Jesus did indeed choose Paul to be an apostle – highly trained in theology with a real passion for his belief, but needing a long time to get straightened out once converted. For the rest, he seemed to prefer fishermen. Would the church had the same kind of mixture again today. For every person famous for their preaching the gospel a small army of ordinary people getting on with it.

From what I read, I have seen this movie before. It has a lot of the ear marks of the abusive discipleship driven organizations of the past, and the signs of recent fleecing machines. Scary & ugly.

Jeebuz! These people didn’t get this from the Bible, they got it from Mao’s Communist China.

Senior Pastor = Mao

Prayer Force Training Leaders Guide = Little Red Book

Small Groups = Neighborhood Committee; Function: to confront admonish and sin-sniff (i.e. spy)

The Bible? Irrelevant insofar as it contradicts what the leader says
Priesthood of all believers? Dead

Reminds of the the SpongeBob movie: “All Hail Plankton”, the only thing missing is the members running around with a bucket on their head with “COH” painted on it.

And people actually gullible enough to sign up for this. God help us all.

Sam wrote:

Wow…just wow. That kind of devotion and submission to a human being is frightening and IMHO idolatry at its worst. That kind of respect, trust, obedience and reverence should only be for three beings (in one): Father, Son and Holy Spirit. End of story. Case closed.

“There can only be one Mediator between God and the German People — THE FUEHRER!”
— Reichsminister Josef Goebbels, as quoted by Frank Capra, Why We Fight

12. COH does not exist for the people present but for those to come….

For future generations of the People who will one day forever live in True Communism…

JeffT wrote:

Senior Pastor = Mao

Actually, Senior Pastor = Moses. The leadership concept is literally called the Moses Model, which gives it a biblical OT look to a structure that is not found in the New Testament. Deebs, thanks for taking on this project with your usual thoroughness.

This creeped me out. From the Prayer Force handbook at the link provided above –

1. Agreement with our pastor
We began this study with the vision that our pastor has for our church. The reason for this is that we as a prayer force exist for one purpose – to serve our pastor and the vision the Lord has given him.

Yikes.

karpgirl wrote:

This creeped me out. From the Prayer Force handbook at the link provided above –
1. Agreement with our pastor
We began this study with the vision that our pastor has for our church. The reason for this is that we as a prayer force exist for one purpose – to serve our pastor and the vision the Lord has given him.
Yikes.

My thought exactly when I read that.

Yikes! Yikes! Yikes!

@ dee:
Cool, thanks!

If there are professionals out there, I am wondering what would motivate a sane person to submit to and support this system? This comes close to Marshall Applewhite levels of out-there deception.

senecagriggs yahoo wrote:

Commenters already comparing pastors/leaders to Mao and the Fuerher.
Isn’t that out of bounds?
Deebs, you could actually put in a little box at the top of the site, the general rules of engagement for commenters. It might help.

If the shoe fits

I’ve never commented before, but I wanted to say that I am looking forward to this series. I’ve attended two of the “partner” churches on the website and have been to services at one of the church plants.

The lead pastor at one of these churches definitely seems to be striving for Gospel glitterati status- multiple site church, multiple books, conference participation, and Trump-like real estate ambitions, although this church is notably more “liberal” than the Calvinist pastors you have examined- for example, there is a female pastor on staff that preaches to the whole church (and is excellent at it).

The care groups in CLC eventually morphed into confessing sin, which was not appealing at all.

Off topic alert – I have several facebook friends that I see getting more and more conservative and radical, in my opinion. One of the most recent things I saw posted was the woman who drove from Tennessee to the National Cathedral in D.C. and interrupted a Muslim prayer service by telling them not to take over our church. It was an interesting scenario, and I don’t think I agree with the cathedral allowing it (are muslims going to give us a mosque to hold a prayer service there?), but am just curious for other peoples’ thoughts. I just fear that we will turn more and more people off instead of drawing them to the Lord.

Gram3 wrote:

Weird inversion of Gothardism and Shepherding…Put that together with Dominionism and lots of money, and who knows how crazy bad this could get.

You have no idea how crazy bad this can get. I spent 7 years immersed in a similar church and still have loose ties with friends who are into the NAR /dominionism stuff. After 7 years in that place, I had succeeded in cutting myself off from all outside friends and most family. The brainwashing is subtle and very real. And after 8 years out of that place, stories like this still cause a knee-jerk fear reaction in me.
Gram3 wrote:

If there are professionals out there, I am wondering what would motivate a sane person to submit to and support this system?

It starts with love-bombing. If you are vulnerable and looking for someone to care, this is a huge initial draw. Then, slow and subtle indoctrination. It doesn’t happen overnight. I look back and I really cannot explain how I was pulled in so fully, but in the end, fear is a huge motivator. And we were taught that disagreement was disunity and disunity meant you were out of God’s will and being out of God’s will meant being open to all sorts of demonic attacks. So yeah. Fear.

That is quite some list they have.

I’m surprised to see that giving the preacher weekly foot rubs and washing his car for him on the weekends wasn’t included as well.

This: “6. Looking happy brings people into the church.”

So people with clinical depression or undergoing a serious heartbreak in life (eg, death of family member) will get no support at ARC churches. You have to be a shiny, happy, fake, plastic person to attend their church.

This: “8. The main goals of small groups are to confront and admonish one another. Every member of the church must join one.”

As a former, lifelong codependent who now understands and realizes the hazards of sharing one’s most inner issues, troubles, and fears with new people, I would have to give them a resounding “thumb’s down” on that practice.

The more you open up to people and share your personal dirty laundry with them, the more opportunity they have to mess with you or take advantage of you, especially if you are in an emotionally vulnerable spot in your life – if they are dirt bags, that is.
(Some people can be trusted with personal information, but some cannot, and you have to discern the types of people you are around.)

You need to spend a lot of time around people and ascertain their character before you go opening your mouth and sharing very private, personal information about yourself with them (and I mean people you meet face- to- face, like at a church, not necessarily when writing under a screen name on a blog).

This church system is advocating people not to have boundaries, but people should have them.

Even the Bible talks about “guarding your heart,” which I take to mean in part, not blabbing all your hang-ups and problems with folks you don’t know well, and using Christian-ese phrases such as “accountability” to tell people they need to blab away in a “small group” does not trump the concept of having boundaries. These people would be lucky to learn so much as what my favorite cereal is if I attended one of their “small groups.”

Gram3 wrote:

If there are professionals out there, I am wondering what would motivate a sane person to submit to and support this system? This comes close to Marshall Applewhite levels of out-there deception.

What Jeannette said is true. I’m currently working my way through a book titled “Take Back Your Life: Recovering from Cults and Abusive Relationships.” The authors knew nothing about my former community when writing this book, but they nailed it.

Most people get drawn into this environment at a vulnerable time in their life. Sometimes very smart people are susceptible. It has to do with the techniques of thought reform and how they are reinforced by the church environment. It’s very subtle and manipulative.

This:

“4. Satan mainly targets pastors.
…satan (sic) prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. His main target will be our leaders because of the influence they have. (P.4)”

The NT verse they’re getting that from is addressed to any and all believers, not predominantly, or only, preachers, if I remember right.

I’m still astonished that Christian churches or groups who would claim to be sola scriptura (I am guessing) never-the-less feel very comfortable adding rules and words into the biblical text that just are not there.

I don’t remember the Bible stating that preachers are more susceptible to demonic attack or whatever type of persecution than average joe’s who sit in the pews.

Jesus also said that whoever wants to be first must put him or herself last. These guys always forget that.

So far, they sound like a combination of the authoritarianism of some reformed circles with the spiritual kung-fu of the Calvary chapel/Pentecostal persuasions. Scary, like the first time you tasted a peanut butter & jelly sandwich and realized how powerful they were together.

@Bene D. and Mirele – thanks for the inside scoop. It validates that my gut is still intact and working just fine. I think this relates in a way, since my friends who get into this stuff are getting more “in your face” and woe to this world type of Christians. One facebook friend wrote that he hates this culture – and he has preteen and teenaged children. Makes me wonder what he’s giving his children to look forward to – depression, doom, and gloom in this life. I am losing my patience for this crap! They’re not claiming the God I know.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

“There can only be one Mediator between God and the German People — THE FUEHRER!”
— Reichsminister Josef Goebbels, as quoted by Frank Capra, Why We Fight

Capra was every bit the genius Riefenstahl was at crafting propaganda films in the old school fashion.

roebuck wrote:

However, NO ONE has to go along with their cultish nonsense. And yet, they do. THAT to me is the real problem. What happened to discernment? What happened to critical thinking? Heck, what happened to just plain thinking?
How do these cultish charlatans get any traction whatsoever? I continue to be baffled by the way that folks disregard all the clear warning signs of cultish behavior and just get roped into this evil stuff.

