A Quote by Deb That Sums Up Two Days of Posts on the History of SGM/CLC

Thank you Deb for this awesome summation.

The bottom line from our perspective is that churches affiliated with Sovereign Grace Ministries have a specific DNA.  The pastors who have worked in this system also possess that DNA.  SGM perhaps more than any other denomination has exhibited harmful 'shepherding' behavior and a patriarchal approach to ministry.

Comments

A Quote by Deb That Sums Up Two Days of Posts on the History of SGM/CLC — 151 Comments

  1. I think this quote is an excellent summation and something for people to keep in mind when evaluating the impact of a ministry philosophy, style, and culture. Being able to say, “Well, I wasn’t named in the lawsuit,” or “I kept my hands clean,” is not enough. I think this quote by Joshua Harris upon resigning captures a very important element:
    “I’m realizing that everything that I’ve learned about leadership, pastoral ministry, and much of the Christian life has been in one context. It’s all been here. While I’m grateful for some of that, there is a lot that I’ve realized needs to be evaluated and changed (and that’s hard to do while you’re leading). I’ve been trying to grow and change, but there’s a lot of muscle-memory when it comes to leadership. I believe that to be fruitful for the next stretch of my ministry, I need to step away from the responsibility of leadership and learn in a different context. ” http://www.covlife.org/blog/joshua_harris_sunday_remarks

  2. Aluminum!

    God, I never knew that you looked like a British chap named Nick across The Pond.

  3. Sadly there are too many others with a similar DNA: c
    ontinue to search them out girls!

  4. The real problem with SGM and similar Neo-Cals is that they are not only like bulldogish with their theology they are subtly deceptive. This is what makes them so dangerous, plus they are great debaters. A new believer or even seasoned believer walking in to this church would have no clue what they are up to until many times it is too late. They seem so righteous on the outside, but their cup is dirty on the inside.

  5. Faith wrote:

    The real problem with SGM and similar Neo-Cals is that they are not only like bulldogish with their theology they are subtly deceptive. This is what makes them so dangerous, plus they are great debaters. A new believer or even seasoned believer walking in to this church would have no clue what they are up to until many times it is too late. They seem so righteous on the outside, but their cup is dirty on the inside.

    I have witnessed the deception as well. Do you have thoughts as to why the two (Neo-Calvinist theology and deception) seem to occur together?

  6. Faith wrote:

    The real problem with SGM and similar Neo-Cals is that they are not only like bulldogish with their theology they are subtly deceptive. This is what makes them so dangerous, plus they are great debaters

    I agree, except the part about being great debaters. They are clever debaters, when they are willing to debate, but they are not great debaters except in the sense that they are able to persuade people of things that are fabricated and proof-texted. The culture within the churches is not about open inquiry or being a Berean and searching the Scriptures. It is about disseminating the System and teaching people how great and deep their theology is. The System particulars may vary from church to church, but the underlying principle they want people to absorb is Submission to Authority, and they are not talking about God’s authority, which is not to be confused with either theirs or Nick’s.

  7. Gram3 wrote:

    The culture within the churches is … about disseminating the System and teaching people how great and deep their theology is.

    That anything like the TV Trope “People’s Republic of Tyranny”?
    Where the more adjectives about Democracy there are in a country’s official name, the nastier a dictatorship it is?
    Lotsa “Because We Say So!” in both.

  8. abi miah wrote:

    Do you have thoughts as to why the two (Neo-Calvinist theology and deception) seem to occur together?

    Calvinistas stress absolute loyalty and obedience to the pastor along with threats of discipline for any old thing since they refuse to define it. Can you imagine selling that to a congregation? Deception is biblical when it keeps you in *authority.*

  9. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Don’t know about TV much…Definitely true of the People’s Democratic Republic names. I do know that it is difficult to escape a curriculum by one of the GGOs, like TgC, 9Marks, SGM, etc., especially if you include book studies of the Gospel Glitterati authors. They will tell you what is Biblical, so there is no need to actually explore and discuss what the Bible says, nor is there any need for the gifts or illumination of the Holy Spirit among the members of the Body.

  10. dee wrote:

    @ Michaela:
    God is cuter than Nick.

    LOL, Dee!

    Nick, we will still award you some kind of prize.

  11. In case some reader hasn’t heard of these FREE resources before, here are Dr. Ronald Enroth’s well-known books about churches that abuse. Bless him for making them available for FREE now. (I always try to post them on the articles that have to do with abuse, in case some person would find them useful.)

    I wanted to share Dr. Ronald Enroth’s well-known books on abusive churches (which he has, bless him, now made available for FREE) in case a reader would be helped by reading them:

    1. Churches That Abuse
    http://www.ccel.us/churches.toc.html

    2. Recovering From Churches That Abuse
    http://www.ccel.us/churchesrec.toc.html

  12. Re God speaking: We must keep in mind that almost all of the time God speaks, it comes out of the mouth or pen of a human being! When God draws or paints, however, we can see it all around us. When it is in words, we must carefully evaluate whether it is, in fact, something that God might say, and then carefully evaluate whether he might say it through that human, and then carefully evaluate whether both of those things make sense in terms of what else we know about God and about those who have claimed to be his mouthpiece. Generally, I suspect that most of the people who presume to speak for God are not, the exception being those who actually do something that God on earth, Jesus, told us to do, e.g., what Matthew 25 reports that Jesus said.

  13. Gram 3 I would say you are right about the debating. Maybe I should have implied that they are good at the art of illusion in debating. Circular reasoning is more like it and contradictions. To others though how and what they say sounds sooooo…….”intellectual”.

    abi miah, like Deb said that authority is key. Also, I think they go to seminary and come out believing in the lies that they are told and then disperse them to the rest of the congregation. I truly believe that most of these pastors had good intentions and only a few actually have an agenda. Those with the agenda are the higher ups/elitists. The deception, in my opinion, is because they are not adhering to the simplicity of the Gospel. Jesus did not speak in such grandiose and intellectuall verbose- the Pharisees did. His disciples were simple men. The thicker you wade in the Calvinist pool the more confused and depressed you become. The other reason is that neo-Calvinism is based on all of your spiritual essence outside of you -not inside; in other words, the Holy Spirit is not seen as One who dwells in you and gives you the power; the Holy Spirit is seen as One who directs a believer from the outside. It is derives its existence from a gnostic viewpoint. You cannot do anything, everything is done for you and to you- even evil. This is why the elders can implement authority for they have the higher knowledge and you don’t.

