Top Ten Posts: The Year of Social Media and Sheep Who Found Their Voices

“Tomorrow is the first blank page of a 365-page book. Write a good one.” ― Brad Paisley link

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=65944&picture=2014-hvezdy-zlato2014

Today we are listing some of this year's blog posts that garnered a large number of comments. We have always said that this blog is about our readers, so we chose posts that generated lengthy discussions. During 2014 TWW attracted a fair number of new readers, most likely due to the Nate Morales trial and the stunning confession of Grant Layman, C.J. Mahaney's brother-in-law. This was followed by the resignation of Mark Driscoll and the reconfiguration of Mars Hill. Who would have thunk it!

When we first began blogging almost six years ago, we featured posts that focused on Sovereign Grace Ministries (which at the time was headed by C.J. Mahaney) and Mars Hill Church (founded by Mark Driscoll), among other high-profile Christian leaders. In very short order we became laser focused on child sex abuse in churches as well as abusive church leadership. We were roundly criticized by some Christian leaders who were quite certain that Mahaney and Driscoll were the next best thing in the Reformed firmament. These leaders and their loyalists were stunned as blogs, church members, and a brave talk show host began speaking out.

This year has seen the development of our thinking on covenants as legal documents which we believe are intended to protect church leadership while leaving members at risk for abusive behavior. Furthermore, we have serious reservations with the phrase *church discipline*.  We suspect this expression is intentionally left undefined so that abusive church leaders can have wide latitude in deciding what to discipline and how to discipline — leaving members at a serious disadvantage — a fact we have emphasized in personal stories and will continue to highlight in 2015.

We want to recognize Warren Throckmorton, Janet Mefferd, and Wenatchee the Hatchet for their diligence in exposing the excesses at Mars Hill and with Mark Driscoll. They have endured considerable criticism as they have pursued the truth. 

We also want to recognize Todd Wilhelm who has stood firm in his support of SGM victims by leaving his 9Marks church in Dubai and putting up with the elders' attempt to hold him in membership limbo. No wonder 9Marks churches are beginning to garner the label 'Hotel California' by some.

Finally, as always, we remember the SGM victims as well as those hurt in other churches. Boz Tchividjian has exposed horrendous stories of child sex abuse cover-up in both churches and parachurch organizations. This blog exists to tell your stories. 

May 2015 be a year in which we see a continuing effort to address entrenched problems in our churches. May God have mercy on the congregation which turns a cold and/or blind eye to abuse.

Predictions for the coming year:

  • We expect to see some 9Marks leaders imposing church discipline on members who leave their church for *unapproved* churches.
  • The SGM lawsuit will make an appearance.
  • Acts 29 churches will continue to deal with pastors and leaders who mimic Mark Driscoll's temperament. However…
  • Mark Driscoll will begin a new ministry, presiding over demon trials for Robert Morris.
  • There will be continued attacks on bloggers who report on negative experiences in churches.
  • There will be a continuing rise of the *Nones* and *Dones.* This will result in declining church budgets and defaults on loans.
  • There will be fewer church building projects. Instead of investing in brick and mortar, congregations will continue to develop the satellite concept by utilizing rental facilities.
  • There will be a full court press to emphasize membership in local churches, along with the signing of covenants and an expectation of a 10% tithe to be given to the local church.
  • John Piper will tweet the entire book of Leviticus.
  • Stephen Furtick will add 3,000 square feet to his house in order to contain his vision.
  • TWW will train readers in hostage negotiations with the hope of freeing all detainees handcuffed to membership covenants.
  • Certain groups will continue to overlook issues of child sex abuse in churches which preach their doctrine.
  • Racial inequality will continue to be addressed by a number of church groups.
  • More church members will boldly share their stories of abuse.

We would love for you, our dear readers, to share your own predictions. We plan to go back and review them at year end.

We leave you with the following ten posts that generated considerable discussion this year.

Bob Jones University, Boz Tchividjian and Grace – An Unprededented Historic Report on Sex Abuse

Tullian Tchividjian Takes SGM and TGC to Task

Mark Driscoll Speaks at Gateway – The Manipulation Video

Is CBMW the Bellweather for the Complementarian Movement?

Recovering Grace Confronts Bill Gothard

Nathaniel Morales Found Guilty on All Charges

Capitol Hill Baptist Church – The Hotel California of Church Discipline

Anne Graham Lotz – Women Treated Badly By A Gender Driven Gospel

Does Science Support a Six-Day Creation?  What is Science – Parts 1 and 2

Eagle's Story – Part 1

We would love for our readers to share their favorite posts, either at TWW or at any other website. 

We love you all and wish you a Happy New Year!

Comments

Top Ten Posts: The Year of Social Media and Sheep Who Found Their Voices — 248 Comments

  1. Quoting Brad Paisley just took you to a whole 'nutha' level of cool. 🙂 Grateful for you both!!! My 2014 had stories of redemption and healing because of You, Wartburg and Echurch!!

  2. You know so much has happened since I published my story here at TWW. My story deals with a lot, and is broken into three parts. Plus I wrote another two posts on doubt, and constructive criticism of evangelicalism. My story deals with a faith crisis that was hell, while walking away and exploring atheism. Against all that I also had to contend with being unsuccessfully recruited to Redeemer Arlington. Against a faith crisis I had to contend with SGM which was the very last thing I needed. During this time I consumed a lot of Christopher Hitchens and atheism. And as SGM was dealing with a lawsuit and I read the horrific details of child abuse online the last thing I was going to do was explore Christianity in a church that was associated with SGM. Yes Redeemer broke away but there are still deep concerns. Sovereign Grace was the first time since my involvement with Mormonism in college where I had so many red flags, and people who contacted me behind the scenes warning me to stay away. I got the message loud and clear and I did stay away. However I also think I was too belligerent at times. If I could do it all over again I would. I would act differently in a heart beat. But in the depths of a faith crisis I was in a lot of emotional pain and turmoil. It can be destructive when you faith implodes. I mean look at me….look at how many faith systems I experienced by my late 30’s? Catholicism, Mormonism, Atheism, and differing sides of evangelicalism. I don’t think I have the strength to go through another religion again.

  3. “There will be fewer church building projects. Instead of investing in brick and mortar, congregations will continue to develop the satellite concept by utilizing rental facilities.”

    Oh yes

    ” John Piper will tweet the entire book of Leviticus. ”

    bwahahaha

  4. I have to tell you that of all that I wrote about the one thing I want to be remembered most is approaching nearly 140 people and asking them for forgiveness. That was the hardest and yet most beautiful thing that I am grateful. In my story I had to deal with a false accusation that could have destroyed me, my financial livelihood, name, and reputation and that false accusation came from a CGL at Redeemer Arlington. In the end due to his false accusation he also prevented me from approaching Redeemer Arlington and asking them for forgiveness. When I realized that I needed to approach Sovereign Grace for forgiveness since Redeemer was the church that resulted in World War III between Andrew White and myself, I knew that I needed to approach them for forgiveness. I was ready and willing to do that, but due to what Andrew White falsely alleged that was not feasible. So in the end what I would also suggest is that Andrew White also cheated Redeemer as well. Kind of ironic isn’t it?

    I am still working out things with people and as of December 31, 2014 I still have about 5 people unresolved. Those 5 are:

    1. A homeless woman who is mentally ill in DC who attended National Community Church. I don’t know how to get a hold of her. I still pray that our paths can cross in DC.
    2. A former accountability partner from Crusade in Milwaukee. However I now know why it’s unlikely I will hear from him. I cried when I heard what happened.
    3. A guy from a men’s group at National Community Church who disappeared off the face of the earth. No one can contact him.
    4. A guy from Mclean Bible who my gut is telling me is having a faith crisis himself. No one has heard from him at all. I’m still praying and working this issue.
    5. Andrew White from Redeemer Arlington.

    I still crave peace, and if Andrew showed some honest to God repentance and owned his false accusation I would forgive him in a heartbeat. I would vouch for him, go to bat, and lay down so much of my life for him if he repented. If he repented I would see myself as being on the hook for him. Don’t you think it’s strange that a guy who walked around boasting how Redeemer was the healthiest church he knew would be the only Christian who couldn’t repent and practice forgiveness? I mean 140-142 people and the only Christian who will not practice forgiveness is Andrew White. It’s sad, ironic, and frustrating. Until he repents he is not qualified for any church position or place of leadership. And he is foolish if he thinks that this won’t haunt him or create problems for him in the future. Currently he is acting like Jonah thinking he can run off to Colorado Springs and run from his sin. The issue before him is twofold. He can be either Judas Iscariot or Peter. Both betrayed, both committed horrific moral failures, and both caused deep pain. However, one repented and became stronger in his faith through humility in how he responded. The other couldn’t deal with it and became unglued. This choice is before Andrew White. Is he going to be like Peter or Judas? Time will tell.

    If he came to me and asked me to forgive him, or even say that he needs time to work through it I would work with him. I put my finances and reputation on the line for so many people…why would I deny that to him if he repented and asked to resolve things? If he approached me and I spurned him or denied him grace and refused to accept his forgiveness then according to scripture I should be damned to hell. And I believe I should go there if I am going to accept grace from nearly 140 people but turn around and deny it to Andrew White.

    Peace is all I crave, it’s all I desire. What type of Christian denies another Christian peace? That’s probably the ugliest and horrific thing a person can do. But if he repented I would accept it and resolve it with him. I’m not his enemy…I’m his friend. I still love and care, and I feel like this because of so many other people who responded. If I approached 140 people and 70 blew me off I would not care as much. But what happened in the end took my breath away and stunned me. Christians today don’t practice repentance. Can you imagine if they did? Would Christianity in the United States be as ugly, condescending, and struggle with its image as much? My guess….highly unlikely.

  5. Happy New Year, everyone!!

    I had been thinking about doing this for months, but I finally went to Yelp.com and wrote a review of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, based on my time as a member there, and based on my being shunned by leaders and most members, after I returned to the Catholic Church. Unless it has been deleted by CHBC, the review should still be on the site.

    Then, I decided to go to CHBC’s Facebook page and post basically the same review with a few small tweaks. I want to make clear– this is *not* about me bashing brothers and sisters in Christ, as mistaken and misguided as I believe that they are on certain subjects. It is about me warning people who may be visiting CHBC, or thinking about visiting there, about certain aspects of their practice of “Biblical church discipline.” (I actually gave CHBC a rating of three out of five stars, so my review is definitely not entirely negative, but it is truthful.)

  6. P.S. To see the review on Facebook, you don’t have to “like” the page. Just click on the “Reviews” tab, and scroll down to find the 3-star reviews. As with the review at Yelp, unless it has been deleted by someone at CHBC, the review should still be there.

  7. Thanks so much, Numo! 2014 was a very hard year in many ways (not regarding church though), but I am trying to keep my focus on God. If I can do that, 2015 will be a good, if, perhaps, not easy, year. Hope that all is well with you too!

  8. Christopher Lake wrote:

    Happy New Year, everyone!!

    I had been thinking about doing this for months, but I finally went to Yelp.com and wrote a review of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, based on my time as a member there, and based on my being shunned by leaders and most members, after I returned to the Catholic Church. Unless it has been deleted by CHBC, the review should still be on the site.

    Then, I decided to go to CHBC’s Facebook page and post basically the same review with a few small tweaks. I want to make clear– this is *not* about me bashing brothers and sisters in Christ, as mistaken and misguided as I believe that they are on certain subjects. It is about me warning people who may be visiting CHBC, or thinking about visiting there, about certain aspects of their practice of “Biblical church discipline.” (I actually gave CHBC a rating of three out of five stars, so my review is definitely not entirely negative, but it is truthful.)

    Hi Christopher,

    I wrote a negative Yelp review about my independent Bible-believing church in Silicon Valley (California) after my recent excommunication and shunning (they subscribe to your former church’s bullying practices) because I wouldn’t bow and scrape to my pastors/elders in their enabling of their friend, a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List at our church. They think he’s harmless, won’t tell parents and adults, have put him in positions of leadership, and even invited him to volunteer at our summer week-long children’s basketball camp/evangelism camp. Believers and unbelievers enroll their children and entrust them to us, having no clue that a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List has been given carte blanche to their children courtesy of the sick and twisted pastors/elders.

    My yelp review was recently taken down about my former church. But with the holidays…I will be posting another version of it up soon!

  9. Deb,

    Thanks for your good wishes. Here’s to a happy and blessed 2015 for all of us!!

  10. Michaela, I'm truly sorry to hear about your experiences at your former church. Your trials make mine seem very small. After writing my review of CHBC, I thought that, perhaps, I should have mentioned the fact that C.J. Mahaney had gone there, for a time, while he was still in a very problematic situation re:Covenant Life Church, but if I *had* mentioned that, I think it's quite possible that my review would have been taken down very quickly.

    Even as it is, it may not stay up on Yelp and/or Facebook for a long time, but I felt that I had to speak the truth from my experiences with the leaders and congregation. As I wrote in my review, not all of my friends there have shunned me… A few courageous souls continue to interact with me, and in a friendly way too, but most have remained silent.

  11. Julie Anne,

    Well, all I can say is that I certainly hope CHBC won’t sue me, because I truly don’t bear anyone there ill will. Far from it. (I’m also physically disabled and currently without a paying job, so I don’t have much to give them financially.)

    I wouldn’t characterize my review as a “negative” one. I gave the church three out of five stars, and I did mention things that I consider to be good points, about the church, objectively, and about my time there. I don’t even disagree with *all* of their thinking on church discipline. It’s mainly the utter shunning that I find to be deeply unChristian.

  12. Christopher:

    Thanks for clarifying that your review wasn’t “negative.” I’ll correct that.

    I don’t think you will be sued. I don’t think Dever is that stupid (although he was stupid to allow CJ to take shelter there). But if you get threatened, feel free to let me know and I can pass along my notes. Brad Sargent (futuristguy) spent around 300 hours compiling court documents, analysis, articles on my case so that it might benefit others who go through something similar. http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/about/bgbc-defamation-lawsuit-archive/

    I agree with you on shunning. The only appropriate word I can find is: insidious. That about sums it for me. Death is easier than shunning because at least there is closure.

  13. Not to change the subject….
    But the discipline for going to an ” unapproved” church…..you know that’ll happen.
    I’ve caught so much flak because I no longer attend a SBC Church. And the thing is, I am looking hard at either an ELC or Episcopal Church in the area to visit. I can just hear what people at the SBC Church will say…..

  14. Eagle wrote:

    I mean look at me….look at how many faith systems I experienced by my late 30’s? Catholicism, Mormonism, Atheism, and differing sides of evangelicalism. I don’t think I have the strength to go through another religion again.

    With all due respect, atheism is not a “faith” system, it is simply non-belief in gods (I am an atheist).

  15. @ cookingwithdogs:

    We’re going to have to agree to disagree. I learned that atheism can be a faith system with primary and secondary doctrine. It has its evangelists like Richard Dawkins, Greta Christina who I deeply respect. I respect them much more than Mark Driscoll or CJ Mahaney. Finally atheism can also be fundamentalist as well. I learned that at the Reason Rally in Washington, D.C. in 2012.

  16. Why is membership so important to 9 Marks pastors and leaders?

    Well, several years ago 9Marks pastors and staff told us why. But then, sometime between August and December 2014, they removed their articles.

    Fortunately we have the Wayback Machine and can find the articles again. Very embarrassing for 9Marks.

    Here they explain it in their own words on their own blog:

    Pastor Deepak Reju’s admission that he looks forward to monitoring you – http://www.9marks.org/blog/gospel-minded-churches-cooperating-pastoring (Sometime between August and November 2014 this page was removed by 9Marks, but you can still see it here on Internet Archives: web.archive.org/web/20130426190235/http://www.9marks.org/blog/gospel-minded-churches-cooperating-pastoring)

    Jonathan Leeman’s very unsettling post on making life miserable for former church members – http://www.9marks.org/blog/churches-cooperating-discipline (Sometime between August and November 2014 this page was removed by 9Marks, but you can still see it here on Internet Archives:: http://web.archive.org/web/20140820135612/http://www.9marks.org/blog/churches-cooperating-discipline

    Deepak Reju again talking about maintaining information on your family members – http://www.9marks.org/blog/why-use-house-church-membership-directory (Sometime between August and November 2014 this page was removed by 9Marks, but you can still see it here on Internet Archives: web.archive.org/web/20140815225117/http://www.9marks.org/blog/why-use-house-church-membership-directory

  17. cookingwithdogs wrote:

    With all due respect, atheism is not a “faith” system, it is simply non-belief in gods (I am an atheist).

    I am glad you brought that up. Sometimes “believers” insist that everything is a faith system as a verbal snide remark directed at atheists. It can be a way of implying that someone could not possibly have a brain in their head unless they agree with the believer-agressor who is slinging around some particular idea. When they do that it really is childish and is something that might work in the fourth grade but not beyond. On the other hand, people who are true-believer types-that is they tend to commit sometimes passionately to some set of ideas, perhaps even beyond what evidence and sensibility would merit, can be “believers” in atheism, at which point is does look like a faith system.

    I am trying to say that simply not being convinced by the evidence seems to me to be a different thing from what some do who take up atheism with all they passion they used to have with their lost saints (to reference EBB here).

    Then there are lots of us who do think there is a god, but who at the same time think that lots of religious systems have got it wrong about some of their conclusions about that god. We sometimes get called atheists, or at least have some ideas labeled as atheistic ideas when we differ on specific points of doctrine or practice. Personally I think it is kind of fun, because we are able to “out” some of the worst offenders from time to time by tapping into that tendency some have to act like said fourth graders.

    Eagle is not, however, a snide person and I do not think that he meant anything offensive by his characterization of his own faith journey (that is what they are call it now-and that bugs me to death, but that is a different topic.)

    But “cooking with dogs?” What is that?

  18. @ Eagle:

    Yes, I think so too. There is atheism and then there is atheism. That would make a good conversational topic if some of you who have been down that road could enlighten some of us who have not.

    My experience with unbelief did not include being convince that there was no god. I just gave up the idea that it really mattered one way or the other whether there was or was not actually a god. I did come to have some serious negative conclusions about some religious ideas and practices, but scads of believers do, so that is not actually atheism. It may be a symptom of sanity though, don’t you know.

  19. 2014 is the year that for one moment, I considered returning to Christianity. The moment was a blog here about a pastor who had repented and I thought longingly on subject of grace. However, what I found here was a harshness towards the pastor, an attitude of criticalness, a condemnation that his repentance was not good enough, even dogmatic statements about the certainty of the pastor’s future sins.

    I made a couple of posts that some found unacceptable, and was accused, judged, diagnosed, and lied about. (I guess is it hard for people who think they are so right, to even question their own opinions about another poster they’ve never even met.) When I pointed out that the accusations being made towards me were incorrect, heels dug in, and judgments and accusations were repeated. No apologies were forthcoming. (At the same time, I saw another poster appear, receive the same treatment as myself, and then just disappear.)

    So, 2014 will be the year I considered “grace” but found none.

  20. Michaela wrote:

    They think he’s harmless, won’t tell parents and adults, have put him in positions of leadership, and even invited him to volunteer at our summer week-long children’s basketball camp/evangelism camp.

    Pardon my language, but WTF??? In my state that is illegal. Have you contacted the DA?

  21. @ Rob:
    Wait – are you saying that your entire trajectory has been shaped by interaction with one blog post? Pardon the turn of phrase, but that’s really weird, dude. Are you being melodramatic or something? If you are actually telling the truth, please please see a professional therapist. I mean it. The science has come a long way in the last few decades, and I think it could be a real benefit to you.

  22. cookingwithdogs wrote:

    With all due respect, atheism is not a “faith” system, it is simply non-belief in gods (I am an atheist).

    Welcome to TWW and thank you for your comment. I understand what you are saying. Eagle spent some time in the atheist/agnostic camp. He is merely expressing what he observed during that time.

    However, I think that everybody puts their faith in something. Anne Frank believed that there was a little good in everybody. Some put their faith in a set of moral constructs. Some believe that we can build a better world if we all just tried. I know that you do not place you faith in any sort of divine being but I bet you have faith in something.

  23. @ Rob:
    I spent some time going through the comments that you have left on this blog, starting in 2013. My WordPress program allows me to do that. I think there were some good discussions on a number of your comments. You were not the brunt of lots of criticism but you did get some critique just like we do on a daily basis. We also are called all kinds of names and have our motives judges regularly. We do not take it personally. We try to push through to get to the heart of the matter.

    Blogging is an anonymous medium. We cannot see each other and cannot read body language. So, our only way to understand each other is through words.

    Each and everyone of us daily needs the grace of God to get through our day. We will all fall short-hurting others, intentionally or not intentionally. We will all be selfish at one point or another or think more highly of ourselves than we should. We will do this until the day we go home.

    Grace is the recognition of our human condition. Grace was given to us because we could not achieve it ourselves. We live in tension between what we should be, what we will be, and what we could be. Perhaps this quote by CS Lewis will be of help.

    “You come of the Lord Adam and the Lady Eve,” said Aslan. “And that is both honour enough to erect the head of the poorest beggar, and shame enough to bow the shoulders of the greatest emperor on earth. Be content.”

  24. Dr. Fundystan, well, thanks for the diagnosis. Of course, one interaction here was not my one and only deciding factor. I left Christianity a number of years ago, and have found no reason to return.

    Over the years, I find the harshness of Christians a confirming factor. The lack of grace, kindness, and forgiveness astounds me. It seems that we walk to the alter to receive grace, but grace ends there. From the moment we get up, and walk back down that narrow aisle, everything thereafter is based on walking according to traditions and requirements, and should we fail, judgement is quick and harsh.

    Again, it amazes me that you decided I needed professional help based on a 2 paragraph posting. Perhaps I erred in not posting a long qualified explanation. Or perhaps it is my fault I did not find grace here. The pastor blogged about did not find grace here. In fact, based on the posts here, he will continue to sin so of course, there is no need for grace. Anyone who attempted to “defend” his less than perfect apology will not find grace.