This fascinates me – the creation of mental prisons that people find themselves in. Places where a large number of thoughts just cannot be thought; not because the person does;t want to, but because they’re mentally completely unable to

If you try and push someone into a prison, they’re resist and run

If you can entice someone to a nice place – not too hard – and then give them just enough reasons, usually by way of enticements with a tiny amount of fear, not to wander too far, they’ll probably stay there for a while. Long enough to start gradually building the walls.

It helps to remind people how nice it is where they are, and how much better it is than other places. But always keep slowly building those walls. Just slowly … a few stones around aren’t scary – I could step over them anytime. That waist high wall – I could easily climb over it if I wanted. That 6ft high wall – easy enough to shimmy over, but it’s nice here. That 50ft high wall – it looks so secure and seems to be doing a great job keeping all the bad things going on outside, outside.

@ Gram3:
I would love to see some sort of serious psychological study on that question. SGM was full of educated professionals. Why? I have some theories but would love to see a serious analysis.

@ Gram3:
Hi Gram 3, I went to one of the largest ARC churches and I didn’t find out about ARC until I got free. You could go through hundreds of hours of their sermons and never hear a reference to ARC and you certainly never read or heard about the above practices and beliefs – at least not that bluntly. What you experienced was awesome music, Hollywood quality productions and videos, smoke machines and light shows, the cleanest bathrooms you’ve seen, great coffee and Disney quality children’s ministry – plus everyone is so friendly. It is completely overwhelming and intoxicating on a visceral level. You are already involved and have new friends and your kids love church before you start to have questions. But the music is so great! What was that question again? Well they had you bring your bible, turn to a couple of scriptures and Jesus’ name was brought up at least 4 times; therefore it’s “got to be” a “Christian” church, right?. Oh they’re playing The Stand. I love The Stand! That’s how it happens to perfectly “sane” people. These pastors are masters of manipulation and they don’t want members to ever hear the above ARC list which was intended for the pastors not members. God bless TWW for enlightening the masses.

Note that even in the Roman Catholic Church, where the Pope can pronounce infallible statements of dogma by taking his seat on the Cathedra at the Basillica of St. John Lateran, a privilege most recently exercised by Pius XII, Catholics are not expected to follow the Pope without question. Consider the uproar at Pope Francis over the attempt to grant communion to divorced couples among conservative Catholics who are by no means supporters of the SSPX or Sedevacantists. In the Orthodox Church we refer to our bishops as master, but if they tell us to do something wrong we are expected to refuse it, and bishops and pastors can be deposed by their peers or even in some cases the laity, as happened most recently to Patriarch Ireneos of Jerusalem.

The demonology bit also sounds quite wrong. The Patrisric corpus suggests that bestiality
and other paraphilias are the result of failure to control the passions; masturbation was frowned upon for the same reasons. However demonic activity was always understood as being different from insanity, although certainly in the last some mentally ill people were regarded as demonaic, and certainly in the present the reverse is true. The most offensive aspect of the demon trials system to me seems to be the guilt imposed upon the alleged demonaic; if someone actually has a demon, the Fathers are unanimous that they are not accountable for their actions, and are also highly unlikely to voluntarily cooperate with a demon board.

What I think is being described here is basically a cult, that is to say, a system of mental subjugation and brainwashing akin to those used in Scientology. I look forward to the upcoming post on Wednesday. I also have to ask in response to this latest discovery of an abusive cult on the fringe of the evangelical mission: would it kill people to just join one of the traditional churches? If there is one thing Ive learned from Wartburg Watch, it’s the relative safety of going to mossy Gothic churches with stained glass windows, an organ and/or choir, and ministers wearing vestments or a geneva gown.

The last church I was in, the Pastor would say all the time, “God judges those who teach more harshly than others, so I must be very careful to not lead you astray and to whom I invite to speak to this congregation”. Humble man, interesting preacher and cared about people.

Martin Luther’s concept of priesthood of believers:

“In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit carefully avoids giving the same ‘sacerdos’ priest, to any of the apostles or to any other office. Rather he accepts this name to the baptized, or Christians, as their birthright and heredity name…none of us is born an apostle, preacher, teacher, pastor; but there all of us are born solely priests. Then we take some from among these born priest and call and elect them to these offices that they may discharge the duties of the office in the name of all of us.”

Pastors are the servants of the people who elected them, not the other way around, in Martin Luther’s view. What I see described above has taken the believer out of the equation. So the pastor is answerable to a college of other pastors rather than the members of a congregation? There is some form of pastor scandal and this college will deal with the issue rather than the local congregation? So the college has taken upon itself to absolve the scandal, but who gave them this authority? The pastor committing the scandal or the congregation who elected him? There has been a negative movement among radical Protestants (evangelicals) against the Reformation doctrine of the priesthood of the believer. Are we seeing the fruit of this in the form of ecclesiological corruption where the pastor is answerable to nobody, or the absolving of his sin by buddies in a college such as the ARC?

@ Dave:

That was very helpful to me. Thank you.

Doug wrote:

There ARE good small churches out there, and I think they are worth the effort and the pain they sometimes bring. And I am somewhat troubled that “none” is considered a viable option.

Agree. I don’t know about None being a viable [long term] option, but right now I don’t see an alternative here. I prefer small churches, but the ones here have their own issues. I’m hopeful…

Jen wrote:

It is completely overwhelming and intoxicating on a visceral level. You are already involved and have new friends and your kids love church before you start to have questions. But the music is so great! What was that question again? Well they had you bring your bible, turn to a couple of scriptures and Jesus’ name was brought up at least 4 times; therefore it’s “got to be” a “Christian” church, right?. Oh they’re playing The Stand. I love The Stand! That’s how it happens to perfectly “sane” people.

That was a helpful personal description of how the hook is set. From that perspective it makes some sense, especially the part about the kids. People will endure almost anything if they think their kids are being protected or benefited.

dee wrote:

@ Doug:
I read, rather quickly, the link. There is much to refute but let me leave it at this There is not one link in the entire treatise. “I have heard” with no links is the “proof.” The author then goes on to attack those who hold to a different point of view as bitter and pathological. This is baloney and not surprising for this group. Ho hum typical.

I noticed that too. He seemed like a Chuck Smith fan-boy and was engaging in the very thing he was condemning. Unless I read it wrong. But you could not miss his labeling of criticism as being pathological, that’s for sure.

Lydia wrote:

SGM was full of educated professionals. Why? I have some theories but would love to see a serious analysis.

One study some bit ago showed that there were more doctors, engineers and I think psychologists in conservative baptist churches than in moderate baptist churches. At the time I was surprised, but now I too have some theories and would like to see some serious analysis.

dee wrote:

How can the church change so that it is palatable to those who have left yet still believe?

There are also those who have not left but who have ceased to believe. Whether “none” is an option or not, it is a reality.

Elizabeth Lee wrote:

http://www.thelifechurch.com/resources/coaching/?campus=

I followed this link and read this:
“Make Room Coaching is an interactive 2-year experience designed to help churches break their next growth barrier. You’ll receive coaching from and direct access to Pastor John and our Lead Team. Enrollment is very limited because we want to really connect with each church on an individual level. This experience is best suited for churches of 150 people or more.”

And then this:
“Participation in Make Room Coaching is a high-level commitment and includes a fee of $2000 (total for the 2 year experience). For churches who have planted through ARC, Make Room Coaching is free. We’d love to start a conversation with you to see if the Make Room Coaching experience is right for you – contact Pastor Dan Lord today.”

So this is really “Church-As-Profit-Center”, isn’t it?

Isn’t this exactly what is done in the franchising model of business development?

I wonder how much Jesus charged for coaching his twelve disciples? Oh wait… I seem to remember now…”You have received free of charge, now give it away…” (DPE)

One thought. In our culture at this time we have lost or changed radically the idea of community. Ideas about and/or realities involving the following have changed: extended family, local church, school just down the road a bit, neighborhood pool, long stay in one place with subsequent life long friends, working the same job from youth to retirement (with private pension increasingly rare), attitudes toward what it means to be citizen of the nation, probably lots more. Anyhow, humans do not tend to thrive best as solitary creatures. I am inclined to think that in addition to doing whatever for the sake of the children we will also do whatever in order to not be quite as alone as people in our culture are becoming. What these churches are doing may well tap in at some gut level of survival need.