  14. Faith wrote:

    The deception, in my opinion, is because they are not adhering to the simplicity of the Gospel. Jesus did not speak in such grandiose and intellectuall verbose- the Pharisees did. His disciples were simple men. The thicker you wade in the Calvinist pool the more confused and depressed you become. The other reason is that neo-Calvinism is based on all of your spiritual essence outside of you -not inside; in other words, the Holy Spirit is not seen as One who dwells in you and gives you the power;

    Yes, this is exactly how I see it, too, and you put it so well. And I totally knew what you meant by the debating. They *think* they know all the answers, but they don’t know how to derive the formula, so to speak. They have memorized the “right” answer, along with answers to anticipated objections which they obtained from their own spiritual authority, but they don’t know how to get there from the text. So they punt by turning the table.

    So many times they start with poisoning the well with things like “We don’t want to be man-centered like the easy-believism, but we want to be God-centered” or something like that. “Mutualism is the path to liberalism” etc. It sounds to me like you’ve had more than a bit of much exposure as I have. And I agree that *most* pewpeons have no idea what is going on.

  15. That quote really does sum it up for my daughter and me. When her and I are discussing different church options or new things our own church starts getting into that just doesn’t feel right, we often say “it’s just so SGMish.”

  16. Gram 3, my husband attended a fundamentalist Calvinist church and school. This attributed to a lot of his growing up thinking that God did good OR evil things to you (predestined it); he struggled with this and it affected our marriage. We also attended a MacArthur church for about 3 years. This was the church that eventually got me to start thinking “why am I going to church?”. I have to say I am glad I went through the experience; we did not stay long enough to fully become immersed and the elders kept us at arms length anyway. They pretty much made us feel invisible (this has happened in pretty much all the churches I have attended).
    I think they knew the type of person I was just by my conversation, for I would bring up the Holy Spirit in discussion and how active He was in my life. That was one element of Scripture they did not bring up often and I wondered why, so I started to question. Plus, my husband and I started to have feelings of despair and doubt, so we questioned “why at a church would we have these types of questions, should we not have peace, joy and love for one another and in our own self ?”. This made us question our own salvation and assurance of it. It made us question whether we were the “proper” Christian or not. The other part I was questioning was “why were extra Biblical activities, such as spiritual disciplines being added (journaling, meditation, etc.) as something that made the perfect Christian?”. I can understand that an individual could do things as their own personal walk with Jesus, so in of itself these practices are not wrong; but if they are required then I have a problem. This is the problem with Calvinism, it requires a perfection that is hard to attain, and when it is not then the assurance of salvation is questioned (maybe we did not persevere).
    When I wanted to go ask our pastor these questions, my husband did not and I am glad now we didn’t. We just left. I think back and if we would have gone to the elders and pastor with our concerns, we would have place ourselves in a firestorm. The other good thing was that we were about to become members and we backed out.

  17. Again I have to give credit to TWW team for dealing with these issues and abuse. It certainly aided my research into what was happening to the church at large. I may not have been abused per se, but I certainly understand and side with those who were and are. My heart breaks when I hear the stories, for I love the Lord Jesus and He weeps with those who are brokenhearted. This is how I look at my Savior and anyone (I do not care what church you are) that does not look to the simplicity of Christ and His message of love I HAVE to question. This is the first and foremost important doctrine – whether or not we love others and Him. Love conquers all fear. With love, the Spirit moves in each and every Christian to do what is good. Neo-Calvinism (and other doctrines, as well) is an “intellectual” gospel with no love. Mercy and justice are words that are manipulated and verses are twisted to FIT their doctrine. I think this is why they could not understand or comprehend where I was coming from because I knew the Spirit. The Spirit has power to overcome and conquer those with another agenda.
    The Spirit is about the individual and his or her relationship with Abba.

  18. Arce wrote:

    So, God COULD be speaking from someone who looks like our friend from Scotland.

    Are you saying that God disguised himself as Nick? Kind of a covert operation? 🙂

  19. Faith wrote:

    Mercy and justice are words that are manipulated and verses are twisted to FIT their doctrine

    You make an important point here. We think we are operating on a level playing field when people use words like love, mercy, and let me add, grace. That assumption can lead us into an abusive situation. We needs to always ask what people mean by words.

  20. Faith wrote:

    “why at a church would we have these types of questions, should we not have peace, joy and love for one another and in our own self ?”.

    Part of the problem is that the church kept you at arm’s length. Anybody with an ounce of compassion could have come alongside you and supported you as you searched for answers. That church failed you. They were probably far more interested in their version of proper doctrine than they were in in caring for you.

  21. Gram3 wrote:

    So many times they start with poisoning the well with things like “We don’t want to be man-centered like the easy-believism, but we want to be God-centered” or something like that. “Mutualism is the path to liberalism” etc.

    Sound bites which are accepted at face value. Today, I will introduce you all to a church who is not into easy believism and is, instead, poised to abuse people.

  22. Well Dee I was clued in real fast that my husband and I were to be used, not become a part of….
    When I wanted to work with college students, there was no use for me there; they placed me in the nursery. Which by the way is no problem to serve in the nursery and many people love being there, but it was not my gift. When we kept doing and thinking “our thing” (my husband and I) then they did not want to have anything to do with us. We were the ones to “watch” out for. I knew and felt this pretty much anywhere I went. I did feel alone and I think that is what drove me to reading Scripture for myself and relying on Him…. alone. Mind you I am not trying to say that I had the answers or have them, this is just where I was. It has been a pretty lonely ride and still is. I do not have many friends who get the fact that His way and yoke is easy and burden is light. But it has driven me to start loving more because I get how lonely someone can feel when there is no one there.

  23. When you are a person who comes in with questions…..right away you will have a problem fitting in. They don’t want your kind and they know how to spot you.

  24. In my experience, every denomination – from the Roman church down to the smallest independent fellowships meeting in somebody’s house – has a particular DNA.

    That DNA reinforces itself over time as well. In the larger denominations, this effect can be remarkably strong. A bit like London’s “wobbly bridge” (wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Bridge_London) that had to be closed almost as soon as it was opened to the public because of a resonance that was set up when people began walking across it. There’s a video clip at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAXVa__XWZ8 in which you can actually watch hundreds of people all swaying in time. I should emphasise: this was not caused by the wind or other environmental factors (as in the famous Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse), and it was not planned by anyone. It began as a very tiny effect that slightly influenced the way a few people walked, and the more people it influenced, the more people it influenced.

