear this is all words and rebranding.

    Yes. Yes. Yes. All of what both of you said.

  217. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    For the sake of full disclosure, I do personally have a dog in the fight regarding “hurt”. My reasons for being a None have been challenged (kind of) on two particular occasions that I will describe here.

     The first person suggested that I’m a None because I’m sinfully rebellious, which makes it wrong
     The second suggested that I’m a None because I’ve been “hurt”, which makes it “understandable”

    Did the second give you the “There there” voice and condescending Pat-Pat-Pat on the head?

  218. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    I have wondered if RW’s material, popular back then, which emphasized vision and not caring about the congregants “in the way”, had a part in MD’s evolution. Some of the words MD has used over the years is similar to Saddleback-speak. Perhaps these similarities exist between a lot of mega-churches, celebrity pastors and that’s all.

    Didn’t both Citizen Robespierre and Comrade Pol Pot emphasize Vision and not caring about those “in the way” of the Vision?

  219. Paula Rice wrote:

    ..while Mark & Grace Driscoll indulgently mollycoddle their kids, and give them whatever they want – exactly the way CJ Mahaney did.

    But how do you know this to be true? How are the Driscoll an exacat analogue of the Mahaneys? Is that even possible?

    I’m not trying to be provocative, but your saying earlier that Grace D. = Sapphira was kind of startling to me; this is even more so.

    I am very, very sorry for the pain you’ve gone through re. your time in SGM, and I sympathize (having had my own awful experience of an SGM-like “church”). But I wonder why you feel a need to attack Grace Driscoll as equally culpable? MD might well have her terrified into doing what he wants, for all we know. I *do* know that I have heard that about some MH wives who were in group therapy; they were participating without letting their husbands know and would literally shake at the thought of being found out. (This from another participant in the group.)

    I have a feeling that MD, with his love of violent threats and consistent demeaning of everyone he doesn’t like (witness his FB blow-up over the post he made asking people for examples of the most effeminate “anatomically male” worship leader they’d ever known), that she’s scared of him. But that could just be because I’ve known emotionally/verbally abusive people myself.

  220. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    What I recall was that Warren indeed sold pastor handbooks/materials, and that’s where the ugliness got started. There were some uncaring methods to it. Like many people and organizations, there is not one that is all good or all bad. Despite RW addressing an important topic of dying churches, bad things happened along the way because he got specific (right down to words to use). The system and implementation was where things went awry. Also, this wasn’t done in dying churches. I saw it done in vibrant churches with healthy membership of all ages, who were steady or growing. The church I grew up in is actually a skeleton because of it. It forced out all the elder saints who were solid leaders and who also had financial stability to support the church. A church cannot be stable with a membership of 20 somethings who are in college or just getting started. That’s what happened.

    Because of my location, the stepfordism was VERY obvious. I got tired of the preachers with the Hawaiian shirt, slicked back hair, using the lingo such as “campus” to talk about the church property. It felt very Orwelian. Perhaps in the UK, this wasn’t how it all went down, and people were more individual and light handed with how they implemented RW’s concepts.

    What you say about how the neo-cals don’t like his more light, seeker preaching is interesting. One can clearly see how they look alike in many ways, despite differences.

    Anyway, I didn’t mean to get the thread off topic on RW, but I’ve wondered about him in context with MD and MHC because of timing. On the West Coast, RW’s system was full swing by 1999, much earlier than the rest of the country.

  221. Lydia wrote:

    And RW was the big guru for that movement. When the president of Rwanda announced a book that would save Rwanda and named Purpose Driven Life, then what does that tell us?

    Glad you mentioned this Lydia, and I’m also glad that Warrren got called out for his complicity in the horrific persecution of gay and lesbian folk in Rwanda. Warren’s true colors also emerged with his unequivocal support for the brutal dictator Paul Kagame.

  222. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    I completely understand. There are many of us who have been more left by “the church” than we have left “the church” but who passionately remain members of the true Church, the eternal community that is comprised of believers from all over the world!

    But I’m hopeful and very optimistic because, despite these ugly things we discuss, I’m seeing the structural damage in the Church being diagnosed and repaired from within. I’m confident this is to prepare us for a greater weight of glory!

    “I will build my church, and the powers of hell will not conquer it.” Matthew 16:18

  223. @ numo:
    It’s my perspective. And this isn’t my first rodeo. As far as the mollycoddling, that is my opinion.

    And I say that, in part, based on how I saw the Mahaneys do the same thing.

    I think there’s a pattern here.

    I don’t know who you are, but if you were involved in SGM, then I’d guess you’d see a pattern here too.

    These guys use their families as the main platform for their ministries. For anyone who spent time in SGM, that’s just Leadership Training 101.

    The Mahaneys cut away from CLC with the whole clan in tow. Positions, educational degrees, houses, allowances, expensive family vacations were all part of the package plan. Their allegiance was bought and paid for.

    Why should this come as any surprise? It’s what hierlings do. It’s how they raise their children, too.

    And what is shocking about comparing these women to Sapphira? I’d say, in many ways what they’ve done SURPASSES the sin of Sapphira.

  224. @ Paula Rice: I think talking about the Mahaneys is one thing, but making a wholesale series of assumptions about Grace Driscoll and her kids is just taking things too far.

    yes, there *might* be similarities, but we don’t know what’s going on in Seattle, really – neither of us, nor anyone else who comments on this blog. I think there are understandable reasons for concern about both Grace D. and the Driscoll kids, which were detailed upthread by other commenters.

    Lots of us here have personal experience of abusive churches; I have friends at both CLC and FX and I wish to God they’d all leave. (You can take the church out of SGM, but you can’t take SGM out of the church so easily.) The places where I was weren’t SGM affiliated, but all were born out of the discipleship/shepherding fiasco and had touches of Gothardism and the harshest sorts of neo-Cal thought thrown in for good (well, bad!) measure. I was actually booted out and shunned at the last of hat series of churches, in late 2002. It’s taken me over a decade to realize that I don’t need to be afraid anymore, and even then, there are still scars. The old thinking can be a hard habit to break.

    So, that’s me. This is a place that attracts lots of people who’ve been hurt by churches. There are even other former SGMers here. But I don’t know what that has to do with Grace Driscoll or the Driscoll kids, really.

    Again, I am *not* trying to be dismissive of your experiences or to minimize anything you’ve been through/are still in the process of working out, if for no other reason than that I’ve been there, and on bad days, am still there (but far less so than 3-5 years ago). I *know* it takes time to recover from trauma.

  225. @ Paula Rice: Finally, I think it is jsut unfair to assume that “these women” = Sapphira.

    You might be able to substantiate this re. Carolyn Mahaney, but neither Grace Driscoll nor any other woman married to an abusive man in s position of power (*any* position of power, not just in a church) is a carbon copy of either C. Mahaney or Sapphira.

  226. @ numo:
    Oh, that’s right. I remember now you saying how you have friends in SGM churches, including the one I attended for 12+ years while CJ Mahaney was Senior Pastor – Covenant Life Church – that I left in protest in 2001 after raising what I saw as serious doctrinal issues concerning the exclusive emphasis on the cross the cross the cross. That was the last straw, preceded by plenty of other confrontations with leadership.

    And you saw you had a horrible “SGM-like” church experience?

    Have you ever revealed what that church was? Can you provide a little more detail? How long were you involved? Did you confront any of the problems?

    I’m just curious, especially seeing how closely connected you are to friends within SGM that you’re no doubt in touch with. Hopefully your story of coming out of you own horrible SGM-like church has had an impact on them, assuming they all know what you’re talking about.

    And knowing your horrible church experience would, of course allow others to feel really, really, really bad for you, too.

  227. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Branching off from the idea of “If I’ve hurt you, get in touch and I’ll apologise”. There’s a difference between hurting someone, and sinning against someone. Obviously there’s a big overlap! But it’s possible to sin against someone without hurting them. You might, for instance, deliberately try to insult someone who turns out to be far too resilient and thick-skinned to be bothered; or you might steal some change from the wallet of someone who is extremely wealthy. But the person would still be right to point out your wrongdoing.

    It’s also possible to exhibit persistently wrong behaviour that hurts nobody but oneself, but that others around you can see; etc, etc, etc. My point is that a person does not have to be hurt in order to deserve a hearing. And by the same token, if someone wants to take issue with me over something, it does not follow that they must be “hurt”.

    I was thinking maybe since all their apologies are so similar, let me know if I have hurt you/sinned against you, that they may have gone to re-pentance group which is right between re-surgance group and re-train group which is followed by re-frame what actually happened group, which handouts our lawyers prepared so that we can admit wrong without admitting wrong (liability)
    because mars hill is run so much more like a business than a church my mind wanders to what do ceo’s and executive managers say when it looks like the company is falling apart and no one is buying our product anymore. I posted in another thread about jeffsavage aka jeff betger and his similar apology and what he is actually tweeting these days which still looks nothing like Jesus

  228. @ Bunsen Honeydew:

    That’s interesting, and not in a good way.

    The comparison that comes to mind is the manna in the wilderness. It was fine for a day, but if you kept it past its eat-by date it stank and rotted. Similarly, a concept like being purpose-driven is great for church congregations that have drifted into serious decline and have only been existing for the sake of existing. But turned into a franchised / merchandised product, and you get maggots.

  229.   __

    “Bucking Da Brand Bully?”

    hmmm…

      Will Mark Driscoll suffer the risk of professional discipline?

    huh?

      How is that ‘now’ possible at Mars Hill Church?

    ( i.e. how does dat work exactly?)

    Will MD continue to ‘fire’ dissenting voices? 

    Will ‘This Man’ continue to be ‘The Message’?

    Krunch!

    …stay tune’d

    *

    …Let love of the brethren continue; do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers as well, for by this some have ‘entertained’ angels without knowing it.…

    (grin)

    Sopy
    __
    Inspirational relief: Taylor Davis – “Last of the Mohicans” Theme
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGt_KpgXymU

    Bonus: Conductor Trevor Jones- “Last of the Mohicans”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FGxdBzjuGw

    ;~)

  230. @ Paula Rice:
    If you don’t mind, I’d rather not go into details here, other than to say that the church that booted me is in DC, and that I lived in NoVA for many years. I’ve told bits and pieces of my story her in comments over the past several years, but never in full, because I’m not sure that rehashing it in a public forum would be helpful to anyone (very much including me). I have no desire to get anyone to feel badly for me; what would be the point? Learning to move forward and gain confidence is crucial to me and, I suspect, to other survivors.

    As for being in contact, not really. It’s a difficult thing and I’m not sure they would accept my POV on being part of an abusive church vs. leaving. I can understand – I spent years and years living in the kind of tension that comes from sensing that things are profoundly off but knowing there’ll be hell to pay if/when you (plural “you”) begin openly questioning.

  231. @ Sopwith:
    We share some very similar music tastes Sopwith. Love that album. The switch in composers resulted in some very awesome music playing off each other.

  232. Gram3 wrote:

    This is Dee’s and Deb’s digital living room, and it is very rude to talk about things they don’t post about.

    If you didn’t notice, I did initially comment on what this thread was about. Sorry if I just gave an unpopular opinion. Just looking at the numbers, I only responded to 20% of the posts that were directed at me.

    If you want to start pointing fingers, at least be equally consistent with others and yourself. You also gave commentary in your post which either was going to continue the debate (somebody have the book reference?) or to “have the last word” on the subject. I don’t know.

    You tell me to talk about abuse, but it seems that many here don’t hold themselves quite to the same standard when it comes to those who express their deep convictions on this blog. How about a “thanks for sharing THC, I don’t agree but that’s something I didn’t consider” on my post instead of immediately heaping hot coals. You hate when Driscoll does it, do you do it?

    And, Gram3, if you are a moderator on this board, then go ahead and have the last word, again.

  233. Gram3 wrote:

    In somewhat OT news, David Platt, has been appointed head of the IMB.

    What’s the IMB?

    I’ve read ‘Radical’. It was imbued with Calvinism but my friends loved it :/

  234. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    Personally, I’m atheist.

    You know, I really appreciated Richard Hitchens. I have watched many hours of his debates on Youtube. Very smart guy. Though he actually calls himself an antitheist. He opposed most religions.

  235. @ numo:

    Yeah, I second the call not to go too far in speculating about Grace Driscoll. It’s one thing to point out that Mark has exhibited public behavior that’s abusive (which is just obvious and easily demonstrated), another thing to act as if you (general you, not you personally) know exactly what’s going on behind closed doors. We don’t know for sure if she’s being abused, how she feels about Mark, if she acts like Mark, etc.

    None of this is to say that I don’t understand the concerns of those who have dealt with abusers. I think many of them are valid and much more than possible, and it wouldn’t surprise me if certain things were going on. But this still isn’t the same as a publicly demonstrable fact, so it should probably be left at “I’m concerned about X because…” until we have solid information.

  236. @ THC:

    I’m not a moderator, for which all are duly thankful. You can make a valuable contribution on the topics here, I have no doubt, and I hope you will. And you can contribute another perspective at Called to Communion, since that is run by converts to Catholicism.

    Having the last word…well, I can always try. 😉

  237. May wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    In somewhat OT news, David Platt, has been appointed head of the IMB.
    What’s the IM
    I’ve read ‘Radical’. It was imbued with Calvinism but my friends loved it :/

    Sorry about the lingo–it has become somewhat second nature and I don’t think about it. Thanks to Dave for translating.

    The thing with Radical is that it is just more legalism and guilting and shaming except it is about money. He got some pushback about that even from the Calvinist tribe.

  238. @ Daisy:

    He had some sort of “vision” about her fooling around with some guy on a Senior trip. By the way, he was dating her at this time too, and he was fooling around with her too.

    He questioned her about this right after he had the “vision”. They were married and she was very pregnant with their first child. Imagine having to deal with this during such a time, after having been married for awhile? Seriously, if he needed to know about every single guy, why didn’t he ask about it before they got married?