@JeffT said: “These people didn’t get this from the Bible, they got it from Mao’s Communist China.”

Robert Jay Lifton — a sort of “founding father” in the psychology of trauma movement which has researched post-traumatic stress disorder — used his findings from interviews of released political prisoners of China’s Cultural Revolution as the base for developing eight criteria to identify an authoritarian “cult” society that uses a “psychology of totalism” to control all aspects of its peoples’ lives. His research was in the mid- to late-1950s and first published in 1961. So the criteria for identifying a political, sociological, or theological “cult” is not exactly new news. Thus, actually, there is a whole lot in common between Maoism and Christian authoritarianism. In case interested in an overview of those criteria, plus a study guide and applications to *The Hunger Games* series, here’s something I wrote:

https://futuristguy.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/liftons-8-criteria-for-identifying-authoritarian-cults.pdf

@ Nancy:

Great point. I think that desire for connections and community in this fast paced world impacted our willingness to remain in a very controlling community group at our church.

@ dee:

Of the four ARC churches in our area (Huntsville, AL), two have husband/wife lead pastors and two have male pastors. It doesn’t seem to matter whether the church is “planted” or a “partner’ (a distinction made in the ARC church search details); the two with husband/wife lead pastors are split in this regard. All four churches note their affiliation with ARC on their websites.

Nancy wrote:

So, now I want to stand out on the proverbial street corner or stand up in the middle of the sermon somewhere and say to people,”can’t you see where this is going?” No, they cannot. I can’t see exactly where it is all going, but some trajectories are identifiable and we must not miss this. I think this is in line with what the Deebs are doing, trying to make people take a good look at what is going on.

Totally agree, Nancy. We tend to see just static “snapshots” of where we were/are, and ignore the dynamic “video” of the storyline of where we are going. Trajectories are about choices and consequences. We’re too often caught up in just taking “selfies,” and not in actively working to prevent the slow slide into otherwise inevitable decline.

Extra Credit:

Question: Did Jesus Himself on the “cross” end the temple tax (Exodus 30: 11-16, Matthew 17: 24-27)? (How is the temple tax (and tithing) tied to Malachi 3: 8-12 and James 2: 8-10)???

Answer: (Come on now) Think about it…

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

@ roebuck:
People like to belong to the in group, and if it has special knowledge or power all the better. Critical thinking can go out the window once it’s under the influence of group dynamics and social pressure. That’s one of my theories anyways, and I can see it in my own history of leaving a religious group.

I agree. Great input! I can see this in my own history in a large religious group. It drew me in with stories / videos of life change examples of heart / behavioral changes. It seemed superior to my prior church because there were so many evidences (videos & large group testimonies) of life change. This new religious group mega church had a very dynamic lead pastor. He spoke against ‘dead churches’ which confirmed to me that I was wise to sign up a covenant membership contract with this new mega church. Once in the mega church, newest church plant location my critical thinking was slowly released as I came under the influence of group dynamics, the group’s special lingo and ways, and social pressures.

May I put forward ‘Ken’s hierarchy’?

The head is God himself, revealed to us in the Word = Jesus, who himself is revealed in the scriptures which are the word of God. In the gathered church, there are the leaders to be submitted to. This is clear from Heb 13 “Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account”. However earlier on in the chapter such leaders are identified in this way: “Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God”. Such leaders persuade rather than command, and the word authority is absent (except unfortunately in the NIV).

The picture is that each and every believer is under the authority of God himself, and Jesus is Lord of each believer. They are also under the authority of the NT as the word of God to believers both individually and corporately. It therefore follows that no pastor or board of elders should ever try to usurp the place of God in believers’ lives, neither does such authority as they do have trump the writings of the NT. Indeed their ‘authority’ is to speak or implement that word in the lives of believers, and ‘lead’ by example. Now the bible itself does instruct believers to yield to their leaders, but it puts in the check or safeguard that the bible itself has by far the greater authority if leaders start to get authoritarian or interfere where they shouldn’t. Obedience to leaders is conditional, only submission to God is unconditional. We must obey God rather than man. Sometimes the only way to obey God is not to obey man!

This means pastors should not be trying to wield authority over the churches as though it were vested in themselves, and believers should not feel themselves bound to submit to them except in the Hebrews 13 sense. Some Christians are defiant against any authority over them (‘it’s just me and Jesus’), but if only more realised God has put clear limits how much he requires them to submit to leaders, the rug would be pulled from under the feet of the status seekers who want to lord it over the flock.

We still need large supplies of the antidote to the old shepherding/discipleship error.

Incidentally, I’ve noticed a lot on Team Pyro (for example) the exhortation to be in a church ‘in order to be accountable’, but isn’t it the leaders who are going to give an account?

@ Foot:

I really don’t see where you are going with this. Apparently I missed the first episode. If Jesus’ death was the propitiation for our sins, was tithing a sin? He said that the law would not pass away until all was fulfilled, so did the law pass away (thou shalt not commit adultery, for example) with his sacrifice or is there more to the story than that? In the sermon on the mount he mentioned tithes within the context of the Jewish system, so does that limit it to the Jewish system or do we look elsewhere for explanations? Do the more comprehensive ideas of the NT (present your bodies a living sacrifice) obviate both tithing and giving as requirements as the greater subsumes the lesser? What I don’t get is, what on earth does the cross have to do with any of this? There must be some currently popular teaching that I don’t know about that ties in here somewhere.

Ken wrote:

Incidentally, I’ve noticed a lot on Team Pyro (for example) the exhortation to be in a church ‘in order to be accountable’, but isn’t it the leaders who are going to give an account?

Yes. You seem to now be seeing the problem that many of us have been living with for decades. Not to mention that the member often (because of how the church governance is structured) has no say in the choice of leaders.

__

Is it possible that ARC in their ‘zeal’ have put the ‘machinery’ above the ‘message’ ?

—

@ Foot:

This is in regards to your view on tithing. I tend to agree with John Macarthur: tithing was an Old Testament law that applied to a theocratic state. It was basically taxes that was used to run the government services. We no longer live in a theocracy and we pay upwards of thirty percent of our salaries in taxes. This is more than a tithe.

On your second question, I would feel ashamed if I gave my tithe to corrupt ministries, and I would have to answer for this at the End of the Age.

Here is an example of what you describing and this is common among mega preachers:

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local/investigates/2014/08/06/13492060/

One could also mention Steven Furticks mansion in the mix. These men of Gawd!

Sopwith wrote:

Is it possible that ARC in their ‘zeal’ have put the ‘machinery’ above the ‘message’ ?

As did Chin Dynasty Legalism and later Communism.
The System is above all.

“PSI CORPS IS MOTHER! PSI CORPS IS FATHER!”

Gram3 wrote:

That was a helpful personal description of how the hook is set. From that perspective it makes some sense, especially the part about the kids. People will endure almost anything if they think their kids are being protected or benefited.

Which is why so many Kyle’s Mom Activists go on and on about “THINK OF THE CHILDREN, THE CHILDREN, THE CHILDREN…”

@ Mark:
Clarification : if I knowingly gave money to corrupt ministries.

Nancy wrote:

One study some bit ago showed that there were more doctors, engineers and I think psychologists in conservative baptist churches than in moderate baptist churches. At the time I was surprised, but now I too have some theories and would like to see some serious analysis.

Like to hear some of your theories on that.

The ARC is quite active in the Washington, D.C. area. Not long ago I was curious and checked out one ARC church in Alexandria, VA. I am “churchless” and trying to find a place. It was slick, lots of marketing, and loud. The service I went to was DC Metro Church.

http://www.dcmetro.org/

They opened up a campus in Fairfax as well. As I watched the sermon I spent a lot of time reading about Dinno Rizzo on the Deebs blog. And in the book store they had books by many of the authors and pastors quoted above. The sermon was broadcast, slick, and reminded me more of a marketing presentation. I didn’t get much out of it, but I had no intention of going further.

Ken wrote:

This is clear from Heb 13 “Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account”. However earlier on in the chapter such leaders are identified in this way: “Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God”. Such leaders persuade rather than command, and the word authority is absent (except unfortunately in the NIV).

As part of our ongoing discussion of “head” and “authority” I appreciate what you have said here and said very well. I do have one quibble, of course. 😉

The imperative is not properly “obey” but rather “be persuadable or attentive or put confidence in” or considered from the negative “don’t be obstinate and stiff-necked or dismissive” when taught. The context for that is exhortation to the Hebrew Christians to not be drawn away by other teachers but to remember the teachers who proved faithful, and attend to their teachers who contend for the faith. Unfortunately, as you point out, this verse is used as a blanket command to obey whatever the Leader says to do.