    It can be the same in a denomination. Subtle imbalances in the way people interact in the group begin to influence more and more people in a runaway group-think effect until it is almost impossible for anyone to function in the denomination without walking exactly in synch with the dominant culture. This is even stronger if a leader emerges, or arrives, who is both strongly opinionated, and is believed to be a great thinker/leader/preacher – or whatever else carries weight with that denomination.

    The odd thing is that even the leader may not have much of an agenda to start with. Rather, he himself (it’s usually a man in practice, though pride is an equal-opportunities delusion) gets caught up in the resonance created around him, until he honestly believes himself to be on a mission from God to correct everybody else. The end result: a monoculture of people who all think they’ve been “transformed by the power of God’s Word” when in fact they’ve just self-selected according to a certain narrow set of character traits. In other words, it’s counterfeit love, which certainly manifests if any of the cultural mainstays get caught with their hands in the till, or with their trousers down. “Love” proves itself to be a toxic kind of loyalty that can’t face the reality of flawed leaders and therefore makes excuses for their sins. True love addresses sin.

    Herein lies the enormous value of mixing with Christians whose cultures, histories and accumulated traditions differ from one’s own. Left to my own devices, I might well just hang around a church full of people like me. But – to paraphrase Jesus – sinners and scumbags love people who love them. We don’t need any miraculous salvation for that.

  25. @ God:

    Hmm… God seems to’ve posted as me there. That would certainly be an under-cover operation!

    Although God does have previous in that regard; the whole “Galilean carpenter” thing wrong-footed a lot of people.

  26. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    Note to self:

    When in the habit of commenting under a smart-a**e pseudonym, adjust the content of the pre-filled fields before you click “Post Comment”.

  27. Faith wrote:

    The real problem with SGM and similar Neo-Cals is that they are not only like bulldogish with their theology they are subtly deceptive.

    Faith, you’re scarin’ me here. Not only with this quote, but a few others from your comments farther down. You’re articulating exactly some of my concerns about a movement toward a 9Marks format in my church. Here are some of your other quotables:

    [N]eo-Calvinism is based on all of your spiritual essence outside of you -not inside; in other words, the Holy Spirit is not seen as One who dwells in you and gives you the power; the Holy Spirit is seen as One who directs a believer from the outside. It is derives its existence from a gnostic viewpoint. You cannot do anything, everything is done for you and to you- even evil. This is why the elders can implement authority for they have the higher knowledge and you don’t.

    This is the problem with Calvinism, it requires a perfection that is hard to attain, and when it is not then the assurance of salvation is questioned (maybe we did not persevere).

    You’ve hit the nail on the head.

  28. Nick, I think PRIDE is the key. Many don’t walk in saying “I am going to control these people and make them my peons”. Over time, however, when a leader sees a problem it needs or “has” to be fixed. They develop this viewpoint that they (instead of the Spirit) are the Ones to fix it. They corral others into that same viewpoint and then this creates a us vs. them. The ones that are corralled have a “sense of purpose” and they are wanted. This then creates a barrier that is hard to penetrate because it is well fortified. I mean look at the example of Julie vs. Tony Jones. They start to believe the lies of Satan that tell them they can know more and be more (Adam and Eve complex). Thus starts a hierarchy. God says that He gives a spirit to know and He gives us the Spirit to grow (stating this my paraphrased version). We are given a spirit to understand and know who God is (Romans 1) and we are as believers are given the Spirit to grow MORE in understanding and action (1 Tim. 2:4-5) “He wants all humanity to be delivered and come to full knowledge of the truth. 5 For God is one;[a] and there is but one Mediator between God and humanity, Yeshua the Messiah, himself human”

    You know with all the talk of demons and mystical stuff I would have to say this is where Satan just laughs because the area of controlling churches and abuses is where his greatest weapon is.

  29. Whoo…..looking back on that verse 1 Tim.2:4-5 made me take a second look “He WANTS ALL humanity to be delivered and come to full knowledge of the truth” not just some or the elect. Ponder that for a moment.

  30. @ Faith:
    That is an interesting story, Faith. I can’t think of a more effective way of driving people away from Christianity than MacAurthur’s religion. There few things as toxic as legalistic fundamentalism combined with Calvinism, combined with a passé foundationalist epistemology. It worked on my atheist brothers, anyway. They take great glee in assuming that all Christians are as rude, arrogant, and simple-minded as the MacAurthur camp, which is terribly unjust of them.

  31. Dr. Fundy. I now understand why Atheists think the way they do. Just to think how arrogant I was to believe I was so religious and had all the answers myself. I looked down on unbelievers and atheists; I had an us vs. them attitude; but also I did not quite fit in at church either, so I was wading around in a shallow pool of obscurity. Fortunately, being alone was my greatest asset (even though at the moment it did not feel that way) for it gave me time to think for a long….time.
    Yes, MacArthurism is a Lordship salvation nightmare. How in the heck is someone to come to Christ by getting rid of all his sins before he even trusts in the Savior? Believe me that is what this belief is. Then on top of that you are only predestined or elected, soo tell me is this a contradiction or what?

  32. and I have to say that being without the system has forced me (and still is) to look at everyone as important to Christ.
    I have a transgender friend who knows Christ and expresses her love for Jesus. I may not agree with what she has done, but the Spirit has given me the charge to love her as a person loved by Him. Give her dignity. I tell you it was hard at first, but over time I began to see that it was not my charge to fix her, but His. When I came to the place that it is NOT my business to fix people, I came to a place of having eyes to see. Today these guys feel and think they are the ones to fix people- pride sets in. It is Christs perogative that they feel they have. Sorry, this is where the Spirit is blasphemed and quenched in my opinion. True leadership comes to those with a humble spirit and one who has the true spirit of love. Yes, one can confront and exhort, but it is in a far different spirit then the one that I see in the church today.

  33. and to clarify what I said about “I tell you it was hard at first, but over time I began to see that it was not my charge to fix her, but His” is that my idea of fixing may not be God’s idea of fixing. He grows us in His own way and time. I need fixing too 🙂

  34. @ Faith:

    Faith, you comments have really reasonated with me. We have thougths along the same lines about the Calvinist resurgence. I came to see it as a psuedo-intellectual indoctrination movement. I see places like SBTS as indoctrination centers.

    And while they used the internet to forward the movement in great waves, it is also their achilles heel in the long run. I don’t think we can look back in history and find anything like the open discussion/debate over this particular brand of belief by the masses of pew peasants. Even in the sharing of experiences on blogs with this movement have global similarities!