    It would appear his past didn’t matter to Grace. It would appear she didn’t throw it in his face. I guess it was okay for her to fool around with him, but not the other guy. He felt the need to talk/write all about this openly. It must be hard to be married to someone who has such double standards and loves to talk about private things openly. Why was she shamed over something from years ago?

    There’s a lot one could interpret from this one story alone. Yes, I too, feel concern for Grace but will refrain from assumptions.

  239. @ Hester:

    I’m inclined to agree. The one person who is fully competent and authorised to say whether Pace Fiscal * is being abused is Pace Fiscal herself. As far as I know, she has never hinted at such a thing.

    To do so might be easier said than done, for many reasons. But that would be offset, at least a little, by the growing Church Under The Bus – all the believers who have either established, or joined, much better and healthier church groups. On paper at least, it may be getting easier to extract oneself from MH.

    * Sorry – had to think fast there

  240. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Branching off from the idea of “If I’ve hurt you, get in touch and I’ll apologise”. There’s a difference between hurting someone, and sinning against someone. Obviously there’s a big overlap!

    I’ve just been spending some curiosity time on Mr Noriega. I did see on his Facebook that he’s recently gone to/apologized to/been forgiven by at least one individual. Even if that’s the only one, he’s already made a better start than Fiscal. We can hope for his further improvement.
    Another Facebook commenter suggested he still needs to get off his high horse and
    “Then only then will I or any other man accept your “sorry”
    Turn it into an apology!
    And that is out of love brother.”
    This points to a a problem many of the 21 who brought the formal charges may have with those they abused– they’re still in professional ministry positions of authority. Noriega vanished from Mars Hill without a trace around 3 years ago, then started a business-try about 2 years ago teaching churches to do counseling. If I understand the Martian “Redemption Groups” correctly, the very counseling methods he still promotes are responsible for much of the abuse. Someone familiar with redemption groups can enlighten us further.
    I just read statements from others of the 21 — Gaydos and Kraft (both still professional ministry leaders, BTW)– and speak of owe who are “hurting” in the same way. I think only a couple from that group have publicly apologized to Petry, who was publicly denounced.

  241. @ Nick:

    Curious question that I’ve wondered about a long time and never remembered to ask – why Park Fiscal instead of his real name? 🙂

  242. @ Hester:
    He had me confused there with “Pace” Fiscal! 🙂
    In my last comment, I was unfair and inaccurate to say only a “couple” had publicly apologized. I can think of at least several and I’m sure more have– but more should!

  243. @Daisy

    Additionally…my husband became a Christian after college and regrets things he did during that time. He had steady girlfriend and much from that relationship he would undo if he could.

    I do not need to know details. Imagining him doing things in his dorm room with his GF isn’t a “vision”–it’s a sound, logical, reasonable conclusion. It’s also a situation Jesus paid for on the cross and one I can have peace about because of the entire context. I have never understood all the “vision” talk by MD and why people don’t raise eyebrows at this.

    It astounds me how MD responds to things like a 16 year old…repeatedly. He offers very little grown up, wise perspective, yet is thought of so highly because of doctrine. So disgusting.

  244. Paula Rice wrote:

    you have friends in SGM churches, including the one I attended for 12+ years while CJ Mahaney was Senior Pastor – Covenant Life Church – that I left in protest in 2001 after raising what I saw as serious doctrinal issues concerning the exclusive emphasis on the cross the cross the cross. That was the last straw, preceded by plenty of other confrontations with leadership.

    Paula, I’m curious about the attraction SG had for you and your family and still has for the people you know that are still there. I know how we got the totally wrong idea about our last church, in spite of warning flags, and I’ve thought about why we did and why others don’t. It would be interesting to hear what you think the big attraction is for CJ and/or his teaching. What do you think are the biggest dangers in that system?

  245. @ Dave A A:

    It does make you wonder: what does repentance look like? I suppose people to whom Jesus said your sins are forgiven, or words to that effect, would provide some hints. Zacchaeus (other spellings are available!) was the closest thing I can think of in the Gospels to being a person who abused others, given what is known about how the Roman system of tax-collection worked. And he made some significant reparations.

  246. Dave A A wrote:

    He had me confused there with “Pace” Fiscal!

    Me too! For some reason I immediately parsed it as Latin for ‘peace’ – so in my mind it sounded like pah-chay, which doesn’t rhyme with Grace 🙂

  247. Hester wrote:

    @ Nick:
    Curious question that I’ve wondered about a long time and never remembered to ask – why Park Fiscal instead of his real name?

    I can’t remember when I first used it, but it was kind of a joke that became a habit. I think my reasoning at the time included (inter alia) a desire not to make him any more google-heavy than he already was!

    He’s not the only one. Merry Global is another. I can’t think of a rhyme for “Furtick”, and Rick Warren isn’t controversial in the same way. It so happens that I have never referred to Grace before this evening!

    I will never refer to their children, jokingly or otherwise, in the context of any controversy involving their father. (In years to come, they may become prominent in their own right. And who knows? perhaps for really good reasons.)

  248. @ Gram3:

    I have no doubt you’ve spent time at that other blog. Not my thing really. But good for you.

    I comment here because of a couple things:

    1) TWW spoke out about Ed Young, Jr. (he hates to be called junior) when very few other people would.
    2) I could see the problems associated with other denominational preachers that were exposed, i.e. MD.

    You know this blog name is associated with Martin Luther and the reformation, right? The Wartburg Castle, where Martin Luther stayed after he was excommunicated from the Catholic Church? The comparison is that this blog is a place of refuge from the big, bad power-hungry sword-wielding, authoritative Church who is willing to take your life in order to preserve the structure?

    Fast-forward. I am now a Catholic. Part of it has to do with this blog. Funny thing is, TWW makes one start asking tough questions. Was Martin Luther truly a reformer? Did his “here I stand, I can do no other” really make him a victim?

    I’d really like for Dee and Deb to give their opinion on that. Open it up for comment. Was Martin Luther a reformer or rebel? Was Martin Luther a heretic or did he restore doctrines of the early church? Was he suffering from a mental illness? Should he have been excommunicated, Why or why not? In those days, Church and state were mixed and that didn’t bode well for those who were excommunicated.

    I have watched the movie Luther several times over the years and I used to empathize with Martin Luther, as a victim. But then I started seeing things differently. Don’t get me wrong, the church had problems back then, namely the sale of indulgences. Tetzel was absolutely wrong. But Luther, had his own demons. He wholesale rewrote doctrines of the Church based on misguided understanding and personal sins. Scrupulosity for one.

    I wonder what would have happened if Luther truly understood the actual teachings of the Church on indulgences and not the heretical view of an individual Catholic (Tetzel)?

  249. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    Interesting! I watched Tsonga play and was impressed by his game, although I noticed he has issues with his accuracy.

    I, of course, would always place the ball exactly where it needed to go based on my hundreds of hours of watching my favorite sport on TV, xD

    I must say I prefer Wimbledon over all the other tournaments, by far. And there’s still something about the Monarchy and Royal Box, although I’m glad July 4th always happens during Wimbledon haha!

  250. @ Gram3:

    Oh, that goes back a long way, to 1989 when SGM was People of Destiny, International, to the days when Larry Tomzcak was on board. Afterwards the ministry proceeded through numerous mutations in keeping with Mahaneys chameleon-like nature.

    And I apologize for not being familiar with your comments well enough to know where you come from, although I did take note when you mentioned you had problems with complementarianism. We’re you ever involved with a Sovereign Grace Ministries Church?

    Sorry to ask. I just have no idea about you since I don’t think you were around last I was here commenting. Welcome! I’ve been around the blog for quite some time.

  251. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    In my view the whole thing was political/economic and the rally cry was indulgences. In the end, there was another state church. There was no real distinction in political function with a state church on either side. The 95 Theses were mainly about indulgences. All that money going to Rome and the electors/princes were not happy about that at all. All of history is very nuanced. There are no real black and white sides to it. The history of Christianity is a bloody evil mess on both sides of the state church divide.

  252. Gram3 wrote:

    In somewhat OT news, David Platt, has been appointed head of the IMB. Which news will no doubt be received with great joy by women in the third world who will hear the Good News of the gendered gospel that God loves men and has a great plan for men to rule over them. That is going to come as a great relief to women and girls outside the West who have been struggling under a lack of male supervision.

    You know, there are just some things that are downright head shaking ridiculous. His comp stance position aside, the man is going to be president of the International MISSION Board. So lets think back to his recent journey to Dubai. Anyone remember? TWW wrote a post about it. NOw remember, he will be sending folks out to some dangerous places and what does he do in Dubai?

    Milks it. To make himself look as if he is in real danger spreading the Gospel. That will be the SBC’s International Missions Board president. There are some things that are just too obvious for words. Yet, many continue to not be able to connect dots.

    Since his big shtick at Brook Hill was being poor and encouraging his flock to give it all away for the cause of Christ, I am sure he will be insisting on a very small salary instead of the nice six figure one for that position. And, they will be sure to move to a bad neighborhood even if inconvenient the IMB offices. After all, he is big on walking the talk.

    Here is the post about Platt’s dangerous trip to spread the Gospel in Dubai

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2013/10/30/my-my-dubai-9-marks-played-hardball-while-lifeway-david-platt-stretched-the-truth/

  253. Luther was probably both.

    What do you mean by rebel? Many Americans were rebels during the Revolutionary War. Were they good or bad rebels?

    Have you studied the Papacy? Several Popes were scoundrels. Some bought their position. Some abused it. There is no perfect denomination as far as I can tell. They all have issues. There is only one Church. As far as I know, it belongs to Jesus exclusively, and he seems pretty inclusive towards those who trust in Him.

  254. @ THC:
    Why not start a blog of your own and invite them to comment on it? It’s not something that seems to be in the purview of TWW nor its focus, but I totally appreciate you wanting to get the Deebs and their peanut gallery in on such a discussion. That would certainly be a nice and detailed conversation with this crowd.

  255. THC wrote:

    Very smart guy. Though he actually calls himself an antitheist. He opposed most religions

    Yeah, Hitch was awesome and is missed. He was certainly very much an outspoken antitheist, he’s been an example of standing one’s philosophical ground to me. What a wit.

  256. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    but I totally appreciate you wanting to get the Deebs and their peanut gallery in on such a discussion.

    Speaking as a peanut, yes, I think that’s probably the best way to proceed THC. Free blog hosting is everywhere…

  257. @ Paula Rice:
    Btw, your suggestions about my SGM contacts are silly. I have none, except for the friend that I don’t know how to approach given what’s been happening over the past several years.

  258. @ THC:

    It’s great you could see through Ed Young, Jr. He’s actually a very good example of the corrupting influence which nepotism brings to the church.

    Luther, I would say, was both a rebel and a reformer. ISTM that one cannot be a reformer of a power system unless you are first a rebel against the system. I believe the Roman Catholic church at that time, certainly, was a power system. And in a power system, most people just go along with it, especially if they have no freedom to do otherwise. A few rise within the system for a number of reasons we all know. And a very few will see the corruption in a system and speak out about it.

    Worldly power does not go with the NT faith, and every other faith during Bible times was a power religion, whether it was the Temple system or the pagan systems. Worldly power includes economic power, which IMO is a big part of the problem we have today. In other times and places, the organized church has teamed with civil authorities in a mutually beneficial partnership. It has never been good for the church or the people in the church who saw the need for reform. Or who simply had a difference of opinion.

    I don’t spend time at Called to Communion, but I just thought it was a better fit for what your concerns seem to be. In our family different folks have made different journeys between Catholicism and various Protestant bodies in both directions. So I’m aware of the issues because I try to listen to people and understand.

  259. @ numo:
    Friends, plural.

    I also have an old friend who fled ages ago, back when it was TAG, only to end up in the church where we got to be friends – the one that booted me and, though she’s never said, might well have booted her. I didn’t think the people there could be so harsh, until it happened to me.

  260. Someone up the thread The Demon Trials at MHC. Just did some reading about it. Wow…just wow. This is getting deep into the bizarre, especially for a neo-cal. It would seem MD is a theology all his own.

  261. @ Lydia:

    I remember that post well. Brook Hills does a lot of good things, missions-wise, but the info I’ve seen is that they have done that independently and have been a relatively small contributor to the Cooperative Program.

    For those who are not SBC, this is an important point because the Cooperative Program is pretty much the only reason for the existence of the SBC as a denomination. Platt will oversee a huge agency of the SBC that is largely supported with Cooperative Program dollars. It simply doesn’t make sense to promote someone to be head of an agency which he has not led his church to support in the past.

    Of course Platt knows the right people and has a high profile, and has the correct doctrine. So, administrative expertise and proven service in a difficult mission environment is not considered as desirable in a leader as the others. This should not be.

  262. @ Bridget:
    If you start reading the history of xtianity, you end up facing some very stark facts about human nature, what happened when the Western church became a political entity (includes owning large chunks of what is now Italy), the king making power of bishops and popes, the corruption of many popes and of the Curia.

    At the same time, there were people who carried the light and love of Christ to others from century to century – Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant.

    The church is Christ’s, not ours, and I think we’re all in for some big surprises in eternity.

  263. @ Bunsen Honeydew: I was stunned when I first found out about the “demon trials,” too – and I was in charismatic circles for decades. But this is WAY beyond anything I’ve ever encountered there, and actually sounds like some of the wilder goings-on of New Apostolic Reformation folks.

  264. Paula Rice wrote:

    We’re you ever involved with a Sovereign Grace Ministries Church?

    Sovereign Grace first came to my attention when T4g was formed, and I’ve never been part of a Sovereign Grace church. There are multiple reasons for that due to personal experiences. When I looked into CJ, trying to figure out why Dever and Mohler would partner with him, I connected some dots going back to the 70’s when the Shepherding movement and the second wave of the charismatic movement were in vogue. it was deja vu all over again. I saw the carnage, as you accurately describe it, back then and was/am horrified it is happening still.