The rest of your explanation is perfect, and for once I am “obeying” what you say. And, for the record, I’m agreeing with William that we should remember the examples and teachings of those who have faithfully gone before us and taught the Word and lived the Life.

@ Foot:
IMHO, bringing new covenant believers under the tithe is a kin to compelling circumcision, and is the work of modern day Judaizers. We are not under the law, but are under grace. As a Gentile, I have never been under the Levitical law. So for a church to insist that Christians obey any part of the Levitical law is to fall from grace and to disqualify ones self.

As far as the tithe being pre-covenental, and therefore applicable to all ages, it was never applicable to Gentiles unless they converted to Judaism. So, count me out, I’ll stick to grace.

@ Doug:

I think that Foot was making your point unless I have misunderstood him/her. Which is always a live possibility/probability.

Muff Potter wrote:

Wisconsin originally. I was born about 60 miles NW of Green Bay (GO PACKERS!!!)

Currently 73 miles SW of Green Bay. 🙂

I have to tell you that last night I was stunned to see National Community Church (NCC) as being a member of the ARC network. I knew NCC is a member of Willowcreek, and Assembly of God. But I was stunned to see its affiliated with ARC. That deeply bothers me. In my story of forgiveness Mark Batterson was one of the nearly 140 people I approached for forgiveness. In the past I had a history with NCC and know many people who go there. I don’t think any of them have a clue that NCC is affiliated with ARC. Many of the people I know have attended NCC because its affiliated to AOG.

NCC does have a female pastor, her name is Heather Zempel. This is her bio as lifted off the website:

“A native Alabamian, Heather Zempel currently leads the discipleship efforts at National Community Church in Washington, DC where she oversees small groups, directs leadership development training, and serves on the weekend teaching team.

Heather followed a circuitous route into full-time ministry. Having obtained bachelor’s and master’s degrees in biological engineering from Louisiana State University (Geaux Tigers!), she worked as an environmental engineer and as a policy consultant on energy and environment in the United States Senate before coming on staff at National Community Church. Using her educational background, Heather now can be found exploring environments that foster spiritual growth.

She lives on Capitol Hill where she can be found enjoying theater with her husband Ryan, searching out the best barbeque joints, and nerding out on church history. Heather is the author of Sacred Roads, Community is Messy, and Amazed and Confused. You can read about her ramblings on small group environments and discipling the next generation at heatherzempel.com.”

You can see her mug shot in the link below.

http://theaterchurch.com/about/staff/executive-leadership-team

A couple of years back I was researching NCC and I discovered on Heather Zempel’s Amazon page that she was recommending CJ Mahaney’s “Why Small Groups?” She explained that she had some theological differences with Mahaney but thought he explained why small groups were important and recommended it. This bothered me a lot. I don’t think Heather Zemple understands the problems that SGM has had. Did she read SGM Survivors? Probably not…Is she aware of how the Shepherding Movement works? Highly unlikely… Does she know all the abuse, and problems hemorrhaging out of SGM and Sovereign Grace Churches in the DC area? I honestly don’t think so… Here’s the concern I also have about Mahaney…he’s engaged in criminal activity in using blackmail to drive Larry Tomczak from ministry so he could turn the denomination into a hyper-reformed sect. I have no respect for Mahaney at all, especially in light of his criminal activities. Zip, nada, zilch… I honestly have more respect for Richard Dawkins than I do for CJ Mahaney.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Like to hear some of your theories on that.

I think that some people tend to respect and be comfortable in hierarchical situations more than others. I also think that the whole authority issue may be experienced differently. The best I can do is give an illustration. In this nation health care including the practice of medicine went from being a knowledge based system to a money based system, (I read a book on this about the transformation of american medicine.) Anyhow this happened during my sojourn in medicine. It no longer mattered ultimately what was the best thing to do based on the available knowledge (which incidentally was in the hands of the researchers and the doctors) but rather things were controlled by the MBAs in the front office. The MBAs worshipped a different god. Now certainly doctors hated to lose their power, but it was a lot more than that. It was the destruction of an entire authority system (knowledge) and they/we did not know what to do with ourselves. It was the equivalent to the God is dead movement. To this day, when I go to see the doctor(s) they complain to me loud and long about this issue-not the money but working for the new god apparently. And the new god does not seem to know what to do or how to make it work and may not seem to care sometimes. How good it was under the old authority system. You did not have to fight it out, you just looked up the information. This is spite of the fact that doctors earn more money under the new system.

I look at my children and see something similar. The desire/need/demand to have somebody in charge and have that person be capable and responsible and the need for some authoritative reference point “Just like I do on the job.” They respect that. They know how to function in that sort of situation.

Now, it is not limited to just certain occupations. My grandchildren have taken up with the episcopalian way of doing thing as regards liturgy like poor little orphans who have finally found a home precisely because they know what to do and are not left at loose ends. They thrive on structure. How wonderful it is to have the morning service and the responses all printed out and handed to you and not have to feel awkward and clueless. Somebody has told them just what to do, and they can be successful at doing it. How great that is. That is also part of it.

I also think that it is nice to not, in fact, have to cobble up your own opinions and defend them every minute. What a relief to just go along to get along with somebody else’s program, because a lot of people actually have lives outside of church that require a lot of thought and ingenuity and what a relief to just have that be somebody else’s problem at church.

So: authority based system, clearly defined expectations, strong person at the helm (error can be excused or corrected but weakness cannot be forgiven or remedied), and a system that seems to be working.

I am sure there is more, these are just some of the big issues.

@ Law Prof:

I’m thankful you all were able to leave this cult. Thankful our Father led you out. Sorry for your hurtful experience.

Have you found a healthy church?

How did you go about finding a healthy church after the experience with the cult?

Eagle wrote:

I discovered on Heather Zempel’s Amazon page that she was recommending CJ Mahaney’s “Why Small Groups?”

There’s only one appropriate response to any church that’s into ‘small groups’ – RUN!!

Eagle wrote:

Here’s a good article about Mark Batterson….
http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/people/is-national-community-churchs-mark-batterson-the-most-innovative-pastor-in-america/

That was a good article. Took a look at his bio on their website and found this:
“After a prayer walk through a cow pasture, he felt called…”

I did that once. Afterward, I felt called to hose off by boots…

@ Doug:

Ha!!! Funny !!

Actually, a childhood friend and I did a prayer run through a cow pasture once after we discovered the bull at the far end of that pasture.
Pretty sure two guardian angels got fired over that one…

Law Prof wrote:

My wife and I were drawn into such a cult after we moved halfway across the country for work. The region was very strange to us, we didn’t understand the culture, we were disoriented and vulnerable.

That’s exactly the type of situation described in “Take Back Your Life.” From pp. 20-22:

“Is there a certain type of person who is more likely to join a cult? No.
Individual vulnerability factors matter much more than personality type when it comes to joining or staying in a cult or abusive relationship. “Everyone is influenced and persuaded daily in various ways,” writes the late Margaret Singer, “but the vulnerability to influence varies.” . . .

The reality, however, is that anyone, at any age– in a moment of confusion, personal crisis, or simply a life transition– may become attracted to or drawn in by a cult’s appeal. New in town, lost a job, recently divorced, a friend or family member just died, need a career change, feel a little blue? The unstable and anxious feelings experienced at such times make a person vulnerable, whether that person is twenty or seventy years old. . .

While we’re at it, let’s shatter another myth: people who join cults are not stupid, weird, crazy, weak-willed, or neurotic. Most cult members are of above-average intelligence, well adjusted, adaptable, and perhaps a bit idealistic.”

@ Lydia:

I remember that. Especially the money part.

Oops…hit send too soon

Hebrews 13:17 is a horrible translation from a church state mentality. it even seems to contradict the words of our Lord in Matthew. it is a very interesting word study though.

BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

Law Prof wrote:
My wife and I were drawn into such a cult after we moved halfway across the country for work. The region was very strange to us, we didn’t understand the culture, we were disoriented and vulnerable.
That’s exactly the type of situation described in “Take Back Your Life.” From pp. 20-22:
“Is there a certain type of person who is more likely to join a cult? No.
Individual vulnerability factors matter much more than personality type when it comes to joining or staying in a cult or abusive relationship. “Everyone is influenced and persuaded daily in various ways,” writes the late Margaret Singer, “but the vulnerability to influence varies.” . . .
The reality, however, is that anyone, at any age– in a moment of confusion, personal crisis, or simply a life transition– may become attracted to or drawn in by a cult’s appeal. New in town, lost a job, recently divorced, a friend or family member just died, need a career change, feel a little blue? The unstable and anxious feelings experienced at such times make a person vulnerable, whether that person is twenty or seventy years old. . .
While we’re at it, let’s shatter another myth: people who join cults are not stupid, weird, crazy, weak-willed, or neurotic. Most cult members are of above-average intelligence, well adjusted, adaptable, and perhaps a bit idealistic.”