    I say this because my experience with the YRR (I cannot swing a dead cat in my neck of the woods without hitting one) is that they were indoctrinated and therefore cannot really deal well with open debate/discussion. It simply was not supposed to be like this for them. They have truth and we are not to question. Their ivory tower profs and the insulated guys like Piper have not really had to deal with serious dissent and therefore did not prepare them beyond the indoctrination. I learned this the hard way because you have to be willing to endure the insults and shunning and continue questioning. Their belief system makes no sense once taken to logical conclusions. The foundation of their belief system is authoritarianism.

    Is there authoritarianism in other belief systems? You bet. I spent a lot of time in the seeker easy believism world and it is there in droves. The authoritarianism there is just well hidden. Their goal is to make you like them while they hide all the bad stuff. They rely on cult of personality. (Just like the emergents do) The Calvinists just say that authoritarianism is from God because God is authoritarian in nature.

  35. Ted wrote:

    N]eo-Calvinism is based on all of your spiritual essence outside of you -not inside; in other words, the Holy Spirit is not seen as One who dwells in you and gives you the power; the Holy Spirit is seen as One who directs a believer from the outside. It is derives its existence from a gnostic viewpoint. You cannot do anything, everything is done for you and to you- even evil. This is why the elders can implement authority for they have the higher knowledge and you don’t.

    Yes! That one really reasonated with me, too. Faith has been doing some serious thinking and articulating things for me! I started asking where the Holy Spirit was at all in that movement. Then it dawned on me that with an authoritarian foundation, an individual does not need the Holy Spirit. That is the job of their leaders: To be the Holy Spirit for them.

    IMO (which carries no weight) Faith’s recognition of “spiritual essence outside of you” comes from their Augustinian dualistic roots. Calvin just systematized it. In this thinking the only spiritual world is good but material world is evil including humans. There is much more to it but that is something I picked up on but could not articulate it until I did a ton of research and saw how much influence Augustine had and imposing some of his Manichaean thinking into Christianity. Then you have the idea that the masses need a few special Philosopher Kings to lead them. What a bloody mess that thinking caused for history of what passes as the “church”.

  36. God wrote:

    The odd thing is that even the leader may not have much of an agenda to start with. Rather, he himself (it’s usually a man in practice, though pride is an equal-opportunities delusion) gets caught up in the resonance created around him, until he honestly believes himself to be on a mission from God to correct everybody else. The end result: a monoculture of people who all think they’ve been “transformed by the power of God’s Word” when in fact they’ve just self-selected according to a certain narrow set of character traits. In other words, it’s counterfeit love, which certainly manifests if any of the cultural mainstays get caught with their hands in the till, or with their trousers down. “Love” proves itself to be a toxic kind of loyalty that can’t face the reality of flawed leaders and therefore makes excuses for their sins. True love addresses sin.

    Wow, Nick. I have seen this over and over. Great comment!

  37. @ Faith:
    Your insights about the Holy Spirit acting within the believer are so critical. The problem with the authoritarians is that they cannot control the Holy Spirit who is like the wind that blows where it will. I think they are afraid of the Holy Spirit in more ways than one.

    He cannot be systematized. And they love to systematize things because it provides the illusion of deep understanding and feeds grandiosity. If not that, then it feeds the wormy feeling that some people have about themselves and sometimes others. That, IMO, is why the two Blue Books of Grudem’s ST and RBMW have supplanted the actual Bible for all practical purposes. Did you read the post by JeffS about their theology of man? He linked it in a comment on the PIper thread, and IMO Jeff explained the problem perfectly.

    While it was wrong for the elders to keep you at arms length, the other extreme is love-bombing where they draw people in by pretending that it is real love. SGM folks have talked about that, and back in the 70’s the cults were famous for it. So, I think that overall you were protected by their indifference, and you got out before you got caught in the gears of the machine.

    I love the way you write and express your heart while at the same time putting your finger so accurately on the problems.

  38. Ted wrote:

    Faith, you’re scarin’ me here. Not only with this quote, but a few others from your comments farther down. You’re articulating exactly some of my concerns about a movement toward a 9Marks format in my church.

    Do you think there is any way to stop it in your church? I ask because nothing has been able to stop it in my former church. The people who are left from Before the Takeover have made what I would call a live-and-let-live bargain with the New Leadership. They are people that have been there a long time. Many others have left over the years over various New Ideas.

    I’m glad you’ve been able to see the problems because many cannot see the ones Faith has described. I don’t understand it, but that’s how it is.

  39. God wrote:

    The end result: a monoculture of people who all think they’ve been “transformed by the power of God’s Word” when in fact they’ve just self-selected according to a certain narrow set of character traits. In other words, it’s counterfeit love, which certainly manifests if any of the cultural mainstays get caught with their hands in the till, or with their trousers down. “Love” proves itself to be a toxic kind of loyalty that can’t face the reality of flawed leaders and therefore makes excuses for their sins. True love addresses sin.

    Loyalty as toxic love is a great way of putting it, so thank you for that insight. Yes, indeed to that and to the way that monocultures develop and morph into something ugly even when they started as something good. Systems that do not permit negative feedback do not end well.

  40. Lydia said

    Is there authoritarianism in other belief systems? You bet. I spent a lot of time in the seeker easy believism world and it is there in droves. The authoritarianism there is just well hidden. Their goal is to make you like them while they hide all the bad stuff. They rely on cult of personality. (Just like the emergents do) The Calvinists just say that authoritarianism is from God because God is authoritarian in nature.

    Well, this is my thinking also. There are elements of truth in all religions and cults. These truths I believe is what gets people coming to these institutions. We have it in our minds that only stupid people believe in cults, but statistics show that THAT is not the case. People are searching for truth. It is when truth becomes distorted. Satan did the same thing to Adam and Eve.

    Ok lets look at Scientology – the people who come walking into one of their sessions and end up being audited and for the most part it is harmless. Is it not good to have some awareness of what your weaknesses and strengths are? But this is the carrot that is dangling in front; they gotcha. They now proceed to tell you in a nice pleasant voice “We can give you more sessions for free……if you give us a little of your time”. Sure why not, harmless right? Meanwhile, you feel great, liberated! So SINCE you are feeling liberated and free it becomes a drug – you do not want to give that up at ANY COST. So yes here then comes giving them money or basically your life at the SEA ORG. to keep that drug going.
    Calvinism, sure who does not want to be godly and righteous? But the COST is high. You end up trying to be all, give all, perfect all, etc…. Calvinisms David Platt, Francis Chan mantra “It is COSTLY to follow Christ”. Yeah , you bet it is under their yoke.