    Quick, quick, rushes to judgement, are lacking in grace.

  25. @ Janey:
    WOW!!!!! You are officially invited to join the TWW staff. That is some fascinating stuff. I have already put it into a pending post. Thank you!!!!

    Now, as to why…Conjecture: I think that they have been a bit concerned about the 9 Marks/Hotel California posts on this blog-both the Dubai fiasco and another post we did on another member of CHBC.

  26. @ Rob:

    I don't recall responding to you with a harsh tone. Looks like you are condemning all of us here.

    Anyway, Happy New Year!

  27. Janey wrote:

    Why is membership so important to 9 Marks pastors and leaders?
    Well, several years ago 9Marks pastors and staff told us why. But then, sometime between August and December 2014, they removed their articles.
    Fortunately we have the Wayback Machine and can find the articles again. Very embarrassing for 9Marks.

    I would copy those articles because I’m thinking 9 Marks will figure out a way to deep-six them from the Wayback Machine.

    On a different note, I discovered today that a church I had occasionally attended has basically gone up in smoke. Website gone, Facebook gone, etc. It’s been within the last few months, too. I feel weird, but also relieved in a way. That was a very strange situation.

  28. @ Rob:

    Whoa now. Somebody was not nice enough in ways you wanted them to be and therefore you have turned your back on christianity? Is that a variant of “I would be a christian but there are too many hypocrites in the church?” Why on earth would you give other people that much power over your decision making process? I mean, you don’t maybe even like God any more because there are lots of people you don’t like? I know some people do that, but it seems like poor thinking to me.

  29. In 2015 and beyond, there will be fewer people who believe in a (anti-Christ) mandatory tithe. More on this later…

  30. Rob wrote:

    The moment was a blog here about a pastor who had repented and I thought longingly on subject of grace.

    What pastor repented?

    You know, I always tell folks like you not to blame Jesus Christ. He is not forcing people to respond to things in a manner that will prove something to you.

  31. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Michaela wrote:

    They think he’s harmless, won’t tell parents and adults, have put him in positions of leadership, and even invited him to volunteer at our summer week-long children’s basketball camp/evangelism camp.

    Pardon my language, but WTF??? In my state that is illegal. Have you contacted the DA?

    Yes, I have. I have contacted:
    1. the District Attorney
    2. five police chiefs (in all of the jurisdictions where various parts of this occurred here in Silicon Valley)
    3. the Sheriff’s (which is the supervising law enforcement agency for this sex offender)
    4. the California Attorney General’s Office (which is in charge of my state’s Megan’s List)
    5. the other church’s denomination (which can be sued if anything goes wrong on their property that they rent to my church, a church during the year and a school gym for the summer basketball camp);
    6. the California credentialed teacher licensing (my former senior pastor is a credentialied teacher and a mandated child abuse reporter);
    7. Child Protective Services (all of the pastors/elders are my former church are mandated child abuse reporters and are required by law to report and they refuse to);
    8. the State Bar of California (which is a division of the California Supreme Court and licenses attorneys since my senior pastor ‘said’ that ‘his attorney [the sex offender’s] told him he was coming off Megan’s List.’ The Sheriff’s and the Attorney General’s called that ‘a total lie’. It takes 30-days for the Attorney General to remove someone from Megan’s List, if they are allowed.
    If such an attorney even exists and truly said that, that attorney committed a serious breach of legal ethics in California that is grounds for State Bar discipline and disbarment.
    9. I still have to go to the police department and write up police reports about my four pastors/elders since they told me that I was to never contact law enforcement again about this sex offender and that I was to ‘obey’ them and ‘to submit’ to them. That’s a crime in California (obstruction of justice and intimidating a witness) that they can be arrested for.
    10. Additionally the senior pastor told me in a meeting with the 4 pastors/elders that if any father at church permitted the sex offender to touch his children (I’ve watched him touch kids at church whose parents have no idea he’s on Megan’s List) that ‘the father’s decision was binding on his family’ and that his wife was ‘to obey him’ and ‘to submit to him’. Uhhhh, no. Parents are required by God and by California criminal law to protect their children. A refusal to do that can get those parents arrested and prosecuted for misdemeanor or felony child abuse/endangerment/neglect. The criminal consequences? 1-year in jail or up to 6-years in state prison. (Child Protective Services will also take away the children and put them in foster care.)

    This sex offender is on Megan’s List because he was convicted and imprisoned for having child porn. The pastors/elders said that isn’t a big deal. It’s a big deal to me since the research done by the F.B.I., The District Attorneys’ Association, and The Mayo Clinic of inmates ‘just in prison for child porn’ shows the majority of them confessed during research interview to having gotten away with on-contact sexual abuse of children. In short, where there’s smoke (child porn) there’s usually fire (pedophilia; child sexual abuse).

  32. Janey wrote:

    Well, several years ago 9Marks pastors and staff told us why. But then, sometime between August and December 2014, they removed their articles.

    Hmmmm. Wasn’t that about the same time that articles appeared at TWW dealing with CHBC/9Marks control-freakish beliefs and behavior due to the KEYS? I think it is not a coincidence that the articles were disappeared at the same time as they were exposed here. These guys really think that they *are* the church and that to resist them and their beliefs is to resist the Holy Spirit.

  33. Rob wrote:

    2014 is the year that for one moment, I considered returning to Christianity. The moment was a blog here about a pastor who had repented and I thought longingly on subject of grace. However, what I found here was a harshness towards the pastor, an attitude of criticalness, a condemnation that his repentance was not good enough, even dogmatic statements about the certainty of the pastor’s future sins.

    I made a couple of posts that some found unacceptable, and was accused, judged, diagnosed, and lied about. (I guess is it hard for people who think they are so right, to even question their own opinions about another poster they’ve never even met.) When I pointed out that the accusations being made towards me were incorrect, heels dug in, and judgments and accusations were repeated. No apologies were forthcoming. (At the same time, I saw another poster appear, receive the same treatment as myself, and then just disappear.)

    So, 2014 will be the year I considered “grace” but found none.

    @Rob,

    I don’t know which pastor you’re talking about that was reported here on the TWW since you omitted that pastor’s name.

    Following Jesus has nothing to do with following a pastor or for that matter a group of bloggers and posters and their responses to a topic. I still follow Jesus and I was just excommunicated and my former church family was ordered to shun me because I had opposed the carte blanche access to children that my pastors/elders gave to a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List, without telling the adults and parents. He’s their friend and so they cut him deals, including at the expense of other people.

    So I’ve been through a brutal experience, have been read out of my church where I served in ministries, lost friendships I’ve had with people for 8-years who no longer speak to me, didn’t get a single Christmas card or call from anyone at that church, and I have found that Jesus has been with me, comforted me, refreshed me, and I have found ‘grace’.

    Since you have such powerful emotions (and negative ones) may I suggest that you try at least six Al-Anon meetings (they’re free).

    I wish you well in 2015.

    Take care.

  34. Christopher Lake wrote:

    As I wrote in my review, not all of my friends there have shunned me… A few courageous souls continue to interact with me, and in a friendly way too, but most have remained silent.

    You did the right thing leaving a review that reflected your experience there. I don’t think Dever will sue you because…Discovery. More likely you will be ignored because the pewpeons really are *not* important to these men except as giving units. People will be “cautioned” that you are going through a difficult season and they should pray for you. As you said, the vast majority will remain silent because they truly care more for their own comfort than for what is right or biblical or Jesus-like or for how the “leaders” in this movement are hypocrites (Dever and C.J.) and lords over the flock, contrary to the example and explicit teaching of the Lord they claim to follow.

    I’m so sorry about your disability and unemployment. That must make the experience with CHBC much more difficult. I’ll be praying for you.

  35. Nancy wrote:

    Eagle is not, however, a snide person and I do not think that he meant anything offensive by his characterization of his own faith journey (that is what they are call it now-and that bugs me to death, but that is a different topic.)

    But “cooking with dogs?” What is that?

    Oh I never took what Eagle said as a snide remark. Just wanted to clear up any impression that atheism is some kind of belief/faith system. Yes, there are atheists who get very passionate about their unbelief but I am not one of them. I choose to live and let live as long as no one tries to legislate away my rights.

    Cookingwithdogs is my very inactive blog. About dogs and minimal cooking.

  36. I don’t really remember the Rob guy who posted above, and I’m not necessarily defending him on all accounts, but I would hope people would be a little more understanding of his reasons for wanting to leave the faith, if they are what I think the are.

    As Nancy put it,

    Somebody was not nice enough in ways you wanted them to be and therefore you have turned your back on christianity? Is that a variant of “I would be a christian but there are too many hypocrites in the church?” Why on earth would you give other people that much power over your decision making process?

    That mirrors a big reason why I am caught between agnosticism and Christianity now and don’t know which way to turn.

    It’s a legitimate reason to question the faith and wish it was not so quickly dismissed as though it’s a silly, trivial, or stupid reason.

    I recently had a long time internet friend – who went through her own crisis of faith a year or two ago but rebounded and decided to stay a Christian – bite my head off over this not too long ago, when she found out about a year ago I am now the one having issues in this area.

    When she was having her own crisis of faith, I was supportive of her. I did not get mean, nasty, dismiss her concerns, etc, but she was the opposite of this with me.

    She feels the only legitimate, respectable reason a person can leave the Christian faith is due to “intellectual” reasons, not to reasons like being mistreated by Christians, or let down by 90% of Christians 99% of the time, or by Christian hypocrisy.

    My problems with the faith are not intellectual in nature for the most part.

    Being ranted at in a very rude manner by this person – who I have supported and encouraged over our 8 – 10 year online friendship, including during her doubts over the faith and other matters in life – was something else, and she says she is a Christian.

    I know a lot of Christians are uncomfortable by this, (and it’s easy to remind people to look to Jesus only, and I do have a lot of respect for Jesus), but the truth of the matter is that a self-professing Christian’s behavior towards other does matter.

    If you are actually living out the faith to the best of your ability or not matters, at least to people like me who wonder if the Christian faith is true or real at all. People do judge you based on your behavior and then in turn judge what they think of Christianity.

    If Christianity does not produce meaningful change in most of the people who claim it, if I cannot distinguish a Christian from an average Non-Christian, I’m not grasping the point of the faith.

    I some situations, I see some Non-Christians who display more compassion and understanding than some Christians.

    I remember on the iMonk thread a way back, people were discussing this. One guy who was recovering from surgery got no help from his Christian friends and family, but his Buddhist friend dropped by with stacks of pre-cooked meals he could pop into his microwave while he was recovering.

    Another guy said he gets more compassion about his clinical depression from an atheist co-worker than he does from people at his own church.

    His atheist co worker, when she senses his depression is even worse than usual, helps him out more with his duties on the job, to make the day easier for him. Most Christians would probably not do that, but lecture him about being lazy, how all he needs is more Bible reading to get over it.

    I tried explaining all this sort of thing to my friend who was infuriated I have doubts about Christianity.

    I’m having a hard time understanding what the point is in following this faith if it apparently does not produce a real, lasting change in many of its followers in earthly life.

    My mother was one of the few Christian people I know who really did live the faith out on a more or less consistent basis. She followed up her beliefs with acts of kindness to those in need, and she lived a moral life. I tried living the faith out as consistently as I could. But I’m not seeing to many do that.

    I certainly don’t expect absolute perfection off every Christian at all times, but these days, I see a lot of self professing believers who can or will not even adhere to the most basic teachings of the Bible/Jesus.

    Some Christians don’t even know the most basic teachings of Jesus because they don’t read the book (Bible) they claim to believe in (I did and still do read it, and spent years prior reading books about the Bible, and I read lots of Christian apologetics too).

    The most bizarre thing from this friend of mine, is that she misconstrues my views as being an irrational, all-out hatred of every Christian to ever live. I do not hate all Christians (though plenty make me ill, like Mark Driscoll, but I doubt he is a Christian).

    I cannot figure out where this friend is getting some of these notions from. My few discussions with her about these topics have been level-headed and civil on my part, and I don’t say nasty things about Christians, and I don’t get ranty. (I am turned off by radical atheists who behave this way about Christianity and Christian people and never see myself becoming like that.)

    In the midst of my exchange with her, this friend also accused me of being a liberal Democrat now, even though she’s known for years I am right wing and Republican, and I reminded her that I remain conservative.

    With her, I’m apparently not allowed to notice Christians who are not living up to the Christian faith, I’m supposed to just ignore that and be fine with it, or else noticing this makes me a hateful, anti-Christian, bigoted, liberal Democrat voter, or something… and I’m none of those things.

    How Christians are living and behaving (or not living out the faith they profess as the case may be) does make an impact on doubters. You may not feel as though it should, but it does.

  37. Your predictions resemble the famous essay by Michael Spencer (the original internet monk) entitled “The Coming Evangelical Collapse”—right down to “John Piper will tweet the entire book of Leviticus.” 😉

    The essay was picked up by Christian Science Monitor in 2009 and got Michael a lot of attention—unfortunately he died a year later. Internetmonk is still thriving though, and it’ll be interesting to see how his—and your—predictions get resolved. God bless you in 2015.

    http://www.internetmonk.com/essays

  38. cookingwithdogs wrote:

    With all due respect, atheism is not a “faith” system, it is simply non-belief in gods (I am an atheist).

    I know that’s what atheists say, but it does come across as its own faith, regardless of the protestations.

    Some atheists even hold services now (like church services, where there is singing and fellowship).

  39. Ted wrote:

    “John Piper will tweet the entire book of Leviticus.”

    Did Michael Spencer really say that???!!! Good night! It must have stayed in my subconscious! I need to give him credit immediately!

  40. @ Eagle:

    You are correct.

    Sometimes I see editorials by atheists who are strongly disagreeing with other atheists.

    There is also a big problem with sexism in atheism. Women atheists have written articles detailing the horrible treatment they’ve received by male atheists online or at atheist conventions.

    Some atheists in their editorials argue for a softer, kinder form of atheism, while others write editorials that say “No, let’s stick it to theists and be as obnoxious as we can.”

    Many atheists disagree with each other and over certain points as much as Calvinists and Arminian Christians debate over free will vs sovereignty of God; or Catholics and Protestants over sola scriptura, sola fide; or as much as moderate Baptists disagree with conservative ones over dancing or drinking or women wearing pants or skirts.

    Atheists do get into their own doctrinal disputes. 🙂

  41. Yesterday, I was really feeling down, thinking about the loss of a 20 year career and what that career cost me. 2014 was a really bad year. I woke up this morning with the resolve to keep looking forward and not back. This post reminds me that I left organized religion behind during the past 20 years and I am really, really glad I did. I can live to get the most out of the only life I will have without a bunch of other people telling me what I have done wrong. TWW has shown me that there may be some good christians out there, but there are still a lot of whack jobs. Happy New Year.

  42. Daisy wrote:

    I don’t really remember the Rob guy who posted above, and I’m not necessarily defending him on all accounts, but I would hope people would be a little more understanding of his reasons for wanting to leave the faith, if they are what I think the are….How Christians are living and behaving (or not living out the faith they profess as the case may be) does make an impact on doubters. You may not feel as though it should, but it does.

    @Daisy,

    I agree that how Christians behave is important and does impact other people. But isn’t that true for all of us, not just Christians?

    I concur that many non-Christians are loving, kind, decent, generous people who display a natural love for others that Christians are to be known for and many frequently don’t display.

    If someone is having spiritual struggles than this website is probably not the appropriate place for them to be reading and posting since it deals with many abuses going on in the church today, which frankly I find refreshing and transparent.

    A person like Rob is entitled to his opinions and so are other people here. So people still disagreed with whomever it was that Rob was defending. That happens here. The discussions are civil.

  43. dee wrote:

    “John Piper will tweet the entire book of Leviticus.”

    Did Michael Spencer really say that???!!! Good night! It must have stayed in my subconscious! I need to give him credit immediately!

    Dee! You didn’t see the ” 😉 ”

    No, Michael didn’t say that. But he would have, if he’d thought of it.

  44. @ Ted:
    Ignore my last comment! I really try very hard to give proper credit and it causes me anxiety if I think I did’t do it. Now, I can say its my funny!!! Thank you.

  45. Lydia wrote:

    What pastor repented?

    Jordan (JD) Hall.
    In the August 12th article, I actually thought Dee was quite grace-full.

  46. Dave A A wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    What pastor repented?

    Jordan (JD) Hall.
    In the August 12th article, I actually thought Dee was quite grace-full.

    I agree that Dee extended a lot of grace to J.D. Some commenters expressed doubts which were/are grounded in the experience which comes from abusive personalities exploiting the goodwill of those who extend grace. I wish that the people who don’t get it could learn to discern the difference between skepticism born of experience and a lack of grace. There is a difference, and Jesus called us to be both gentle as doves *and* wise as serpents. Words of repentance are proved through real and sometimes personally costly actions. I don’t think that the Pulpit Posse has proved J.D.’s repentant words with actions consistent with repentance. Specifically AFAIK they have not retracted and taught against their doctrines which led to that debacle. When that happens, then J.D.’s words will be proved true.

  47. Gram3 wrote:

    Dave A A wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    What pastor repented?

    Jordan (JD) Hall.
    In the August 12th article, I actually thought Dee was quite grace-full.

    I agree that Dee extended a lot of grace to J.D. Some commenters expressed doubts which were/are grounded in the experience which comes from abusive personalities exploiting the goodwill of those who extend grace. I wish that the people who don’t get it could learn to discern the difference between skepticism born of experience and a lack of grace. There is a difference, and Jesus called us to be both gentle as doves *and* wise as serpents. Words of repentance are proved through real and sometimes personally costly actions….

    Thanks Dave for pointing out the pastor that Rob had omitted from his post that was written about and discussed on this blog. http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/08/12/jd-hall-and-me-discussions-and-a-statement-on-brokenness-and-repentance/

    If I understand the story correctly, JD Hall made social media statements about another man’s son to the son about the son’s sin. The son then committed suicide about 1-month later.

    Rob then posted here that people didn’t accept JD Hall’s act of repentance. Whoa, Rob. A kid is dead and you omitted all of that???? No wonder people were upset!
    And you talk about “grace” being given, like a magic wand. Someone is dead, Rob. That is a very big deal.

    The Bible says that pastors/elders are to be above reproach in their conduct and gentle with all. An example for us to follow.

    I thought there were thought provoking posts, including the points that Gram 3 made to Rob.

  48. @ Gram3:
    The last exchange between you and Rob included this point about the underlying doctrines:
    ———————–
    Rob on Wed Aug 13, 2014 at 01:39 PM said:
    My final comment on this post:
    I do not know what JD Hall will do in the future.
    I do know he has opportunity for great personal growth, as well as potential for healing in his ministry.
    If I could encourage him, it would be to:
    1. Surround yourself with a group of men (outside your personal, doctrinal circle) who are full of mercy and grace.
    2. Consider seeking professional counseling that is secular based (free of any religious, doctrinal biases) for yourself and family.
    3. Give yourself time. You have nothing to prove to anybody at this point. No rush. Take time for healing, forgiveness and restoration.
    4. After a time of healing, restoration, growth, then (not now) revisit some of the doctrinal issues that have been part of your foundation, and that may have contributed to the hurt that has occurred.
    All the best,
    Rob
    Gram3 on Wed Aug 13, 2014 at 02:07 PM said:
    @ Rob:
    Thank you. That is good counsel, and I hope Jordan and friends take it along with the other good counsel on this thread.
    See, I can be agreeable!
    ———————————-
    Rob– as I read the comments, I don’t see any others nearly so *disagreeable* as Gram3’s prior ones– yet she left off with thanks and affirmation.
    Personally, that post and related ones would be in my Top 10– since then I’ve sought to be much more sparing with my snarkasm and grace-less-ness.

  49. @ dee:
    I saw something not too long ago from the Pulpit and Pen taking up the battle against Mr Caner once more. I thought–really they have enough to talk about to leave that one to others for a year or two… 🙁
    Headless Unicorn Guy’s “Purity of Ideology” trumping all else comes to mind.

  50. @ Daisy:

    Sorry to hear of your experience with your friend. (Oddly enough, I had a very similar experience with a friend some years ago.)

    In Lesley’s and my experience, in recent years at least, is that one needs to be very careful about which kind of Christian one shares either one’s difficulties or one’s aspirations with. Too many Christians labour under the illusion that we are supposed to have all the answers to anybody’s struggles and that therefore, by some unknown physics, we do. The practical upshot is that if you try and discuss a problem with a Christian of this ilk, they will reduce your problem down to something that they can comfortably solve in a single sentence. In other words, they will treat you like a baby, an idiot or a reprobate.

    And anybody reading this may rest assured that it gave me no joy at all to write the above. Rather like Paul always gravitated (on principle) first towards his fellow-Jews when preaching the gospel in a new region, Lesley and I cannot shed the obligation to go first to our fellow believers when looking for people to stand and fight alongside us. (Metaphorically, I hasten to add.) But in practice, it’s like looking for hen’s teeth. 99 times out of 10, a Christian will attempt to counsel or advise – or parent – us.

  51. Gram3 wrote:

    I wish that the people who don’t get it could learn to discern the difference between skepticism born of experience and a lack of grace. There is a difference, and Jesus called us to be both gentle as doves *and* wise as serpents.

    I agree with what you have said. Permit me to chime in my two cents here.

    This could be a whole but short topic of conversation. First, I checked out bible-hub and I do not see gentle used to describe the doves in this reference. I see harmless and innocent and guileless used, but not gentle. This sounds picky, but I am trying to work up onto something here. There seems to be an idea somewhere that christians should always be vague and mealy mouthed and would never hurt anybody’s feelings for any reason. As if the bible said believe on the lord jesus christ and thou shalt be nice. Being nice when nice is indicated is a good idea, for everybody not just christians. But people can and do come along and say, and we see a lot of this any more, that one must never say anything at which someone might take offense. So if you believe something that might push somebody out of shape then you have to not say it. They can say what they think but the christian must not. Or if somebody asks you something and the real answer is not what they want to hear and they would be offended, then you must be evasive or whatever it takes to avoid being offensive.