    About the same time some people in my life became involved in circles that are/were heavily influenced by Driscoll and Mahaney, so I started paying more attention, including reading here a TWW.

  265. @ Gram3: the shepherding mess has casualties worldwide. Imo, it was pervasive well before it was given that name, and is still very much with us, albeit called other things now.

    Being a kid in my late teens, I got swept up in it w/out having any idea what it was, nor of the havoc it would wreak in my own life and that of so very many others.

  266.   __

    🙂

    THC,

    Hey,

    Got a moment?

    IMHO I’de like ta see you get off to a better start here at TWW.

    Ok?

    So, let’s begin.

    “No buddy really cares how much you know until they know how much you care.”

    We have all heard that phrase.

    Sure.

    It’s true.

    So What?

    Well, there is someone I would like you to meet: Rooter President, COO Rick Arquilla, 

    really,

    I really think he can help you. 

    Please take a look at the following video presentation:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXCJHAfl-Oo

    You’ll be very glad you did!

    ATB

    Sopy
    __
    Inspirational relief: Vivaldi – “Four Seasons” 
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRxofEmo3HA

  267. numo wrote:

    @ Gram3: the shepherding mess has casualties worldwide. Imo, it was pervasive well before it was given that name, and is still very much with us, albeit called other things now.

    Being a kid in my late teens, I got swept up in it w/out having any idea what it was, nor of the havoc it would wreak in my own life and that of so very many others.

    I was only on the fringe (though the Shepherds(TM) kept pressuring me to go deep) but that was enough. Still did damage.

  268. numo wrote:

    @ Bunsen Honeydew: I was stunned when I first found out about the “demon trials,” too – and I was in charismatic circles for decades. But this is WAY beyond anything I’ve ever encountered there, and actually sounds like some of the wilder goings-on of New Apostolic Reformation folks.

    Sounds more like the Malleus Malefacarium to me. Probing the “demons on trial” re female sexuality was the clincher.

  269. numo wrote:

    @ Bunsen Honeydew:
    But maybe not so far from 17th c. Puritan superstition and belief.

    Or the Witchfinders-General of the war zones of the English Civil War and Thirty Years’ War (commonly called “The Burning Times”).

  270. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Yes, transplanted to the Mass. Bay Colony.

    There are some very interesting books about popular New England beliefs (folklore, mainly) and superstitions during the colonial period. Some of it is scary stuff, insofar as people accused others of doing X (like causing therm to an experience an attack of airborne rocks thrown by unseen hands).

  271. sam h wrote:

    I was thinking maybe since all their apologies are so similar, let me know if I have hurt you/sinned against you, that they may have gone to re-pentance group which is right between re-surgance group and re-train group which is followed by re-frame what actually happened group, which handouts our lawyers prepared so that we can admit wrong without admitting wrong (liability)

    Or they all use the same lawyers and PR spinmeisters.

  272. numo wrote:

    @ Bridget:
    If you start reading the history of xtianity, you end up facing some very stark facts about human nature, what happened when the Western church became a political entity (includes owning large chunks of what is now Italy), the king making power of bishops and popes, the corruption of many popes and of the Curia.
    At the same time, there were people who carried the light and love of Christ to others from century to century – Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant.
    The church is Christ’s, not ours, and I think we’re all in for some big surprises in eternity.

    This is the conclusion I came to as I read up on church history, after I realized the bloody mess a great amount of it was. I also came to he conclusion that it was not ordained by God which is what most of the Christian home school world would suggest, along with the biased history books. I have a very different view of who and what God is about.

  273. Lydia wrote:

    There are no real black and white sides to it. The history of Christianity is a bloody evil mess on both sides of the state church divide.

    Which is precisely why I am exceedingly glad that the Founders of our Nation were products of the Enlightenment and not the medieval cauldrons of Rome, Wartburg, and Geneva.

  274. Gram3 wrote:

    Once upon a time, I read in a book on church history the idea that God allowed the church to naturally divide *visibly* and *organizationally* to protect one part of the church from the doctrines of others. My paraphrase of the idea is that God decided to diversify his portfolio, if you will, so that the portfolio’s returns would be more stable.

    I like that! It follows my own general thoughts on the subject.
    I now also wish that I knew to thom the idea belonged originally; I have all this bits of miscellany wandering arounfd in my [mental] attic, with no idea in the world where they came from.

  275. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    THC wrote:
    Very smart guy. Though he actually calls himself an antitheist. He opposed most religions
    Yeah, Hitch was awesome and is missed. He was certainly very much an outspoken antitheist, he’s been an example of standing one’s philosophical ground to me. What a wit.

    I believe you mean Christopher Hitchens (“Richard” would be Dawkins).

    But Hitchens is indeed much missed. He was one of the few well-known atheists willing to debate Christian apologist William Lane Craig – celebrity atheist fundamentalists such as Dawkins and Polly Toynbee displayed a suspiciously great reluctance to do so – and Craig thought highly of him.

  276. numo wrote:

    The church is Christ’s, not ours, and I think we’re all in for some big surprises in eternity.

    Indeed – if we don’t get some big surprises then I for one will be seeking a refund.

  277. Lydia wrote:

    All of history is very nuanced. There are no real black and white sides to it. The history of Christianity is a bloody evil mess on both sides of the state church divide.

    Yes, and yes. I need the T shirt for that is I can find it.

  278. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    That would certainly be a nice and detailed conversation with this crowd.

    It might not be so nice once it got started. I get it that this was not how you were using that word.

    I do not plan to discuss theological doctrine here, not like THC might get into. However, I have noticed that the catholic church has a somewhat different approach to authority and a somewhat different approach to suffering and a long history of hierarchy with its advantages and disadvantages, and in that mix somewhere might be some insight to be gained from the catholic experience in these areas. But doctrine itself, as in who is right and who is wrong, nope. And rehashing the reformation, or for that matter the early church arguments, would have no use except to stir up disagreements.

    The thought has crossed my mind that one of the vulnerabilities of people who get involved in some of these authoritarian and hierarchical protestant novo-churches may be that the people on the pew have little experience with authoritarian/ hierarchical anything and have not developed the defensive mechanisms to deal with that kind of thing. For example, I don’t hear a lot of “Oh well, let them say what they want, I know how to get around the system even while I sit here and appear harmless and co-operative.”

    Anyhow, I am with you if what you are saying is that this is not the place to debate doctrine or to have dueling apologetics.

  279. Bridget wrote:

    I also came to he conclusion that it was not ordained by God which is what most of the Christian home school world would suggest, along with the biased history books.

    You lost me there. The christian homeschool movement is suggesting that what is ordained by God? The history? The mess? Their own supposed calling to historical revisionism? What?

  280. To pick up on several comments re the corrupting effect of wealth and power on christians… I suspect there is always a fine line between the restoring of lost doctrine and truth on the one hand, and heresy on the other.

    We (i.e. human beings) have a well-documented tendency to seek familiarity. In a religious context, that translates into at least some tendency to regard whatever was in place when we first came to faith as being sacred in a way that new practices cannot be. (Forgetting, of course, that all of our most treasured traditions were themselves new once!) But by the same token, if something manages to survive the passing of one generation, it is more likely to survive permanently, because it was there when the next generation came to faith, which makes it sacred, and the cycle repeats.

    At the same time, while we may be reluctant to “repeal” ancient rules, we share our ancestors’ desire to make rules. So, to take a single example, the basic idea of complementarianism becomes a list of umpteen things a woman is not allowed to do. The result is often a gradually shifting baseline, whereby we cling to ever more rigidly-defined and unshakeable traditions. They may even persist long after the social contexts for which they were first designed have gone. The best example of this I can think of is the King James bible – the whole purpose of which was to create a translation of scripture in the language of the day.

    Against this backdrop come the rebels and heretics. I suppose I’m one of them. We’re always at risk of pride and self-importance: We’re just as good as the people in the Xth Century – why shouldn’t God speak through us the way he did through them? At the same time, we are open to a God-focused possibility: What if God really doesn’t change – what if he wants to speak through our generation like he did in the Xth Century?

    The idea that each new generation must discover God afresh for itself – dig its own wells, so to speak – does not imply that each new generation must scrap historic christianity and invent its own God. And it is certainly not without biblical precedent, nor historical precedent – what, after all, were the 2nd-century christians doing? – which brings me back to the role of heretics and rebels (as we are sometimes called!).

    I believe we need the constant challenge of people who will ask the rebel heretic questions. Jesus rose from the dead, which means he is alive – what is he doing? What are the works of the Father he has for us? The Holy Spirit is given to abide with us forever – what is he doing? Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would take things that belong to Jesus and give them to us – so what is he giving us? What should we do with it? If we believe the whole bible is the word of God, then what about the obscure passages we never teach on? Passages describing angels, demons, apocalyptic visions, etc etc, are all in there for a reason and they mean something. What do they mean? And so, of course, on.

    The majority of the church at any one time, who are not rebel heretics, are not therefore immune from dangerous mistakes and deceptions. We risk projecting a false infallibility onto previous generations and defending their output as though it were God, when it may not be. Or rejecting God’s mercies, new this morning, because they don’t sufficiently resemble those of yesterday morning. Each refinement of the rules can, paradoxically, drag us further and further from the spirit of Jesus’ teaching. I think it’s worth noting that, on the day of Pentecost, it was not a book that came down from heaven, but the Spirit of God himself. There is almost a case for saying that any attempt (however ancient) to replace Spirit with letter is in itself a turning away from the living God. There is always a tension between Historic_Christianity and Jesus of Nazareth, crucified, dead and risen.

  281. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I suppose I’m one of them.

    You suppose? Under the general heading of it takes one to know one, let me assure you that your credentials are impeccable and your heritage is probably aristocratic in Rebelland. Of course, it has been said that Himself was a bit of a rebel, so it is a proud heritage to be sure.

  282. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Each refinement of the rules can, paradoxically, drag us further and further from the spirit of Jesus’ teaching. I think it’s worth noting that, on the day of Pentecost, it was not a book that came down from heaven, but the Spirit of God himself. There is almost a case for saying that any attempt (however ancient) to replace Spirit with letter is in itself a turning away from the living God. There is always a tension between Historic_Christianity and Jesus of Nazareth, crucified, dead and risen.

    Lots of good thoughts in those few sentences alone. It is implicitly forgotten that the Book is the inSpirited word and what the Spirit has inspired, the indwelling Spirit enables believers to understand, however imperfectly.

    That’s why we should not set up a few individuals as the sole authoritative interpreters. Or limit our understanding to a particular historical interpretation or historical application. Because we are limiting the scope of what the Spirit is doing in each cell of the Body. Then, when the Book divorced from the work of the Spirit in the greater portion of the cells of the Body becomes a tool of power and control for the elites, who it is assumed are the only ones who can properly understand it.

  283. Nancy wrote:

    Anyhow, I am with you if what you are saying is that this is not the place to debate doctrine or to have dueling apologetics.

    That is what I’m saying. There are hundreds if not thousands of other places to have that debate.
    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I believe you mean Christopher Hitchens (“Richard” would be Dawkins).

    That’s who I figured THC was referring to.

  284. Bridget wrote:

    This is the conclusion I came to as I read up on church history, after I realized the bloody mess a great amount of it was. I also came to he conclusion that it was not ordained by God which is what most of the Christian home school world would suggest, along with the biased history books. I have a very different view of who and what God is about.

    Pretty much a ditto here Bridget. Evangelical homeschooling (in general, for the most part) is dominated by the belief that God works to a pre-defined ‘blueprint’ which they loosely refer to as a ‘Christian world view’. In this view, human agency is at best an aberration and at worst it is evil and what the Apostle John referred to as the spirit of anti Christ.

  285. Interesting and apposite article in Patheos today:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2014/08/evangelical-superstars-and-why-they-fall/

    “To be perfectly blunt: The moment you hear someone say in response to criticism of a spiritual leader “Touch not God’s anointed,” beware and prepare to flee. Frankly, I blame those who take that attitude toward “great spiritual men of God” as much for their downfalls as the allegedly great spiritual men of God themselves.
    Every pastor, minister and evangelist, like every government leader, whether elected or appointed, needs an accountability network with real authority and power to check him. At least some of the people in that accountability network need to be independent of the minister or evangelist—not under his influence.”

  286. Muff Potter wrote:

    ‘Christian world view’

    Now here is some good news in that area, at least I think it is good news. I just checked out some articles on Focus on the Family about “biblical worldview” mostly because it was a Focus course which was taught at the local SBCmega. The list of things which they say constitute a biblical worldview is consistent with what you are saying. The good news is that the article said that only 9% of “born again” christians agreed with all the points on their list. I don’t know what percentage of christians self identify as “born again” but not all by any means, “born again” now being one of the terms co-opted by fundygelicals, as far as I can see, and twisted in meaning for their own purposes. Jesus made no mention of a worldview when he introduced that terminology. This is one of my pet peeves, the assignment of different meanings to words and phrases.

    I will hush. It is a rather difficult day at my house. We just found out about some hyper-ugly racial bullying of one of the grandchildren at school, and young daughter left with set jaw and flying spittle to deal with it. She did this while hobbling in her boot from where she broke a bone in her foot. At the same time I am totally changing our eating habits in drastic ways due to increasing grocery store prices, but it takes a lot of time in the kitchen to do what I am doing. I do not enjoy anything about the kitchen. So in the middle of this there is somebody who thinks that it is a good idea to redefine ideas and presumes to tell people about what worldview they ought to have? Not even on a good day, and this is not a good day!

  287. @ roebuck:
    That was a great article, thanks! Patheos really has some excellent writers. One of the big initial draws to TWW was it shows how to see and avoid the pitfalls of group dynamics and leadership. I’m interested in forming communities for “nones” on my side of the none spectrum, and I think taking note of people’s experiences in dealing with identifying and stopping abusive behaviors is invaluable.