Let us not forget that certain demographics are targeted by these groups. They know what ZIP Codes to target what ages , professions and so on. A big part of building a mega church is targeting the right demographic and then getting them to invite their coworkers and friends. They are not planting churches or opening satellite in the bad parts of town.

When CJ fled to Louisville. he planted his new church in a very upwardly mobile ZIP Code. Unfortunately for him it was a private Christian school which has zero tolerance for protecting child molesters.

And a big thanks to this blog for printing the names of the superintendent and chairman of the board of that school. It worked.

Mark references Martin Luther’s concept of the priesthood of all believers. This opens up this topic for further discussion.

Here is a brief excerpt from my book: ‘Spiritual Abuse Recovery’. I pondered the common belief of the priesthood of all believers and how it gets worked out in church practice. See what you think. (I have added more paragraph breaks for ease of reading online.)

“Even though the common belief in the priesthood of all believers is meticulously proclaimed as a New Testament concept, in actuality there has often been a drift back into the old covenant model. The unspoken expectation for the priestly office with a prescribed authoritarian model, rather than a servant model, seems to remain fixed in people’s thinking. This embedded thinking is found in both church and parachurch organizations.

The blurring of the lines between a servant model of leadership and a hierarchical/authoritarian model of the relationship between the leader and the followers continues to cloud leadership beliefs and practices. An apparently Old Testament authoritarian model, which has been blended with New Testament leadership principles, has unconsciously been intertwined.

The unwarranted merging of the leadership tasks from this type of Old Testament model with a New Testament one ends up sustaining a hierarchical and authoritarian model. This manner of leadership is accepted without question and has become the norm in many Christian organizations.

Why has a hierarchical model of Christian leadership worked to some degree in congregational churches? A hierarchical model is relatively efficient–a top down model has worked in various contexts as a method of church governance. This model of leadership has historical precedence in the church and provides authority and the enabling power to execute the tasks of church administration and ministry. It is simple for Christian leaders to follow as well as to model for others. Also, this model is often the expected leadership model in many denominations and church organizations.

Unfortunately, some leaders take advantage of the situation and believers become wounded through the negative behaviors which this type of leadership tends to allow. Congregants are often inclined to tolerate forceful tactics by spiritual leaders and the corporate church culture seems to accept, rather than challenge, deviant leadership actions.” (Ch. 3, p. 32)

dee wrote:

Law Prof wrote:
2). Hell is in the center of the Earth because you can hear the screams of the damned if you put a mic close enough to the mouth of a volcano; 3). The gov’t is storing up guillotines in our state to behead Christians; 4). The Illuminati are taking over;

How cool! I love weird conspiracy theories.

Though the ones you mentioned are more “standard” than “weird”; (2) is a variant of the “Well to Hell” Hoax from the Eighties and (3) & (4) are straight out of Jack Chick’s 666 tract.

(Though (2) does show some synchronicity; I heard that at the time the NT was written, the term “Lake of Fire” was an idiom for an active volcanic vent.)

mirele wrote:

Why does this remind me of Multi-Level Marketing? It’s not enough that the church is a member of ARC, but they need to have their own thing going as well.

I shall let the Alan Parsons Project answer for me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-KWb6JuYp0

Lydia wrote:

Oops…hit send too soon
Hebrews 13:17 is a horrible translation from a church state mentality. it even seems to contradict the words of our Lord in Matthew. it is a very interesting word study though.

Well, it certainly is convenient for Authorities to use, because most people will not look below the English translations to the underlying text. They are unaware of how certain translations get cast into stone when the ideas behind the translation which drove the translator’s choice changed long ago.

My spouse and I came to call the neocalvinist church we attended “The Hebrews 13:17 Church”, because the pastor was so fond of quoting it from the pulpit. Towards the last few months of our time there, he may well have quoted that reference more than he said the name “Jesus”, if you can believe that. It was at least a close call. Certainly, towards the end, he referenced “The Mission” (defined as whatever he thought at the moment was important for the growth of our particular congregation, whether it be his absolute authority and control over all finances, our obedience to go out and make disciples to bring into that particular church, out tithing, our trust that even though he’d unilaterally cancelled almost all of the fellowship meals, that it was good for promoting fellowship, his right to promise to support a missionary, collect money for that support, then unilaterally withdraw funding from said missionary so that he could afford, inter alia, to send leadership and their families to expensive conferences where they could learn about church growth, etc.) more than Jesus.

roebuck wrote:

You want love-bombing… For reasons unbeknownst to me I was targeted for recruitment by the Children of God back in the early 70’s when I was in my teens. ‘Flirty Fishing’ was what they called it at the time – using sex to rope people in.

Ah, yes. Mo David and the COGs. Now that was one weird group.

Lydia wrote:

Let us not forget that certain demographics are targeted by these groups. They know what ZIP Codes to target what ages , professions and so on. A big part of building a mega church is targeting the right demographic and then getting them to invite their coworkers and friends. They are not planting churches or opening satellite in the bad parts of town.

Interesting the mega church – church plant I was apart of seemed to follow the ‘target the right demographic’ just like you suggested.

Law Prof wrote:

Ali wrote:

@ Law Prof:
I’m thankful you all were able to leave this cult. Thankful our Father led you out. Sorry for your hurtful experience.
Have you found a healthy church?
How did you go about finding a healthy church after the experience with the cult?

No, we immediately–and in a fit of profound stupidity–went into another church that was generally OK, at least among the laity, but was led by a semi-closeted NPD sufferer. The members of the church had this unspoken (at least among new members) understanding that something was seriously wrong with Pastor E, but he kept the church up nicely, smiled really big for visitors, didn’t draw too big a salary, and used his side business to direct people into the fellowship, they tolerated it. It wasn’t until I became an elder insider there that I realized the depth of Pastor E’s issues which I can only chalk up to depravity. Some representative samples of Pastor E: 1). Poor people are not children of God because David said in Psalms 37:5 “I have never seen the righteous forsaken or their children begging bread”; 2). Hell is in the center of the Earth because you can hear the screams of the damned if you put a mic close enough to the mouth of a volcano; 3). The gov’t is storing up guillotines in our state to behead Christians; 4). The Illuminati are taking over; 5). The Book of Job was put in the Bible to show us how Job was in sin because he didn’t have sufficient faith. The coup de gras was when I caught him in an outright lie, confronted Pastor E in the presence of another elder with the evidence, and then Pastor E denied it, turned to said elder and said “See, I told you Law Prof was a DSM IV sociopath, a liar, a sicko.” Later, when I confronted Pastor E with denying something he knew was true and calling me the liar, he said “I never lie, Law Prof, I thank God I have no problem with lying.” That was the end, haven’t seen him or the church since and haven’t gone back to any church. And frankly, I’ve soft sold what happened, downplayed it, it was far worse, diabolical, but when you encounter someone like that, you don’t feel like you can tell everything that happens behind closed doors, just you and them, or people will think YOU’RE nuts.

Wow, that sounds like a very terrible experience. I’m so sad that this type of pastor exists and that you and your wife had this double bitter dose.

By the way, there is no way would any of us at this site think ya’ll are nuts. We unfortunately have walked similar paths. 🙁 Thankful for this blog as I process.

@ Barb Orlowski:
This is a real issue is the office of pastor and the station of the individual believer. It is foundational to most baptist sects except the reformed Southern Baptist Convention. Even more theologically conservative baptist denominations than the SBC such as the GARBC have it as part of the acronym b.a.p.t.i.s.t. Now I agree it is unfortunate baptist churches have a habit of firing pastors at the least provocation. This happened to two friends of mine. I wish there had been more of a intervention before it came to their firing. On the other side the model that is now emulated in Southern Baptist seminaries is the authoritarian preacher, the model being the mega church preacher. I agree with your thesis that having a authoritarian, hierarchical clergy is more efficient, but it also downplays the role and responsibility of the individual believer, and the congregation, especially in a congregational polity. For some of these authoritarian pastors, it is all about them and the church leadership, whether they be elders or deacons,The little old lady who sits in the pews and is faithful doesn’t really matter. And there is this disconnect between clergy and the people in the pews. With such a disconnect a college of clergy such as the ARC wouldn’t matter to the person in the pews because the pastor is in a plane above the congregation and disconnected from the church members. Elders or deacons are go betweens. The church will still run with the elders or deacons. And the ARC will send in a gifted preacher from their corporate office.