    So I want to say two things. At one end of the spectrum are those who seem to live to be offensive and think somehow that they are doing god a favor by being obnoxious. At the other end of the spectrum are those who let the building burn down and when all that is left is a pile of ashes they say “well, I did notice some smoke early on but I didn’t want to say anything.” I think these are both wrong. And I think that we must not let ourselves end up at either extreme like that.

    For me “you are not being nice to me” may be a legitimate complaint or it may be an attempt at manipulation, and that is one place where wise as the serpent is needed.


  52. PREDICTIONS

    Actually, I think most themes I would predict as issues, you’ve already covered in your list of predictions, plus themes that are underneath the posts that commenter interaction indicated as their main interests. I would pull out three clusters of issues just for emphasis. These are themes that I believe have been increasing in awareness for a few years, and where we’ve perhaps hit a “tipping point,” not just a “turning point.”

    (1) I think there is more systems-oriented thinking going on, so I predict in the next five years increased push-back on the informal associations and generic “Christian community” leaders who haven’t had so much accountability for how they have propped up abusive leaders through their speaking and their silence, and by their actions and inactions.

    (2) This is part of a larger trend of people getting fed up, speaking up, giving up, and/or getting out. I would not be surprised to begin seeing more mega-collapses as people pull out their funds and themselves as evidences mounts of pastoral abuse, organizational misdirection, and non-profit fraud. As part of this, we could well see increase reporting to police and other civil authorities of ministers whose actions fail to comply with local, state, federal, and regulatory agency laws. If they won’t obey from their conscience these civil codes as a matter of moral-ethical mandates given to us in Scripture as disciples, then perhaps fear of judgment and punishment will inspire compliance, as Romans 13:1-7 talks about.

    (3) I’m also wondering if there’s going to be some significant push-back/backlash against church planting programs that typically rely on 20-/30-somethings — because that’s mostly what it’s been since the mid-1990s. How much of what turns out to be harmful comes mostly from men, who are still relatively short on life experience, who are put in CEO-type roles, without the wisdom or skills or spiritual gifts to accomplish that, and may be highly susceptible to “programs” that give them church-in-a-box, or membership-in-a-covenant templates? I think this is a crucial concern interwoven into a lot of the key issues looked at in 2014.

    PROJECTS

    There are two projects I “hope” will happen. But instead of these being just predictions based on analysis of what seems to be on the horizon, I think these are likely things I’m called to help bring into being. So, if others don’t necessarily see them as needs, I get that. Sometimes the people who see particular needs are the ones being called to do something about them. Anyway, here are two projects I see as needs to help survivor communities move toward more prevention work in addition to the ongoing needs for intervention, support, and advocacy:

    (1) Some kind of solid, real, and objective type of “certification” process for ministries, churches, and other Christian non-profits to evaluate how transparent and accountable they are in relation to genuine benchmarks that embody health and remove abuse. (I don’t see how ECFA will ever regain trust after this past year.)

    (2) Some kind of training resources to help ministry leaders and volunteers identify warning signs of abuse and do something to intercept or prevent the problems before they become ingrained. G.R.A.C.E has catalyzed a team of experts to do this for child sexual abuse; something like that is needed for spiritual abuse.

    2014 was an amazing year for abuse survivor communities, though I suspect it was also utterly draining for many of us when so much of the news was triggering. As best I can see, 2015 will likely be on that same trajectory. What’s happened has been difficult, but it’s contributed to making headway for changing the course of the future …

  53. dee wrote:

    Unfortunately, JD has been causing quite a bit of conflict on Twitter. I am quite concerned about his *trajectory.*
    https://twitter.com/fbc_jd

    That is very sad but not unexpected if the underlying issues are not faced squarely and without fear. Words do not suffice for the long term and do not change character. So the problem will continue, even if it does so in a different form. I don’t do Twitter so I’m not familiar with what is going on with J.D. If he is reading this I pray he will revisit that post that Dave AA brought up. I think even his worst critics would rejoice to see real and lasting change because he is young and has the opportunity to be a blessing to many. But the way he chooses to spend his life is his, Calvinism or not.

  54. Dave A A wrote:

    as I read the comments, I don’t see any others nearly so *disagreeable* as Gram3’s prior ones– yet she left off with thanks and affirmation.

    Well, I try not to be disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable. I wish that Rob had said in his first comment what he said in his last comment. Oddly enough, what Rob said in his last comment was quite similar in substance to what I wrote to J.D. early in the thread.

    I guess I became accustomed to having my ideas challenged which was pretty much the universal experience of young people of several decades ago. I was blessed by many older people who showed me that I was not the one the world had been waiting for and many of my ideas did not descend from heaven directly to me.

    Today, young people have a voice that exceeds their wisdom gained from life experience and they are vulnerable to being used by older men with agendas. By speaking mostly to those who already are in agreement, they gain the false assurance that their ideas are correct and unassailable. What a waste of youthful energy and passion.

  55. Nancy wrote:

    I checked out bible-hub and I do not see gentle used to describe the doves in this reference. I see harmless and innocent and guileless used, but not gentle. This sounds picky, but I am trying to work up onto something here.

    That’s not being picky. That’s checking the accuracy of my memory and my paraphrase which is not so perfect! I think the point you made is a big problem in the church, and it is a recipe for staying in our immaturity. I’ve seen some metaphorical houses burn down in the church, and you captured the reaction of some very accurately. They are the ones who value their own comfort and affirmation more than the truth.

  56. Nancy wrote:
    ….First, I checked out bible-hub and I do not see gentle used to describe the doves in this reference. I see harmless and innocent and guileless used, but not gentle. This sounds picky, but I am trying to work up onto something here….

    @Nancy,

    I found several translations of the Bible online that use the term “gentle”.
    Matthew 10:16: “I am sending you out like sheep with wolves all around you. Be wise like snakes and gentle like doves.”

  57. @ Rob:

    I’m glad you left this comment. Please do not leave the faith because of the way I or others responded to you. None of us is the point of the church. I am an advocate of grace. But the grace in Christianity has come at a great price, and is not to be thrown about as if it were some cheap thing. There are many of us who have received zero grace from those in the neighborhood where J.D. is influential. We have received accusation, judgment, and condemnation. In my case because I am an uppity woman. Our lives are just as important as his, and we are just as entitled to the grace Jesus bought as he is. Will you be an advocate for grace for us, too?

    Your last comment on that thread was very good. You should know that the comment I left for J.D. was made late at night as I was contemplating the damage done to me personally–physically, emotionally, and spiritually–by men and the doctrines of men who are firmly in J.D.’s camp. It was God’s grace alone that enabled me to write anything to J.D. other than something like the contempt I have received from men like him. Like others, I hope that his life will vindicate his words of repentance.

  58. dee wrote:

    WOW!!!!! You are officially invited to join the TWW staff. That is some fascinating stuff. I have already put it into a pending post

    Dee,

    I’m truly honored! TWW is doing a wonderful job of speaking up for the voiceless, the victims of spiritual abuse. A lot of non-Christians find this site a huge relief. They thought we were all lemmings. This gives them hope.

    -Janey

  59. mirele wrote:

    I would copy those articles because I’m thinking 9 Marks will figure out a way to deep-six them from the Wayback Machine.

    Mirele,

    I’ve got screen captures of the articles.

    -Janey

  60. @ Daisy:

    Daisy, I hear your confusion, disappointment, and pain. I admit to experiencing many of the same emotions and observations myself.

    Once when I was expressing these emotions to a friend (who is not a Christian btw), she simply told me to “lower your expectations” and you won’t be so disappointed in the behavior and actions of others. I found that to be helpful after many years since she told me that.

    Christians are people who are flawed. Some are immature in the faith. Some are opinionated and narrow-minded. Others have made the NT into a book of laws rather than a book that brings freedom from whatever binds us. Some are free in one area; others have been freed from 10. We cover a wide spectrum in the journey to selfless love, compassion, understanding, etc.

    Would it be helpful to imagine some believers as “first graders” and others as “college graduates” in their growth as Jesus would have us grow in His image? And perhaps lower your expectation? ….smile…

    Saying a prayer for you and sending a virtual hug.

    I pray I haven’t sounded too “preachy.” Just empathizing with what you’re going through and sharing what I hope might be of help as it was for me.

  61. Ted wrote:

    Your predictions resemble the famous essay by Michael Spencer (the original internet monk) entitled “The Coming Evangelical Collapse”

    That is a great essay. I read it the first time around. I miss Michael’s articles. Although I do like the folks who have kept the website going and write for it now.

  62. Christopher Lake wrote:

    Michaela, I’m truly sorry to hear about your experiences at your former church. Your trials make mine seem very small. After writing my review of CHBC, I thought that, perhaps, I should have mentioned the fact that C.J. Mahaney had gone there, for a time, while he was still in a very problematic situation re:Covenant Life Church, but if I *had* mentioned that, I think it’s quite possible that my review would have been taken down very quickly.

    Even as it is, it may not stay up on Yelp and/or Facebook for a long time, but I felt that I had to speak the truth from my experiences with the leaders and congregation. As I wrote in my review, not all of my friends there have shunned me… A few courageous souls continue to interact with me, and in a friendly way too, but most have remained silent.

    Thanks, Christopher, for your kind words to me. You probably know – if you recently left Capitol Hill Baptist – some of my former church members from my church in Silicon Valley who moved back East and joined that church.

    I think ALL of our experiences of being spiritually abused are terrible! My recent excommunication and shunning from my Silicon Valley church, for taking a moral stand, is certainly terrible. But at the same time, I feel like I can breathe. I felt like in that church I was becoming some kind of Stepford Wife. I mean…we’re in America but in that church women were to have no say. I just got tired of it and the whole patriarchy thing (“obey” and “submit”), adults-as-idiots form of church governance with power concentrated in the hands of a few. I came to worship Jesus not these mortal men with these control issues who are just insufferable.

  63. Michaela wrote:

    . But at the same time, I feel like I can breathe. I felt like in that church I was becoming some kind of Stepford Wife. I mean…we’re in America but in that church women were to have no say. I just got tired of it and the whole patriarchy thing (“obey” and “submit”), adults-as-idiots form of church governance with power concentrated in the hands of a few. I came to worship Jesus not these mortal men with these control issues who are just insufferable.

    This sounds very familiar, and I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one. One of the first things I said about our painful departure was, “I can breathe. I’m free.” One of the next things that came to mind was the question of why these men make such a big deal out of something that, at best, is read into the text? Why is it so crucial to keep the women in their roles that are nowhere described, much less prescribed, in the Bible? How can people with any knowledge at all about the text believe and preach what is not there?

    I am curious whether you believe that much of the stuff we ran into is templated? Have others you know had the exact same experiences, even down to the words spoken? I know that some of the things I’ve read from SGM survivors as well as from Todd Wilhelm really sounds familiar, too.

  64. @ Michaela:
    Were you using Bible Gateway? Must admit I’m not familiar with the bible-hub site that Nancy mentioned, but i guess i need to take a look.

  65. Gram3 wrote:

    This sounds very familiar, and I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one. One of the first things I said about our painful departure was, “I can breathe. I’m free.” One of the next things that came to mind was the question of why these men make such a big deal out of something that, at best, is read into the text?….
    I am curious whether you believe that much of the stuff we ran into is templated?.

    @Gram 3,

    As we have experienced, people will always find verses from the Bible to justify their theological convictions and the culture that they espouse. My former pastor was a Masters’ Seminary graduate (headed by the conservative John MacArthur of Grace Community Church in Southern California). My former pastor was also a follower of Mark Dever/9 Marks in Washington, D.C.

    I don’t know the entire history of this oppressive, demeaning belief system that I experienced at this Silicon Valley church and where it comes from. In just a little research that I’ve done, I discovered that some of my former church’s beliefs are from the 1970’s shepherding movement whose founders later apologized for its abuses and un-Biblical control of members’ lives. The shepherding movement went underground and has come back with new names. Then there’s the influences of the Patriarchy Movement, Bill Gothard, and the homeschooling movement.

    There’s the books about spiritual abuse too that explain some of the abuses that we’ve faced:
    *The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse by David Johnson and Jeff Van Vonderen
    (both pastors)
    *Churches That Abuse by Ronald Enroth (he points out that fundamentally they are basically all the same and he’s done so much research he can tell people their stories before they can)
    Mr. Enroth has made his book available for free in electronic form here: http://www.ccel.us/churches.toc.html

    *Recovering from Churches That Abuse, also by Ronald Enroth
    *Healing Spiritual Abuse: How to Break Free From Bad Church Experiences by Ken Blue (a pastor)
    *Toxic Faith by Stephen Arteburn and Jack Felton

    Honestly, I am trying to figure out the red flags that I missed. I had, previously, been in a large mega church that I was invited to by a friend. I just…didn’t like it. The anonymity. I left. I just had a bad feeling about the place. Months later the senior pastor had to step down due to an affair. They’ve gone through several other pastors since then.

    I thought with this church, smaller (100 people or so) that it would be solid. After all they did expositional preaching, the senior pastor knew Greek and Hebrew, they seemed tighter knit on so many fronts. But then there was this darker side…the “obey” and “submit” part (to their authority, blindly), to men (as husbands). And I could never accept it. It’s one thing for there to be give and take in relationships. It’s quite another to be told that you as a woman will obey and submit.

    And they even did it to men at my church. They kicked out, excommunicated, and ordered to be shunned one of Pastor John MacArthur’s good friends, a doctor who has been married for 40+ years. Why? The doctor questioned the pastors/elders about how they were leading the church and Biblical error.

  66. numo wrote:

    @ Michaela:
    Were you using Bible Gateway? Must admit I’m not familiar with the bible-hub site that Nancy mentioned, but i guess i need to take a look.

    @Numo,
    Regrets, I can’t remember which website I used. I just typed in the verse with those words and it came up with several Biblical translations.

  67. numo wrote:

    @ Michaela:
    I wondered, if only because Bible Gateway has so many digferent translation. You might like it, I’m thinking.

    Yes, it’s a good website, Numo. Sometimes when I am doing a search…I just type in the phrase to a search engine and get the results. Saves time.

  68. Michaela wrote:

    And they even did it to men at my church. They kicked out, excommunicated, and ordered to be shunned one of Pastor John MacArthur’s good friends, a doctor who has been married for 40+ years. Why? The doctor questioned the pastors/elders about how they were leading the church and Biblical error.

    That’s pretty blatant and arrogant, and a few years ago it might have totally surprised me. It sounds like you and Doug had a similar experience with a MacArthurite. I’ve mostly run into Mohlerites or Mahaneyites or Deverites. But I think that the common thread is that authority is vested in humans rather than in Christ. Once that is allowed, then it is only a matter of how the abuse will manifest.

    The fundamental problem, I think, is that some people think they are put into a superior position of power due to their gender or their theological training or both. It is a religion that baptizes using ones power over others for one’s own purposes while pretending it is for the good of the other person who is usually female. I think there are some deep insecurities under the surface of these guys that are masked by doctrines of spiritual authority. I’m still trying to figure out if the young ones really believe it and are being used by the older men or if the younger guys know exactly what they are doing to people and don’t care.

    I remember the shepherding movement and Gothard when they were the newest thing. It seems like the remarketed shepherding we have experienced is a fusion of those with high Calvinism. If only we could learn from the past…

  69. Michaela wrote:

    Honestly, I am trying to figure out the red flags that I missed.

    I totally know that feeling. For me it was wanting to believe the best and denying the importance of little things until they could not be ignored any longer. Others I know from the same church stay there even though they *know* there are big problems and will even talk about the problems. But they are unwilling to walk away, some of them from the only church they have known for decades until this current poison came along. It is very sad.

  70. Back to the OP: Deebs, what is the reason for believing that the SGM lawsuit will be back in some form? If you can say, that is. Are the allegations from VA still live?

    I agree that the damage from Driscoll and Acts29 will be with us for a long time. Perhaps even a generation in one form or another. I do believe that there are a lot of 20-40 year-old women who are going to wake up and be very upset that they were conned. I pray that there will be churches for them and that their marriages will survive the toxic brew they and their male counterparts have been swallowing.

    The Piper prediction is classic! I think he will slip further into his “odd” behavior patterns since he is immune from correction both internally and externally. All of us need that, but none dare call him on his weirdness. He is the buck nekkid Emperor of the fundy wing of Evangelicalism.

    Thanks for doing a great job these past few years. I believe I started reading TWW due to SGM, but it might have been Driscoll. I must say that I did not foresee such a quick downfall for Driscoll, being the realist that I am. I’m looking forward to the new year and what you have planned.

  71. Gram3 wrote:

    Michaela wrote:
    And they even did it to men at my church. They kicked out, excommunicated, and ordered to be shunned one of Pastor John MacArthur’s good friends, a doctor who has been married for 40+ years. Why? The doctor questioned the pastors/elders about how they were leading the church and Biblical error.

    That’s pretty blatant and arrogant, and a few years ago it might have totally surprised me. It sounds like you and Doug had a similar experience with a MacArthurite. I’ve mostly run into Mohlerites or Mahaneyites or Deverites….
    The fundamental problem, I think, is that some people think they are put into a superior position of power due to their gender or their theological training or both. It is a religion that baptizes using ones power over others for one’s own purposes while pretending it is for the good of the other person who is usually female. I think there are some deep insecurities under the surface of these guys that are masked by doctrines of spiritual authority. I’m still trying to figure out if the young ones really believe it and are being used by the older men or if the younger guys know exactly what they are doing to people and don’t care.…

    @Gram 3,

    Yes, it was very arrogant of the senior pastor at my former church to excommunicate and order that the godly doctor be shunned. (That doctor had also, among his many kindnesses toward our church, arranged for our senior pastor to join the doctor and Pastor John MacArthur on a trip to North Carolina for a personal visit with the Rev. Billy Graham at Rev. Graham’s North Carolina log cabin home. The doctor paid for our senior pastor’s airfare and expenses! And the thanks the good doctor gets…is stabbed in the back and his name dragged through the mud. I was so angry the day the doctor was excommunicated, I almost got up and walked out. In my head I was screaming at the senior pastor, “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!”

    The books on spiritual abuse all say that where there’s insecurity (and there always is in these leaders) that there is spiritual abuse. And these closed systems lead to other kinds of abuse, sexual abuse (of children and adults, domestic violence, and financial abuses).

    I am in Northern California. Are you back East? I’m not in Dever, Mohler, or Mahaney territory.

    As to the younger crowd and why they tolerate this here are some of my theories:
    *many of them come to church with their friends and they were evangelized by churches at their campuses (we had many students from Stanford; lots of students too from UCLA who moved here to work as engineers and went to church together in SoCal)
    *respect for authority;
    *respect for sound teaching/intellectualism
    *lack of risk-taking (including standing up for what is wrong)
    *loss of peers if they change churches
    *having to make a change (a hassle)
    *not wanting to get involved
    *inexperience
    *abusive backgrounds, possibly, and that it all seems familiar
    *fear of being punished in public (although other people, Asians who left my church and some professionals, said they did not like the shunnings and public humiliation and for them that was the straw that made them look for a new church)

    I forgot to mention that many of these traditions that I’ve experienced may come from the Southern Baptists, even though my church was an independent. And apparently there are many abuses in independent churches because of the lack of oversight and accountability, but let’s face it abuses can happen in any type of religious structure.

    At my former church only men were permitted to head the clean-up teams after the lunch (fellowship meal). The pastors/elders put one of their friends, a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List, in charge of a clean-up team. A guy with that kind of record can serve on this team, people are supposed to respect him (and don’t know his past), and yet a godly woman can’t serve in even that capacity! Puuuuhhhhhlsssssseeeee!

  72. Gram3 wrote:
    I agree that the damage from Driscoll and Acts29 will be with us for a long time. I must say that I did not foresee such a quick downfall for Driscoll, being the realist that I am. I’m looking forward to the new year and what you have planned.

    Gram 3,

    I must say that you have underestimated the power of prayer! I was personally praying for the Lord to shut down Mars Hill and Driscoll after the horrible damage that was done to Paul and Jonna Petry (the pastor/elder who was fired and ordered shunned along with his family for his standing on the Biblical principals of how a church should be led) and the enormous damage done to others (abuse, shunnings, etc.).

  73. Gram3 wrote:

    Michaela wrote:

    Honestly, I am trying to figure out the red flags that I missed.

    I totally know that feeling. For me it was wanting to believe the best and denying the importance of little things until they could not be ignored any longer. Others I know from the same church stay there even though they *know* there are big problems and will even talk about the problems. But they are unwilling to walk away, some of them from the only church they have known for decades until this current poison came along. It is very sad.

    @Gram 3,

    One woman that I know at my former church (she’s married and well-to-do) has known our pastor for 16 years and he’s screamed at her and she’s said she’s left many “counseling meetings” in tears and that he’s done that for decades. Not just to me and other women recently. But for a long time. I wonder about her: “OK, why did you stay? Why did your husband put up with a pastor screaming at his wife?” I mean…the allegiance to this sick system boggles the mind.

  74. Michaela wrote:

    I must say that you have underestimated the power of prayer!

    No doubt that is correct. But in fairness to my inner realist, the Lord has seen fit to leave a lot of junk in the church for a long time despite the prayers of his people. He has remarkable patience with us. I remember the by-law changes at Mars Hill and could not believe that the leaders of the YRR were not sounding the alarm about Driscoll. He was obviously (to me) a false shepherd, but I got nowhere with any criticism of him or Mahaney. These guys know how to protect their own.

    Also that occurred during an extremely difficult time for me. Praying for much of anything other than emotional and physical survival just did not seem to be possible. That’s why I have a lot of sympathy for people who are struggling emotionally, physically, and spiritually. I’ve been there and back, by God’s grace and mercy to me. I have not been shunned as you were, and that must be very, very painful. I oddly don’t feel anything but relief for myself from the madness and sadness for those who are still captive to this false and abusive doctrine of authoritarianism.

  75. ‘May 2015 be a year in which we see a continuing effort to address entrenched problems in our churches. May God have mercy on the congregation which turns a cold and/or blind eye to abuse’.