    My advice is simply this: Never follow a leader who is independent and unaccountable. And if you find yourself in such a situation, flee. There should not be such situations. And if you stay, you are part of the problem. And if he falls, you have yourself partly to blame

    That guy lays it out well.

  288.   __

    There are those individuals who faithfully carry the light and love of Christ Jesus, to others.

    huh?

    Their light still shines into the darkness.

    (bump)

      However, there are also those of corrupt minds, who through-out the whole of history, abscond the proverbial religious microphone (metaphorically speaking), and used it for their own sordid purposes: yet do they PREVAIL against God Almighty?

    hmmm…

    “think again.”

    (grin)

    hahahahahaha

    The Almighty, (in His heaven) laughs, He knows they are but dust.

    Skreeeeeeeeeeeetch !

    Jesus will appear, one day, upon the Mount of Olives, …just the same.

    *

    …sure, some are preaching Christ Jesus, even by selfish motives,

      Yet Jesus, in His love and dedicated devotion, extingushishes not even the smallest of candles, so take courage, Kind Folk, and speak the word of God in love without fear. 

    Sopy
    __
    Intermission: Bach, Toccata and Fugue in D minor, organ (w/ patterns of light)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipzR9bhei_o

  289. Throckmorton has a new post up about a letter that Thomas Hurst, the Mars Hill Bellevue pastor, posted to the congregation there.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/

    I think it can be read lots of different ways, but Hurst’s reluctance to allow comments on Reddit and his call to keep matters strictly internal is not promising. In fairness, the substance of what he says sounds good, but I guess at this point I just expect spin, even if it is truthier spin.

  290. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Dave A A:
    It does make you wonder: what does repentance look like? I suppose people to whom Jesus said your sins are forgiven, or words to that effect, would provide some hints. Zacchaeus (other spellings are available!) was the closest thing I can think of in the Gospels to being a person who abused others, given what is known about how the Roman system of tax-collection worked. And he made some significant reparations.

    Good example!
    Pastor Hurst speaks of repentance and reconciliation in his letter:
    “We must own our sin, seek repentance and reconciliation. We must do this not so it will allow us to leave the storm, but because the storm will not leave us until we repent and change.”
    Some mention of reparations or restitution, or even that there exist people deserving of such, would have been helpful. Instead, he extensively uses the “storm” analogy. We may be guilty of losing hope during a storm (which he confesses) but never of causing a storm (which he does not confess).

  291. I braved the Throckmorton comments section on this article, because the trolls have not yet come out. I hope Mike the Professor will not mind my reporting this– it’s soooo good!
    “The problem is these leaders have been trained in a certain mindset, a paradigm, it shows up in their vocabulary and the way they approach everything. I do not believe that based on their fruits as I see them that it is a godly one.
    Some of them (such as Mr. Hurst) seem to be groping for truth, wanting to fix things, knowing something’s terribly awry, but using the volcabulary and paradigm of Mars Hill–hence the cultic verbiage. This is something like building an automobile-bearing suspension bridge with crepe paper, it cannot be done.
    It will take one capable of questioning the paradigm itself, rather than the application thereof, to fix things. The Hebrews had to break out of a mindset that was artificially preventing them from entering the Promised Land. Same thing here.
    They need a Joshua, but cults tend to dispense with them.”
    BTW, speaking of trolls, I’m watching The Hobbit, and 3 trolls were just now arguing amongst themselves over the proper way to cook dwarf. Caring not a whit, of course, that the dwarves did not wish to be cooked! Hearts of stone, those trolls!

  292. Is the Mark Driscoll story of pastoral abuse also a story of pastoral inerrancy, a story the has afflicted evangelicalism for quite some time? We have seen his kind before in pastors such as TT Shields, J Frank Norris, and John Roach Straton. Now these individuals weren’t cussing pastors who spouted filth, but they were just as cantankerous and authoritarian in their leadership model, and were equally divisive and controversial. There were no checks or balances for these individuals, and they were beholden to no one. What is a deacon or elder body to do in the face of these tyrants? The solution may be in Scripture and in the Reformation doctrine of Priesthood of a Believers?

  293. And speaking of restitution/reparation, one of the publicly-known victims has already commented:
    “Shawn Nickerson • 33 minutes ago
    Thomas effectively banned me from ‘his’ church. Until he rescinds that, and apologizes to me publicly, there is no reconciliation.”

  294. Dave A A wrote:

    BTW, speaking of trolls, I’m watching The Hobbit, and 3 trolls were just now arguing amongst themselves over the proper way to cook dwarf. Caring not a whit, of course, that the dwarves did not wish to be cooked! Hearts of stone, those trolls!

    Well, the dawn took them all, as Gandalf correctly predicted.

  295. Nancy wrote:

    I will hush. It is a rather difficult day at my house. We just found out about some hyper-ugly racial bullying of one of the grandchildren at school, and young daughter left with set jaw and flying spittle to deal with it.

    I am so sorry to hear of this Nancy. I think it is of utmost importance that we teach our young that these kinds of things are totally UNACCEPTABLE and also the whys of how they are unacceptable. In my experience the kids learn this ugliness at home from their parents. Daughter has righteous anger and I hope that she demands that the school environment not tolerate this or any other kind of bullying.

  296. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    There is almost a case for saying that any attempt (however ancient) to replace Spirit with letter is in itself a turning away from the living God. There is always a tension between Historic_Christianity and Jesus of Nazareth, crucified, dead and risen.

    I know Gram3 already commented on this, Nick, but I just want to say I appreciate the clarity with which you express it, and I won’t forget it. Thank you for all you contribute here. Your posts have helped me straighten out my muddled thinking.

  297. I’m a new church goer at Mars Hill, I AM NOT A WRITER NOR A GOOD COMMUNICATOR, BUT I WILL TRY MY VERY BEST TO SPEAK OUT OF THE ABUNDACE OF MY HEART.
    My wife and I was so blessed about Mark’s delivery of his message and his knowledge and gifts about God’s Kingdom. There were many Pastors I’ve heard before but his anointing is so powerful and it creates a penetrating power of the Word with the leading of the Holy Spirit. Every time he delivers his message. We all have different traits and characters ( I challenge you, deep inside w in you, once pressured, will come out the real you in flesh.) But the Holy Spirit will work it out on you since we are all under construction.) Would you think Mark is not on his knee right now praying like Jesus? Please do not bring out the issue of cussing, unrepentant etc…etc… by doing an assassination to Mark’s character, it will not convince church members to do something drastic to go against this Man Of God. Mark Driscoll earned the right to be the Leader/Pastor of Mars Hill Church and by giving him a second chance rather than kicking him out will be more glorifying to our God.

    Mark, anything you’ve done in the eyes of God and men, God will forgive you, God is watching your back. Christians are not majoring in minor. Ladies and Gentlemen. Brothers and Sisters in Christ…LET US ALL AGREE AND PRAY THAT PASTOR MARK DRISCOLL DESERVES A SECOND CHANCE! from RCOFROCKLIN@GMAIL.COM

  298.   __

    “Mars Hill Storm Clouds?”

    “We must own our sin, seek repentance and reconciliation…

      We must do this not so it will allow us to leave the storm, but because the storm will not leave us until we repent and change.” ~ Pastor Hurst, Mars Hill Church

    hmmm…

    Judgment from his own lips.

    *

    “Better ta be cast into da sea…”

    (sadface)

    Jump’in MarzHil is a gas, gas, gas?

    hmmm…

    could b.

    Sopy
     __
    Disaster relief: The Giant Media Wave – “The Perfect ‘ Religious’ Storm, Perhaps?”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9Tdw5nG4dQ

  299. Dave A A wrote:

    Some of them (such as Mr. Hurst) seem to be groping for truth, wanting to fix things, knowing something’s terribly awry, but using the volcabulary and paradigm of Mars Hill–hence the cultic verbiage.

    I refer you to “The Principles of Newspeak” by G.Orwell (appendix to 1984):

    Isn’t the idea of Newspeak to restrict thought until nothing exists or is even possible but The Party Line? To redefine away all but The Party Line? Because if there are no words to express ungoodthink, there can be no ungoodthink.

  300. Sopwith wrote:

    dee

    Please prove that you are ‘not’ a robot.

    (grin)

    Sopy

    Sopy, have you just watched Johnny Depp’s ‘Transcendence’ or something? The question to ask is, “Can you prove you’re self-aware?” 🙂

  301. Muff Potter wrote:

    Evangelical homeschooling (in general, for the most part) is dominated by the belief that God works to a pre-defined ‘blueprint’ which they loosely refer to as a ‘Christian world view’. In this view, human agency is at best an aberration and at worst it is evil and what the Apostle John referred to as the spirit of anti Christ.

    This damaging worldview is also prevalent outside of the evangelical homeschooling world you refer to. I can attest that this philosophy made it very difficult as a teen and as an adult to make sound life and career choices.

  302. elastigirl wrote:

    the trial of Paul Petry

    May wrote:

    The demon trials.

    Dave A A wrote:

    Consider I’m writing a novel and asking, “would this be believable?”

    All of these comments iterate to me that a play is begging to be written. Where’s Arthur Miller when you need him for ‘The Crucible II’?

  303. Dave A A wrote:

    I braved the Throckmorton comments section on this article, because the trolls have not yet come out.

    “Mr. Truth” is, IMO, someone who is role-playing what he/she thinks a Mars Hill Bot would say just so he/she can be entertained by the responses to his/her absurdity and is not really trying to defend Mars Hill or Driscoll. Surely, surely an adult cannot be that far gone and use so many smileys and caps. Or maybe I just think that because it’s too depressing to think otherwise.

  304. @ raul so:
    I have previously written of my concern for MD, I truly wish the best for him, and his family, and send blessings, not curses his way. However I firmly believe he should never take up a pastoral position again. It would be something akin to sending an alcoholic back into the pub – you know what the outcome is going to be. I strongly agree with Bent Meyer’s comment:

    ” Shame is too much for him to experience without employing minimization
    and denial. He cannot be in a position of power, since for him, it is an elixir to fuel his fantasies of grandiosity. He cannot be in a position which places him in authority, since his firm stance on entitlement will emerge again. In such an environment, everyone in his surroundings will be beneath him.’ p.3 https://joyfulexiles.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/bent-meyer-written-record-8-28-14-letter-combined-document-set.pdf

  305. THC wrote:

    I wonder what would have happened if Luther truly understood the actual teachings of the Church on indulgences and not the heretical view of an individual Catholic (Tetzel)?

    And you’re assuming he didn’t. I’m thinking he was smarter than either one of us.
    You’re reminding me of quite a number of people I’ve met over the years. You’re totally certain about the “One True Church,” and you’re being condescending and a bit snide. You’re assuming that anyone who is honest and intelligent has to agree with you. Sorry, but no.
    Okay, that’s the last time I’ll read or respond to you. Take care.

  306. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Isn’t the idea of Newspeak to restrict thought until nothing exists or is even possible but The Party Line?

    I’ve been trying to reread pastor Hurst’s letter carefully, to think out, if not write, a careful, fair reply. But it’s really difficult just to read it without skimming over large portions of something like newspeak.

  307. @ Dave A A:

    Maybe. The last IFB I came across was the early 70’s, and my impression was that they were merely tightly wound about most everything. This is something else, I think.

  308. @ Gram3:
    Maybe a graceless to you seminarian — sorry-/ a GRACELESS TO YOU 🙁 🙁 seminarian?
    I think I visited an IFB pastor’s Bible study in the early 70’s. Well, I know I visited, but think he was IFB looking back on it. Very strange. I chose to attend an EFCA at the time, which was much more culturally relevant and progressive. That pastor was a certain pastor Wilson, whose son went on to greater prominence.

  309. @ Gram3:

    It could be someone looking for entertainment. Or, William Wallace II comes to mind. Oh wait a minute, this post doesn’t mention pe$£s and pu::#y so it couldn’t be.

  310. Re: Mars Hill Salaries…

    Just realized that a couple of salaries are not censored in Bent’s recently released documents. Two deacons are documented as receiving raises up to $74,000.

    I’m astounded. That’s an amazingly high amount of money for anyone in ministry, but especially for a deacon.

  311. Dave A A wrote:

    Consider I’m writing a novel and asking, “would this be believable?”.

    “The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make some sense.”
    — attr to Mark Twain

  312. Dave A A wrote:

    FF founds SRC. He brings up MC in the faith and makes him his young protege. In a nearby city, LT and CJ found CLC and later PDI, which would become SGM. They bring BD and JL in as young proteges (amongst others). FF thinks they’re his friends, and joins in. Instead, BD degifts him, makes him janitor, rustles the mutton, and installs MC as FF’s boss. FF goes away quietly, but now sometimes wishes he’d blown the whole thing up. Eventually CJ degifts LT, JL takes over at SRC, JH becomes CJ’s young protege and eventually boss at CLC, MC degifts BD, who does NOT go away quietly, JH states this may be God’s discipline, and now may leave SGM and take CLC with him, CJ goes away briefly but may well end up at SRC, CJ invites, then disinvites, LT to a reconciliation conference…

    Reminds me of the finale of the Bruno Bozzetto short, “Grasshoppers”. About 7 1/2 minutes in, there’s a final burst of mayhem by a bunch of terrorist causes all taking each other out: KKK, UWM, PLO, PKY, LSD, FSOZK, etc.
    http://youtu.be/ijcuXh-Lk9E?t=7m105s

  313. numo wrote:

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    I’ve heard people supposedly question demons, and that was long before MH came into existence.

    Like Doctor Faustus and Aliester Crowley?

  314. @ Sopwith:
    Thanks Sopy, I swear you must own YouTube shares. I usually like me some Guy Pearce but the Guardianistas seem to have canned Prometheus. I’ll give it a chance though. High marks for this YouTube commenter on Jean Michel Jarre – Oxygene 2, “Great old-school electronica. Fun live performance if you can ignore the rhythm-impaired aging white people.” heh

  315. __

    “Live” from Seattle?