I have a daughter in college in Birmingham and many, many young college students attend there. She visited COH with some friends and hated it. Unfortunately, everyone else loved it. A big thank you to the Deebs for this blog. It has been through your writing that I’ve had my eyes and mind opened. I often copy and paste portions of your post and send to my college aged daughters. I’m certain that was one of the reasons my daughter didn’t like COH. She has learned to approach these kinds of churches with a lot of skepticism. Thank you, thank you, thank you, and keep it up, please!

Somewhere I heard, protestant or catholic or where I do not recall, that the work of the religious (priest or pastor) was in the church but the work of the laity was in the world. Actually I liked the idea because it sort of made it respectable that I had lived my life that way.

Wish I knew where I heard that.

Cousin of Eutychus wrote:

I find at present that I can only rest in liturgical churches,

Hey Cousin,

I think if I ever get to church again, it will be a liturgical church, for all the reasons you mention.

You know who you should do an in-depth piece on next? Matt Slick and CARM. @ dee:

@ dee:

I think I’ve linked to it before, but Pat Robertson (there is a You Tube video of this) believes that sweaters from Good Will can be possessed by demons.

“Robertson: Worth it to Pray Away Demons on Clothes, Inanimate Objects”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDpp9UWVjsQ

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:

There are now more single adults in America than married couples (see http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/09/09/for-first-time-more-singles-in-u-s-than-married-couples/ ).

You would think these churches and Christians would want to attract singles, not repel them (repel them with the continuous marriage sermons or rude assumptions about singles, and other things), but they keep doing it.

Daisy wrote:

@ dee:
I think I’ve linked to it before, but Pat Robertson (there is a You Tube video of this) believes that sweaters from Good Will can be possessed by demons.
“Robertson: Worth it to Pray Away Demons on Clothes, Inanimate Objects”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDpp9UWVjsQ

Note that the services for consecrating holy water, vestments and liturgical objects such as chalices and patens involve prayers of exorcism; Pat Robertson is only out in left field to the extent he thinks only used clothes could be thus effective. It can’t possibly hurt to pray that God will bless and purify any object you acquire, that it might He might be glorified through your use of it. I recall that a relative of mine of advanced years in the early 20th century has the minister of their Methodist Episcopal church come by and bless their new appliances.

Former CLC’er wrote:

I feel so weary and worn right now. Life is a bit overwhelming so that’s magnifying my view of this church stuff. This a.m. I had a discussion with my roommate about that crazy lady in the Washington cathedral, and even when I said she’s mentally unstable, my roommate kept saying, “But she stood up for the Lord”. ugh! I feel like I’m surrounded by super conservative Christians and I don’t even recognize their God nor want any part of it. It’s frustrating and it’s frightening and it’s making me mad. I just hate to have God represented by people like this and find myself withdrawing. I really would like to be through with this phase and figure out my faith and where I fit, but I guess it’s a process

Me to a T brother (or sister). I understand exactly where you’re coming from

@ Dave – sister

Nancy wrote:

I am inclined to think that in addition to doing whatever for the sake of the children we will also do whatever in order to not be quite as alone as people in our culture are becoming. What these churches are doing may well tap in at some gut level of survival need.

I think you’re right. To take your point further, an atheist friend started attending church for this very reason – community. She sung its praises. I know of a home group which an avowed atheist (love that word combination!) attends – she enjoys the fellowship and is welcome.

Part 2

Dave wrote:

Enter the “professional” pastor with his confidence and his ability to tell you “*this* is exactly what it means” …

On, please. Bless you, you have so misread the drive and self confidence (sinful pride ?) and self reliance (pig headed comes to mind) of lots of us. Listen, I personally have accumulated enough undergrad hours in religion to constitute an undergrad major, I was a missions major at a school affiliated with SBTS, and just for fun because I like languages I took a beginning course in biblical Greek. I spent some time in west Africa as a “guest” of the mission board as a time of discernment. At the SBC mega here where we were previously there are at least half a dozen professional laity who put me to shame including one professor of nuclear med at the local university med center, one practicing psychologist, and several doctors and dentists who habitually go on mission trips, mostly to Haiti. At the other grandparents’ church is our family doctor who takes the prize in knowledge, commitment and number of mission trips to Haiti. BTW, it was the SBC mega that offered the course in greek. And I come from a family just like me. My father (a lawyer) was a lay bible teacher who at first declined to teach because, while he was proficient in greek knew no hebrew. So he told them to wait until he ran out to the seminary and got some hebrew and then he would teach the class. He did (the language) and he did (teach the class) and it was hugely successful. We are horrible people; we think we know it all; we are the preacher’s worst nightmare. And, we earn our living dealing with people on the job, and some of us got pretty good in that aspect of it.

If people did not think we have money we would all be marginalized as total geeks. Example: when I was in college, and of course mucking around with some language, and we had translated Aus Meinem Leben und Denken and I thought the author was translatable at my level (which was not much) I took a notion to read his work of “The Quest of the Historical Jesus” because I wanted to know what he thought (the german theologians had been saying some interesting stuff for a century or so more or less), and I wanted to see if I could read it in the language in which it was written. I was none too successful but I have continued over the decades to follow some of the ideas of some of the people who have been doing that research as well as the research on Paul. This gives you an idea of the kind of people we tend to be.

Mostly we think the sermon is boring, that would be boring, but the preacher has to do the best he can under the circumstances and one should not expect more. More is not his job. There are publishing houses for that. My son (a lawyer) did an undergrad major in philosophy and religion, and my daughter went to Liberty, a hotbed of sometimes over the hill religious thought and is now a teacher who works with teens in a public school. We are ferocious. We were often bred in ferocity, and we pass it on to whoever of our children is inclined to take up with it. It is a recessive genetic defect apparently. We are prideful and impatient, but for a redeeming quality we mostly care intensely about people.

Here is a, perhaps the, core issue about the church for those of us who are obnoxious heathen like me. How well does the system work? Does the leadership manage (as in management) well? How are problem issues solved? Do they manage the money well (I worked hard for it-don’t try to pull some mess with me.) If I take my kid to Wednesday night kids activities, are there any, what are they telling the kids, who is in charge and do they show up on time? In teaching the kids is the material substantive and presented at an age appropriate level? And if the doctrine gets off base, as my family has decided the current baptists are doing, we are out of there, I mean sooo out of there.

Now let me give you a textbook example of a medical professional who is a proven professional both in education and experience and who meets all the criteria for being some hapless and worthless pastor’s worst nightmare: (drum roll) MIss Dee herself. (The Miss is a southernism meant to convey respect.) Man alive, have you watched that woman? Classic. Incredible. You think she is waiting for the preacher to tell her what to think? My word, let’s get back to reality here.

And I think Miss Deb is probably just like that, it is just that my topic included medical people mostly.

@ Ken:

For consideration also is that there was no NT as we know it when Hebrews was written, some letters including from Paul certainly and a couple of the gospels and of course the OT since it was written to “hebrews” but not what we use today. So probably the pastor or teacher or leader or apostle or evangelist had more of an authoritative acceptance with the believers at that time. I also note that even the cessationists think that the prophetic gifts were at work during the apostolic era, so that would have been a part of how people valued, or not, the spoken word and the leadership itself, I am thinking. We cannot know exactly what the author had in mind, we only know the words, but people “hear” the same words differently depending on the circumstances–so there is room for consideration at that level also.

Ken wrote:

The RSV here pre-dates the shepherding controversies and therefore cannot be liable to the accusation of translating the word to suit a theological bent. (The NIV does this sometimes, e.g. iirc the marginal reading about Luke’s census.) Of course the RSV in places reflects the liberalism that was in its heyday when the translation was made.

Does the RSV predate the church state mentality?

I think any religious system built around a central personality, no matter how charming or attractive, is bound to fail or collapse. God does not share His glory with men–it is the height of idolotry how the men at the head of these systems strut about with some man-given sense of importance. In mercy, God will set His true people apart from these systems–I think all these ’empires’ will be gone in a generation or so.

Lydia wrote:

I think it has to do with the culture war most of these churches have waged over the last 30 years.

You must be correct because otherwise why would they have continued to emphasize those issues. Also I think that culture is more than just the stated political issues they tended to emphasize, because the local SBC mega was only minimally involved in that as compared to, say Jeffress in Texas.