    One of my favourite quotes is from William Wilberforce, abolitionist: “You may choose to look the other way but you can never say again that you did not know.”
    ― William Wilberforce

  76. @ Rhonda Aubert:

    Like that quote, Rhonda! One of my own favourites (which sits rather nicely alongside it, I think) is from Bishop Helder Camara:

    When I give food to the poor, people call me a saint. But when I ask why they are poor, people call me a communist.

    It’s one thing to help “victims” (a term that can be overused, insofar as it’s potentially demeaning) find “healing” (another term that can be overused, insofar as “healing” is no substitute for justice). It’s another to call attention to the misdeeds of the wolves who attacked them.

  77. Gram3 wrote:

    I remember the shepherding movement and Gothard when they were the newest thing. It seems like the remarketed shepherding we have experienced is a fusion of those with high Calvinism. If only we could learn from the past…

    That is what it looks like to me, also. There are some advantages to having been around for a while.

  78. Gram3 wrote:

    I remember the shepherding movement and Gothard when they were the newest thing. It seems like the remarketed shepherding we have experienced is a fusion of those with high Calvinism. If only we could learn from the past…

    That's one of the reasons why we blog. I have to admit that I didn't know anything about shepherding until I began researching it around the time we launched TWW. I had a elderly friend who knew A LOT about the Fort Lauderdale Five and their repentance.  I think she knew Bob Mumford personally, but she has since passed away. 

    Hopefully, our posts on topics such as shepherding that will help others educate themselves on these destructive groups/movements.

  79. Michaela wrote:

    I was so angry the day the doctor was excommunicated, I almost got up and walked out.

    Imagine a church where the pastor ordered someone ejected and shunned, and half the congregation got up and said ‘fine, we quit.’ The emperor really has no clothes, and people need to un-cloud their thinking on these matters enough to be able to call him on it…

    Yes, I know it’s hard, but IMO that’s the only solution to this issue.

  80. __

    “Clouds Without Rain?”

    “We would love for you, our dear readers, to share your own predictions. We plan to go back and review them at year end”. ~ Dee

    hmmm…

    Dee, Deb, 

    Hey,

        I predict that TWW will continue presenting a program to the christian churches encouraging them ‘to include a “visible” rider in their by-laws concerning mandatory perp reporting’.

    (bump)

    It is my ‘hope’ that kind folk will be strongly encouraged ‘not’ to financially support any 501(c)3 religious organization unless they have this type of policy ‘firmly’ in place.

    What?

    Without such a policy in place, a 501(c)3  pastoral person feeds on ashes; his deluded heart will mislead him; he cannot even save himself much less others. Is not this ‘religious’ thing in his right hand become a lie?

    (sadface)

    Sopy

  81. @ Michaela:

    Michaela — I live where you do — in the interest of freedom and the ability to breath, can you shed light on which church this is?

  82.   __

    “LET MY PEOPLE…GO?”

    *

    Michaela 

    “I agree that the damage from Driscoll and Acts29 will be with us for a long time. I must say that I did not foresee such a quick downfall for Driscoll, being the realist that I am. ” ~Gram 3

    “I must say that you have underestimated the power of prayer! I was personally praying for the Lord to shut down Mars Hill and Driscoll after the horrible damage that was done to Paul and Jonna Petry (the pastor/elder who was fired and ordered shunned along with his family for his standing on the Biblical principals of how a church should be led) and the enormous damage done to others (abuse, shunnings, etc.). ~Michaela

    *

    MerkyD. Has apparently fallen behind the ‘bus wheels’ he set for others.   

    (bump, bump)

    God answers prayers of His people,

    Amen!

    Bricks without straw…HA!

    (grin)

    I have indeed seen the oppression of my people in Marzhil. I have heard their
    groaning and have come down to set them free..

    ***

     thank-you Jesus!

    (smiley face goes here)

    Sopy

  83. @ Michaela:

    As a youngish person who used to be a Navigator in college (oh the stories. over all, a great program at MY school but things always got awkward when we left our bubble for interschool events), let me see if I can add my 2 cents.

    For one thing, people earlier in their faith journeys have a stronger tendency toward legalism. You learn about God and then you wanna know the rules. I had a pastor say that he’d always seen this progression. Legalism-Some giant inexplicable tragedy that inevitably happens in everyone’s life at some point- either fall away from the church or fall away from legalism. Most young people (especially the young men, but I’m going to get into that) just haven’t had that crisis yet. So they haven’t had any reason to *question* legalism because things are going well or if they aren’t going well, they know it’s because of their sin and not Sin (the capitalization suggests the fallen nature of our world). More young people are drawn to legalistic churches where they excommunicate people because more young people are legalistic.

    Second, young people are… special. Or at least, we like to *think* we’re special. By virtue of our age and hormones and energy and whatnot, we’re driven to Do Great Things! God planned this precisely, I’m sure, and society really benefits on the whole. This is the age where you make Great Sacrifices and Accomplish Things. We’re used as soldiers not only because we’re healthier and in better shape: it fits into where we are in our heads.

    Young people have this drive to make a name for ourselves. And these churches provide that. I mean, especially for the men. Imagine. You’re 19 years old and a young man growing up in this culture. There are no great coming of age rituals. You can’t just pick up a lance and a suit of armor and go around being a knight, so you really aren’t sure what “Manhood” means. BUT you want to *be* something! And so someone tells you “Oh yes, You ARE something. You are a leader! You are a God-ordained leader and the things you say are important and worth listening to *by virtue of your gender* because that is how God said it would be.” They’re gonna jump on that.

    In my experience, the rationale is a bit different for women. After all, didn’t I just say that young people want to be important and frankly these types of churches do not see women as important? Girls in our culture, inside and out of Christianity, are treated like accessories to men. So in some ways, they’re conditioned to swallow the nonsense these churches spew from the cradle. I didn’t decide to sleep around based on seeing photoshopped models on Cosmo covers, but when someone said “Godly women do this and this and this..” Well, I knew that Godly women didn’t do what Cosmo suggests, so I guess we do that instead. But even then, we didn’t buy it fully. We nodded and rolled our eyes and planned on doing exactly that. But, women are not the main enforcers of female gender roles. and that’s where things get depressing.

    When I was 19 and caught up in all that (and I was at an Ivy League school, so they were really treading carefully on what women could do, because um.. no), the women of the group essentially staged a rebellion against the men. We were talking and realized that the guys did all the cool stuff, alone, and we were basically left with no one. The head of our group was male and obviously favored him, while the highest ranking female staffer was just a volunteer (and therefore had a life of her own, which we respected, but seriously….) And we were sick of “girls’ days” we wanted to just hang out. Also, tired of being treated like girlfriends to be. So, we told them “Stop treating us like women first and humans second. In Christ there is neither male nor female and we are sick of being defined by our body parts.”

    They were enraged. They said we were lumping them in with the frat guys who slip roofies to girls at parties and were frothing at the mouth in indignation. They were the good guys and we weren’t giving them any credit! “God made you a woman! Why are you rebelling against that? I’ve got no problem being treated as a man first, because I am a man!” They were completely ignorant. Ignorant and blind. No idea that the reason they have no problem being treated like men is that being a man has never kept them from doing a cool thing, that man=human and woman=eh, slightly less.

    And we backed down. Because we’re heterosexual and they are the guys and in the end, we did belong to them. Who else would we reach out for? Who else would we date? And, we ARE nothing but wives-in-waiting at the church- non-entities until we get a man and a pair of rings, and then only half-entities until the baby comes. Definitely couldn’t have us yoking ourselves to the non-believers we met in women’s studies classes who actually understood that when someone tells you their lived-in experience, you believe them. And if you’re a survivor of sexual violence, you keep that to yourself, because how could they believe you if you told them it was a church kid, and not a frat guy? So slowly, your soul dies, because it occurs to you that you have to choose between your faith and having a partner who treats you like an equal. You read all those Christian books about being a princess and you make yourself small to fit into that world, because that’s what women do, they take up less space, and anyway, you already feel small. You feel small because of the things you’ve already experienced, the micro-and-macroaggressions of your life, so what’s a bit more contracting.

    And that’s why young women join.

  84. @ Caitlin:

    We all so desperately yearn to be significant. Yet we are deceived and sell our true significance in Christ for the faux significance these groups offer. I think you are exactly right about how young people think. I can still remember, and sometimes blush, at my self-importance and certainty.

    Wouldn’t it be great if we could really be a community and benefit mutually from the vigor and energy and passion of youth and the wisdom and steadiness and experience spectrum of the old? What if half of the church were not pigeon-holed as “helpers” and auxiliary members of the Body but were freed up to minister as the Holy Spirit has gifted them?

    I agree that the men are the primary formal enforcers of this system, but I think the women are the primary informal enforcers. The women I know who are caught up in this are actually caught up in a worldly competition to see who can submit the most or the most graciously or paste on the best smile. I remember sitting in church and observing the women interact with their husbands. There was not the real joy that comes from being one with another person. In unguarded moments, there was a sadness and exhaustion. The system is set up so that women can only be “successful” and gain worth by being “less than” a man and playing by the rules. Or as you put it, but taking up less space physically, emotionally, and intellectually.

    It reminds me so much of the days of Jim Crow, and I wonder if part of the problem is that the younger folks have no memory of how certain people were considered “less than” and consigned to a “role” in the social fabric and how wrong that was and is. I know that when I bring up that comparison, the younger folks have no real concept of what I’m talking about and just say that there is no comparison between the two. Yet they cannot explain reasonably why they believe that is so. I do believe there is a great deception in the church on this point among others.

    Thought experiment: What if this afternoon, every female physician and scientist and engineer were removed from their vocation. The results for our society would be disastrous. That is why I believe the Gendered Gospel Glitterati do not extend their doctrines into the public sphere. Yet why is it not obvious that the opportunity cost of keeping women effectively silent in the church is not just as great as the opportunity cost of keeping women out of vocations in the public secular sphere? It seems to me they are stuck in a zero-sum paradigm of a power struggle rather than the win-win of mutual love and respect between equals who truly regard one another as equals. It is very sad to see God’s design corrupted by humans baptizing sinful worldliness and calling it Biblical manhood and womanhood.

  85. @ Caitlin:
    Thank you for adding your voice. You know, I was raised by two parents who both have more than one degree, and as a result certain progressive aspects were just inherent in our upbringing (despite my mother having a very traditional stay-at-home role raising nine children). One of these was the idea that women and men are equal – strengthened by the success of the women in the family. I remember as a young man (eight, I think) being shocked reading Ian Fleming – not shocked by the atrocious writing (although I should have been), but by the way in which he depicted women, and they way in which they were treated. I remember in one novel (Goldfinger, I think) Bond tells a female stranger to do something, and Fleming describes it as a “master/slave” communication (or something like that, it has been a while). Anyway, for those of us who grew up assuming women were, you know, fully capable humans, it can be jarring to come to terms with the bias that is out there.

  86. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Michaela:

    Michaela — I live where you do — in the interest of freedom and the ability to breath, can you shed light on which church this is?

    My former church is Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley which is located in Sunnyvale, CA and rents from the Seventh Day Adventists. GBFSV practices authoritarianism, patriarchy, excommunication/shunning, that incompetent form of Biblical counseling that’s been discussed here and elsewhere (the pastors/elders have no training and can’t direct troubled people to professional therapists to resolve childhood issues, alcoholism, etc.).

  87. @ Gram3:

    Yes, I agree both with the Jim Crow comparisons (the idea that some people are essentially less than human, the idea that other people are inherently more valuable or more correct by virtue of appearance) and that women are the informal enforcers.

    Our little rebellion was a unified front of very good friends, but part of what we were upset about was how our churches (with a full range of ages) treated us. We were criticized on our clothes, we were treated with condescension (you’ll understand when you’re a wife, dear), we were treated with suspicion (all those nubile females, threatening our marriages) and at best, we were treated as children who were to be told what to do. And this was from the women. The older women, who’d bought into it. We were just young and naive enough to question why, and I’m sure if I had stuck on that path, I would be squishing the vitality of young women today.

    And yes, we were young. And yes, part of what was rankled was that youthful pride of the newly adult. BUT, young people are energetic and full of big ideas and bright optimism for a reason. We should be encouraging and guiding that enthusiasm (that age and responsibility will eventually wear out) rather than suppressing it.

    @Dr. Fundystan: my mom’s a doctor and my dad was a high school teacher until he retired. I grew up in the Methodist church, so the whole thing was very confusing. But, when you’re a young person trying to find your way and you know that the world’s way isn’t right but you aren’t sure what IS right, you grab on to whatever you can. It was ultimately though my parents’ relationship that inoculated me from the whole thing. Long story short, I was in a very serious relationship with one of those young men who were so horrified and he broke it off because I told him that I felt I ought to work and have my own career, so that I could support our family if I needed to. He envisioned at stay-at-home wife who would rely on him and thought I was not only going outside proper gender roles, but defying God by insisting on using my own talents to support us, rather than relying on God to provide. Or something. I knew that was baloney so I refused, so I wasn’t his wife. (He was engaged 8 months later to a girl not old enough to drink, and married 7 months after that).

  88. @ Caitlin:
    I was also involved with The Navigators in college, and I also went to an elite school in the Northeast. I bet we have similar stories, and, depending on when you graduated, I think we might know some of the same people.

    In my case, being involved with The Navigators made life at a large, somewhat overwhelming university in a big city friendly and manageable. Because I went to school in New York City, even though the campus director subscribed to traditional gender roles, it wasn’t too evident in the day-to-day ministry. I was in leadership from early on–partly, there were few men, and partly, this was New York, and, well, mutiny. For me, it was through The Navigators that was I introduced to the larger world of evangelicalism, and, at least in my case, because I hadn’t grown up in evangelicalism, things that should have raised red flags initially didn’t. This was partly because I could file them under the ‘well, I’m a new Christian, I have a lot to learn’, category, or because I didn’t see the more harmful ones until I was out of college and in different environments.

    I spent two years on staff with The Navs in Japan after college, and that was a huge wake up call. Not only was I navigating differences between the US and Japan, I was navigating cultural differences between the US and Japan Navs organizations. Even within the US, Navs ministries vary quite widely, but the particular staff team I was on was particularly rigid and hierarchical. From the reading I’ve done about the Shepherding movement, aspects of the Navs ministry structure seem very similar to that movement, and, in Japan, it was particularly toxic because Japanese society is already more hierarchical than American society. While I was in Japan a married female friend working for a Navs ministry in the US came to visit me, and we were comparing notes about navigating team dynamics. I told her that I felt like I could never just say no to something, and even if I had a reason, it probably wasn’t going to be good enough. She told me that in her case, she could ask her husband to make excuses for her, and they wouldn’t be questioned. But we agreed that I was stuck because I didn’t have a husband to advocate for me, and it was clear that I couldn’t say anything on my own. This anecdote still makes me angry–not at her, but because it now seems to encapsulate for me how bad my situation was, and also because it seems crazy to me now that we would have stayed part of these environments. (We have both since left staff).

    The thing is, it takes time, wisdom, and experience to be able to see some of these things, and sometimes bad or abusive situations don’t first appear that way. Instead, if you’re new to an institutional culture, it can be hard to see where the pitfalls are. And things may initially just look different, not wrong. It takes time for little things to add up so that they reach a breaking point. In my case, although I knew Japan was bad, it wasn’t until I was in grad school in Texas and going to a church at which all the women were married and, if parents, homeschooled their kids, that I really began to question everything. I knew that I didn’t want that life, but evangelical culture strongly implies that that’s what women do. I remember saying to a friend of mine from college that I didn’t feel like there was room for me in that culture, but it took me a long time to get there. I’ve spent the last 4 years analyzing and deconstructing these things.

  89. roebuck wrote:

    Michaela wrote:

    I was so angry the day the doctor was excommunicated, I almost got up and walked out.

    Imagine a church where the pastor ordered someone ejected and shunned, and half the congregation got up and said ‘fine, we quit.’ The emperor really has no clothes, and people need to un-cloud their thinking on these matters enough to be able to call him on it…

    Yes, I know it’s hard, but IMO that’s the only solution to this issue.

    Yes, not enabling evil would take away its power. But, sadly, there are so many people who ‘believe’ what the pastors/elders said about whomever it is that was ordered to be excommunicated/shunned. And none of those cases have anything to do with things like marital infidelity and being unrepentant. Any personality clashes and any questioning results in church discipline, being threatened, and being lied about.

  90. roebuck wrote:

    Michaela wrote:

    the allegiance to this sick system boggles the mind.

    It’s like an evil spell has bound people up…

    …or like carbon monoxide poisoning!

  91. Sopwith wrote:

    __

    “LET MY PEOPLE…GO?”

    *
    Very good, Sopy! Thanks for the laugh.
    Michaela

    “I agree that the damage from Driscoll and Acts29 will be with us for a long time. I must say that I did not foresee such a quick downfall for Driscoll, being the realist that I am. ” ~Gram 3

    “I must say that you have underestimated the power of prayer! I was personally praying for the Lord to shut down Mars Hill and Driscoll after the horrible damage that was done to Paul and Jonna Petry (the pastor/elder who was fired and ordered shunned along with his family for his standing on the Biblical principals of how a church should be led) and the enormous damage done to others (abuse, shunnings, etc.). ~Michaela

    *

    MerkyD. Has apparently fallen behind the ‘bus wheels’ he set for others.

    (bump, bump)

    God answers prayers of His people,

    Amen!
    ….

    I have indeed seen the oppression of my people in Marzhil. I have heard their
    groaning and have come down to set them free..

    ***

    thank-you Jesus!

    (smiley face goes here)

    Sopy

    @ Sopwith:

  92. Caitlin wrote:
    <blockquote

    For one thing, people earlier in their faith journeys have a stronger tendency toward legalism. You learn about God and then you wanna know the rules. I had a pastor say that he’d always seen this progression. Legalism-Some giant inexplicable tragedy that inevitably happens in everyone’s life at some point- either fall away from the church or fall away from legalism…. .

    In my experience, the rationale is a bit different for women….Girls in our culture, inside and out of Christianity, are treated like accessories to men. So in some ways, they’re conditioned to swallow the nonsense these churches spew from the cradle…We were talking and realized that the guys did all the cool stuff, alone, and we were basically left with no one… And we were sick of “girls’ days” we wanted to just hang out. Also, tired of being treated like girlfriends to be. So, we told them “Stop treating us like women first and humans second. In Christ there is neither male nor female and we are sick of being defined by our body parts.” And, we ARE nothing but wives-in-waiting at the church- non-entities until we get a man and a pair of rings, and then only half-entities until the baby comes. Definitely couldn’t have us yoking ourselves to the non-believers we met in women’s studies classes who actually understood that when someone tells you their lived-in experience, you believe them….You read all those Christian books about being a princess and you make yourself small to fit into that world, because that’s what women do, they take up less space, and anyway, you already feel small. You feel small because of the things you’ve already experienced, the micro-and-macroaggressions of your life, so what’s a bit more contracting.

    And that’s why young women join.

    @Caitlin,

    Wow! Thank you so much for adding to the conversation and explaining why young women join these fundie churches.

    I appreciate the time you took to write all of that and explain it!

  93. @ Megan:

    I stayed out of most of the regional stuff (I went to one winter conference, and we had fun, but it mainly underscored the differences between our campus and most of the Navs programs!)

    But, what really got me was that the permanent staff were men and the volunteers were women (or sometimes the men’s wives). It meant that the young men had people to devote themselves to “men’s” studies, but the women were basically on their own. The volunteers and wives did what they could, but it wasn’t their *job*.

    One of our male staff was also an alum of our school, so he had a greater awareness that the women here were expecting equal treatment. and he tried to get the women their own things too, but who could lead it? Ultimately it was senior women leading younger women, which is part of the Navs dynamic, but the older women were just as unled so….

    What I don’t know and am only guessing is the the source of the gender dynamic within the hierarchy. If there aren’t as many women staffers, you can’t send out as many. Of course, if there aren’t as many, maybe we should be asking why?

    Because, even (especially?) within a complementarian structure, women need women to mentor them!

  94. @ Michaela:

    You’re welcome! I’m sure that’s not the only reason, but it’s the path that I’ve seen well-educated, intelligent women walk time and again.

    To me, the biggest take away is that there needs to be a personal-morally-conservative feminism. One where you can say “I am still rejecting some of these sexual liberties because God doesn’t want that for us, but all of the rest of it, yes.”

    In college, it was a choice between “drink and party and sleep around/with your boyfriend” and “make yourself very small to fit into this Christian Woman Mold we have prepared for you.”

    BOTH felt like conforming. Both felt restricting. Both felt like I was dancing for male attention. BOTH were contrary to what God made me to be.

    The message that needs to get across is “You are not defined by men.” and neither side was saying it.

  95. Daisy wrote:

    How Christians are living and behaving (or not living out the faith they profess as the case may be) does make an impact on doubters. You may not feel as though it should, but it does.

    I agree. No-one expects perfection in this life (but that is no excuse for not aiming for it!), the ‘saints’ are often a pain in the neck. It is not so much that they do not live out the faith, it is when they don’t even try to or are content to be indifferent that can be so discouraging. (That’s what I’ve found anyway.)

    Can I suggest Psalm 1 as at least a bit of an antidote to all this? To ‘delight in the law of the Lord’ rather than delight in the church, which all too often falls very far short of what it’s creator intended. Sometimes I’ve found it necessary as well to take break from being over-concerned about what is wrong in the church, you can be overwhelmed with it if you are not careful. And of course not everything that calls itself church is church.

    It’s easy to foget that many normal churches for all their imperfections are trying their best, and fruit is being grown, unspectacular but real and lasting. There are also parts of the world where growth is robust, even if this doesn’t usually include the Anglo-Saxon church world, with its blatant mixture of saved and lost, and nominal ‘believers’ who are only concerned with what the faith will do for themelves, their feelings, their needs, self-esteem etc. etc.