    From Under Da Marzhil Bus: “Sympathy for Whatz his Name” ?

    hmmm…

    another Marzhil pastor bitz da dust,
    another Marzhil pastor bitz da dust,
    another Marzhil pastor bitz da dust,
    And another one,
    And another one,
    another Marzhil pastor bitz da dust…

    ,,,
    ,,,
    ,,,
    ,,,
    ,,,

    MarkyD: “hey, ‘click, click’, where is every buddy?

    🙂

    __
    Comic relief: MarzHil non-violent demonstrators protesting for MerkyD’s removal?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOPDN9HsiYg

    Bonus: Part Two: More MarzHil Demonstors calling for MerkyD ta step down?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhCzXjLE04c

    ;~)

  316. Mr.H wrote:

    Re: Mars Hill Salaries…
    Just realized that a couple of salaries are not censored in Bent’s recently released documents. Two deacons are documented as receiving raises up to $74,000.
    I’m astounded.

    And that was in 2007!

  317. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Albuquerque Blue:
    I thought that’s who you thought THC was referring to. Richard Dawkins somehow never quite inspires the same affection as Christopher Hitchens.

    He really doesn’t, does he? Most scathing put down I ever heard of Dawkins is when someone (no memory of who) said he was ‘a very good Biology Teacher’, no reference to his current work. Ouch.

  318. Dave A A wrote:

    Consider I’m writing a novel and asking, “would this be believable?”. FF founds SRC. He brings up MC in the faith and makes him his young protege. In a nearby city, LT and CJ found CLC and later PDI, which would become SGM. They bring BD and JL in as young proteges (amongst others). FF thinks they’re his friends, and joins in. Instead, BD degifts him, makes him janitor, rustles the mutton, and installs MC as FF’s boss. FF goes away quietly, but now sometimes wishes he’d blown the whole thing up. Eventually CJ degifts LT, JL takes over at SRC, JH becomes CJ’s young protege and eventually boss at CLC, MC degifts BD, who does NOT go away quietly, JH states this may be God’s discipline, and now may leave SGM and take CLC with him, CJ goes away briefly but may well end up at SRC, CJ invites, then disinvites, LT to a reconciliation conference, gives a speech there to say he was wrong to say he was wrong, and to publicly mark divisors like BD, and MC unfriends BD. Last and least, I friend BD, just to be contrary.

    Reminds me of an excerpt from the Goon Show, on BBC Radio in the 1950’s:

    Wallace Greenslade: For listeners who’ve been asleep, of whom I am one, here’s a short resumé of what’s gone on before.

    Peter Sellers: Helen Lovejoy, beautiful heiress to the Halibut millions, has been jilted at the altar by Villion de Paprikon, son of Louis XIV. Peter, Villion’s Eton boating friend, has heard this, but being in Tibet has embarrassed Mary, his fiancée who being the only cousin of Sir Ray Ellington has passed the title on to Baron Geldray, also heir to the Halibut millions. Now read on.

    Greenslade: Has he finished?

    Harry Secombe: Yes.

    That particular episode (“The Silent Bugler”) also contained the memorable line Wait! I happen to be wearing red flannel underdrawers with a patch on. If I could lower my trousers, he’d think it was the Russian flag and salute!

  319. There is nothing new under the sun in American Evangelicalism. Writing in 1741 to Jonathan Edwards during The Great Awakening, the Irish preacher Gilbert Tennent had this to say:

    ” I know most young zealots are apt, through ignorance, inconsideration, and pride of heart, to undertake what they have no proper qualifications for: and, through their impudence and enthusiasm, the church of God suffers. I think all that fear God, should rise up and crush the enthusiastic creature in the egg.” ( Memoirs of Jonathan Edwards, p55).

    Maybe that should be your call to arms.

  320. ADarcyjo wrote:

    THC wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Luther truly understood the actual teachings of the Church on indulgences and not the heretical view of an individual Catholic (Tetzel)?
    And you’re assuming he didn’t. I’m thinking he was smarter than either one of us.
    You’re reminding me of quite a number of people I’ve met over the years. You’re totally certain about the “One True Church,” and you’re being condescending and a bit snide. You’re assuming that anyone who is honest and intelligent has to agree with you. Sorry, but no.
    Okay, that’s the last time I’ll read or respond to you. Take care.

    If the facts are as THC supposes, and it was all a misunderstanding of Rome’s real position, then why was he tried (in his absence) in Rome for heresy in1518?

  321. TedS. wrote:

    Mr.H wrote:

    Re: Mars Hill Salaries…
    Just realized that a couple of salaries are not censored in Bent’s recently released documents. Two deacons are documented as receiving raises up to $74,000.
    I’m astounded.

    And that was in 2007!

    All the men there have to make big bucks. Goes hand and hand with the theology. He isn’t a real tough guy if he’s not bringing in the dough. Oh, and if his wife has to work…he is scum of the earth and very effeminate. The tithes/donations there have as much to do with making sure all the men feel very masculine in their provider role as it does going towards “ministry”.

  322. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    All the men there have to make big bucks. Goes hand and hand with the theology. He isn’t a real tough guy if he’s not bringing in the dough. Oh, and if his wife has to work…he is scum of the earth and very effeminate. The tithes/donations there have as much to do with making sure all the men feel very masculine in their provider role as it does going towards “ministry”.

    In churches that do this it has a convenient side effect, if those who do not meet this standard simply move on, that is blessedly subtract themselves. That would tend to insure that the pew sitters would ten to be a financial asset to the church, not some dead weight financially.

    I did not make this up. I heard a discussion at one time about why the churches do not want a lot of single mothers hanging around, and the reasons were mostly financial.

  323. gram3 said:
    If you have read around here lately, I’m one of the crankiest ones about so-called complementarianism. And that’s even when I’ve had my meds. The women who promote this are putting great burdens on others that they are not willing to bear. It is shameful, and Grace is not an exception.

    Is there a Biblical alternative to complementarianism? This is what we’ve been steeped in for the more than 30 years of our marriage. When we discuss this, we keep coming back to the verses, I’m sure you know which ones I mean, they’re drilled into us from our youngest days onward. One little snippet of a verse where husband and wife are to submit to each other, followed by a longer section on wife submitting and husband loving. Another section on the man being head of the wife as Christ is head of the church. Proverbs 31, distinct roles — the husband is sitting in the gates while the wife is doing all this other stuff (and the teaching at our old church made it sound reasonable that the wife was doing all this stuff working from home, home-based business, even doing business under her husband’s direction and/or oversight. Aargh. I can’t get the voices out of my head, and I don’t know how to counter this teaching *Biblically*. Do I have to leave the Bible, leave the faith, in order to leave complementarianism?

  324. Muff Potter said:
    No matter what the Patriarchal culture, they all fear and loathe the primal power of women. Given the numerous references in Scripture (in addition to those you’ve cited) which attest to the special place of honor the Almighty affords women, there is no excuse for any Evangelical boyz club to withhold full enfranchisement from half of their numbers based solely upon plumbing received at birth.

    That’s the cognitive dissonance I’m dealing with. For more than two decades we went to a church that taught the specialness of women, their spiritual equality with men, even honoring them as weaker vessels (what’s that verse, about the weaker members being treated with more honor), all the while emphasizing a difference in roles. In other words roles are clearly distinct, but souls are of equal value.

    Never mind that there is some serious dysfunction in our family, and others we know in that church… But that’s not the church’s fault, or the teachings (after all, they come directly out of the Bible!).

    After all, don’t all of the passages describing requirements for teachers and elders talk about them being a man of one wife? (which sort of precludes women from being teachers, elders, maybe deacons, I don’t remember) Doesn’t Titus 2 pretty much consign the women to their fate?

    (I loved the quote I read somewhere, that the word “roles” is similar in the original Greek to the root word for “hypocrisy”. I have not found the word “roles” in the Bible yet, so have been unable to check this to see if it’s urban myth or fact.)

    I am not an apologist for complementarianism, but it’s as pervasive in my thinking as I used to think feminism from my upbringing and college days was, back when I read “The Way Home” by Mary Pride. Even in recent years, I attributed some of my uneasy thoughts about the whole lifestyle to those old “feminism messages” — which I now suspect was part of my instinct for survival fighting its way to the surface, only to be pushed down with further indoctrination and promises that all would be well if we just followed the paths laid down in scripture. Hah. Our family is falling apart. The answer the ex-church gave us: if we had just followed the paths a little better; if we had just trusted the Lord more; if we would turn from our sin and hard-heartedness, all will be well. We have raised up our children in the way they should go, so when they *are old* they will not depart from it. It doesn’t matter if they walk away from us, and from the faith, now, because, well, because that’s the promise. Can you hear my heart howl in anguish?

    As I said in my earlier post just now, is there a Biblically defensible alternative? I would love to know.

  325. In discussing women’s “roles” I am often reminded of Marian Zimmer Bradley’s Darkover, which had a tribe where the women were chained. The shorter the chain (i.e. constraining movement, making it more difficult to work), the higher their status. Rich women wore golden chains studded with jewels, and wore them with pride.

    In our ex-church, women were spoken of with honor, high honor sometimes, just so long as they stayed tight within their role. But sometimes the mask would slip, and you’d hear the objectification. I can’t quote an example here, because it might threaten our anonymity, but it was jarring to hear.

    Insanity.

  326. Sopwith said:
    __
    Inspirational relief:” The Nutcracker & The Mouse King”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYz-IxTntmo

    Oh thank you! I love the music but have found local productions to be incredibly tedious to sit through. Just the first few minutes of this youtube performance are smile-inducing and promise more to come.

    I needed such.

    Merci beaucoup. (Hope I spelled that right)

  327. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    there’s a final burst of mayhem by a bunch of terrorist causes all taking each other out: KKK, UWM, PLO, PKY, LSD, FSOZK, etc.
    http://youtu.be/ijcuXh-Lk9E?t=7m105s

    He forgot KAOS!
    IIRC, SGM Survivors started using initials in place of pastor’s names, due to the propensity of pastors to search for their own names and take countermeasures against the survivors.

  328. Just posted – Part 2C in my Research Guide series on Mars Hill. This has five tutorials on what may turn out to be key *organizational* issues that potentially put Mars Hill Church’s tax-exempt status in jeopardy. So — when people believe there’s no evidence on Mars Hill for this or that issue, or “that’s just your opinion,” this may be something to point them to.

    I’ve tried to give the standards by which the IRS — who could end up as the final judge of what evidence applies or not — might evaluate Mars Hill. I’ve sifted through possible materials, given as clear and concise a description as possible for what seem to be the most important points, and linked to what I honed in on as KEY sources from the IRS, Washington State, and ECFA. Links to “case study” articles specifically on aspects of Mars Hill activities to be added, which will give readers who want to some DIY sources to apply the IRS and Washington state and ECFA standards for themselves.

    Hope this helps translate a lot of technical material to where it is more accessible for interested everyday readers. It ain’t perfect, so feedback to help with questions and clarity would be very welcomed! Thanks …

    http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/mark-driscoll-and-mars-hill-church-research-guide-part-2c/

  329. Dave A A wrote:

    IIRC, SGM Survivors started using initials in place of pastor’s names, due to the propensity of pastors to search for their own names and take countermeasures against the survivors.

    Though knowing those Gospelly Godly Guys, wouldn’t “REPRISALS” be a better word for it than “countermeasures”?

  330. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    There could be some radio dramas based on the Mars Hill staff meetings of the past few weeks:
    Spacely: I take your concerns seriously!
    Jetson: That means you’re gonna resign?
    Spacely: No–the board’s decision is final!
    Jetson: But you appointed the board.
    Spacely: I don’t give a horse puckey about the board. Not another word!
    Jetson: But you said…
    Spacely: Jetson!!! You’re fired!!!
    Jetson: But I have a family to support.
    Spacely: I don’t give a steer manure!
    Spacely: unless….. You sign this recantation!

  331. @ Beakerj:
    I really enjoyed his books “The Greatest Show on Earth” and I’ve got the Selfish Gene on my Kindle for reading sometime at work soon. His science stuff is great. As a “leader” of the atheist movement (used very loosely, organizing atheists makes herding cats look easy) though I tend to prefer Hemant Mehta of the Friendly Atheist and some others. Though I’ll say one thing I’ll be forever grateful to Dawkins for, and that’s I no longer stay quiet about my beliefs, no I share them openly and proudly.

  332. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    raul so wrote:
    BUT I WILL TRY MY VERY BEST TO SPEAK OUT OF THE ABUNDANCE OF MY HEART.
    Hi Raul So. What does this mean?

    Haven’t seen Raul So back on, so does anyone else know what this phrase means?

  333. Jesus to Pharisees: “O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.”
    Raul could be a Poe—
    Or else he’s saying that Pastormark’s sermons have blessed his heart.