But part of culture also has to do with authority and how that is perceived, in lots of areas. The conservatives continued to reference scripture-a lot. And they considered the role of pastor as a certain kind of authority. This has a strong pull for some people. For example, THC in writing about his conversion to catholicism said something about it was about authority (I don’t remember the exact words.) And William in referencing saints and fathers and councils as authoritative. Mohler on his website (last time I checked) has a speech on how the pastor should speak as one who has authority.

Our society has changed in how it considers authority. For example at work (for the feds) they decided to go to a team concept and all you know what broke out–among the brightest and the best who thought this was just a way to dump more work on them, whereas when there had been supervisors then those who worked less were “dealt with” rather than just having their work picked up by other people. So you go to church and nobody seems to be in charge and some of us develop irregular heartbeats over that. To the point of “they don’t seem to be able to find their way out of the bathroom without a map, I don’t need any more of this sort of thing.”

But yes, I bet you are correct about the attraction of the culture war. I just think this other is also a huge draw for some people.

@ Nancy:
Thanks Dr. Nancy for a nice summary of how many of us approach our professions. I would add only one word, skepticism. Question everything. The antidote to skepticism is evidence: Reproducible experimental or observational data. Rock solid derivations from accepted theories. The best pastors I have known understand their limitations as well as any STEM professionals. The worst are absolutely sure their understanding is the only possible one. And by understanding I mean ALL subjects, not just their theological training.

Gram3 wrote:

The context for that is exhortation to the Hebrew Christians to not be drawn away by other teachers but to remember the teachers who proved faithful, and attend to their teachers who contend for the faith.

The abuse of Hebrews 13:17 is classic proof-texting. Find one verse you can use to your advantage and ignore translation issues, the context and all other verses that are contrary to your interpretation. The problem is so many people nowadays don’t know the Bible and are too lazy to look into it themselves, so whatever their Fearless Leader says is treated as the Word of God because others are unwilling or unable to challenge the heresy.

On the Hebrews 13:17 issue, it’s all so very convenient how the religious dictators completely ignore all the other relevant texts such as the following:

So Jesus called them and said to them, ‘You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognize as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.’ Mark 10:42-45

Now as an elder myself and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as one who shares in the glory to be revealed, I exhort the elders among you to tend the flock of God that is in your charge, exercising the oversight, not under compulsion but willingly, as God would have you do it—not for sordid gain but eagerly. Do not lord it over those in your charge, but be examples to the flock. 1Pet 5:1-3

But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all students. And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father—the one in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted. Matt 23:8-12

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. Matt 7.15

And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. Matthew 24.11

Lastly, I want to condemn all of you who are married:

To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. 1 Corinthians 7:8

Have a nice day! 🙂

JeffT wrote:

And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father—the one in heaven.

And then we note that Paul referred to himself as Timothy’s spiritual father. But Paul wrote before the gospels were written, so they say, so maybe he did not hear that. I have thought that the church should come along and trim some of the biblical ravelings, so to speak. Just a thought. (And not my original thought-I just globbed on to it.)

i agree with Dee that some people seeking faith are willing to suspend careful examination. But, it seems to me that many people attending this church have no idea that this theology even exists, much less that their pastor believes it. Many churches in Birmingham have lost members to this franchise. Folks are willing to abandon sound doctrine for flashy light shows and entertainment. It feels so good to be a part of some really great mission work and surrounded by shiny happy people, that they don’t realize their ears are being scratched. Everyone should download and read the entire document. This is serious, and we all should be prepared to explain to members that we are not trying to tear them down because we are being used by satan to quash the gospel. You’ll know when members become aware of this, believe me. I am so thankful that the Deebs have taken this on. Pray that the good people of Bham will have their eyes opened, and then pray for yourselves, because it’s coming to a city near you. Dee, hope you have saved everything, because it’s probably going to disappear. Right now you can find all sorts of slick marketing tips being shared among pastors in this church growth movement. Want an increase in giving? Wait until the music has done it’s work and call it worshipping God with your tithe. Not kidding. Secret shoppers will rate the friendliness of your greeters, the quality of your upbeat music, and the cleanliness of your bathrooms. Don’t skimp on that hand soap! The money you spend will be worth it.

Ken wrote:

My only quibble, and you know there would have to be one, is that although persuade gives the flavour of the word and takes away the possibility of misunderstanding obey as a kind of absolute, I would be wary of watering the meaning down. It is parallel with the submit/yield word applied to the members.

Well, if you want to quibble about watering down, you had better be prepared to be handbagged by one with Thayer’s and the NAS Concordance in it. 😉

http://biblehub.com/greek/3982.htm

The actual word has little to do with “obeying” in the military sense which is how these dishonest exegetes and expositors use it. It has to do with believing or trusting teachers who have proved themselves trustworthy. IMO, the later translations kept the KJV “obey” because they saw no reason to change it, since they were the ones to be “obeyed.”

I think it is difficult to argue that King James and the Archbishop(?) under him had no reason to prefer “obey” as the translation. And so an antiquated translation choice becomes concreted, and from there laziness or indifference takes over with subsequent translators.

Was it Maggie Thatcher who handbagged someone. I seem to recall that, though in truth I associate the Queen with the handbag. Could explain a lot about Charles…

Nancy wrote:

And then we note that Paul referred to himself as Timothy’s spiritual father. But Paul wrote before the gospels were written, so they say, so maybe he did not hear that. I have thought that the church should come along and trim some of the biblical ravelings, so to speak. Just a thought. (And not my original thought-I just globbed on to it.)

That’s one more of the many conundrums the Bible poses. Trying to figure out how to reconcile varying passages is sometimes hard work. I think way too many people just don’t want to do any work at all and just want someone to tell them what it means regardless of how ridiculous it is.

@ Dave:

I would disagree with tame. especially when you take into consideration the reach of their entities. those include not only seminaries but church planting operations, international missions, LifeWay bookstores and so on.

Al Mohler is the SBC Pope even though more and more are starting to take him on. Finally. but he pretty much had carte blanche to do whatever he wanted for a good 15 years and he built quite a little Kingdom.

His protege, Ezell, was put in charge of SBC church planting and has partnered with funding acts 29 church plants. if you read the acts 29 charter they only plant Reformed churches. that would have been news to the average SBC Pewsitter funding it all whi is not a Calvinist.

now it seems that those asking cannot get figures on how much money has actually gone into acts 29 church plants.

the SBC has tentacles in a lot of what’s wrong out there in Christendom. From promoting Driscoll and Mahaney to the insistence on going patriarchal to elder rule. it is not the same SBC I grew up in.

to give you an example of what I am talking about, the flagship SBC seminary, Southern, used to be known as a center for theological academia. differing theological views were welcomed within reason but were at least allowed to be discussed and debated.

I was around this stuff all the time as about half of my extended family attended there and many of the profs were friends of my parents.

things started changing in the late 80sand early nineties. it eventually became an indoctrination center as they got rid of any dissenters. different views were no longer welcomed debated or discussed. You either towed the party line or you were out. women faculty were dismissed.

al Mohler took over at the wise old age of 33. everyone was told how brilliant he is. he basically consolidated power in the nineties using the culture war. during those years he took an old Calvinistic abstract, dusted it off and SBTS is now a Calvinism indoctrination center. And well known for it.

Mohler has been able to ingratiate his proteges into most of the entities. Gram has mentioned a few. but it also includes Thom Rainier at Lifeway, Ed Setzer at LifeWay Research, the church planting guru who has quite a few failures under his belt and double dips.

Now, with David Platt at the IMB, the circle is just about complete. but I am sure David Platt is well qualified even though his church did not help fund the cooperative program yet that is how the International Mission Board exists. Funding from SBC churches.

After he got the job he did say, however, that he NOW sees the beauty of the cooperative program. and of course we all know he was under heavy danger in Dubai which qualifies him understanding international mission work.
I am just wondering if he “radically” forgoes his six figure salary at the International Mission Board and is living in a bad neighborhood after the move?

you cannot make this stuff up.

JeffT wrote:

That’s one more of the many conundrums the Bible poses. Trying to figure out how to reconcile varying passages is sometimes hard work.

Because at the time the NT was written down, things were still shaking down. Remember the old saying “Two Jews, three opinions”? (And years ago, I ran that past a Jewish friend for vetting. He said that was probably an old saying even in NT times.)

Canna Berrong wrote:

Dee, hope you have saved everything, because it’s probably going to disappear.