    Jesus said “My yoke is easy, my burden is light” This does not mean we are not persecuted or don’t suffer for Christ. It just means that we are under Christ’s yoke not mans. Man cannot determine what is the best road for each individual. Yes, those in leadership do have a charge to teach and lead, but not in the sense of an authoritarian. When one does not follow the truth in what a teacher says then the teacher can just “brush the dust off his or her feet and move on”. There is no where in Scripture that states an elder or teacher “sticks his brand” on people and claims them for his own- this is an anathema. And I won’t state too much how dangerous it is for an elder or teacher to do so according to what God says just look up Galatians 1 and look it up in the Orthodox Jewish translation.

  41. Gram3 wrote:

    The people who are left from Before the Takeover have made what I would call a live-and-let-live bargain with the New Leadership.

    That is happening at my former church along with the pulpit committee that wants to save face.

  42. @ Faith:

    Some of the issues you touch on are the reason why I journal online. I am NOT reformed/Calvinist at all and I write to refute their spirituality and problems. For example I knew a guy who liked Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Seattle because of how Mars Hill dissected movies and used them to make theological points. It was made to seem as if Driscoll and crowd are the only ones that can do that. That’s why I do this from a non-Calvinist perspective. Its why I have written about Rush, the Dark Knight Rises, etc…

    The single biggest threat I believe to Neo-Calvinists are blogs like this. They want to dominate and control the information. Blogs like that throw a wrench into that effort at control. The internet is your friend. People need to research, research, research….

  43. @ Faith:

    About Neo-Calvinism being intellectual. The biggest problem with Neo-Calvinism is that it makes the problem of evil worse. Since evil is foreordained by God that means anything from 9-11, to James Foley being decapitated in Syria by ISIL is God’s will. Its ordained and his plans.

    In regards to Sovereign Grace I have wondered if this is why SGM dealt so much with child abuse. You are dealing with a determinist theology system where there is no free will. Everything is planned, orchestrated by God. I wonder if this is why SGM protected child abusers, and molesters. When you think about it the child abuse was foreordained by God and it was an act of worship to God. Going to the police is an act of sin and rebellion as you are challenging that mindset. CLC was ground zero and any church that brings on someone who came out of Sovereign Grace will be bringing this corruption with them.

  44. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:

    Nuts!!! I have a million and one posts to write about at my blog. One of them deals with how MacCarthurs theology bit me at funeral. It was one of the factors that drove me in rage in my faith crisis.

  45. You are so right Gram3…. the Holy Spirit is key. And they (the wolves) know that. They are scared of it.
    I believe the only way to stop it is from the outside. It was not until I got on the outside myself and was able then to look at the inside. You can’t see it as clearly even though you know something is wrong. You then are fighting an uphill battle because these guys are entrenched in the system. Just look at welfare- once it was set in motion, it will be a most difficult, if not impossible thing to change or rehabilitate. Although, that said, slavery was demolished, but not without high cost.

    This is just my opinion however.

  46. @ Faith:

    This is part of the reason why I write about atheism and Neo-Calvinism on my blog. They go hand and hand together. I rejected Christianity for years and part of it was due to my embrace of John piper. Neo-Calvinists are creating atheists by their theology. THEN they have the nerve to say, “well you weren’t a Christian to begin with…if you were you wouldn’t have struggled with this” The blame or the issue always gets put back on the person. Its like Mormonism. I see so many parallels between Neo-Calvinism and Mormonism.

  47. Lydia wrote:

    Faith, you comments have really reasonated with me. We have thougths along the same lines about the Calvinist resurgence. I came to see it as a psuedo-intellectual indoctrination movement. I see places like SBTS as indoctrination centers

    SBTS or Trinity is no different than a Taliban training school in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region. The Taliban recruits young people to indoctrinate them.

  48. Faith wrote:

    You know with all the talk of demons and mystical stuff I would have to say this is where Satan just laughs because the area of controlling churches and abuses is where his greatest weapon is.

    “Nowhere do we corrupt as effectively as at the very foot of the altar!”
    — Screwtape

  49. Faith wrote:

    You are so right Gram3…. the Holy Spirit is key. And they (the wolves) know that. They are scared of it.

    Because ha-Ruach blows wherever and whenever He (or is that She?) wishes.
    NOT wherever or whenever we want.

    From ha-Torah to the Gospels, God seems to have this way of moving that takes our expectations about Him and turns them one-eighty around. Always the Unexpected.

  50. Gram 3

    What is exciting is to see how those who coming out are being used in such various ways and with such different beliefs! It certainly proves to the fact that the Holy Spirit moves like a wind not knowing where He is going or when. Thank you Gram for your sweet comments and they have encouraged me.

    Eagle I have enjoyed your blog and your muses :). I think the blog is such a wonderful way to get this out there! I sure hope in the near future I can start loving on all these young adults who are being discouraged by the church because “their faith is just not enough”. I am praying about it.
    You guys are such an encouragement to me today you just don’t know.

  51. Eagle wrote:

    The blame or the issue always gets put back on the person. Its like Mormonism. I see so many parallels between Neo-Calvinism and Mormonism.

    I see a lot of parallels between Hyper-Calvinism and X-Treme Islam. I think both are side effects of their view of God as micromanaging determinism. All Omnipotence and Sovereignty and Will and POWER until it crowds out all else.

  52. Eagle wrote:

    You are dealing with a determinist theology system where there is no free will. Everything is planned, orchestrated by God. I wonder if this is why SGM protected child abusers, and molesters. When you think about it the child abuse was foreordained by God and it was an act of worship to God.

    “In’shal’lah — Eh, Kismet…”

  53. Faith wrote:

    There is no where in Scripture that states an elder or teacher “sticks his brand” on people and claims them for his own- this is an anathema.

    “Sticks his brand on” or “brands his Mark on their forehead and right hand”?

  54. Gram3 wrote:

    The people who are left from Before the Takeover have made what I would call a live-and-let-live bargain with the New Leadership.

    Like the German church in the Thirties?

  55. Faith wrote:

    They pretty much made us feel invisible (this has happened in pretty much all the churches I have attended).

    I don’t know if it fits with your experience, I have witnessed many good people overlooked while everyone fawns over the extrovert who is charming and charismatic. We are a culture that values personality and glitz over character and substance and it has crept into the church.