  334. @ Albuquerque Blue:

    I still read Mehta and follow his blog a lot. He does say stuff that many Christians need to hear. BTW…my last post about doubt is with the Deebs Albuquerque Blue 😀

  335. refugee wrote:

    Muff Potter said:
    No matter what the Patriarchal culture, they all fear and loathe the primal power of women. Given the numerous references in Scripture (in addition to those you’ve cited) which attest to the special place of honor the Almighty affords women, there is no excuse for any Evangelical boyz club to withhold full enfranchisement from half of their numbers based solely upon plumbing received at birth.
    That’s the cognitive dissonance I’m dealing with. For more than two decades we went to a church that taught the specialness of women, their spiritual equality with men, even honoring them as weaker vessels (what’s that verse, about the weaker members being treated with more honor), all the while emphasizing a difference in roles. In other words roles are clearly distinct, but souls are of equal value.
    Never mind that there is some serious dysfunction in our family, and others we know in that church… But that’s not the church’s fault, or the teachings (after all, they come directly out of the Bible!).
    After all, don’t all of the passages describing requirements for teachers and elders talk about them being a man of one wife? (which sort of precludes women from being teachers, elders, maybe deacons, I don’t remember) Doesn’t Titus 2 pretty much consign the women to their fate?
    (I loved the quote I read somewhere, that the word “roles” is similar in the original Greek to the root word for “hypocrisy”. I have not found the word “roles” in the Bible yet, so have been unable to check this to see if it’s urban myth or fact.)
    I am not an apologist for complementarianism, but it’s as pervasive in my thinking as I used to think feminism from my upbringing and college days was, back when I read “The Way Home” by Mary Pride. Even in recent years, I attributed some of my uneasy thoughts about the whole lifestyle to those old “feminism messages” — which I now suspect was part of my instinct for survival fighting its way to the surface, only to be pushed down with further indoctrination and promises that all would be well if we just followed the paths laid down in scripture. Hah. Our family is falling apart. The answer the ex-church gave us: if we had just followed the paths a little better; if we had just trusted the Lord more; if we would turn from our sin and hard-heartedness, all will be well. We have raised up our children in the way they should go, so when they *are old* they will not depart from it. It doesn’t matter if they walk away from us, and from the faith, now, because, well, because that’s the promise. Can you hear my heart howl in anguish?
    As I said in my earlier post just now, is there a Biblically defensible alternative? I would love to know.

    Here is a start. This is part seven with links to the six previous parts. Much of what your former church taught regarding women is due to the interpretations they chose to follow. I hope this is a beginning for you to evaluate what scripture says about women. Blessings.

    http://www.wadeburleson.org/2008/04/biblical-primer-on-women-in-ministry_25.html?m=1

  336. @ refugee:
    I would recommend “God’s Word to Women” by Katharine Bushnell. You can download the original for free online or you can get a modernized abridged Kindle version (original was written over 100 years ago) on Amazon for .99.

  337. Mark Driscoll was right about one thing-he is the Mars Hill brand. Without Driscoll Mars Hill is dead. After MD all that would be left is a group of untrained men without the charisma to get so many people to buy into a ‘gospel’ of vulgarity, porn, oppression of women, control and abuse. As the core group is composed of lackeys of MD and likely dependent on him for their substantial incomes, they’re going to do all they can to keep him in the pulpit. I hope the result is the captain going down with his sinking ship.

  338. refugee wrote:

    I can’t get the voices out of my head, and I don’t know how to counter this teaching *Biblically*. Do I have to leave the Bible, leave the faith, in order to leave complementarianism?

    Oh, no. On the contrary, you can leave complementarianism–more properly hierarchicalcomplementarianism,or HC–precisely by using the Bible. I am probably one of the most conservative people that comments here. I came out of HC via using the Greek text and lexicons and looking up the historical context of Ephesus from non-religious sources. I didn’t read the egalitarians, because I assumed for my purposes that they have an agenda, too. I’m not asserting that, but I didn’t want that to influence my own study.

    And it was the misapplication of 1 Timothy 2:12 that started it all in motion. That’s because when 1 Timothy is read in its literary context, the HC interpretation is jarringly incoherent. And Paul is very methodical and purposeful in his writing. Also, the HC interpretation requires a very literal application of 2:12 while ignoring the rest of Paul’s argument, specifically 2:15. However, if you look at the historical and cultural context of Ephesus at the time, the whole of Paul’s argument makes a lot more sense. I’ve written a lot on this blog as others have about that context.

    What I have found by going to the Greek text and using a lexicon and concordance (I really like Biblehub) is that it is easy to look up every use of a word and how it is translated in every instance. The dirty little secret is that translators make decisions about how to translate words. And if they presuppose male hierarchy, guess which way they will choose to translate!

    The most galling example is Grudem’s re-writing of 1 Corinthians 11. The ESV is marketed as a literal translation, not like the evil NIV, but Grudem and pals actually added “symbol of” to “authority over her head” to make Paul’s entire argument say exactly the opposite of what he is actually saying. He is saying that a woman has the authority regarding whether or not to cover her head. But she needs to keep in mind that she may bring shame on her head by leaving it uncovered. That is because of the cultural context of headcovering which is still extant in conservative parts of the Mediterranean today.

    I could go on, but I strongly encourage you to investigate the facts for yourself. Do not allow yourself to be manipulated by the spiritual blackmail of accusing you of being in rebellion against God’s decree. They first have to demonstrate it by showing where God decrees that females are created to be subordinate to males.

    They cannot demonstrate that except by using bad logic and bad exegesis and making the text say things that are not in the text. They make up an entire narrative when they narrative details they assert as facts are not actually in the text but are actually just in their organically fertile imaginations.

    Here’s my outstanding challenge to HC everywhere: Genesis 1:26-28 states that God created male and female and gave them tasks to accomplish jointly. He did not say anything about “roles” or hierarchy. He gave the Father’s Blessing to *both* of them without distinction. And that is culturally significant because in that culture the Father only gave blessings to the sons, and especially the Firstborn.

    But, praise God, the Firstborn of all creation has made us joint heirs with him without regard to gender. And he has brought reconciliation to the sexes, not the division which patriarchy (or rarely matriarchy) has created. That makes it doubly sad and outrageous that these self-appointed spokesmen for God take it upon themselves to misuse the words he has given us and pretend that *they* are the ones being faithful to scripture.

    Beware, however, that pressing the Equality Challenge of Genesis 1:26-28 will earn you all sorts of honorary titles. The last one I engaged here with the challenge, Dusting Germaine, left the conversation in a huff calling me a vexatious woman. Thereby, of course, proving the point that it really is not about what the text actually says. 😉

  339. @ Gram3:

    Sorry, I got so wound up I forgot to add the rest of the challenge to HC’s0. Given what Genesis 1:26-28 *explicitly says*, where is that explicit equality revoked or modified such that roles and hierarchy are introduced? They invariably point to 1 Timothy 2:12. This is circular reasoning. Since these guys probably know how to use logic and words, I assume they are being either willfully blind or willfully deceptive.

  340. refugee wrote:

    One little snippet of a verse where husband and wife are to submit to each other, followed by a longer section on wife submitting and husband loving. Another section on the man being head of the wife as Christ is head of the church. Proverbs 31, distinct roles — the husband is sitting in the gates

    Just a short comment on these. Read the entire Ephesians letter and figure out for yourself what Paul’s main purpose is for the letter. Is it to establish the nature of relational hierarchies? Or is it to establish how everyone should live together by the power of the indwelling Spirit.

    Proverbs 31 is descriptive, not prescriptive. I’m sure you can imagine the bad places we could go by prescribing that everyone do whatever a person of their gender did! This is one of the most frequent errors in interpretation.

  341. Gram3 wrote:

    Dusting Germaine

    Should be Dustin Germaine, the Pulpiteer, so sincere apologies for the typo. My new computer’s keyboard is very chiclety, or that’s what we used to call them anyway.

    In no way should Dusting be considered a subconscious error, since dusting is never on my mind consciously or subconscously.

  342. @ refugee:
    Mon cher Sopwith,
    What a delightful version of ‘Nutcracker’! This ex-rat is loving every minute of it.
    Que Dieu vous bénisse.
    E

  343. Too many Dustins! I should be dustin’ right now, instead of reading resignation letter from a Dustin. Or would dustin’ violate my masculinity? Overall, the letter is good. Could have called for a little restitution to go with the repentance, could have shown more concern over victims and little people than just with leaders, and played just a wee bitterness card– but–referred to what Fiscal and Friends are doing as a “farce” and generally encouraged kind Martian folks to go find themselves a good church somewhere.

  344. refugee wrote:

    As I said in my earlier post just now, is there a Biblically defensible alternative? I would love to know.

    Yes! There absolutely and totally is.

    I have found this to be my gold standard:

    “Beyond Sex Roles: What the Bible Says about a Woman’s Place in Church and Family”

    Read it first before you read anything else. It’s completely rooted in scripture.

    I couldn’t put it down when I first discovered it, oddly enough, in a PCA church library! (Which then led to some interesting conversations with the pastor, but that’s another story)

    I’ve met Dr. Bilezikian. My daughters have met Dr. Bilezikian. He’s a wonderful man, going strong for the Lord in his mid-80’s

    Highly, highly recommend it! And if it doesn’t make you happy and liberate your mind, then I will personally refund the money you spent on the book.

    http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Sex-Roles-Womans-Church/dp/0801031532

    Furthermore, complementarians have attempted to root their beliefs in the doctrine of “The Eternal Subordination of the Son” or ESS. Basically, they’re saying women should be subordinated to men because Jesus is subordinated eternally to the Father within the godhead, and it’s complete nonsense, to put it kindly.

    Bilezikian does a masterful job of exposing the ESS in his paper:

    http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/40/40-1/40-1-pp057-068_JETS.pdf

    The man is my hero!

    And don’t forget about my offer. I mean it!

  345. @ Dave A A:

    I believe the letter is an instance where the kids would say “BOOM.”

    Removing the lampstand. He went there. All in all, not a very winsome letter for such a season, and divisive, too, in the manner of sheep and goats. May his tribe increase.

  346. Dave A A wrote:

    would dustin’ violate my masculinity

    I think, on the contrary, it might be a beneficial way to “work in the garden of your marriage” and to bring an overflowing measure of grace and peace while also bringing you great joy.

    This is probably a discussion from the Capitol Hill/9Marks thread, but actually we’re discussing the same things on both. Indie authoritarianism vs. Cufflinked authoritarianism.

  347. Gram3 wrote:

    Removing the lampstand. He went there. All in all, not a very winsome letter for such a season, and divisive, too, in the manner of sheep and goats. May his tribe increase.

    I am now going to have to take a shower. But don’t worry, I’m not bitter 😉

  348. refugee wrote:

    Is there a Biblical alternative to complementarianism?

    Try also the search function in TWW (drop box under ‘categories’ – top right of the page) – see ‘complementarianism’ and ‘gender roles’. You may get a sudden ‘rhema’ why Eagle often mentions John Piper and toilet bowls in the same sentence. I have saved many brilliant comments on TWW about this topic over time, as I have a friend in an abusive Christian marriage where ‘submit’ has been vilely abused.

  349. refugee wrote:

    For more than two decades we went to a church that taught the specialness of women

    Let me warn you of something. The longer you listened to something and the more times you heard it the harder it will be to “hear” any other explanation. But there are other understandings and explanations.

    Something I have found helpful is to be sure to read opposing opinions/ understandings from people/ theologians from very different backgrounds. Read what liberal protestants have to say and also read what liturgical churches have to say as well as what evangelicals have to say. If all you do is read conservative vs moderate evangelicals you will miss out on some good thinking.

    At some point you will have to trust yourself that you are “hearing” rightly. Sometimes ultra conservative evangelical protestantism seems to me to try to convince people that they must never trust themselves to be able to think or recognize a good argument when the see it. Twenty plus years is a long time to hear a lot of stuff to overcome.

    You can make it.

  350. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Bridget:
    Go to Throckmorton and follow his link:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/09/03/mars-hill-church-director-of-worship-dustin-kensrue-resigns/

    Thanks, Gram3. I may have more concerns with the polity structure and the idea that the elders have spiritual authority in the church and are the highest human authority in he church. These concepts frighten me. He also referred to the Holy Spirit being the one who annoints/chooses the elders . . . what exactly does that look like and how does it happen?

    I short, I believe that the premise that he is working from on how he disagrees with what is going on at MH is ALSO wrong. I have to believe that most of these men were brought into their elder positions by way of MH/Acts 29 programs and what is being taught is wrong from the root. It is the same as what I saw in SGM. The root beliefs about spiritual authority are wrong and it is hard to get it out of the man once it is ingrained.

  351. Bridget wrote:

    I short, I believe that the premise that he is working from on how he disagrees with what is going on at MH is ALSO wrong. I have to believe that most of these men were brought into their elder positions by way of MH/Acts 29 programs and what is being taught is wrong from the root. It is the same as what I saw in SGM. The root beliefs about spiritual authority are wrong and it is hard to get it out of the man once it is ingrained.

    ,
    The Berlin wall did not come down in an earthquake. Steady State Cosmology used to be unassailable. Bit by bit, though, some people let the evidence lead them. I agree with everything you say, but I’m hopeful that even this much recognition of the wrongness might yet lead to a fuller examination of root causes.

    See Nancy’s comment above to refugee, too for some good thoughts. The paradigm has to be broken, then people can start to think.

  352. @ Bridget:

    PS – How are the people in 15 churches in five states going to be cared for if their “campus” elders resign? Mega churches with one man on top don’t work. As we watch what is happening at MH, my concern is for the people in the pews. It might be better if each church separated from MH (I don’t even know, and doubt, if this is possible) and structure themselves. Then again maybe it’s best if the people in the pews just leave and go find or form healthy churches. MD can be the last man standing since this is what he seems to want.

  353. Nancy wrote:

    It sounds like that children’s game of “king on the hill.”

    Sounds like the old text computer game ‘Adventure’… “you are in a twisty maze of passages, all alike”.

  354. Bridget wrote:

    @ Bridget:
    PS – How are the people in 15 churches in five states going to be cared for if their “campus” elders resign? Mega churches with one man on top don’t work. As we watch what is happening at MH, my concern is for the people in the pews. It might be better if each church separated from MH (I don’t even know, and doubt, if this is possible) and structure themselves. Then again maybe it’s best if the people in the pews just leave and go find or form healthy churches. MD can be the last man standing since this is what he seems to want.

    Well, I think the Lord will care for his sheep, and it might not be clear to us right now how he intends to do that. I don’t think that polity is primarily the problem. That was the mantra at SGM. It’s not the polity; it’s the ecclesiology and pneumatology, and anthropology, and theology proper and just about every other category of sytematics.