    You’ve actually been a great encouragement to me, although you are having a tough time at the moment: you’ve kept going despite this, and I find it all too easy to get discouraged with a version of Christianity around me where young people in particular give up the moment the going gets rough or the church doesn’t endorse their view that the world owes them a living and it should all be blessing and endless, effortless fun without cost, or that happiness is a higher priority than holiness.

    I appreciate your honesty in not pretending that the faith never hurts.

    So I hope you will not give up!

  96. Not just the resources but in reading the staff bios your former church shows the problems well within evangelicalism. So you are going to bring people from the Chruch of the Nazarene denomination and place them in a Hyper-Cal church highly influenced by John MacArthur and Mark Dever. As they would say in the US Marine Corps…

    WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT!!! 😯

  97. Michaela…why does a church have such strong political commentary? I’m not complaining about people being conservative (after all I voted striaght Republican last election). But a church has no place recommending David Limbaugh, Thomas Sowell, etc… The church in this case has become a political agent, and advocating something that shouldn’t. My beef is not with conservative ideology, instead a church using its influence in such a questional way. This would be a good church for the People of the American Way to investigate.

  98. On the plus side on the sermons they have Ravi Zecharus who I respect and I don’t see them pushing Mr. Humility who leds his run away church plant in Louisville. Todd Whilhelm will be happy! 😀

  99. Caitlin wrote:

    BOTH felt like conforming. Both felt restricting. Both felt like I was dancing for male attention. BOTH were contrary to what God made me to be.

    The message that needs to get across is “You are not defined by men.” and neither side was saying it.

    Yes, that is so true. We are not to be conformed to this world, even to the molds that supposedly godly people make for us. We are to be conformed to Christ. When we find our identity and significance in him, these other things become, at best, distractions from that marvelous truth. We are in Christ. Not in Piper or Grudem or MacArthur or Mohler or Dever. They cannot be Christ, however much they might pretend so.

  100. Eagle wrote:

    The church in this case has become a political agent, and advocating something that shouldn’t.

    We’ve been talking about people being put off of church or even Christianity because of shabby behavior by purported Christians. And that indeed does have an effect – took me a long time to get over it, if indeed I have.

    But another issue that you bring up here is churches becoming political agents. It can get very uncomfortable and awkward… I, too, have no problem with a considered conservative approach to governing, but when you have to be a right-wing wack-job to maintain Christian cred, that is extremely off-putting.

    It works both ways, too – if someone learns that you are Christian, they more or less assume you subscribe to a very hard-right package of beliefs (wherever they personally fall on the political spectrum).

    I think it turns a lot of folks away from wanting to even label themselves as ‘Christian’. I’ll bet there are a lot of ‘closet Christians’…

  101. Eagle wrote:

    Michaela!!! Wow!!! I’ve heard of drinking the kool-aid, but after looking at the recommended resources I never knew it was possible to get intoxicated on kool aid!
    http://www.gbfsv.org/#!resources/caia

    Not sure if it is hilarious or delusional that CBMW is a recommended resource for evangelism. Right. I’m going to take my culturally Muslim friends who have rejected the male supremacy in Islam to a Christian church that teaches male supremacy. These guys are so deep into their own ideology that they can’t think straight.

  102. Eagle wrote:

    Not just the resources but in reading the staff bios your former church shows the problems well within evangelicalism. So you are going to bring people from the Chruch of the Nazarene denomination and place them in a Hyper-Cal church highly influenced by John MacArthur and Mark Dever. As they would say in the US Marine Corps…

    WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT!!!

    Exactly, Eagle! It’s the Salem Witch Trials all over again at that church. Just insufferable the amount of legalism, control, authoritarianism. When I didn’t want to be friends with a couple of toxic women (we have 12-step programs for people with their kind of problems)…the pastors/elders accused me of being “bitter”. There’s another “b” word that they don’t have and don’t permit anyone else to have: “Boundaries”.

    Truly, they even tried to dictate friendships. I will be cordial with all folks. But if they’re toxic, I will keep them at bay.

  103. Gram3 wrote:

    Yes, that is so true. We are not to be conformed to this world, even to the molds that supposedly godly people make for us. We are to be conformed to Christ. When we find our identity and significance in him, these other things become, at best, distractions from that marvelous truth. We are in Christ. Not in Piper or Grudem or MacArthur or Mohler or Dever. They cannot be Christ, however much they might pretend so.

    I was imprisoned in that for a while. It was partly a prison of someone else’s making via specific sins against me, it was partly a prison of the world’s making. I stayed because I didn’t realize I could leave. I had no desire to be there and got nothing out of it besides being able to avoid the disapproval of those who made the prison or who benefited from the prison’s existence. The prison made the guilt and shame of being a victim of sexual violence crippling. I was told to wait for rescue. Jesus would be the one to do it, but there’d be a man involved to because symbolism or something.

    It’s a weird kind of victimization. Because you ARE a victim but you should be ashamed of a victim. And you aren’t allowed to forget that you’re a victim, because you are the goal of some man’s story and if you don’t play that role, what is he supposed to do?

  104. Michaela wrote:

    I wonder about her: “OK, why did you stay? Why did your husband put up with a pastor screaming at his wife?” I mean…the allegiance to this sick system boggles the mind.

    I wonder too. What is the mechanism in the human psyche that allows us to ignore our moral compass within, along with what Lincoln called the better Angels of our nature? I think that the allegiance you describe is fear based, fear that if you don’t knuckle under and toe the mark, then you probably never were ‘saved’, and fit only for the fires of hell.

  105. Gram3 !
    http://www.gbfsv.org/#!resources/caia

    Not sure if it is hilarious or delusional that CBMW is a recommended resource for evangelism. Right. I’m going to take my culturally Muslim friends who have rejected the male supremacy in Islam to a Christian church that teaches male supremacy. These guys are so deep into their own ideology that they can’t think straight.

    @Gram 3,

    And now you understand why they got rid of me, excommunicated/shunned me. That was preceded by ‘serious meetings’ with the pastors/elders in which they repeatedly accused me of being destined for hell, factious, an unbeliever for raising the issues of child safety about a sex offender on Megan’s List in our midst (who is friends with the pastors/elders unbeknownst to me at the time).

    You’re probably seen my other posts about this. I told the pastors/elders that I had seen the sex offender (convicted for child porn) touch young children at church whose parents had no idea he was on Megan’s List. The senior pastor said it was no big deal as did the associate pastor. They said they permit him to touch their kids. The senior pastor then told me that if a church member father permits the sex offender to touch his children that the father’s word “is final” over his family and binding, that his wife is ‘to obey him’ and ‘to submit to his authority’. The other three elders agreed with the senior pastor.

    Uhhh, no. Dead wrong. Under California criminal law both mothers and fathers are legally required to protect their children. It’s a crime to NOT protect your children. If a father doesn’t have the brains to do it that doesn’t absolve the mother’s responsibility under law. Fathers and mothers can be arrested and prosecuted for child endangerment/neglect/abuse and get up to 1-year in jail or up to 6-years in state prison. Child Protective Services can take away their children and put them in the foster care system.

    I have never heard anything more idiotic in my life than what has spewed out of the mouthes of these pastors/elders.

    The senior pastor said that the convicted sex offender ‘said he was coming off Megan’s List.” Since when do you take a ‘felon’ who is a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List at ‘his word’ instead of taking ‘the word’ of said felon’s/sex offender’s supervising law enforcement agency, The Sheriff’s sex offender’s task force? The Sheriff’s called it “a total lie”, said he wasn’t coming off Megan’s List, and contacted the California Attorney General’s Office which runs Megan’s List in my state. The Attorney General told the Sheriff that everything the pastors/elders told me was “all lies”.

  106. Gram3 wrote:

    Eagle wrote:

    Michaela!!! Wow!!! I’ve heard of drinking the kool-aid, but after looking at the recommended resources I never knew it was possible to get intoxicated on kool aid!
    http://www.gbfsv.org/#!resources/caia

    Not sure if it is hilarious or delusional that CBMW is a recommended resource for evangelism. Right. I’m going to take my culturally Muslim friends who have rejected the male supremacy in Islam to a Christian church that teaches male supremacy. These guys are so deep into their own ideology that they can’t think straight.

    A Christian man from the UK commented on Julie Anne Smith’s Spiritual Sounding Board about this very thing about my church (male supremacy/patriarchy): that there seems to be no difference between this form of American Christianity and teachings of radical Islam. He was horrified!

  107. Eagle wrote:

    Michaela…why does a church have such strong political commentary? I’m not complaining about people being conservative (after all I voted striaght Republican last election). But a church has no place recommending David Limbaugh, Thomas Sowell, etc… The church in this case has become a political agent, and advocating something that shouldn’t. My beef is not with conservative ideology, instead a church using its influence in such a questional way. This would be a good church for the People of the American Way to investigate.

    Spot on, Eagle. I found that many people at that church buff and shine their legalism, hatred of others, with talk radio (which I can’t stand). Many of them talk frequently about politics, or groups of people that they don’t like, in a holier-than-thou way. I think to myself: “Take the log out of you own eye before taking the splinter out of someone else’s eye.”

    My former senior pastor, like many conservatives, is against gay marriage and had a big sign up on his front lawn during the California elections regarding same that was vandalized. Of course he never put up a lawn sign saying, “I support a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List.” And we wonder why Christians have a credibility problem with an unbelieving world. During the next election, I’d personally rent his neighbor’s front lawn and put up a big red arrow saying, “but HE DOES SUPPORT A SEX OFFENDER ON MEGAN’S LIST”! (Yes, all caps!)

  108. Michaela I posted the following on SGM Survivors last week. Stirred up a hornets nest. This is my thoughts on Calvinism and why I would reject it. Basiscally it makes the Problem of Evil worse. And the Problem of Evil is the best reason to reject faith to begin with.

    One other thing to…but the issue of Calvinism has come up in the past and people have weighed and looked at it. The name “Sovereign Grace” means Calvinism. However, this also gave me a laugh when Sovereign Grace fought the lawsuit. That action alone shows how they don’t believe the Lord is sovereign.

    I just have a few thoughts as I think everyone needs to wrestle with this issue by themselves. You have to think through all the issues and see where you stand. There is one thing I admire about Calvinism and that is the a-million teaching. I’m still recovering from Kirk Cameron’s acting and the Left Behind movies and theology. So many Christians have made Left Behind the 67 book of the Bible. So I am attracted to a-millianism, and find that rich.

    Now the downer to Calvinism is the following. Calvinism makes the Problem of Evil worse. Due to the Sovereignty taught, which is really nothing more than pure determinism, Calvinism makes the Problem of Evil worse. Since every action is foreordained by God you can’t say that excludes the Problem of Evil. That would mean that every act….from a child being sexually assaulted to a 767 flying into 1 World Trade Center on September 11, is ordained and ordered by God. As a result Calvinism celebrates evil and as a by product the act of evil now becomes an act of worship since God ordained it. Why? Because in true Calvinism there is no free will.

    Sovereign Grace manipulated Calvinism for its own means and purpose. That was one of the problems with SGM. Many people in the reformed community by their actions have shown they don’t believe that God is sovereign. For example John Piper when he received death threats went to the Minneapolis Police Department. If God was sovereign and his time was up, since it was pre-determined by God then he should have accepted his fate. Matt Chandler showed that he doesn’t believe the Lord is sovereign when he sought medical treatment for his brain tumor. If the Lord willed his brain tumor then by all means he should have just submitted and let the tumor take its course.

    For those who have not heard many people because of both the determinism and kind of sovereignty being taught, it really has been called the “Islamization of Christianity” The type of sovereignty is more aligned with Sunni Islam that Christianity. The Francis Schaeffer foundation wrote a well researched and thought provoking article on this point of the parallels between Islam and Christianity. Google “Islamization of Christianity” and you will find it.

  109. Muff Potter wrote:

    Michaela wrote:

    I wonder about her: “OK, why did you stay? Why did your husband put up with a pastor screaming at his wife?” I mean…the allegiance to this sick system boggles the mind.

    I wonder too. What is the mechanism in the human psyche that allows us to ignore our moral compass within, along with what Lincoln called the better Angels of our nature? I think that the allegiance you describe is fear based, fear that if you don’t knuckle under and toe the mark, then you probably never were ‘saved’, and fit only for the fires of hell.

    @Muff,
    And that woman, whom I’d been friends with for 8+ years, has shunned me.
    My take away: If you aren’t willing to protect yourself than you aren’t willing to protect anyone else.

  110. @ Eagle
    The “Islamization of Christianity”….absolutely….these groups have more in common with ISIS than they realize….

  111. mirele wrote:

    I discovered today that a church I had occasionally attended has basically gone up in smoke. Website gone, Facebook gone, etc. It’s been within the last few months, too. I feel weird, but also relieved in a way. That was a very strange situation.

    May I ask what state that was in?

  112. Burwell Stark wrote:

    mirele wrote:

    I discovered today that a church I had occasionally attended has basically gone up in smoke. Website gone, Facebook gone, etc. It’s been within the last few months, too. I feel weird, but also relieved in a way. That was a very strange situation.

    May I ask what state that was in?

    You can check:
    1. online at your Secretary of State’s office since the church would have had to dissolve their business entity;
    2. online records for your county recorder, and
    3. online records for your county superior court.

  113. @ Michaela:

    That is correct. I am asking specifically, though, because of a 2 y/o church plant in my area that recently closed. Though it was two years old and had received money, including tithes, it was never incorporated with the State of North Carolina. (Btw, that was just an indicator of the problems that existed.)

    I asked to see if it was the same church.

  114. Eagle wrote:

    This would be a good church for the People of the American Way to investigate.

    Actually, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State would be the go-to group.

  115.   __

    Dancing To A Different Drum…”

    Caitlin 

    “In college, it was a choice between “drink and party and sleep around/with your boyfriend” and “make yourself very small to fit into this Christian Woman Mold we have prepared for you.”

    “BOTH felt like conforming.” 

    “Both felt restricting.”

    “Both felt like I was dancing for male attention.”

    —> BOTH were contrary to what God made me to be.” ~Caitlin

    ***

    You go Girl!   🙂

    …pray’in

    “No more running down the wrong road,
    Dancing to a different drum,
    Can’t you see what’s going on,
    Deep inside your heart?
    Always searching for the real thing,
    Livin’ like it’s far away,
    Leave all the madness in yesterday,
    You’re holding the key when you believe it…” ~Michael McDonald, “Sweet Freedom”

    ***

    ATB

    Sopy

  116. @ Michaela:

    I think that these pastors have over-identified with their ideology, so any perceived threat of exposure of the weaknesses of the system becomes a personal threat to them. That is why you, the person Michaela, are perceived by them as a greater threat than a pedophile or child pornographer is. It is totally irrational when viewed from the perspective of the Kingdom.

    If their identity were truly grounded in Christ rather than their system, then they would not hesitate to protect the children first, last, and always. But the proof of where their identity really lies is in what they value and what they work so hard to protect. They are into reputation management rather than sanctification.

    Based on what you have written, we have much in common WRT the experiences with “leadership” in the church.

  117. Is there a prediction that those of us who have suffered years of abuse would find refuge in the true body of Christ by being genuinely loved and cared for?

    It’s a bit lonesome being part of the body scattered rather than gathered, even though we’ve found bits and pieces of encouragement through all the good folks on sites like this.

    Are there really communities out there that care regardless of whether you do their ‘church thing’? If so, we’d like to be part of at least one before we kick the bucket.

  118. @ Sopwith:

    It’s a much happier beat these days, that’s for sure!

    “For He has been mindful of the humble state of His servant.”

  119. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Michaela:
    I think that these pastors have over-identified with their ideology, so any perceived threat of exposure of the weaknesses of the system becomes a personal threat to them. That is why you, the person Michaela, are perceived by them as a greater threat than a pedophile or child pornographer is. It is totally irrational when viewed from the perspective of the Kingdom.
    If their identity were truly grounded in Christ rather than their system, then they would not hesitate to protect the children first, last, and always. But the proof of where their identity really lies is in what they value and what they work so hard to protect. They are into reputation management rather than sanctification.
    Based on what you have written, we have much in common WRT the experiences with “leadership” in the church.

    This nails it in a nutshell.

  120. Burwell Stark wrote:

    May I ask what state that was in?

    Arizona. It’s not the only church that’s up and folded in the last year. It was probably the smallest, though. I talked on this blog about how an Assembly of God near me with a very large building folded and is now renting its building to an up and coming charismatic group. And one of the megas in my city on the Hartford Seminary’s megachurch list has now been folded into an even larger mega. (That would be Spring of Life, now the “East Valley Campus” of Christ’s Church of the Valley.)

  121. @ Kin:

    I have been blessed with real, in life, professional pastors. The UMC pastor who officiated my wedding is a wonderful woman, full of God’s love for other people and a special compassion for those who have been abused, and she offered me the first in-person words of compassion and understanding. (and recommended several therapists of the trained variety as well, knowing where her expertise lay)

    So, yes, they exist. They can feel very rare, but they exist. (While the mainline churches are not perfect, I’ve found that they have better backstops to prevent abusive situations, and you might look there.)

  122. Lydia wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    @ Michaela:
    I think that these pastors have over-identified with their ideology, so any perceived threat of exposure of the weaknesses of the system becomes a personal threat to them. That is why you, the person Michaela, are perceived by them as a greater threat than a pedophile or child pornographer is. It is totally irrational when viewed from the perspective of the Kingdom.
    If their identity were truly grounded in Christ rather than their system, then they would not hesitate to protect the children first, last, and always. But the proof of where their identity really lies is in what they value and what they work so hard to protect. They are into reputation management rather than sanctification.
    Based on what you have written, we have much in common WRT the experiences with “leadership” in the church.

    This nails it in a nutshell.

    Thank you Gram 3 and Lydia!

    I simply wanted to go to church, worship Jesus, and grow. And I was counting on all of ‘this’ muck. I understand “The Dones” (believers who refuse to go back to formalized church again).

  123. @Eagle

    In reference to your thoughts regarding Piper and Chandler’s responses in lieu of their choices/ belief in the Sovereignty of God, I think you perhaps have misrepresented their viewpoint to a certain degree. I am not saying this because I want to argue with you, but rather to inform in a friendly nature.

    From what I have read, they believe that God’s sovereignty does not contradict or negate man’s personal responsibility to in one’s choices in life. Both are compatible since they see examples both taught in the scripture. Otherwise, known as compatibilism.

  124. __

    Hey Caitlin,

    From this time forward, let your seasons be greatly blessed, in Jesus’ name!

    & don’t take ‘no’ for an answer…

    (grin)

    ATB

    Sopy

  125. @ Kin:

    First of all I have no problem with being challenged. Actually I welcome it. But I would disagree on a couple of points. Why is it that when Rick Warren’s son committed suicide that some people in the reformed community said that his suicide was God’s will? Why is God sovereign over every other act but not the Problem of Evil. If you are going to define as Sovereign as every act of man, every molecule, etc… than you can’t exclude pain and suffering or the Problem of Evil. Piper believes and teaches this and has gone so far as to proclaim that God has foreordained evil. Since Piper believes as such I would argue that him going to the Minneapolis police to report a death threat shows that he doesn;t beleive God is sovereign.

  126. @ Eagle:

    …why does a church have such strong political commentary? I’m not complaining about people being conservative (after all I voted striaght Republican last election). But a church has no place recommending David Limbaugh, Thomas Sowell, etc.

    I wish I knew the answer to this question. The American evangelical church at large can’t seem to separate conservative religion from conservative politics and personally, and I’ve never met a conservative Republican who wasn’t also a conservative evangelical and explicitly linked the two. Which is a shame. I’d like to investigate conservative political positions by themselves, but I don’t know how because everyone I encounter is either a) actually talking about conservative religious positions, b) nasty and belligerent, or c) a raving conspiracy theorist.

    Honestly, Eagle, this isn’t me trying to stir the pot, I’m really curious. How do you separate the two? Because when you’re brought up in Christian homeschooling, one must of necessity lead to the other and Democrats are Satan incarnate.

  127. Kin wrote:

    @Eagle

    In reference to your thoughts regarding Piper and Chandler’s responses in lieu of their choices/ belief in the Sovereignty of God, I think you perhaps have misrepresented their viewpoint to a certain degree. I am not saying this because I want to argue with you, but rather to inform in a friendly nature.

    From what I have read, they believe that God’s sovereignty does not contradict or negate man’s personal responsibility to in one’s choices in life. Both are compatible since they see examples both taught in the scripture. Otherwise, known as compatibilism.

    The problem with this argument Kin, is that it involves the redefinition of terms, away from how ‘freedom of the will’ is used in everyday language. Compatibilism does not teach that God’s exhaustive Sovereignty

  128. Sorry, tablet issues…
    To continue: which is certainly what is taught by Piper is ‘compatible’ with the ability to choose otherwise, which I contend is the normal basis of personal responsibility. It is specially redefined to be ‘compatible’ with exhaustive sovereignty as being redefined as merely’ the freedom to do what you want to do’. This has the enormous problem, of course, of meaning that as God has exhaustively chosen how our hearts are & what they want, (in Piper’s view) then we act out of desires given to us in the same way instincts are inherent in animals & for which we portion no blame. I believe this is a definition that comes primarily from trying to make something fit with a definition of sovereignty brought to the Bible, & not from how the Bible talks of how we make choices in real life, where we are certainly shown as our wills being damaged, but still having the ability/responsibility to make a contrary choice.
    I think Eagle & others here, & scholars like Scot McKnight are completely right in their understanding of this.

  129. @Beakerj and Eagle – again, I’m not wanting to argue whether I think Piper/Chandler’s viewpoint is inconsistent or erroneous, rather I’m more concerned about the misrepresentation in Eagle’s statement:

    ” If God was sovereign and his time was up, since it was pre-determined by God then he should have accepted his fate. Matt Chandler showed that he doesn’t believe the Lord is sovereign when he sought medical treatment for his brain tumor. If the Lord willed his brain tumor then by all means he should have just submitted and let the tumor take its course.”

    I’m pretty sure they both believe in personal responsibility as it relates to the topic of God’s over-arching sovereignty, and to the extent that this is excluded (in Eagle’s example) would be misrepresenting their viewpoint, imo.