  56. So right HUG! If you look at the Word (Jesus) you will see that no where was man directing the Holy Spirit; the Spirit came to Abraham because of HIS FAITH. The Spirit came upon David and his instruments of praise. The Spirit came upon the mouths of the lions when Daniel was in the den.
    The Spirit came upon Esther when she spoke in front of the king. These were individual relationships between Abba and His children. When it comes to corporate worship the Holy Spirit is also the director and producer.

  57. Bill M, yes I have seen that. I am an introvert myself. I can become quite sanguine if I am comfortable with who I am with. I probably analyze those I am around just to see if I am “safe”- taking from the line of Marathon Man “Is it safe?”

    Christian Szell: Is it safe?… Is it safe?
    Babe: You’re talking to me?
    Christian Szell: Is it safe?
    Babe: Is what safe?
    Christian Szell: Is it safe?
    Babe: I don’t know what you mean. I can’t tell you something’s safe or not, unless I know specifically what you’re talking about.
    Christian Szell: Is it safe?
    Babe: Tell me what the “it” refers to.
    Christian Szell: Is it safe?
    Babe: Yes, it’s safe, it’s very safe, it’s so safe you wouldn’t believe it.
    Christian Szell: Is it safe?
    Babe: No. It’s not safe, it’s… very dangerous, be careful.

    Eagle I would have to say this is a very good movie line to muse over, huh? 🙂

  58. Eagle wrote:

    SBTS or Trinity is no different than a Taliban training school

    There are people at and from Trinity that oppose the Calvinista mindset, so we can be thankful for them. And I do know of one EVFree guy who is re-thinking the whole Calvi-Comp religion. While AFAIK the faculty at SBTS/Boyce has been fully purified, there are some ex-students and grads who are not indoctrinated and are fully turned-off by the System. There is hope, I think, but it will take time and it will take a new generation rising up, perhaps led by those young people who got caught up in it and discovered it was not the Answer to Everything.

  59. Bill M wrote:

    We are a culture that values personality and glitz over character and substance and it has crept into the church.

    Exactly right.

  60. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    The people who are left from Before the Takeover have made what I would call a live-and-let-live bargain with the New Leadership.
    Like the German church in the Thirties?

    Maybe, but in a number of cases, they realize that they can actually help from the inside. They are not happy about it, but they are doing their best to encourage those within while not actively opposing the New Leadership. However, now that I think about some others who stayed, there may be some who are indifferent and maybe even some who just like being Insiders regardless of the regime. But the ones I had in mind are doing their bit from the inside. Some are called to be good leaven in a bad System, and some are called to shout from the housetops on the outside. I don’t do leaven well, but they do.

  61. http://thewartburgwatch.com/2015/05/03/a-quote-by-deb-that-sums-up-two-days-of-posts-on-the-history-of-sgmclc/#comment-190397

    Well maybe if we take a good long look at the whole of our culture we will see our pervasive this Kardasian culture is.

    One thing I have noticed is that in our country we are so quick to want a solution and react emotionally if we don’t get something done or “need”. Quotes like “This is a new paradigm shift” or “We are doing a great NEW thing here for God”; “the Spirit is in this house”. Well, is not the Spirit everywhere a Christian dwells, no duh?!

  62. Gram 3

    “Maybe, but in a number of cases, they realize that they can actually help from the inside”.

    Well I sure hope the ones on the inside truly have the fortitude, because that takes a lot of guts.
    Not my cup of tea.

  63. Gram3 wrote:

    Faith wrote:
    The real problem with SGM and similar Neo-Cals is that they are not only like bulldogish with their theology they are subtly deceptive. This is what makes them so dangerous, plus they are great debaters
    I agree, except the part about being great debaters. They are clever debaters, when they are willing to debate, but they are not great debaters except in the sense that they are able to persuade people of things that are fabricated and proof-texted. The culture within the churches is not about open inquiry or being a Berean and searching the Scriptures. It is about disseminating the System and teaching people how great and deep their theology is. The System particulars may vary from church to church, but the underlying principle they want people to absorb is Submission to Authority, and they are not talking about God’s authority, which is not to be confused with either theirs or Nick’s.

    This is true, they are not great debaters or even adequate debaters by any rational measure of rhetoric and logic. Were they to use such tactics in a court of law before a judge who’s been trained for decades in logic, they’d be scoffed at, laughed out of the courtroom. As a rule they use manipulation, subtle and dishonest undermining of opponents and, if all else fails, brute force to put their points across, they take advantage of people’s general decency and unwillingness to fight every point. They think they’re serving God, but often their serving idols when they behave the way they do.

  64. Gram3 wrote:

    While AFAIK the faculty at SBTS/Boyce has been fully purified, there are some ex-students and grads who are not indoctrinated and are fully turned-off by the System. There is hope, I think, but it will take time and it will take a new generation rising up, perhaps led by those young people who got caught up in it and discovered it was not the Answer to Everything.

    Here is my personal experience with that over the last 10 years. Those who came to SBTS in their 30’s-40’s from an outside career caught onto it very fast.

    I know a few of them and have had discussions about this with them. (One who worked for MOhler during that time would not talk to me until he was finsished and left town). They were not anti Calvinists at all when they started there. But they were all shocked at the culture/environment at SBTS. Stifling is how one put it. They had understood it to be totally different. And to their credit, there really wasn’t much online about all this until about 6 years ago.

    They finished up as fast as they could and got out. None of them stayed in Louisville and only one of the three is still in ministry. None are in the SBC anymore. One of them was on the periphery of SBTS trying align itself with the Family Integrated Church of Scott Brown/Doug Phillips fame. He was appalled they would even consider partnering with the likes of Brown/Phillips. And that was before the SGM debacle became well known.

    That is a small sampling but it gave me insight that if you want to grow such a movement of loyal followers you start on college campi and in undergrad school. You do not wait for them to spend much time in the real world and gain any wisdom. That is what made the YRR movement unique in many ways: The total lack of wisdom of what are basically emotional children being given so much power. Personally, I think many young people have been used by these leaders who will most likely change the focus, albeit subtly, when it all becomes totally unprofitable.

  65. Law Prof wrote:

    they take advantage of people’s general decency and unwillingness to fight every point.

    Oh boy are you right on this one.

  66. Gram3 you got me to thinking- Dee and Deb provides a internet safe house for those coming out. What if there was a network of those on the outside that provided a physical comfort and safe house for those leaving the institution because of abuse? I do not know how that would work, but just a thought?