Like doubleplusunpersons Trotsky, Kamanev, and Malchenko?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_images_in_the_Soviet_Union

JeffT wrote:

Trying to figure out how to reconcile varying passages is sometimes hard work.

Some of the circuitous explanations I have heard for some stuff are so bad they are embarrassing.

Patricia Hanlon wrote:

So what’s the actual evidence for Al Mohler being the “smartest man in the world”?

I honestly have no clue. Maybe it’s based on his ‘stacks of books’. I actually think Mohler’s an intellectual lightweight. There are any number of reformed scholars I have read and listened to and even though I disagree with much of what they say, they have caused me to dig deeper and think things through. I can’t say I’ve ever had to do that with anything Mohler’s said. I think his reputation is based solely on the fact that he is extremely shrewd politically and able to advance his religious views by political maneuvering and purges rather than any persuasive evangelism or argument.

Lydia wrote:

things started changing in the late 80sand early nineties. it eventually became an indoctrination center as they got rid of any dissenters. different views were no longer welcomed debated or discussed. You either towed the party line or you were out. women faculty were dismissed.

Little difference from a Madrassa in Pakistan huh? Sounds like Calvary Chapel’s school of ministry out here in Southern Cal., although they never allowed wimminz from the get go.

Patricia Hanlon wrote:

So what’s the actual evidence for Al Mohler being the “smartest man in the world”?

Actually, it was part of his becoming SBTS prez at age 33. You have to have some spin to make that acceptable. Frankly, his “academic” career has not been one of scholarship. At one time, he was even a fundraiser for one of the “liberal” moderate SBTS presidents he came to disdain, which I find ironic.

Around these parts we are constantly regaled with how many books he reads per week. It goes back to what folks will believe because they are told and then is backed up with good PR. From radio, to articles, to Larry King to Time Mag. In addition to good PR, there is also the knowledge in some circles at SBTS that one simply does not dissent and keeps their mouth shut. Not different from many mega’s I am familiar with. I know some who worked close with him that said he was tyrannical. That came out years back on a blog and made the rounds to the extent he supposedly apologized to faculty.

We all really need to be careful what we believe that we are told about ANY leaders that we cannot really know well.

@ Muff Potter:

Muff, I think SBTS hides it better, though. It took quite a while for folks to start questioning what was coming out of there. Keep in mind, I doubt it could happen like that again since most were dismissed before the advent of internet blogging. Very early on there was the story of Paul Debusman. The Library Archivist who was fired 9 months before his retirement after many years at SBTS. His crime? He dared to write a recent chapel speaker to correct his declaration that a conservative had not been allowed to speak at chapel for x amount of years (supposedly because of those nasty liberals).

Debusman wrote him a letter showing him the names of speakers for chapel who were conservative. What did this chapel speaker, Tom Eliff who preceeded Platt at IMB, do with it? He sent it to Al Mohler and Al fired Debusman for dissent. So the 33 year old fires the 60+ man 9 months before retirement.

You think that did not prove to be an example to others who dared to dissent? Even your retirement is not safe if you do not tow the young presidents party line. The real question is where were the trustees and who were they in those days.

As you can see, I am no fan of Mohler. He got way too much power too young before he had EARNED the wisdom and experience in the trenches. He was a golden boy. That is why he is the way he is today. That is why he is still there despite his shananigans with Mahaney and all the rest. He is the teflon president. Everyone is scared of him. Including other leaders.

Lydia wrote:

@ Nancy:
Have you ever heard McArthur exegete 1 Corinthians 11? It is a knee slapper! Did you know it is a sin for men to have long hair!? (Nevermind that Nazarite vow Paul took, eh John?)

That’s why I am getting a haircut tonight! I am within 1mm of sinning.

Come to think of it, just to be safe I’ll get them all cut…

Lydia wrote:

@ Nancy:

Have you ever heard McArthur exegete 1 Corinthians 11? It is a knee slapper! Did you know it is a sin for men to have long hair!? (Nevermind that Nazarite vow Paul took, eh John?)

One of the first things my husband did after we left our MacArthurite church was grow out his hair and his beard. He looks like King Theoden from LOTR. John would not be amused.

@ Nancy:
Oh yes, I was raised in an IFB school in the 70’s. My brother, on graduation day, was forced to get a ‘disciplinary’ haircut because a few hairs had dared touch his ears or collar. This was humiliating for him.

@ Lydia:

What a wacko control-freak. These people really have too much time on their hands if they’re worrying about the length of people’s hair. Sheesh.

Patricia Hanlon wrote:

So what’s the actual evidence for Al Mohler being the “smartest man in the world”?

Why that’s just ridiculous! Everybody knows that Professor Barnhardt is the smartest man in the world cuz’ he was the only one Mr. Klaatu wanted to talk to…

Dave wrote:

My apologies for being unclear. I was referring to the churches like those mentioned in the article and on TWW in general. I’m not American and not that familiar with SBC but I gather they’re fairly tame compared to the usual TWW fare

A bit of earlier background for you – see some of the comments. http://thewartburgwatch.com/2011/04/21/who-do-the-independent-fundamentalist-baptists-say-they-are/

@ Haitch:

don’t forget the coffee beans. I am thinking you and I saw the same video.

@ roebuck:

Yes. Too much time and other peoples money.

Former CLC’er wrote:

Whoever brought up the Children of God

That was me. Yes, it’s a strange phenomenon – really leftover from the 60’s-70’s. All those people who devoted their minds and lives to this and so many other cults. Hare Krishna! Remember them? Those people used to really freak me out! So many others. It’s so sad. But the times were so mixed up and weird, I don’t judge so much, I just feel sad.

BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

roebuck wrote:
Hare Krishna! Remember them?
Growing up in the SBC I remember one youth program I attended to warn us about cults and what to look for. I came away from that presentation with a wariness of people in loose orange clothing with shaved heads. Perhaps the Moonies, too.
I never expected a cult to so closely resemble a genuine church. I never expected it to talk so much about Jesus or use the same Bible.

Me neither, and yet when I look at the Bible, the number of times I’m warned about this very issue and these very techniques seems remarkable. Yet still I led my family into two full blown cults and one otherwise OK church that was led by a semi-closeted cultist, all of which used the Bible, all of which presented themselves as angels of light.

@ Nancy:
I think you make a good point here.

Perhaps it would be accurate to say that while the NT was being produced, the leaders of the church could speak the word of God by the Spirit, whereas their successors who have the completed canon can quote it. The end result ought to be the same, as the obedience is really to the word (and hence the will of God) rather than the speaker of it.

@ Florence in KY – LOVE to read your posts! God’s blessings to you!

Law Prof wrote:

Me neither, and yet when I look at the Bible, the number of times I’m warned about this very issue and these very techniques seems remarkable. Yet still I led my family into two full blown cults and one otherwise OK church that was led by a semi-closeted cultist, all of which used the Bible, all of which presented themselves as angels of light.

That’s because Christianese CULT-sniffers always defined “Cult” in terms of Theology, not control-freak abusive behavior towards their people or corruption at the top. Lots of such not-a-cults slipped by under the radar while the CULT-sniffers parsed their Correct Theology letter-by-letter, and the not-a-cult leaders used the Cult-sniffers’ clean bill of health as an additional weapon against their Bitter Rebellious mutton. (Of course it helped that the not-a-cults had the same Correct Theology — Born-Again Fundagelical — as the Cult-sniffer groups rating them.)

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

(Of course it helped that the not-a-cults had the same Correct Theology…. as the Cult-sniffer groups rating them.)

Exactly. I agree with your entire comment but only omitted part of the quote because I doubt that this behavior is limited to any one particular group. Behaviors rarely are. I think cult sniffers and heresy hounds (not limited to evangelicals) are cut from the same cloth.

Lydia wrote:

I cannot tell you how many YRR from there are adament that a cult is comprised of what they are taught are heretic beliefs.

And a party spontaneously breaks out when you try to challenge cult-like dynamics with leadership that has come from the school of thinking. Only you get to be the pinata and do not get a cupcake.

They truly believe they are the ones Jesus has been waiting for to purify the church. It never occurs to them that they are using worldly means and fleshly thinking to do that.

Law Prof wrote:

Not everyone who says “Lord, Lord” knows what it means or cares.

Oh boy, is that ever the truth!! (Especially the part about not caring; I see a lot of that).

zooey111 wrote:

Energy drinks??? I mean, really, I believe you, but ENERGY DRINKS??

After Cabbage Patch dolls and My Little Pony toys, Say-tann-ic Energy Drinks are not that much of a stretch.