  130. @ Corbin:

    At the thought of the former Growing Pains/Fundagelical I have boxes on Rollaids! :-p
    I pop em like candy when I consider Fireproof.

  131. Rob wrote:

    Quick, quick, rushes to judgement, are lacking in grace.

    It would seem that deciding to jettison Christianity as a result of a handful of semi-anonymous negative responses to your posts on a single website would make for a good case study in “quick, quick rushes to judgment”.

  132. Law Prof wrote:

    Rob wrote:

    Quick, quick, rushes to judgement, are lacking in grace.

    It would seem that deciding to jettison Christianity as a result of a handful of semi-anonymous negative responses to your posts on a single website would make for a good case study in “quick, quick rushes to judgment”.

    Here, here, Law Prof. I was excommunicated and shunned recently from my Silicon Valley church (not for any kind of unrepentant immorality but for wanting our children to be protected from a sex offender in our midst, a close friend of the pastors/elders) and not even I would turn my back on the Lord Jesus Christ! Jesus isn’t the problem! He’s the solution!

  133. Gram3 wrote:

    Dave A A wrote:
    Lydia wrote:
    What pastor repented?
    Jordan (JD) Hall.
    In the August 12th article, I actually thought Dee was quite grace-full.
    I agree that Dee extended a lot of grace to J.D. Some commenters expressed doubts which were/are grounded in the experience which comes from abusive personalities exploiting the goodwill of those who extend grace. I wish that the people who don’t get it could learn to discern the difference between skepticism born of experience and a lack of grace. There is a difference, and Jesus called us to be both gentle as doves *and* wise as serpents. Words of repentance are proved through real and sometimes personally costly actions. I don’t think that the Pulpit Posse has proved J.D.’s repentant words with actions consistent with repentance. Specifically AFAIK they have not retracted and taught against their doctrines which led to that debacle. When that happens, then J.D.’s words will be proved true.

    So it was JD to whom Rob was referring? I read that statement from JD all the way through, then went back and reread it in part multiple times to see if I was the one missing something and I was wrong in not being able to make out a genuine repentance in it, though I was willing to admit that perhaps it was a small step, just maybe (though I may have done that concession on another blog, can’t remember). But the thing came across like a narcissist’s rant with at best backhanded attempts at repentance, it just didn’t seem genuine in any meaningful way. I believed that when I first read it and still believe it. But of course, I could be dead wrong. God knows. That is my opinion as an evangelical Christian, and in all candor, that shouldn’t mean squat one way or the other as to someone’s faith in God or rejection of that faith.

    JD Hall didn’t have to repent to anyone here or elsewhere, as we were not the recipients of his abuse; he needed to repent to the family of young Mr. Caner primarily and secondarily, his church.

  134. Kin wrote:

    I’m pretty sure they both believe in personal responsibility as it relates to the topic of God’s over-arching sovereignty, and to the extent that this is excluded (in Eagle’s example) would be misrepresenting their viewpoint, imo.

    Bruce Ware covered compatibilism pretty well in God’s Greater Glory, I think, but his treatment of the question is unsatisfying regarding the problem of evil, at least to me. IMO that stems from Ware’s odd view of the Trinity and the relationships among the Persons of the Trinity. That inadequacy of compatibilism may be what Eagle is pointing out. The problem is that the compatibilists are inconsistent, and so it becomes a little confusing what they mean when they speak of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility. And that is in addition to Piper’s usual incoherence that has been documented here. However, it has been several years since I read Ware, so I’m not prepared to give citations of the problems. Maybe you’ve read it and can make some sense of his position regarding the problem of evil.

    I will quibble with Eagle’s characterization of them as hyper-Calvinists in the proper sense. They are certainly high Calvinists, and Tom Nettles is a true hyper-Calvinist, judging by By His Grace and for His Glory. I think that the Founders types in general flirt with hyper-Calvinism but manage to avoid it by the skin of their theological teeth. Hyper-Calvinists, IMO, defame God’s character. But if Eagle is using the term “hyper” informally to mean those who are rabid about their Calvinism, then the term fits, I think.

  135. Eagle wrote:

    At the thought of the former Growing Pains/Fundagelical I have boxes on Rollaids! :-p
    I pop em like candy when I consider Fireproof.

    “Courageous” wasn’t much better. And the Kendrick brothers are doing post-production on another movie right now. Ugh. Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely going to buy it. But only because I consider myself a Fundagelical connoisseur in training.

  136. Law Prof wrote:

    JD Hall didn’t have to repent to anyone here or elsewhere, as we were not the recipients of his abuse; he needed to repent to the family of young Mr. Caner primarily and secondarily, his church.

    I wonder what the limits of repentance should be if J.D. has taken public positions which have poisoned the church at large. It seems that he, along with others, has taken it upon themselves to police certain doctrines within the church. I don’t have any objection to anyone raising questions about Ergun Caner. J.D. crossed a line when he went after Caner’s son in a public venue. That was not only a breach of common decency which even pagans recognize, but it demonstrated a level of immaturity in J.D. and the Pulpiteers, and persons who are immature emotionally and spiritually should not be pontificating publically as representatives of the church as pastors nor should they be leaders in the church. So, in that sense, I do think that he owes the church at large some repentant actions in keeping with his words. That won’t come until he and the others like him realize the real cause of the catastrophic failure. Same with Driscoll. Same with me when I fail.

    I don’t think Rob was necessarily directly defending J.D. I do think he was greatly mistaken in the way he initially reacted to the post and comments. Maybe he has not been abused and doesn’t have a frame of reference for that. But he ended well with some good advice which I don’t think the Pulpiteers have taken to heart. I am sorry that Rob did not see grace in my responses to him. Maybe that is due to a different perspective on what grace means and what doing good to one another means. I hope that he will think on this some more.

  137. Michaela wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    Rob wrote:
    Quick, quick, rushes to judgement, are lacking in grace.
    It would seem that deciding to jettison Christianity as a result of a handful of semi-anonymous negative responses to your posts on a single website would make for a good case study in “quick, quick rushes to judgment”.
    Here, here, Law Prof. I was excommunicated and shunned recently from my Silicon Valley church (not for any kind of unrepentant immorality but for wanting our children to be protected from a sex offender in our midst, a close friend of the pastors/elders) and not even I would turn my back on the Lord Jesus Christ! Jesus isn’t the problem! He’s the solution!

    True that. I know about shunnings and excommunications, having gone from being a part of the elder team to officially being persona non grata in the span of one week.

  138. @Law Prof,

    I am so sorry to hear that you too have experienced being a persona non grata.
    I do not wish to become a member again of a church that does this. I really am starting to understand American Christians who call themselves “The Dones” (done with formalized church).

  139. @ Muff Potter:
    Group think. Belonging. One of my biggest fears about America is losing our bent toward individualism…. which many now want us to believe is nothing but selfishness.

  140. Hester wrote:

    and personally, and I’ve never met a conservative Republican who wasn’t also a conservative evangelical and explicitly linked the two.

    That is a shame. I know many conservative repubs who are athiest, gay, agnostic and many who attend liberal churches. Some of the latter self identify as evangelicals. I don’t think it is as cut and dried as people think if you follow voting patterns. . In fact, the term “evangelical voter” was coined during Carters run for President. After that, it was all about getting that voting block.

  141. @ Lydia:

    I don’t think it is as cut and dried as people think if you follow voting patterns

    Rationally I know it isn’t. But all the real-life departures from the stereotypes I’ve personally seen, have been on the Democratic side. I know evangelicals who are Democrats – one actually ran in a local election as a Democrat, the other might actually have voted for the Green party once – and both the most avid hunters I know are Democrats. All the Republicans I know are conservative evangelical Christians, and worse, most of them go to controlling churches (like the ones profiled here) that violate every single principle of freedom they say they want applied to the government. Almost all of them believe the kind of crap discussed here and on other sites like ACFJ that enables child abuse, pedophilia, domestic violence, etc. (and if you were to correct them about those things, they would accuse you of being a “liberal” and either stop listening or shut you down – I know, I’ve tried).

    One of these people told me once that he wished there was, essentially, a media review board for the church. The way people could get on it was to write a review of something, which would then be examined by the board to see if it reflected the correct viewpoint(s). Umm, I’m sorry, didn’t we used to call that the Politburo?!?! You don’t make the cut if you don’t conform properly to the Party? That’s totalitarian thinking in just about its purest classic form. And yet this same person would turn around and decry totalitarianism five minutes later. So in essence, the only objection he had to totalitarianism, was that he wasn’t the one on top running the show.

    So yeah, I wish I knew a Republican who was not a conservative Christian, so I could fairly examine what the viewpoint looks like without being pre-rolled through the conservative Christian junk that I already know way too well and don’t like. I don’t believe either party is pure evil (which is always how one party portrays the other), and I want to be fair and not confuse political conservatism with religious conservatism, but the people I see on the internet and know on the ground make it So. Hard.

  142. Eagle wrote:

    So many Christians have made Left Behind the 67 book of the Bible. So I am attracted to a-millianism, and find that rich.

    It wasn’t the first “67th book of the Bible” (superseding the other 66) and it won’t be the last. In the mid-Seventies it was “Late Great Planet Earth” instead of “Left Behind”. After the 2008 elections “Atlas Shrugged” made a bid for the position.

    And Left Behind isn’t the 67th Book; it’s the 67th through 88th — 12 volumes in the main story, a sequel (set AFTER the Second Coming), a prequel trilogy (“Antichrist’s Baby Pictures”), and two shared-universe trilogies by other authors than LaJenkins. Not counting the 40-volume “Left Behind: The Kids” juvenile series, the comic book adaptations, both movie series, the video game…

  143. Corbin wrote:

    And the Kendrick brothers are doing post-production on another movie right now. Ugh. Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely going to buy it. But only because I consider myself a Fundagelical connoisseur in training.

    Or a Bad Movie Aficionado, specializing in the Christploitation genre?

    (If so, Google or YouTube search the name “Estus Pirkle” or the titles “The Believer’s Heaven”, “The Burning Hell”, and/or “If Footmen Tire You, What Will Horsemen Do?” These are considered the Ed Wood of Christploitation flicks.)

  144. K.D. wrote:

    @ Eagle
    The “Islamization of Christianity”….absolutely….these groups have more in common with ISIS than they realize….

    Except political power (as in power of life-and-death over you) and the Christian Reconstructionists/Theonomists are working on that.

  145. Law Prof wrote:

    having gone from being a part of the elder team to officially being persona non grata in the span of one week.

    Well, at least they didn’t drag it out…. All kidding aside, I am so sorry that you went through that. So many who have visited this blog, including me, have been there.

  146. Hester wrote:

    hat’s totalitarian thinking in just about its purest classic form. And yet this same person would turn around and decry totalitarianism five minutes later. So in essence, the only objection he had to totalitarianism, was that he wasn’t the one on top running the show.

    That “control” your life and thinking is on both sides. at least you can voluntarily leave the church and they cant use the IRS to shut you down. it is harder to get the personal control out of your government.

  147. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Except political power (as in power of life-and-death over you) and the Christian Reconstructionists/Theonomists are working on that.

    And the useful idiots like John Piper and his fanboys are assuring us that Doug Wilson is just peachy because, I suppose, he debated Christopher Hitchens and he’s funny and clever, at least to some. Meanwhile, Wilson and and all the others in Idaho and Birmingham and Texas and elsewhere continue working on the project which has been underway for decades.

  148. dee wrote:

    So many who have visited this blog, including me, have been there.

    Gramp3 had the same experience. I think it took about two weeks, all told, for the transformation from hero to zero in his case. If there’s a fire in the theater and you’re the one who starts yelling about it, a lot of people are going to be mad because you ruined their movie.

  149. Deebs, sorry about the typo in my screen name that sent two comments to moderation. It’s fixed now that I noticed the problem.

  150. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    I remember as a young man (eight, I think) being shocked reading Ian Fleming – not shocked by the atrocious writing (although I should have been), but by the way in which he depicted women, and they way in which they were treated.

    Ah, yes. You discovered that the movie version of James Bond was VERY cleaned-up from the original. And secondarily, Ian Fleming’s personal kinks. Amazing how that series of pulp spy thrillers became such a fad in the early Sixties; I heard it was because of an unintentional Presidential endorsement from JFK during the years of Camelot.

  151. @ Eagle:

    That was a great article, Eagle. I have tried to explain that perspective on the sovereignty of God to several people who just look at me like I have two heads if I disagree with the Piper version of God’s sovereignty. I’m bookmarking that article.

  152. Gram3 wrote:

    It reminds me so much of the days of Jim Crow, and I wonder if part of the problem is that the younger folks have no memory of how certain people were considered “less than” and consigned to a “role” in the social fabric and how wrong that was and is. I know that when I bring up that comparison, the younger folks have no real concept of what I’m talking about and just say that there is no comparison between the two.

    You’re absolutely on the money with the comparison. I read your post & had flashbacks of some of the things I heard & saw “way back when”. Thank you.

  153. Eagle wrote:

    For those who have not heard many people because of both the determinism and kind of sovereignty being taught, it really has been called the “Islamization of Christianity” The type of sovereignty is more aligned with Sunni Islam that Christianity.

    The word I have heard for it is “Chrislam”.

  154. nmgirl wrote:

    Yesterday, I was really feeling down, thinking about the loss of a 20 year career and what that career cost me. 2014 was a really bad year. I woke up this morning with the resolve to keep looking forward and not back. This post reminds me that I left organized religion behind during the past 20 years and I am really, really glad I did. I can live to get the most out of the only life I will have without a bunch of other people telling me what I have done wrong. TWW has shown me that there may be some good christians out there, but there are still a lot of whack jobs. Happy New Year.

    Sorry to hear about your job. Yes there are “whack jobs” in the church. And yes they cause needless grief. I understand the rise of “The Dones”: Christians who won’t go to organized church anymore.

  155. Law Prof wrote:

    So it was JD to whom Rob was referring? I read that statement from JD all the way through, then went back and reread it in part multiple times to see if I was the one missing something and I was wrong in not being able to make out a genuine repentance in it, though I was willing to admit that perhaps it was a small step, just maybe (though I may have done that concession on another blog, can’t remember). But the thing came across like a narcissist’s rant with at best backhanded attempts at repentance, it just didn’t seem genuine in any meaningful way. I believed that when I first read it and still believe it. But of course, I could be dead wrong. God knows. That is my opinion as an evangelical Christian, and in all candor, that shouldn’t mean squat one way or the other as to someone’s faith in God or rejection of that faith.

    Hall’s “nonapology apology” struck me the same way.

  156. Hester wrote:

    One of these people told me once that he wished there was, essentially, a media review board for the church. The way people could get on it was to write a review of something, which would then be examined by the board to see if it reflected the correct viewpoint(s). Umm, I’m sorry, didn’t we used to call that the Politburo?!?!

    Indeed. I know the same kind of people. Aaaarrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh! [She snarled].

  157. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Or a Bad Movie Aficionado, specializing in the Christploitation genre?
    (If so, Google or YouTube search the name “Estus Pirkle” or the titles “The Believer’s Heaven”, “The Burning Hell”, and/or “If Footmen Tire You, What Will Horsemen Do?” These are considered the Ed Wood of Christploitation flicks.)

    Just finished watching “The Burning Hell” on youtube. When Hyles came on, that sealed the deal for me: this is one of the greatest movies ever. See, I’m one of those awkward people that can thoroughly enjoy and appreciate movies, pictures, music etc. that would make most people want to run away and forget everything they saw and/or heard. Sure, some stuff really is just unbearable trash, but for me, there’s a healing humor in ridiculous cheesyness that I like alot. I’ll be sure to watch the rest of Pirkle’s movies. 😀

  158. Bridget wrote:

    @ Eagle:

    That was a great article, Eagle. I have tried to explain that perspective on the sovereignty of God to several people who just look at me like I have two heads if I disagree with the Piper version of God’s sovereignty. I’m bookmarking that article.

    Try reading Udo Middleman’s ‘The Innocence of God’ as well, the longer version of this pov.

  159. Janey wrote:

    Why is membership so important to 9 Marks pastors and leaders?
    Well, several years ago 9Marks pastors and staff told us why. But then, sometime between August and December 2014, they removed their articles.

    Thanks for this Janey.

  160. TW wrote:

    Janey wrote:

    Why is membership so important to 9 Marks pastors and leaders?
    Well, several years ago 9Marks pastors and staff told us why. But then, sometime between August and December 2014, they removed their articles.

    Thanks for this Janey.

    Since my recent excommunication and shunning (not for any kind of immorality but for opposing the pastors/elders about a Megan’s List sex offender in our midst and the lack of safety for our children, which they don’t care about because he’s their friend, I’ve tossed all of my conservative books – including Dever’s 9 Marks of a Healthy Church.

    I don’t know what Dever is up to, I found it strange that all of the articles have been taken down from 9 Marks. Wow! What is that about?

    Here’s a discussion: http://www.brnow.org/News/October-2014/9Marks-affirms-the-importance-of-church-membership

  161. Michaela wrote:

    I don’t know what Dever is up to, I found it strange that all of the articles have been taken down from 9 Marks. Wow! What is that about?

    Well, I don’t know. But based on the, I’m sure, coincidental resemblance of this episode of disappearing articles with disappearing articles at CBMW and occasionally at TGC and T4G, it is possible that it has to do with attention being drawn to how ridiculous and/or outrageous their articles and arguments are. The Deebs and company have played a significant part in that, ISTM. Maybe the wicked witches of the blogosphere have conspired to take down the articles, as Owen (not John) once accused Rachel Held Evans of doing to his Twitter account, IIRC. You know how those Jezebels are always trying to deceive and destroy men and make John Piper feel emasculated…

    Or perhaps they have decided to revise and extend their prior re9marks. OTOH, if it looks like a PR move, it might just be a PR move.

  162. Lydia wrote:

    @ Gram3:
    I think they are all rebranding.

    I’m interested in what you think their new brand might look like. At some point re-branding doesn’t work, and I think that the Driscoll debacle is going to be hard to disown by the entire Gospel Glitterati, though they will no doubt try their best to distance themselves.

    Their problem, of course, is that the big names are up to their eyeballs in Driscoll’s doctrine and the fallout from it. He didn’t pull authoritarianism and misogyny out of thin air. He needed at least the appearance of some theological gravitas to sell it since he is certainly no theologian, and they provided it. He, in turn, delivered lots of enthusiastic young male consumers of Gospel Glitterati products.

    What shall they do now that the Poster Boy for their doctrines has imploded and joined the likes of T.D. Jakes and Robert Morris? Doesn’t say much for their theology or for their discernment or for their trustworthiness as shepherds of the flock. Driscoll is Mahaney all over again for the Gospel Glitterati, ISTM. But we shall see.

  163. Michaela wrote:

    I don’t know what Dever is up to, I found it strange that all of the articles have been taken down from 9 Marks. Wow! What is that about?

    As of today, They Never Existed.
    doubleplusungood ref doubleplusunarticles.

  164. Lydia wrote:

    @ Gram3:
    I think they are all rebranding.

    ChEKA rebrands itself to OGPU which rebrands itself to NKVD which rebrands itself to KGB, while the mass graves in GULAG keep filling without interruption.

  165. Corbin wrote:

    Just finished watching “The Burning Hell” on youtube. When Hyles came on, that sealed the deal for me: this is one of the greatest movies ever.

    My writing partner (the burned-out preacher) still says he’s going to get me for sending him the link to “The Believer’s Heaven”.
    The Singing Midgets — it was The Singing Midgets in Heaven that did it.

    One website which specializes in snarking Christianese films and best-sellers is Heathen Critique at https://heathencritique.wordpress.com/.
    For just bad movies, there’s also Jabootu at http://jabootu.net/ .
    Bad Cinema Diary seems to be no more.

  166. PREDICTIONS:

    In 2015 I predict that the Deebs will go undercover and attend both of Gateway’s Pastor Conferences plus the women’s ministry’s Pink Impact and the Pink Impact Cruise. They will then write and publish an astounding Kiera Feldman-esque, scathing investigative exposé on all the inner secrets and workings of North America’s wealthiest church which will place them on the short list for a Pulitzer Prize. They will continue their undercover work amassing a full body of exposés on several other giga-churches that are later reprinted as an anthology in the best selling book “Betrayal 2”.

    By late 2016 the producers of the upcoming “Spotlight” movie will agree to make “Betrayal 2” into a major motion picture called “Stage-lights”. Dee will choose Cate Blanchett to play her while Deb goes for Sandra Bullock. Sandra will have to drop out due to prior commitments and Kate Winslet will take her place. Unfortunately, Kate’s inability to affect a credible light Southern accent will bring production to a halt. Real life Southerner Reece Witherspoon will be called in to save the day.

    However, the price of such fame will take it’s toll. Much to her family’s dismay, Dee will start dressing like Lisa Bevere and start arguing with God out loud in public places while wildly swinging all elongated objects within her reach, claiming they are a sword and she is Xena. Deb will start dressing like Kari Jobe and gossip will ensue as PTA members wonder what’s up with all the maternity style clothing. Due to the prolonged undercover exposure to Charismatic women ministers, both will feel compelled to yell really loudly while make exaggerated hand motions at all times to emphasize their points like Holly Wagner, Christine Caine and Charlotte Gambill.

    During an interview with Marcus and Joni Lamb, Dee will accidentally double karate chop Joni in the face while trying to make a point and Joni’s hairpiece will come flying off. Marcus will then rush over weeping hysterically while rapidly slap fighting both Dee and Deb, screaming “no touching the weave sistahs! No touching the weave!!!” James and Biddy Robison will run in from their set and James will tackle Deb as Dee jumps on his back. James will scream, “they said I was supposed to be the next BILLY GRAHAM!!! ME! ME! I have personally saved one million souls! ME!” Dee will feel so sorry for James that she lets him go. Deb will be covered with black smudges from Marcus’ spray on hair color. Fortunately Dee, dressed in Bevere black leather head to toe, will show no splotches of Marcus’ Just for Men although she will sport some cat fight scratches from Marcus. Joni will check her lipstick and adjust her Spanx while screaming at her ordained chauffeur for not restocking the Chunky Monkey in her limo fridge. Biddy will comfort a whimpering James reminding him “Mike Huckabee used to work for YOU”. James will return to his mansion and Skype the Pope about those “blogging beyatches” and ask for a Papal Bull authorizing the Illuminati to eliminate them. The Pope will demur stating that he exhausted all his favors convincing Vladimir Putin to sell jets to Argentina to take over the Falklands.