  67. a network of those willing to meet, pray with, be an advocate to those who are coming out. It is lonely out there- it was for me.

  68. Faith wrote:

    So right HUG! If you look at the Word (Jesus) you will see that no where was man directing the Holy Spirit; the Spirit came to Abraham because of HIS FAITH. The Spirit came upon David and his instruments of praise. The Spirit came upon the mouths of the lions when Daniel was in the den.

    I think I’ve felt the breeze in My Little Pony fandom.

    Some years ago at Internet Monk, in a comment thread of a posting about Jesus Junk, one commenter related a private revelation (either first- or second-hand): That Christian Media & Arts had dropped the ball so heinously that God was “withdrawing his mantle” from Christianese media and placing it upon the secular media and arts. Henceforth ha-Ruach would blow among the mainstream creative media, and their books/movies/TV/music would begin to say what God wanted said. And I’ve felt that breeze blowing through My Little Pony fandom’s creative output — not all of it (far from it), but it’s there.

  69. Lydia wrote:

    That is a small sampling but it gave me insight that if you want to grow such a movement of loyal followers you start on college campi and in undergrad school. You do not wait for them to spend much time in the real world and gain any wisdom.

    There is precedent for this: Hitlerjugend, Young Pioneers, Komsomol, Sea Org, ISIS, Teen Mania, Acquire the Fire.

    Young and On-Fire for The Cause, Changing the Face of The World.

  70. @ Eagle:
    It’s certainly something I’ve seen that’s been a factor in deconversion from Christianity for a fair amount of people in the atheist community. I’d definitely say my exposure to it was one of many influences on my apostasy. I wonder if there’s a common link to reactions to reformed thought?

  71. @ Albuquerque Blue:
    I can betcha there is – most of the comments I have come across from atheists have to do with some religious background. And many were Catholic or Calvinist.

  72. @ Faith:
    I was raised Arminian for the most part, didn’t get exposed to TULIP till my teens and it freaked me out, I know that. It has a good forthright answer to the Omni-max question of free will I’ve always thought.

  73. Gram3 wrote:

    Do you think there is any way to stop it in your church? I ask because nothing has been able to stop it in my former church.

    I don’t know, Gram3. It’s a small movement, but determined. For two years it’s been apparent in the change in adult classes—videos about male leadership, and a series promoting Calvinism, and now Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. There have been meetings explaining eldership (we’re a Baptist church with congregational gov’t currently), a sermon series on eldership, and a weekend conference ‘way down in DC (Eagle’s turf) at Mark Dever’s church. Those who went were enthusiastic upon return.

    Mostly I think this is going un-noticed and a change to eldership and more Calvinism will be a non-event for many. Although there have been explanatory meetings, they have been poorly attended. Some of us (independently, but we’re now comparing notes) are concerned, and in fact I’ve told my pastor that my concern is to the point of alarm. He says that he has lost at least two families because our church is not Calvinistic enough. I have not yet pointed out that he may lose more if it goes too far.

    Faith has been describing uncannily some of the tactics and language of one of the proponents. It’s as if she knows the guy.

  74. Ted the church I went (Community Bible Church) did not start out Calvinist. It was just a plain ole’ Bible church. I had lived in Tennessee for 3 years left and moved back to find that this church I once knew was changing and drastically. I thought it was the same church so we went. At first I thought “wow….this church is really got it down on theology” but here is what I noticed as a transition:
    books were introduced (Piper, Grudem, Dever, MacArthur, Keller, Mahaney, etc..); then conferences. Soon came emphasis on eldership and the need to submit. Had a friend who went to the elders for “submitting” as far as who to date ( for they felt they had the authority- whatever). They wanted to set her up with this one guy who ….get this… asked to know where she kept her guns if she had any. Creepy…
    The other transitional moment came when the pastor became a pastor with a “Dr. before his name”.
    Books of late Puritans and a call to look to the Puritan fathers was another favorite. Home groups were just another way to spy and know who is the group; check up so to speak. A call to “come to the cross” was one of the many mantras. Well, in my opinion, that means you are always out of favor with God so keep it coming “to the cross”. No need to really understand that “It is finished” as Christ laid there dying to relinquish the sting of death and our new life is in the resurrection.
    Aestheticism was being introduced with “spiritual disciplines” on how to journal or sleep, stating that if one journals with God one REALLY knows God or gets sleep in the proper way. Look up Pipers video on the “spiritual discipline” of sleep- weird. These so-called philosophies were seeping in slowly but surely.
    Then came MacArthurs righthand man Rob Iverson who moved to Tennessee; in my opinion to oversee that this church moved/moves in MacArthurs direction.

    Here is a quote from this churches mission statement and by the way I know many who have moved on from this church that were highly invested in it.

    “Submitting all our lives to the Gospel of God’s Redeeming Work, depending upon its power, and applying its truth to our lives is the passion of the elders, pastors, and leaders who faithfully serve among this body of believers (Titus 2:11-13).”

    Right here the elders and pastors have already set themselves up as the all-knowing ones. Plus, what is the Gospel of God’s Redeeming Work? Redemption is a one time deal. You are redeemed only ONCE by His blood- thats it! So you ask what do they mean by using the word redeeming….. because justification is NOT a one time deal with these guys- it is an ongoing justification and sanctification fused. Watch for the loaded language!

  75. I have said before “I was not abused in this church” so I do not want to rag on them in aspect. I have no idea what it is like now. I do know many have left for what ever reason and I do know by the website that the church is definitely and finally Calvinist. I just saw these certain “doctrines” and practices start to be implemented and knew something was wrong. It affected me spiritually however and messed with my brain in the aspect of theology. My daughter, however, was treated poorly and shunned by her youth group; which I think definitely pushed her away from the faith as of right now.

  76. @ abi miah:

    “Do you have thoughts as to why the two (Neo-Calvinist theology and deception) seem to occur together?”
    +++++++++++++

    sense of entitlement? (the ends justify the means because ‘I in my pastorness am above the rules which were designed for the peasants’)

    or, ‘I do hold the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which at times requires hard choices’ (maybe likening themselves to heads of intelligence or heads of state who are allowed to do all kinds of unjust/criminal things in the name of the greater good)

    ….to whom I say “GET OVER YOURSELVES!”

  77. @ Faith:

    ” I do not have many friends who get the fact that His way and yoke is easy and burden is light.”
    ++++++++++

    I think this is because it’s unbelievable. When it comes to the great gap between God and human, it is easier to believe in a complex web of requirements in order to reach God.