    It may be that God is in the process of totally demolishing Mars Hill because Mars Hill is no longer the highest and best use of the Lord’s property, so to speak. The Lord may be clearing the land on which he plans to rebuild something much more like his kingdom. We can pray that others will follow this lead from Dustin. Ultimately, I think it will become a matter of financial viability.

    We can pray, too, that a lot of pastors/elders/pewpeople are paying attention to what has happened in the past year, that they are drawing the correct inferences and that they will have the courage to act in submission to the Lord and not on their fear of man and what man can do. It will take a lot of faith whether they are in a position of leadership or “just” an ordinary pewperson.

  355. @ Bridget:
    I wish these guys (and others like therm) hadn’t adopted the word “campus” to describe their premises. Not only is it terrible usage, it seems entirely contrary to what actually goes on in these places.

  356. @ Jeannette Altes:
    Do you have an Android phone? If so, it’s possible to copy/paste, though sometimes tricky. Google “copy paste android” and you’ll get a ton of hits for tutorials.

  357. numo wrote:

    Yes, critical thinking is crucial!

    You might even say it’s criti… oh nevermind. 😉

    I agree about these characters gloating over their numerous ‘campuses’. What nonsense.

  358. @ roebuck:
    Not to mention that referring to a building/grounds as a “campus” is incredibly self I aggrandizing on their part.

    And thanks for the funny! 🙂

  359. refugee wrote:

    As I said in my earlier post just now, is there a Biblically defensible alternative? I would love to know.

    Hon, I’ve found that this site is a good start. http://newlife.id.au/
    She’s very good at discussing the “gotcha” verses from the original language, and in context–you might be surprised at how different the verses look after you take them out of the complimentarian world view and through the lens of a bible student/scholar.
    I hope this will help you!

  360. numo wrote:

    @ Bridget:
    I wish these guys (and others like therm) hadn’t adopted the word “campus” to describe their premises. Not only is it terrible usage, it seems entirely contrary to what actually goes on in these places.

    “Campus”, pfffft! Frat house maybe.

  361. @ Nancy:

    Good stuff, Nancy. It is very hard to change ingrained thinking and almost impossible to do if still immersed in it. Sometimes you just have to totally break free of it. I went for over 3 years without hearing ONE SINGLE sermon. I just couldn’t. I was done. It was best three years as I look back for simply rewiring how I approached things. All I did was read the Gospels. No Paul (for the reason all I had heard was Paul and I wanted Jesus)

    That was a while back and it was worth it.

  362. @ numo:
    Numo – thanks. I do have an Android and I do actually know how to copy & paste with it. The problem is that it is very touchy and the combox in my phone is difficult and glitchy and….I only had a couple of minutes. 🙂

    Now, since I am at home….. 😉

    Here is the link to the Amazon site with the abridged version and I see you can get it paperback now, too. I have both the original and the abridged. I like the abridged for the overview and the original for the depth.

    http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Women-Abridged-Katharine-Bushnell-ebook/dp/B00806IR56/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1409793606&sr=8-1&keywords=god%27s+word+to+women

  363. Gram3 wrote:

    What I have found by going to the Greek text and using a lexicon and concordance (I really like Biblehub) is that it is easy to look up every use of a word and how it is translated in every instance. The dirty little secret is that translators make decisions about how to translate words. And if they presuppose male hierarchy, guess which way they will choose to translate!

    Which is one VERY good reason to stay away from the ESV and Holman Christian Standard Bible translations–their translators chose words for that very purpose, and by their own admission from what I have read. If you ever become curious as to why a number of scholars are leery of the ESV, let me know and I’ll link you to a paper pointing out a surprising number of flaws in this work.

  364. Refuge, Funny story. I got so angry about Eph (this was about 12 years ago) that I copy and passed the entire book taking out all the chapter breaks and verse numbers and read it as a real bonafide letter. Try it! (this was after reading how we got chapter breaks and verses to begin with. Did you know it originally came from the printer?

    it reads totally different. And I even took out the words that were NOT in the interlinear. Amazing. Not about hierarchy at all in chps 4-5. It is about being filled with the Holy Spirit.

    I would also highly recommend Katherine Bushnell’s God’s Word to Women. She did her homework on ALL the women passages…..many years ago. It is some serious scholarship and she is no shrinking violet. You will be amazed. And she is quite the interesting character. Doctor, Missionary to China, Greek/Hebrew scholar, etc. And that was back in the 1930’s!

  365. @ Paula Rice:
    I know Belezikian! He is an Armenian, like my family, and one of the prime movers behind Willow Creek. Very, very loving and gentle man. One of my heroes, actually.

  366. @ Darcyjo:

    Are you referring to Mark Strauss’ paper? Anywho, I always crack up when they say it is a “literal” translation. Right.

  367. @ Bridget:

    Thanks for bringing that to our attention, Bridget. It is an intriguing article, and I skimmed through it three times today, looking for different things each time. They had some good points to make. Some of the material on Mark Driscoll fits what I recall from that era, though some doesn’t. (I’ll take a detour but get back to him at the end of this.)

    I also get the impression that they don’t have a very holistic approach to “growth” and “transformation,” and might even think I’m a Drucker-ite in the way they seem him because I sometimes use the Diffusion of Innovation curve. (I’m not using it in a marketing way but as a reality check on the fact that God “wires” people differently and if you care about communicating so that all learning styles can hear the message through their default perception grid, you’ll find tools like the Diffusion of Innovation for its underlying theory of communication and *learning* and not necessarily consumerism and *motivation* … if that makes sense.)

    Anyway, they cited an article I wrote as “Endnote #3.This report lists 5 streams in Leadership Network: EMERGENT VILLAGE STREAM, NEW CALVINISM STREAM, PROGRESSIVE STREAM, EMERGING + POST-EVANGELICAL STREAM, and MISSIONAL STREAM.” I’m not sure how closely they read my article, as (1) I actually talked about six streams (and juxtaposed two) so if that wasn’t a typo on their part, it was odd.

    And, FWIW, (2) I would never have characterized Leadership Network as having these different streams in them. Those streams and the underlying paradigms were and are in our culture. Leadership Network’s role, to paraphrase how they put it at the time, was to try to facilitate connection and communication, and see what people and perspectives rose to the surface. And it quickly became clear that several groups had high-level culture-theological clashes. Especially New Calvinism and what became Emergent Village over theological content, and probably Missional and Emergent Village over theological process – the former being more concrete, constructive, and action-oriented and the latter more abstract, deconstructive, and talk-oriented. I don’t see Leadership Network as actively facilitating the development of each stream, but just hosting the gathering at which people sorted themselves out. And saying that Leadership Network was dedicated to a postmodern shift … well, depends on what you mean by postmodern.

    There’s confusion about “postmodern philosophy” versus “postmodern culture.” Which understandably can be hard to sort through. But the larger point, going back to Mark Driscoll, is that I just don’t see him as postmodern in philosophy or culture, really. In many ways, he’s an ultimate modernist, using a hierarchical centralized CEO business model and organizational systems to create the mega-über-multi-campus model. A “culturally postmodern” church would tend to be the polar opposite: Peer leaders with much personal input from others to gather insight for corporate discernment. Decentralized learning. No CEO. Organic and smaller instead of business and bigger. Independently going and growing instead of institutional overlording and dictation.

    Mars Hill since the 2007 bylaws change seems to have transmogrified into sort of a penultimate modernist model … the kind of approach that may do some good but ultimately does much harm. I’ve expected the model’s implosion for a long time now, and maybe this is the starter explosive to set off that destruction.

    Okay, so maybe that helps some with analysis Haitch was looking for, too …

    And if anybody’s craving more about the New Calvinist *paradigm*, my most extended analysis of their system is probably at this post:

    http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2012/12/06/calvinistas/

  368. Lydia wrote:

    Are you referring to Mark Strauss’ paper? Anywho, I always crack up when they say it is a “literal” translation. Right.

    Exactly! I keep a copy of the PDF to share with people who don’t get why I won’t use it in sermon prep. 🙂

  369. P.S. Meant to say in the previous post but got distracted — Oh look! A theological squirrel! — that the main point is, in my opinion, Mark Driscoll is not so much about transformation and freedom, but conformity and strictures. People may have been helped by some of his teaching — and the Scriptures can set people free regardless. But there’s a weird dualism going on here where the organizational system is crushing the spirits of other elders-pastors, staff, and congregants. I’m not sure the system is salvageable. But that’s what I’m working on figuring out what exactly I believe about that …

  370. Darcyjo wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    What I have found by going to the Greek text and using a lexicon and concordance (I really like Biblehub) is that it is easy to look up every use of a word and how it is translated in every instance. The dirty little secret is that translators make decisions about how to translate words. And if they presuppose male hierarchy, guess which way they will choose to translate!

    Which is one VERY good reason to stay away from the ESV and Holman Christian Standard Bible translations–their translators chose words for that very purpose, and by their own admission from what I have read. If you ever become curious as to why a number of scholars are leery of the ESV, let me know and I’ll link you to a paper pointing out a surprising number of flaws in this work.

    Would very much a link 🙂

  371. Darcyjo wrote:

    If you ever become curious as to why a number of scholars are leery of the ESV, let me know and I’ll link you to a paper pointing out a surprising number of flaws in this work.

    I would be interested in that. The only thing I found in a cursory google search was criticism not of the translation but of the “other stuff” in the ESV study bible. BTW, I like the ESV. I don’t have the “study bible” that people I read were objecting to. I did use the NASB and in doing comparisons of maybe 30 or so samples I did not see any significant difference in meaning but I did find the ESV easier to read.

    But then, I have been reading Bart Ehrman and lo and behold I do not find what he is saying to really be much different from what I heard growing up, waaaaaay back in the day. So, it does seem to me that even if somebody got everything perfect in translation there are still a few major and a lot of minor issues–but that is another discussion. And it does not bother me if Paul believed in the literal historical and scientific specificity of the genesis origin stories–I don’t. Nor does it bother me if they looked at some of the cultural practices and assumptions of their day and saw in them something which appeared to match their concept of God–and perhaps it did. But it may not be workable today to accomplish a similar result.

    Personally my “feeling” is that I want to hear in some translation as nearly close to what we think the original writer may have been saying, and if that is not what we think or practice today I don’t have a problem with that. But I am a rebel. I was raised SBC before they were conservatively resurged upon, so I missed the whole current comp excess and the whole current concept of the demigod status of the ordained clergy. And now I have gone hog wild and become a Methodist, so obviously there is no hope for me now.

    But I would like to know what you are saying about the problems with the ESV.

  372. @ Bridget:

    I’ve seen one about ESV bloopers and have the PDF somewhere on my old computer or backup drive. Just not right at hand. But it’s a great takedown of the kludginess and sometimes really embarrassingly bad translation and awkward English. Hopefully someone else has it, too.

  373. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I can’t remember when I first used it, but it was kind of a joke that became a habit.

    I remember ! We were having fun with rhyming slang, and Nick’s description of ‘Park Fiscall’ was perfectly rhyming and apt… And yes, the less number of google hits the better. Maybe I’ll stop being lazy and go dig out the spot…

  374. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    P.S. Meant to say in the previous post but got distracted — Oh look! A theological squirrel! — that the main point is, in my opinion, Mark Driscoll is not so much about transformation and freedom, but conformity and strictures. People may have been helped by some of his teaching — and the Scriptures can set people free regardless. But there’s a weird dualism going on here where the organizational system is crushing the spirits of other elders-pastors, staff, and congregants. I’m not sure the system is salvageable. But that’s what I’m working on figuring out what exactly I believe about that …

    Thanks for you response, Brad. I seems to me that Driscoll was intent on building an organization verses a church. I don’t see them overlapping without the crushing and people under the bus as we have and are continuing to witness. That philosophy seemed to be endorsed by the Leadership Network.

  375. Gram3 wrote:

    My new computer’s keyboard is very chiclety, or that’s what we used to call them anyway.

    You have my sympathies. The keys on the ‘new’ keyboards are getting smaller, packed more densely, and more and more touch sensitive. I’m thinking it probably has to do with the ‘fittest’ traits surviving the culling process from the days of the Jurassic antiques used at UNIX workstations long ago. (I too am a Jurassic antique, Richard Attenborough would be proud!)

  376. Bunsen Honeydew wrote:

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Purity in Ideology is absolutely more correct. The neo-cals I’m around like to say “precision in doctrine” as much as they like say “Biblical”.

    You left out “Gospel centered”… 🙂

  377. Hester wrote:

    @ Nick:

    Curious question that I’ve wondered about a long time and never remembered to ask – why Park Fiscal instead of his real name?

    Found it ! This is Nick’s first use of *Park Fiscall* Which begs the grammatical question – one l or two?

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/10/26/rachel-held-evans-and-her-critics-they-are-all-missing-an-opportunity/

    Nick Bulbeck on Thu Nov 01, 2012 at 04:24 PM said:
    There seem to be a number of “educated” men who are a little insecure about RHE’s lack (as they perceive it) of learning. They seem to feel that what a Godly™ Gospel™ minister needs is whatever they’ve got.
    Several things.
    Knowledge, which is nothing compared to love, puffs up – that is, it increases size without increasing substance. Studying scripture is good and necessary, but dangerous: because Bible study that feeds the fleshly ego, and leads to pride and condescension, is idolatry and sin. If I can fathom all knowledge, but have no love, I am nothing. Not “less than totally effective” – nothing.
    The Pharisees, the scribes, and the teachers of the law, likewise noticed the boldness of Peter and John and likewise noticed that they were unlettered and unlearned men. They’d been with Jesus, granted, but what difference did that make among that mob that knew nothing of the law? The point: learning is not, in itself, wrong; but neither learning nor lack of it make for spiritual stature. Being with Jesus, and being changed to the core by the encounter, do. Paul had accumulated many of the trappings of Bible™ learning; but he considered them (literally) excrement in comparison to gaining Christ.
    One more thing. My first serious study of a certain famous preacher from Seattle took place last year, when some friends asked us to join them in listening to a series of podcasts from [rhymes with “park fiscall”] on spiritual gifts. I had high expectations, having heard good things about the young man in question. But by the end of week five I was astonished and appalled at the sloppy exegesis and sheer crude inaccuracy of the “teaching” on offer. He seemed to have little idea of what a spiritual gift is, for a start, clearly had no grasp of scripture, and in boldly setting out “what the bible teaches”, was meddling ill-advisedly with matters far outside his gifting. He really should stick to vision-casting and pro-istemi leadership, which is biblical and at which he clearly does excel. I have yet to read RHE’s book, but if she is as illiterate as the calvinistas claim, she’s in famous company.