    Frazzled by all the yelling and wild gesticulations, the Deebs will return to their “quiet” life of blogging where they will blog happily ever after.

    That’s my prediction anyway.

  167. @ Bridget:

    You have to remember that John Piper is basically a fundamentalist. His theology, and roots are in the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Church. Piper has redefined fundamentalist to have an entirely different meaning. The old style fundamentalists were formal dress, KJV only, etc… The new fundamentalists are ESV only, Hyper-Cals. They claim they are not fundamentalists because they wear jeans and are hip, but that reflects more of society than theology today in my opinion.

  168. @ Gram3:

    Yes I use the term Hyper as a means to express someone rabid about Calvinism. There is a formal difference between regular and hyper, however I view Hyper as those who push, act arrogant about Calvinism. This includes many in the YRR movement. One other issue that also leads me to describe these kind of people as Hyper, IMO, is that they also redefine words. For example they proclaim God’s sovereignty of all creation, then back away from the Problem of Evil. Sorry…but it can’t be both ways. All means all…and when you teach God is sovereign over everything that means the problem of evil as well. At least Piper has been more open about this today than in the past, even teaching that God foreordains evil.

  169. Hi, everyone,

    I’ve been away from TWW for a few days (of frenzied activity, preparing for the birthdays of two friends!). Now I’m trying to catch up, reading through the comments here.

    Thanks so much to all who responded personally to my specific comments. Your words were helpful. I want to reply to each of you individually, but that may not happen, as there have been so many comments since I last visited (I had a sense that, perhaps, I should have waited to comment until I knew that I would be a bit less busy!).

    I also found so many other comments in this thread to be thoughtful and fascinating. The experiences of people here (both those which similar to mine and those which are very different) help me to understand my own experiences better.

    One thing I do want to say is that, during the course of my time at CHBC and at the similar (but non-shunning at least) church in New Mexico, I spent many, many hours talking with the church leaders and with my fellow congregants about the 9 Marks thinking on church membership and church discipline. From these conversations, I gained some very valuable insight into that particular thinking on those particular subjects. I know that many people here will disagree with me, but I really don’t think that it’s all about men in suits wanting to control women (and other men in different ways). Now, I’m not saying that everything they believe about church membership and discipline is *right*… not at all… but I’m also concerned that they not be caricatured.

    At least in the case of Mark Dever and the other elders at CHBC, and the elders at the New Mexico church, they spent a *lot* of time… *serious* amounts of time… studying the Bible, trying to understand what it has to say on basically everything about which the Bible speaks. As much as we have our disagreements with these men, I can say from personal experience with them, that is how they came to their convictions on church membership and discipline– through a great amount of serious Bible study. (On a side note, Mark Dever wasn’t even always a complementarian. When he began seminary, and for some time as a seminarian, he was actually on the egalitarian side of the debate.)

    Dever and his colleagues at CHBC truly do believe that it is their Biblical responsibility, as church elders, to “care for/protect” the souls of the people who have *voluntarily chosen to be members* there. They don’t see themselves as being in the same position re: regular attenders of the church– only with church members. Many of the interpretations do seem like a stretch now to me, to say the least– particularly regarding certain Biblical passages– but it *was* through serious study of Scripture that these men came to believe the ideas outlined in the 9 Marks literature, on membership, discipline, and other issues.

    The fact that serious practice of Sola Scriptura *did* lead to the “9 Marks thinking” is actually, in retrospect, one of the things which led me *away* from Sola Scriptura and back to the Catholic Church. Some people might see that as a case of “out of the frying pan and into the fire!” However, I can honestly say that in the almost-five years that I have been back in the Catholic Church, I have actually experienced less legalism, and more Christian freedom and happiness, than I did in my years as a “Reformed Baptist.”

    There is something about having 2,000 years of Church tradition and history on which to meditate and draw (sometimes involving serious *repentance*– he wasn’t a perfect man, by any means, but now-Saint John Paul II did literally travel around the world acknowledging, and repeatedly apologizing for, for the past sins of Church members, including leaders).. something about being in such a long theological and ecclesial line has led to some pretty profound Biblical insights and actions, compared to anything that I found in my old Reformed circles, even at their best.

    As just one example, as far as I know, there is nothing in Reformed Protestant circles that even begins to approach the insightful thinking on *man and woman* that I have found in John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body.” The anthropology of men and women, as related to God, that is explored therein, truly does justice to the God-given dignity of the human person, while exploring the similarities and the differences between men and women (and it’s quite different from what I found in Reformed Baptist circles!!). Fascinatingly, about a year ago, I was visiting the Facebook page of one of my old CHBC friends (who hasn’t yet unfriended me), and I noticed her saying to one of her female friends that she really wished that there were a “Theology of the Body for Protestants!”

    In any event, I would never pretend that everything is wonderful in the Catholic Church, any more than I would pretend that *everything* was horrible in my old Reformed Baptist days.. and even where I now strongly disagree with some of the 9 Marks thinking, I do believe that the people who *formulated* that thinking did so through serious practice, and application, of Sola Scriptura principles.. which is, again, one reason why I’m glad that I no longer subscribe to those principles! 🙂

  170. @ Gram3:

    In my experience when they are attemping a rebrand it can be quite subtle. They never admit anything was wrong, they simply pretend, distance themselves and change the subject. It is not as if they have to answer unvetted questions.

    From my reading around and vantage point they seem to have adopted racial reconciliation. Who can argue with that? And it is a smart one considering Calvinism’s past.

  171. Christopher Lake wrote:

    At least in the case of Mark Dever and the other elders at CHBC, and the elders at the New Mexico church, they spent a *lot* of time… *serious* amounts of time… studying the Bible, trying to understand what it has to say on basically everything about which the Bible speaks. As much as we have our disagreements with these men, I can say from personal experience with them, that is how they came to their convictions on church membership and discipline– through a great amount of serious Bible study.

    But isn’t that the problem with Biblical interpretation? We all seriously study Scripture to come to a conclusion. And yet we come to different conclusions. We approach Scripture with a particular bias and then use Scripture to build on that bias.

    For example, the RCC believes that Peter was the rock on whom the church would be built and Protestants believe it was his confession. As both sides approach Scripture it will be with this assumption which then colors how we interpret passages.

    Once we interpret those passages a certain way, then we apply it. Unfortunately, in our application we can then abuse others with our assumptions. However, since we *studied it* we must be correct so this abuse isn’t abuse. It is the love of God disciplining us.

  172. @ Christopher Lake:
    One other thought, our personalities also color our interpretation. So an Alpha male who likes to be in charge will see the authority verses as very important.

  173. dee wrote:

    @ Christopher Lake:
    One other thought, our personalities also color our interpretation. So an Alpha male who likes to be in charge will see the authority verses as very important.

    …or a control freak male, who is insecure (perhaps even abusive).

  174. Lydia wrote:

    From my reading around and vantage point they seem to have adopted racial reconciliation. Who can argue with that? And it is a smart one considering Calvinism’s past.

    Yes, I see where that is their best option now that Driscoll has flamed out. Funny how they employ subtlety rather than openness and repentance. Pretend they never had anything to do with him and his ideas. Pretend they never had anything to do with keeping C.J.’s “ministry” on life suppport. I think I heard that Thabiti is onboard at Capitol Hill, so it seems reasonable that racial reconciliation will be their tack as a diversion from their spectacular failures elsewhere. If only they could see the real problem.

  175. @ Christopher Lake:

    I’m going to have to disagree about the serious Bible study part. If you read enough of their stuff and dig into their prooftexts for their positions, it is apparent that there has *not* been serious Bible study to determine what the Bible actually is saying. There is a lot of history behind the thinking of CHBC which colors their teaching. They have a very good model for how to spread their teaching without anyone having to do much in-depth study of the Bible. Interns are trained and built up as leaders then placed in churches as vectors for the CHBC/Founders doctrines. It is built on a few older men promoting many younger men who dutifully serve the older men.

    IOW, they are using the model of the Roman Catholic church. There is a definite hierarchy, just as there is in the Catholic church. There is a definite catechism, just as in the Catholic church. The difference is that the Roman Catholics feature their tradition, their hierarchical structure and their catechism while the Founders/CHBC hide theirs.

  176. @Christopher Lake,

    Thanks for posting Christopher. I left a mega church, that I had been invited to by a friend that was theologically off track and too anonymous, for a smaller church plant (100 people, expositional preaching, and that had the 9 Marks).
    Dever’s 9 Marks made sense to me and seemed like a good way to run a church, did expositional preaching (the senior pastor knows Greek and Hebrew).

    But in practice the 9 Marks don’t work. Whatever abuses Dever & Company were trying to address (members on the rolls who didn’t show up at church and therefore having membership covenants; not dealing with *sin*) turned in to their own set of abuses at my church and have at Dever’s too.

    Here’s my list (basically most of the 9 Marks) of things to now avoid in a church, after my recent excommunication and shunning (for my opposing my pastors/elders protecting their friend a convicted sex offender on Megan’s List and risking our church’s children and the children of unbelievers entrusted to us at our summer basketball camp, which the pastors/elders invited the sex offender to volunteer at):

    Michaela UNITED STATES on Sat Jan 03, 2015 at 05:37 PM said:

    Loren Haas wrote:

    My rule for churches: If the pastor’s name is on the sign out front- be wary. If the pastor and the spouse is on the outside be-double wary. If either or both photos are on the sign- don’t go in. If there is a huge digital HD display with the pastor’s pictures out front and they have a huge fully packed parking lot- leave town.

    My new rules/red flags of churches to avoid:

    *Independent churches with no outside authority and checks and balances
    *Membership covenants (a way to exercise inappropriate control over adults’ lives)
    *Patriarchy/Complementarism (it’s just going to be a bunch of insufferable ‘lording it over’ people by immature men who were never required to grow up)
    *Shepherding language: this is authoritarian control of members disguised as “the warm fuzzies”
    *Biblical Counseling: Personal opinions by pastors/elders who have zero training about tough subjects such as alcoholism, domestic violence, sexual abuse, and will do more harm than good and will refuse to give people referrals to bona fide treatment that actually works
    *Lack of child abuse prevention policies
    *Requirements (even unspoken) to spend too much time with church members and not have a balanced life with outside interests and friends

    *Biblical Church Discipline: A way to threaten, bully, intimidate and get rid of all dissenters who raise legitimate issues.

    P.S. Before my recent excommunication/shunning, a godly doctor (married for 40+ years) was also excommunicated and ordered to be shunned. The doctor’s ‘crime’? He had raised Biblical concerns with the pastors/elders about how they were running the church. The doctor is a stand-up man and Biblically sound. The doctor is a long-time, close friend of Pastor John MacArthur’s in Southern California at Grace Community Church.

  177. Eagle wrote:

    Yes I use the term Hyper as a means to express someone rabid about Calvinism.

    That is what I thought. I would encourage you not to do that for one reason only. That is that they can deny that they are hyper-Calvinists on formal doctrinal grounds in order to deflect from the fact that they are rabidly dogmatic about their high Calvinism. That way they can dismiss objections to their approach and methodology. It is unfortunate that the term hyper-Calvinist was already in use when the Calvinistas came on the scene because it does describe them very well.

  178. @ Gram3:
    Another reason is because they DO “evangelize”. Historically, hypers dont.

    Never mind it is to spread Calvinism.

  179. one more warning red flag warning about Dever’s (dangerous) 9 Marks:
    *elder rule: senior pastor gets to choose ‘yes’ men around him; church members who raise legitimate questions about the running of the church are told they are ‘bringing an accusation against an elder without cause’. In short, elder rule is another form of dictatorship.

  180. @ Lydia:

    Right. Too bad their good news is that they are the ones we’ve been waiting for. Lucky we are, too, as ignorant pewpeons to have them teach us all the stuff they know!

  181. dee wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    having gone from being a part of the elder team to officially being persona non grata in the span of one week.
    Well, at least they didn’t drag it out…. All kidding aside, I am so sorry that you went through that. So many who have visited this blog, including me, have been there.

    No, Dee, they didn’t drag it out. It’s probably because when I confronted the neocal leader and right hand man I didn’t do it meekly with any particular regard for their exalted position. I blasted them in person and they, for once, were left speechless and stammering. It was probably because I was the same age as them and saw them as outright phonies; I’ve been a few turns around the world, I’m a middle aged guy who’s been in a few professions and has seen a lot of people who had integrity and a lot of frauds who didn’t (but who were very particular about appearing spotless to the community), both in the corporate world, the legal world and academia. You develop an attuned radar after a few decades of adult experience.

    I was so pointed in telling them exactly what they were doing, how it was abusive, unethical and perhaps illegal, that they really had no answers. No mind, they leader and right hand man turned on each other a year after I was tossed out, then one by one families left until finally, the church imploded two years after my family left and there was nothing left. Not a happy ending. Now, from what I hear, the former right hand man’s oldest son has professed his agnosticism and the former leader’s oldest son is semi-estranged from his family and allegedly doing drugs. having a few teenage children myself, I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, either the child or the parent. I feel bad over the whole thing and foolish for having supported it and not having done something more to try and prevent these results.

  182. Ok just off the cuff here are some of my predictions

    1. There will be an economic war with russia and Europe with us a bit involved. Oil prices per barrel will fall a bit more stabilized than spike by summer back to around 80$ a barrel.

    2. We will have to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan in some capacity and companies dealing in war materials will make a killing, sorry about the pun.

    3. The gap between the very very rich and poor will increase and tensions will increase, there may be another type of vocal “occupy” movement, it will be suppressed with extreme violence on American soil.

    4. The courts will hand down “generous” decisions and congress will try to pass /rescind all the laws passed to stop corporate greed and wall street investors from committing crimes that almost ended our economy. They will try to do it again. They will make more money.

    On the religious front

    1. Driscoll will make a comeback, by years end he will be pulling down more income than he was at MH.

    2. Gothard will try to make a comeback but it wont work well for him.

    3. This is not a prediction Doug Phillips will still be a tool.

    4. The Rob Bell Rick Warren posse will continue their war path, Twitter and blogs will be used on both sides. Spiritual Sounding Board, WW, PP etc blogs will play a bigger role in tipping the scales for the hurting.

    5. There will be a push to reign in the tax exemptions for clergy and it will hurt the real pastors out there not the shills working the business. I hope this fails because the ones that will be really hurt will be the ones that need the Tax exemptions and housing allowances.

    6. I really think the LGBT community will really make inroads to some surprising faith communions. My prediction is that some SBC / Reformed Baptist groups will start to soften the rhetoric a bit. I think we should keep an eye on James White, I think he will make some inroads to the muslim faith in ways even he does not think he will.

    7. Ken Ham’s Ark Project will sink 🙂 sorry about that.

    8. The age of the universe / evolution “debate” (there is no actual debate but that is a different post) will rage on.

    Some hopes

    I hope Caner comes clean and him and JD Hall meet on some platform and show real reconciliation. I understand even God cant make this happen but I can still hope.

    I wish Braxton would have lived another year, things do get better. God that one hurt and I did not even know the kid.

    I hope we have some type of contact with another civilization out there in the cosmos, that would be a real kick. Like Hawking said though dont let them know we are here. They could be like us. 🙂

    I hope to back to a real world faith community.

    I hope I actually believe that God does not hate my immortal soul. I dont expect God to love me, that is far to arrogant, just don’t loath me.

    There are my predictions and hopes.

  183. http://www.dailygalaxy.com/.a/6a00d8341bf7f753ef017ee99a39b5970d-pi

    Thats us, all of us, that ever existed, the history of histories to quote Elli from Contact. From the first days to know our species, in fact all species that live now or are gone existed there. As a small robot powered by no more than that of a small disposable cell phone took this picture of us. The Earth as it left / leaving our solar system. This hunk of outdated scrap tech could actually outlive us as a civilization. But think on this picture, we, all of us are stuck on this sand grain racing through the universe in a rather insignificant arm of an insignificant spiral galaxy in a regular cluster and super clusters etc. Thats us, all of us. I find that comforting, confining in some ways but comforting. Personally I think or species will stick around to dance among the stars in say, a thousand years. I am amazed that God, the creator of all this and more comes here to reach us. I call that good news.

  184. brian wrote:

    8. The age of the universe / evolution “debate” (there is no actual debate but that is a different post) will rage on.

    The YEC proponents will use all the communications tools made available by the same science and technology to sell their POV oblivious to the fact this same S&T provides the estimates of the age of the universe and our planet that they dispute.

  185. brian wrote:

    I hope we have some type of contact with another civilization out there in the cosmos, that would be a real kick.

    If this can happen perhaps it should have. Look up the Fermi Paradox.

  186. oldJohnJ wrote:

    brian wrote:
    8. The age of the universe / evolution “debate” (there is no actual debate but that is a different post) will rage on.
    The YEC proponents will use all the communications tools made available by the same science and technology to sell their POV oblivious to the fact this same S&T provides the estimates of the age of the universe and our planet that they dispute.

    It will rage on with the strong offense that it is all a Satanic deception. It reminds me of Gallilleo and the church trial he went through. The only reason Protestants didn’t get involved in this was because they were infighting and were in the midst of religious wars. The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod followed a very conservative Biblical view of the cosmos until the 1920s. I believe that the earth was the center of the universe. It was in the literal Bible so it couldn’t be wrong. People, including myself, can explain away any thing that doesn’t agree with Scripture, as “of the devil,” if it doesn’t literally agree with the Bible. I am not quite an evolutionist , but I feel very cautious about putting down what in written in the Word of God, so much that is poetic and not literal. In the end it means the same as far as I am concerned.

  187. oldJohnJ wrote:

    The YEC proponents will use all the communications tools made available by the same science and technology to sell their POV oblivious to the fact this same S&T provides the estimates of the age of the universe and our planet that they dispute.

    I don’t think scientific technological advances are the same thing as scientific theories as to the age of the earth.

    But to get back to what I was going to say, this kind of issue and the often heated division it can create to my mind bodes ill for the future, as the church looks like a house divided. It’s not that there is more than one view on this issue, that applies to several Christian doctrines, but rather the unwillingness to stand together on the irreducible minimum of biblical truth. What I am getting at is that theistic evolutionists (for example) need to present to the unbelieving world around them that they have more in common with AiG in that AiG composed of believers in Christ than they do with that same unbelieving world. One Lord one faith one baptism unites them in a way that the age of the earth cannot put asunder.

  188. brian wrote:

    2. We will have to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan in some capacity and companies dealing in war materials will make a killing, sorry about the pun.

    War is and always has been one of the most profitable enterprises an investor can be vested in. Conflict (crusades) in the Levant is how the Venetian shipping magnates got their start and accrued vast fortunes. Don’t be sorry for the pun, it’s an apt description of the true beneficiaries of the Afghan adventure, namely the vast supply chain of manufacturers who sell everything from 5.56 mm rounds to the high-tech-whiz-bang-gizmos needed to keep a military garrison in country.

  189. Ken wrote:

    I don’t think scientific technological advances are the same thing as scientific theories as to the age of the earth.

    Cosmological and geological dating techniques are rooted in quantum mechanics and general relativity as is all of modern electronics and communications technology. Simply stated, you can’t with intellectual consistency have one without the other.

    Evolution is a very slow process thus, I believe, YEC is one way to deny evolution the time to take place.

    The way out of this conundrum is to realize God is all knowing past, present and future thus gave the creation story in the form of a parable that was meaningful to those it was first given to and now, in a scientifically literate time, can be still be interpreted meaningfully.

  190. Ken wrote:

    What I am getting at is that theistic evolutionists (for example) need to present to the unbelieving world around them that they have more in common with AiG in that AiG composed of believers in Christ than they do with that same unbelieving world.

    We can’t. AIG will not allow it. They consider this age thing an essential of the faith. They believe that we pollute true Biblical interpretation.

    BTW-Hugh Ross (OEC) has tried and gets kicked in the face by the YEC.

  191. I do agree strongly with at least *some* of the objections raised here about the general “9 Marks” church model and practice of CHBC… but I guess that I will have to agree to disagree with many people here about the seriousness of the Bible study that was involved in *coming* to that thinking. I was a member there. I breathed the CHBC culture in pretty deeply. At the time, I bought into it and thought it was great. Now, I reject a good bit of it… but I *don’t* reject the elders’ seriousness about Scripture. (I also don’t completely *buy into* the exact way in which they study Scripture either, obviously, given that I’m a Catholic!)

    To many of the commenters here, it may well seem that CHBC’ers just use “proof-texts” to build a “Biblical case” for things with which they already agree, but I know, from my time there, that at the very least, that is not *always* the case. As I wrote earlier. Mark Dever used to be an egalitarian, probably agreeing with many people here on those particular debates. It was through serious study of the Bible that he *later* came to the complementarian position. This hardly makes him an “Alpha Male!”

    I was very hurt and messed up by some of what I experienced from CHBC people– both leaders and (many) congregants. However, I can’t buy into painting the leaders as just a bunch of knee-jerk, controlling patriarchalists. I know them too well for that. Perhaps that makes me the odd person out at TWW– a former Reformed Baptist, and current Catholic “revert”, who was deeply wounded by his former church experience, and who disagrees with a good bit of it, but who also wants to remember and defend the truly good things about it.

    On another subject, I didn’t return to the Catholic Church primarily through my personal, private study of the Bible, through which I came to the conclusion that the Church is what she claims. If I *had* done that, then that would have been an ironically “Protestant, Sola Scriptura” way of being Catholic. In other words, “I agree with the Catholic Church, because she agrees with my interpretation of the Bible.”