  378. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    Thanks for bringing that to our attention, Bridget. It is an intriguing article, and I skimmed through it…

    I, too. The style of prose in the article isn’t my first language, but I got the gist, I think.

    I also get the impression that they don’t have a very holistic approach to “growth” and “transformation,” and might even think I’m a Drucker-ite in the way they seem him because I sometimes use the Diffusion of Innovation curve.

    I know what you mean, Brad. There were several aspects to the post that one also sees in “heresy-spotting” – by which I mean (in brief) polemical websites dedicated to “exposing false doctrine” using misrepresentation and other dishonest means if necessary. In other words, blogs by people trying to use the devil’s tools to do the Lord’s work.

    One of the stocks-in-trade of the heresy-spotter is the “guilt by association” fallacy, and heresy-spotters are extremely resourceful at associating today’s preachers with yesterday’s “heretics”. X teaches this; Y also taught this (well… sort of, and that’s good enough); therefore X was influenced by Y and Y was of_the_devil/new_age/worldy/a_heretic therefore X is a false teacher from the devil.

    I don’t know whether I’d call the article in question an example of heresy-spotting, but I think you’re right about the Drucker thing to which they refer at length. The fact that the Leadership Network had some, or even many, ideas in common with Drucker doesn’t make them his offspring.

  379. Bridget wrote:

    Darcyjo wrote:
    Gram3 wrote:
    What I have found by going to the Greek text and using a lexicon and concordance (I really like Biblehub) is that it is easy to look up every use of a word and how it is translated in every instance. The dirty little secret is that translators make decisions about how to translate words. And if they presuppose male hierarchy, guess which way they will choose to translate!
    Which is one VERY good reason to stay away from the ESV and Holman Christian Standard Bible translations–their translators chose words for that very purpose, and by their own admission from what I have read. If you ever become curious as to why a number of scholars are leery of the ESV, let me know and I’ll link you to a paper pointing out a surprising number of flaws in this work.
    Would very much a link

    Here you go! http://zondervan.typepad.com/files/improvingesv2.pdf

  380. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    How interesting! I don’t know him personally, but I have traveled to Chicago on several occasions to attend his lectures, sponsored by the CBE.

    Willowcreek, interestingly enough, bans complementarian based materials from being sold in their bookstore. I’ve read how complementarians have disparaged this move, calling it into criticism. All I can say is, if you know complementarians and how closed-minded and guarded they are about protecting their male-dominated hierarchies , insistent women be kept in submission to men in the church and home, then you’d know how anxious they are to keep biblical egalitarian materials off their church bookstore shelves! There are some who attempt to have a foot in each camp, but having been in both, I don’t see how it can be done. Lines have been drawn, and the space in between is an important battleground.

    I have discovered some will look up Bilezikian and discover his association with Willowcreek, which some people have mixed feelings about for some reasons. Maybe because it’s a mega-church, I don’t know.

    I will say that Willowcreek has an Association of Churches, and I would send people to visit a church within their association first before I’d send them to an Acts29 or a TGC associated church ANY DAY!

  381. Darcyjo wrote:

    Here you go!

    Alright, guys, here is a followup. Forgive me. To explain this I have to tell you what a geek I have always been. Bear with me.

    About the link which was about the ESV translation. I have, believe it or not, read every word of what Mark Strauss (Dr. Strauss I presume) has written. It was a long and tedious task, but a very helpful one. I now know, I think, both why some people would like the ESV and why some-not so much. He presents pages and pages of examples where he says that either “standard english” or else english idiom or choice of word or word sequence in a sentence would have been more clear if the translators had said it a somewhat different way. I did not see anything that was an accusation that the translators were trying to deceive the reader or trying to push a particular belief position by altering the meaning of the text. He does think that a number of idioms in the Greek were not translated in the best way.

    Some of what he said is obvious once he points it out. Some of it I thought was splitting hairs too much. He talks about the use of “Biblish” as opposed to English in some cases. This I think is the key to his displeasure and also the key as to why some people like the ESV. It “sounds a lot like” some prior translations and that can be very familiar and comforting. One example: he does not like saying that Mary was “great with child.” But for someone like me who has lived through years of nativity plays as a child and then as a mother of little children and having so much emotional investment and so may precious memories of all that, how could Mary ever be anything but “great with child?”

    The other thing I think as to why a lot of what bothers him does not bother me, and I did not even notice it, is that I have long since developed the skill of listening loosely. I grew up in a home where mom had some spanish and dad had taught german early one and from infancy they tried to get me excited about language. Not with much success. So I took spanish in high school and german in college, each to a reading level of sixth grade only. I also took latin in high school because the catholic children had latin in school and I did not want them to get ahead of me. The I had one short introductory course to biblical greek. And now I live in a place in the country where there are many englishes due to a large spanish speaking population and a large african-american population who use a lot of words and expressions which mean little or nothing to me. And, of course, I speak medicalese-with a native accent. And I once won a week at Ridgecrest as a kid for memorizing Luke (as in the gospel of) in the King James. So how many different ways of using words would that be? Seven? S, G, L, Med, spanglish and some A-A lingo, and KJV. Eight; I forgot to count whatever it is that is my native tongue. After all that any idea that there even might be a best (much less only) way to say something gets way lost in the confusion, and I probably would not recognize standard english if I heard it. In fact, I know I would not based on what Dr. Strauss has written.

    So if one listens loosely by habit, and did not major in English, and if one has an emotional attachment to some biblish and if one has already memorized a lot of stuff from prior “literal” translations my thinking is that said “one” will like the ESV. Otherwise, I don’t know for sure but maybe they would be happier with something else. To me, after all that, it reads “smooth as silk” and there is a comforting familiarity about it.

  382. @ Nancy: thanks for this!

    I think the ESV reads much like the RSV, and actually seems – at first glance – as if it’s the RSV under a different name. Haven’t read the Strauss article as yet, but I have to say that translation is a *very* hard job, and translation of ancient documents is even harder. It’s a job I’d never, ever want! (I had a translator friend and heard a lot about it from her – she dealt w/modern languages only.)

  383. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    @ Bridget:

    Thanks for bringing that to our attention, Bridget. It is an intriguing article, and I skimmed through it three times today, looking for different things each time. They had some good points to make. Some of the material on Mark Driscoll fits what I recall from that era, though some doesn’t.

    Just read through the link that I found separately, I missed your fine analysis on this sorry. How the label ‘postmodernism’ is used – yes, I think it’s a term too loosely bandied around, like feminism. But it’s an article that I’ll return to and give further consideration to. It’s definitely in the ‘intriguing’ category to me.

  384. Gavin White wrote:

    If the facts are as THC supposes, and it was all a misunderstanding of Rome’s real position, then why was he tried (in his absence) in Rome for heresy in1518?

    Because he was a heretic. He would not listen nor would change his mind. The political landscape was ripe for change. The princes didn’t want to be shackled to the Church, so his rebellion was fanned by the winds of political change. He wholesale disregarded the teachings of the apostolic church and created his own religion with his own Bible.

    In the end, he was not really different than the other heretics of the previous centuries. The Church won’t change the truths that were handed down through the centuries because, well, she can’t. Martin Luther thought he knew better than the Church.

  385. THC wrote:

    Gavin White wrote:
    If the facts are as THC supposes, and it was all a misunderstanding of Rome’s real position, then why was he tried (in his absence) in Rome for heresy in1518?
    Because he was a heretic. He would not listen nor would change his mind. The political landscape was ripe for change. The princes didn’t want to be shackled to the Church, so his rebellion was fanned by the winds of political change. He wholesale disregarded the teachings of the apostolic church and created his own religion with his own Bible.
    In the end, he was not really different than the other heretics of the previous centuries. The Church won’t change the truths that were handed down through the centuries because, well, she can’t. Martin Luther thought he knew better than the Church.

    Your comment is filled with hyperbole.

    I guess all Protestants are heretics and should be tried — since they use a different Bible (mostly the eame though) and disagree (to some degree) with the RCC?

  386. __

    “I could eat a million of these CHEETOS® ”

    hmmm…

    –> that God would open “The king of Hyperbole’s” eyes?

    huh?

    THC’s hyperbolic bellyache may be ‘fleeting’, but ‘TWW Champions ‘are not. 

    -snicker-

    The ‘common man’ doth ‘presently’ plow da world with da word of God, thank-you very much Wm. Tyndale.

    (grin)

    hahahahahaha

    Skreeeeeeeeetch!

    God is our refuge and strength,        
    A very present help in trouble,
    Therefore we will not fear,
    Though the earth be removed,
    Though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea,
    Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled,
    Though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof!

    Selah. (i.e. think of that!)

    There is a river, 
    The streams where of shall make glad the city of God,
    The holy place of the tabernacles of the Most High.
    God is in the midst of her,
    She shall not be moved,
    God shall help her, 
    and that right early!

    The heathen raged, 
    the kingdoms were moved,
    He uttered his voice, 
    The earth melted.

    The LORD of hosts is with us,
    The God of Jacob is our refuge.

    Selah. (i.e. think of that!)

    Come, behold the works of the Lord,
    What desolations He has made in the earth,
    Who makes wars to cease unto the end of the earth.
            
    He breaks the bow, 
    And cuts the spear asunder,
    He burns the chariot with fire.

    Be still, and know that I am God,
    I will be exalted among the heathen,
    I will be exalted in the earth!

    The LORD of hosts is with us,
    The God of Jacob is our refuge.

    Selah. (i.e. think of that!)

    *

    liven up da moment?

    Yep!

    “Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott!”

    ATB

    Sopy
    __
    Comic relief: Huey Lewis and the News – “Workin’ for a livin’ ? ”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N2CANatVYQ

    ;~)

  387. Bridget wrote:

    I guess all Protestants are heretics and should be tried — since they use a different Bible (mostly the eame though) and disagree (to some degree) with the RCC?

    Not at all. Protestants today are not heretics in the same way that they were in during Luther’s time. Protestantism is a heresy, but that’s different than calling individuals heretics. I would say that Hans Kung is a modern day Catholic who teaches heresy.

    Anyhow, the idea of any Protestant teaching heresy is almost unfathomable. Who decides what is heresy and what isn’t? Some say Victoria Osteen (Joel Osteen’s wife) recently when she said that we don’t do good works for God, but for ourselves. In their world that isn’t heresy. Who decides> Who decides if Mark Driscoll is teaching heresy?

  388. @ brad/futuristguy:

    Brad, I cannot thank you enough for that article you wrote. Spot on entirely. I kept saying “yes! yes!” all the way through it.

    I especially appreciated this:

    [The opposite of these is self-determination. This does not mean there is no such thing as authority, but that each disciple, in his or her “priesthood of the believer,” is personally responsible for their own choices and to grow in discernment and no longer be a “spiritual baby.” All forms of legalism rely on some outside expert or pedagogue to make the rules and set the boundaries for you; this means a system of legalism/totalism automatically keeps you spiritually immature.]

    I had just been thinking about this very thing this past week. I was thinking to myself how this system keeps people from ever growing up into the full measure of Christ and keeps them forever in a one-down state of dependency.

    You also said:

    Calvinista power structures are typically based on authoritarianism. They turn out to be highly hierarchical, but most frequently are oligarchical – ruled by an elite group of leaders.

    You didn’t flesh it out in your article so I’m not sure if this is part of your thinking, but as far as the elite group of leaders goes, I see this not just as among a core group of celebrities that everyone knows but also among the smaller churches too. The leaders seem to often use language that suggests they are a sort of separate, elite class of believer who are above the pleebs in the pew. I think it is related to the perpetual one-down dependency thing. The elite alone are allowed to be the adults in the room (group) and everyone else is judged by how well they follow the leaders.

    That’s all I’ve got time to write now so I’m cutting this off a bit short. But anyway, thank you for the article.

  389. @ formerly anonymous:

    Glad the article was of some help … for more about authoritarianism, this link goes to a short series on the research findings of Robert Jay Lifton from interviews he did in the 1950s with former prisoners and prisoners of war held in China. This because the basis of criteria used to identify organizational “cults.” So, some of the kinds of things you talked about with elite show up in his criteria.

    http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/the-hunger-games-trilogy-5a/

  390. Just posted: Mars Hill Research Guide – Pulling It All Together, with a series of three organizational charts that I think will help visualize key entities and relationships among them.

    Next post in this series likely to be concept frameworks and indicators for creating a comprehensive systems strategy/plan that encompasses (1) personal repentance and recovery for leaders and followers, (2) relational mending and restitution, and (3) organizational renovation (if possible) and restoration of leaders (if warranted by character qualifications and a demonstrated trajectory of transformation).

    That will be a challenging post to write, as I will be sharing some of my experiences in leadership and followership in situations of spiritual abuse, and the kinds of change processes I had to undergo. (For instance, healing and “normalization” of certain relationships took over three years for one, and about seven years for another when I was in the complicit role of a church planting strategist to a planter who bullied a lot of sincere followers of Jesus.)

    I would greatly appreciate your prayers as I seek to synthesize some thoughts from over 35 years ago when I endured a near faith-ending church split as a 20-something, and from the last almost 15 years since the church planting strategist experience. Thanks …

    http://wp.me/p8nAv-1rD