    By contrast, how it happened for me was that I had long held certain interpretations of Biblical texts, through my own study of the Bible, and through listening to the sermons of Protestant pastors. Then, I encountered the writings of the early Church Fathers (and the “later” Church Fathers) and was unpleasantly surprised to find that my interpretations of the Bible, in many cases, on many subjects, were decidedly *not* the interpretations that were held by most of recorded Christianity (at least from what I could see) from 100 A.D. until the Reformation.

    Most of my Reformed friends who even *tried* to respond to me were content to say something along the lines of “Well, God just allowed a lot of professing Christians to be seriously wrong about a lot of things for 1,400 (or so) years.. *but* since the Reformation, most “serious Protestants” have basically been right on ‘the essentials.'” (Which, for me, begged the question of “Who decides what exactly are ‘the essentials'”?)

    Anyway, even though I still wasn’t completely convinced that all of my distinctively “Protestant” Biblical interpretations were wrong, I thought it was even less likely that, for over 1, 400 years, God had simply allowed 99% of professing Christians to be seriously misled about the Eucharist, baptismal regeneration, Purgatory, Saints being able to hear our requests for prayers, the importance of Mary in God’s plan of salvation, and justification not being “by faith alone.” Therefore, I decided that it was *more* likely that I had been wrong, for many years, about many of my interpretations of the Bible– and, therefore, I returned to the Catholic Church.

    Now that I *am* Catholic “again,” so to speak, being Catholic *does* color my interpretation of the Bible– but I didn’t get there (back to the Church) primarily through a kind of Protestant-style study of the Bible (except for on the subject of justification). I know of a few other people who *have* seemed to become Catholic via that path, but I’m not one of them.

  192. @ Christopher Lake:

    Actually, I think that your reason for joining the Catholic Church is not uncommon for Protestants. I do think, however, that you have not escaped begging the question problems since there are problems with that wherever you place your authority chips. I don’t want to go beyond that because it has been argued to death over on the ODP. Just wanted to be clear about that point and not to argue with your decision.

    Out of curiosity, are you aware of the Founders and their agenda? Or the history of the SBC, particularly the past few decades? Or the relationship of the SBC’s conservative leadership and the political right? That might make a difference in how you view what goes on at CHBC and 9 Marks. I believe you have received a carefully crafted script that is played out in places beyond CHBC and 9 Marks.

    And, again, out of curiosity, do you know which particular texts Dever studied which drove him, presumably relunctantly, to the hierarchical view? I did not know that he had been egalitarian, though I should have suspected he was at one point. I wonder if it was interaction with Grudem at Cambridge?

    I have run into lots of complementarians who *think* they have studied the scriptures deeply, including myself at one point, but have actually only read the people who have written in favor of it with their prooftexts, particularly Grudem who has built his career on this one issue. It is a very cozy clique.

  193. @Christopher Lake,

    Thank you for posting your thoughts about Mark Dever. When all is said and done, I don’t care how much he studied The Bible to arrive at his 9 Marks, he missed the part about love. Love people. Love your neighbor as your self.

    He just invented a bunch of legalistic rules to problems that could have been solved in better ways. My former church was a 9 Marks church, and it has done an incredible amount of damage.

    If there are names of church members on the church’s list but they no longer come to church, wouldn’t the practical solution be to follow-up and ask them: a) how they were doing; b) if they still considered themselves church members; and c) if they would like to have their name added or removed from the list. But Dever’s insistence on membership covenants? Give me a break.

    I could go on with all of the problems with Mark Dever’s 9 Marks of an (Un)Healthy, (Controlling, Authoritarian, Boundary-Less) Church but I won’t. It has broken and wounded good Christians and their families who will not go back to any church and have become part of the growing population of “The Dones” (professed Christians who are “Done” with formalized church). And it has been a terrible witness to a watching world of non-Christians.

  194. This is neo Puritanism. I don’t know if I could label it heresy, but it is definitely cult like in its control. Now ESS may actually be heresy. It is expanding and changing doctrine, and if it isn’t Arianism, borders on it. If it is determined to be orthodox belief it opens a Pandora’s box of beliefs that were determined to be heterodox by church councils in the early centuries, and all with the excuse that the people who advocate for such views are “conservative bible believers.” Heresy can also occur among conservative evangelicals. This is something that is being forgotten among a vocal minority whose primary concern has been resisting modernity. Modernity is an enemy because it degrades biblical and spiritual authority, but so are unusual teachings such as ESS. Also of concern if the view NeoCalvinist complementarians have towards women. Arminian complementarians accept woman working outside the home and supervising men in secular jobs. Neocalvinist are against females exercising authority in the secular realm. These differences need to be evaluated by Arminians. What is the Neocalvinist program.? It may not be innocuously different views of fellow culture warriors.? What of oral contraception? And what about dominion theology? Isn’t it part of the program? People need to start questioning. I wiil be very careful before I go to a church that professes the SBC brand.

  195. Mark wrote:

    This is neo Puritanism. I don’t know if I could label it heresy, but it is definitely cult like in its control….Heresy can also occur among conservative evangelicals. This is something that is being forgotten among a vocal minority whose primary concern has been resisting modernity. Modernity is an enemy because it degrades biblical and spiritual authority….Also of concern if the view NeoCalvinist complementarians have towards women. Arminian complementarians accept woman working outside the home and supervising men in secular jobs. Neocalvinist are against females exercising authority in the secular realm. These differences need to be evaluated by Arminians. What is the Neocalvinist program.? It may not be innocuously different views of fellow culture warriors.? What of oral contraception? And what about dominion theology? Isn’t it part of the program? People need to start questioning. I wiil be very careful before I go to a church that professes the SBC brand.

    Excellent post, Mark. Thank you. I too will be very careful about avoiding the SBC brand, and its off shoot independent churches, after this insufferable experience at my recent former church. I’ve never seen so many insufferable ideas and a lack of Christian love.

  196. Sopwith wrote:

    From this time forward, let your seasons be greatly blessed, in Jesus’ name!
    & don’t take ‘no’ for an answer…

    I’m claiming this blessing for me, Sopy! Perfect words at the perfect time.

  197. Gram3,

    Thanks for your replies. I am familiar with the history of the SBC and with the Founders movement. The latter website used to be a regular stop for me on the internet. Now that I think about it, I had completely forgotten about this until now, but that website is actually how I first learned of the existence of “Reformed Baptists” in general, and of CHBC in particular.

    Many years ago, after a period in which I had returned to Christian faith (but not the Catholic Church, about which I had many misgivings), I was attending an SBC-affiliated Baptist church in Maryland. This church was not Calvinistic at all. It was more of a 1980s/early ’90s-style Baptist church of the kind that was ubiquitous when evangelicalism still had quite a bit of social/cultural cache in America. The “Left Behind” books were very popular at this church. Tim LaHaye even used to teach the Sunday School class!! Definitely *not* a Calvinistic Baptist church.

    Through my own study though, I was coming to Calvinistic convictions. (To be clear, I did see, even at the time, that there are “problem passages” for Calvinism, but Calvinist authors seemed to usually have good explanations for how to explain those passages from within their hermeneutical framework, so I wasn’t too troubled– at that time, that is.) I was a deacon at the non-Calvinist Baptist church, and I loved serving there, but I was also becoming frustrated that “Calvinist-sounding” chapters such as Romans 9 were never seriously exegeted and preached on from the pulpit. In short, I was realizing that this church and I were on very different theological trajectories.

    One day, I happened upon the Founders website. After doing a good bit of reading there, I felt that I had found a place, and a whole Baptist movement, of which I was previously unaware– *and* that exactly fit my new theological paradigm. However, I couldn’t find any “Founders-friendly churches” close to where I lived in Maryland, so I did a search for D.C. and found CHBC. I called their number almost immediately, spoke with the secretary, and within a few weeks, I had become a “regular attender” there and was very excited about pursuing membership.

    Back then, if someone had explained to me that CHBC was very warm and welcoming to new people and to church members, but that there also existed this practice of complete “shunning” toward members who had been “excommunicated,” I probably would have been repulsed and and would have left the church.

    The strangest thing to me, to this day, is that Mark Dever, himself, actually preaches *against* shunning. At least from what I can remember, he exhorted us to continue to engage people who have been excommunicated (if they were willing to *be* engaged), in the hope that they might still repent of the ostensible “unrepentant sin” that had brought about the discipline. However, when he learned that I had returned to the Catholic Church, he didn’t attempt to engage me at all. He just unfriended me on Facebook without one word. Perhaps the reason for this is that I had already moved, years ago, to another “9 Marks-style” church in New Mexico, and therefore, in his reasoning, the elders of *that* church were responsible for engaging me (which some of them did), rather than him. Still, I know very well, from the general CHBC mindset towards Catholicism, that Dever and his colleagues now virtually *must* believe that I am either a severely misguided and mistaken Christian who is on a very dangerous spiritual path (as a “reverted” Catholic), or that, possibly, in their view, I never was a true Christian at all, even while I was at CHBC.

    Either way, according to their own views, as preached from the pulpit, I am now on a path that leads to spiritual destruction– so I simply cannot understand how *none* of them, not one, has contacted me to talk with me at all. I would actually welcome such contact. (I think that I may differ from many people at TWW in that respect though!) Don’t get me wrong– I have *no* intentions of ever returning to CHBC, or any church like it, but it would nice to know that they care enough about the state of my soul to contact me, especially if they think I am currently on the way to Hell!

  198. Michaela,

    Thanks for your replies. I agree with you that, no matter how much Mark Dever has studied the Bible, somehow, somewhere, he has missed much of what the Bible teaches about love.

    The lengthy reply that I just wrote to Gram3, above, goes more into detail about my continued befuddlement about the serious difference between the preaching and the practice, in certain ways, at CHBC. I still feel pain over it now many years later. I’m so sorry for the abuse that you endured at your former church. I feel exactly as you do about never wanting to return to another “9 Marks-style” church.

  199. Gram3,

    P.S. Sorry– I completely forgot to answer your question about my knowledge of how Mark Dever came to be Scripturally convinced of complementarianism. I spent a good chunk of my morning writing the above reply to you (and I was happy to do so), but I may not be able to write again until tomorrow. Thanks so much for your patience!

  200. This may sound like a strange question: am I the only person who finds it strange that CHBC is a member of the SBC,yet it is a member of a Neo puritan network that wouldn’t allow its members free flow to a SBC church outside its neo puritan network? In times past this would have been frowned upon by Southern Baptist entities. It would be viewed as anti-denominational.

  201. @ Mark:

    Well, for one thing, Founders/9Marks churches are trying to build their influence within the SBC, so they don’t look kindly on SBC churches who oppose their agenda. At the same time, I know of a couple of Founders churches who will dismiss their members to other SBC churches and independents who are not Founders-like but who do not actively oppose that agenda. Think of it as a pressure-relief valve to get rid of people quietly who question their agenda and thereby purify the membership. Founders are religious about sending delegations to local, state and the national conventions to vote for their approved candidates. I don’t think it is an accident that they have an essentially political model, which is clear when you read their materials.

  202. @ Gram3:

    Well this is too bad. Like a parasite, they know how to play the system. I looked at a spectrum chart to see where I am theologically. I am more a traditionalist baptist. I don’t fit in with 5 point Calvinists and even one of the traditionalist beliefs, the security of the believer is not Calvinist at all. This is a sad situation in my opinion, and controversial outsiders such as Norman Geisler appear to be expressing more concern than Southern Baptist insiders. Geisler claims the young restless and reformed crowd in the SBC is more Calvinist than John Calvin.I like the reaction of that Kentucky association that refused to allow a church into its association that was tainted with Neopuritan teachings. Sorry, but this is how I feel.

  203. Christopher Lake wrote:

    ….Back then, if someone had explained to me that CHBC was very warm and welcoming to new people and to church members, but that there also existed this practice of complete “shunning” toward members who had been “excommunicated,” I probably would have been repulsed and and would have left the church.

    The strangest thing to me, to this day, is that Mark Dever, himself, actually preaches *against* shunning. At least from what I can remember, he exhorted us to continue to engage people who have been excommunicated (if they were willing to *be* engaged), in the hope that they might still repent of the ostensible “unrepentant sin” that had brought about the discipline. than him….Still, I know very well, from the general CHBC mindset towards Catholicism, that Dever and his colleagues now virtually *must* believe that I am either a severely misguided and mistaken Christian who is on a very dangerous spiritual path (as a “reverted” Catholic), or that, possibly, in their view, I never was a true Christian at all, even while I was at CHBC.

    Either way, according to their own views, as preached from the pulpit, I am now on a path that leads to spiritual destruction– so I simply cannot understand how *none* of them, not one, has contacted me to talk with me at all….Don’t get me wrong– I have *no* intentions of ever returning to CHBC, or any church like it, but it would nice to know that they care enough about the state of my soul to contact me, especially if they think I am currently on the way to Hell!

    @Christopher Lake,

    I appreciate the thought with which you have explained your journey of faith. I am very sorry that the members of Mark Dever’s church have not had any more contact with you since you returned to Catholicism.

    I was just thinking the other day how I would like to bill a woman church member and my former senior pastor, at my 9 Marks style church in Silicon Valley, for the cost of a beautiful Italian crucifix that I got rid of because of the two of them. The domineering, insufferable, controlling older woman came to my home one time and when she saw the Italian crucifix (which I just had up because as far as I was concerned it was nice art and I hadn’t even been a Catholic) she went on a tirade against me and it. She was a former Catholic. She always had a negative opinon about something and was delighted to share it. I was baffled as to how to stop her. I finally went to my pastor and asked him for some ideas on how to handle her. He took her side and went on litany as to why I shouldn’t have the Italian crucifix, that he’d been offended too and he was a former Catholic, and then told me why I shouldn’t have it. Under great pressure from them, I got rid of it. I also was angry about that. I feel like telling him to stop watching basketball and playing it because its an ‘idol’ for him. And finally I feel like telling them, “OK come up with a list of gifts you really like that are really expensive. And I get to select something from each of your lists that you have to get rid of.” I’m mad that I caved in to their pressure.

  204. Christopher Lake wrote:

    Michaela,

    Thanks for your replies. I agree with you that, no matter how much Mark Dever has studied the Bible, somehow, somewhere, he has missed much of what the Bible teaches about love….at CHBC. I still feel pain over it now many years later….”

    @Christopher Lake,

    I think that many people are still in pain years later from their experiences in these 9 Marks churches and those like them. They are very abusive places. A friend, who did not ever join my former church because her husband wasn’t at peace with them becoming members and he couldn’t put his finger on the ‘the why’ at the time, said to me last night that these churches lure us all in with things like good Bible teaching and expositional preaching. But they spring a trap of other abuses on us that we aren’t prepared for (legalism, authoritarianism, patriarchy, excommunication, shunning, fear).

    The books on spiritual abuse are quite helpful and have helped me say “ah ha. Yes, that’s it”. (Books that I found helpful:
    1) The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse by David Johnson and Jeff Van Vonderen (both pastors);
    2) Healing Spiritual Abuse by Ken Blue (a pastor);
    3) Churches That Abuse by Ronald M. Enroth (a professor of Sociology)
    which he has now made available for free here: http://www.ccel.us/churches.toc.html
    4)Toxic Faith by Stephen Arteburn and Jack Felton.

  205. @Gram 3, Christopher Lake, Mark and anybody else:

    I really appreciate your posts and I have learned so much from each of you (and Eagle and others too).

    As I look for a new church home, do you have any tips for me? I don’t want to land in the kind of mess that I was just kicked out of (excommunicated and shunned for…well…not being a doormat, or for that matter wall-to-wall carpeting)!

    I know I need the leading of the Holy Spirit. But any advice/wise counsel would be appreciated.

    Thank you.

    Michaela
    Northern California (Silicon Valley)

  206. Michaela,

    Maybe you should visit the Catholic Church or something more gentle than what you have experienced. The RCC has some problems and there is a lot I disagree with them , but they tend to be warm towards visitors. If you want to get away from evangelicalism but don’t want to throw church and fellowship out, try the antithesis, just for fellowship.

    I can relate to your story:

    “The domineering, insufferable, controlling older woman came to my home one time and when she saw the Italian crucifix (which I just had up because as far as I was concerned it was nice art and I hadn’t even been a Catholic) she went on a tirade against me and it. She was a former Catholic.”

    That crucifix must have been beautiful. It is fine art, and it isn’t an idol. Sorry you were forced to give it up because former Catholics were offended by the faith of their fathers. I often wonder sometimes if their hatred of the tradition they left has something to do with anger towards their parents. My parents were evangelicals whose best friends were Catholic. I spent my childhood going to Catholic Church because my parents would leave me with their best friends. So I have pleasant memories of Catholics.

  207. Mark wrote:

    Michaela,

    Maybe you should visit the Catholic Church or something more gentle than what you have experienced….If you want to get away from evangelicalism but don’t want to throw church and fellowship out, try the antithesis, just for fellowship….
    I often wonder sometimes if their hatred of the tradition they left has something to do with anger towards their parents….

    @Mark,

    Thanks for your quick reply. I think that you are spot on: that my former evangelical senior pastor and that insufferable, domineering woman church member are very angry with their parents (he with this father; she with her mother) and it comes out in this kind of inappropriate anger toward others.

    My father was a Russian Orthodox Christian (not really observant); my mother is Presbyterian (not really observant). I was raised between two churches with very different traditions. The common evangelical mantra of hating all Christians who are different and castigating them just doesn’t sit well with me.

    I think I will try the Methodist Church, Lutheran, etc. I am taking my time. I really feel like I’ve just survived a very bad car crash after being excommunicated and shunned from my independent church of eight years and losing ALL of my friends. It’s like a death.

  208. Michaela wrote:

    I am taking my time. I really feel like I’ve just survived a very bad car crash after being excommunicated and shunned

    That is wise, and it is good that you realize that you have experienced trauma. I don’t have a church to recommend for you because Gramp3 and I have had bad experiences with a range of them, including the Catholic church. One thing to think about is to think long and hard about the real reason and the real solution. I’ll give an example that goes both ways.

    People who are harmed by liturgical churches may blame the liturgical or formal nature of the church and be drawn toward informal evangelicalism or even wilder forms of charismaticism. Seen that in action.

    Other people who have been harmed by non-liturgical or less-structured forms of the church which they perceive as unordered may be drawn to the formality, structure, and historical tradition of the Catholic church.

    See how the same mistake can take very different forms? I may conclude that “A” is the problem with church 1. Church 2 is very “not A” so I conclude that church 2 is good or at least better than church 1. That may not be the case because church 2 may have “B” which others have discovered is harmful but which I have not personally experienced. How do I know this? Because I’ve made the mistake!

  209. @ Gram3:

    Well said….I’ve seen questionable avtivity in Protestantism and that is not limited to that. I grew up Catholic and saw a scandal in an elementary school that was about abuse of power. My parents pooled me from Catholic school when I was a kid and put me in public schools. The Orthodox Church is popular with a lot of people today as teh answer, and yet they have their demons as well. Look at how the Romanian Orthodox, Russian, etc.. coroperated with communist governments and toliteran systems. The Lutherans did that as well in Europe.

  210. Michaela wrote:

    I think I will try the Methodist Church, Lutheran, etc. I am taking my time.

    I’ve been there with the left boot of fellowship experience – a long time ago now. If it helps, I wouldn’t feel the need to jump straight back into church life. It won’t do you any harm to take a breather and get the old out of your system.

    I my own case, a few of us just got together for a bit of fellowship, bible study and prayer – and just being friends and relaxing together for several months before actually getting back into a more formal church setting.

    I know we are told ‘not to neglect to meet together’, but we fulfilled that more in our small group than some believers do who faithfully attend formal church where the ‘fellowship’ is little more than a weekly view of the head in front of you! Meeting together involves more than a few relative strangers happening to be under the same roof for an hour or two once a week. 🙂

  211. @Gram3, Eagle, Ken, and Mark,

    Thank you all so much for your counsel. I really appreciate it during this time.
    Yes, it was a trauma.

    My sister, an unbeliever, said that she’s glad that I am out of that independent church as she feared their influence on me. She also feared that I would severe contact with her, because of them, and we’re twins. She said that all of the things that I am saying now about my former church in my evaluation (patriarchy, authoritarianism, legalism, lack of checks and balances from an outside authority, unsound ‘Biblical Counseling’ (which is really just listening to an insufferable ‘opinion’ from the pastors/elders that they try to cram down your throat and they are incompetent in all of the major life issues: domestic violence, alcoholism, sexual abuse, etc.).

    Best wishes,

    Michaela

  212. @ Michaela:

    Blessings to you, too. Keep your eyes on Jesus. Also what Ken said is very good advice, IMO. Find some people who look like the Jesus we see in the Bible and fellowship with them.

  213. Gram3 wrote:

    @ Michaela:

    Blessings to you, too. Keep your eyes on Jesus. Also what Ken said is very good advice, IMO. Find some people who look like the Jesus we see in the Bible and fellowship with them.

    Will do, Gram3. Will keep my eyes on Jesus and spend time with folks who look like him. (By the way, I hit post comment too soon earlier. My twin sister said that all of the criticisms I had of my former church she saw in them years earlier.)

  214. Mark wrote:

    “The domineering, insufferable, controlling older woman came to my home one time and when she saw the Italian crucifix (which I just had up because as far as I was concerned it was nice art and I hadn’t even been a Catholic) she went on a tirade against me and it. She was a former Catholic.”

    Catholics-turned-Fundagelicals are the most rabid Anti-Catholics out there. Continuous foaming “NO POPERY!” Jihad.

  215. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Mark wrote:

    “The domineering, insufferable, controlling older woman came to my home one time and when she saw the Italian crucifix (which I just had up because as far as I was concerned it was nice art and I hadn’t even been a Catholic) she went on a tirade against me and it. She was a former Catholic.”

    Catholics-turned-Fundagelicals are the most rabid Anti-Catholics out there. Continuous foaming “NO POPERY!” Jihad.

    Spot on, H.U.G.