    (it also creates jobs)

  78. elastigirl wrote:

    (it also creates jobs)

    Where else can you teach your way into job security besides the doctrines of church?? Pretty nice gig.

  79. yeah and raking in millions for that matter plus, nice cushy Marriot and Hilton suites to boot at conference time.

  80. Ted wrote:

    Faith has been describing uncannily some of the tactics and language of one of the proponents. It’s as if she knows the guy.

    That may be because the System is creeping in everywhere, and it is almost like they have a manual or a playbook or something. I cannot get more specific, but I will say that I have seen the exact same things in different churches. Not the same things in each of those churches, but definitely some strong common points.

    I’m so sorry you are having to go through this process. It is interesting that the people who are inclined toward the Calvinistas have not stayed at your church. My experience is that the church is colonized by a small and intentional group and then others are drawn to that. And this is not just one church, which I might be able to write off as a fluke. Meanwhile, the others people who are not doctrinaire leave out the back door. Pretty soon, the culture is set in concrete.

  81. @ elastigirl:

    You are right- the same thing happened with the Catholic Church.

    If you ever look at a pyramid thinking it is easier to reach the top, think again.

  82. Faith wrote:

    A call to “come to the cross” was one of the many mantras. Well, in my opinion, that means you are always out of favor with God so keep it coming “to the cross”. No need to really understand that “It is finished” as Christ laid there dying to relinquish the sting of death and our new life is in the resurrection.

    This is, I think, a key point. There is so much talk about the Cross as an abstraction, even weirdly not as an event so much as an idea container that can be filled with whatever is needed to get leverage. There is little talk about Jesus, the man who is God, much less coming to Jesus. That sounds too much like decisionism or revivalism for their taste. Also, as you point out so well, they don’t talk about it being finished in Christ’s work, so we have to keep coming back and paying and coming back and working in an endless loop of anxious futility. When what we really have is peace and rest in the One who has done it all already and who loves us completely. As dearly loved children, not as somebody to take out his frustration on.

  83. @ Gram3:

    This is exactly what happens. The stronger ones (considered “theologically” accurate) will start subtly moving their way in, building up slowly and then WHAM!! You wonder next, what the heck??
    Remember too that many of the older generation started dying out, so this was a prime opportunity.
    If anyone wants to get a good understanding on Calvinism read http://www.Paulspassingthoughts. Excellent expose on where it came from and the resurgence; the theology and history.

  84. Lydia wrote:

    That is a small sampling but it gave me insight that if you want to grow such a movement of loyal followers you start on college campi and in undergrad school. You do not wait for them to spend much time in the real world and gain any wisdom. That is what made the YRR movement unique in many ways: The total lack of wisdom of what are basically emotional children being given so much power. Personally, I think many young people have been used by these leaders who will most likely change the focus, albeit subtly, when it all becomes totally unprofitable.

    Agree completely on this. Young men who have not yet really accomplished anything yet or been tested by the real world and having said real world adjust some of their mistaken ideas. Wisdom comes from paying attention to what went wrong and why and believing it can happen again.

    I think, at its base, there is a transaction occurring between the generations of men. We saw that in the past with the old guys in the CR giving power to a young man, Mohler, who was willing to take names and remove “obstacles.” But now Mohler is an old guy, and old guys need a legacy. Young guys need a shortcut to the top, which the old guys provide if they young guys are willing to give unquestioning loyalty. Now, for the young guys who do not sign on and ask inconvenient questions, there is another path, and it is not a pleasant one.

    I agree with your experience talking to young people who got caught up in the movement and then saw what they had gotten themselves into. That was not what they were about, and those are the folks who give me hope. I talked to one about a year or two ago, and that one said that they are de-toxing from their time there. I take that to be something like the stifling you mentioned.

  85. Gram 3 and Ted-

    This comes from a sermon series called CORE at the church I use to attend (Community Bible Church)

    “The above idea (the lost need the gospel) is certainly true, but it’s not the entire truth. Strangely, it may stand
    in the way of understanding another equal truth – the gospel is also for the saved. The saved also (and equally) need to hear and believe the gospel. The gospel is not merely for the lost, but sinners (the lost and saved).”

    If this does not tell you right here of the teaching of perpetual salvation. This is not the only statements about the Gospel being for the saved as well as lost. Now if one comes in new, they might think what they imply is that the Gospel means all Scripture is use for teaching, encouragement and rebuking, but that is NOT what they are teaching. This covert and intentional teaching of perpetual salvation.

  86. Catch the loaded language here also from CORE: What We Are and Where it Comes From

    “The truth of the gospel – and all the realities of God’s
    grace contained therein – is not only the beginning of
    the Christian life, but also the central source for living
    the Christian life. Unfortunately, most Christians don’t
    think along these lines. Too often the gospel is viewed primarily as the entry point, but not the course of our life of faith. We treat it as a set of facts we occasionally look back on as we go about the business of living for Jesus. For many the gospel is what was first believed, but it is not what we keep believing. Our approach is more “God gets us in and we take it from there.” Or, “We believed the Gospel, now lets move on to the Christian life.”Yet, what we observe on the pages of Scripture is the gospel as the immovable center of all faith and the basis for all we do.”

    Did you catch the insert of “or we believed the Gospel, now lets move on to the Christian life” or “we treat it as a set of facts we occasionally look back on as we go about the business of living for Jesus”?

    Well is that not what we are suppose to be doing? Oh no they want more…..the Gospel means justification in reality. They just won’t say that out loud.

  87. Faith wrote:

    here is what I noticed as a transition:
    books were introduced (Piper, Grudem, Dever, MacArthur, Keller, Mahaney, etc..); then conferences. Soon came emphasis on eldership and the need to submit.

    Similar to what’s been going on at my church for the past couple of years, but in different order. First the men’s videos; then the idea of elders. The book rack idea has been introduced recently, as a result of the conference at Mark Dever’s Capitol Hill Baptist Church a few weeks ago. No doubt the authors will be those you’ve mentioned. And there has been mention of weeding out the library of unwanted books (my reaction? Let me start!).

    Discipline is one of the main “advantages” cited in an elder structure, but the key reason stated is that elder rule is more “biblical” and that we want to honor God. Note: The “stated” reason is not always the true picture.

  88. @ Faith:
    Maybe Ted or somebody else knows more about this, but it sounds a lot like works sanctification. Work to be sanctified. Sounds more like Sisyphys than Sola Fide (which I take to apply to both salvation and sanctification.) Isn’t that basically the heart of the sanctification dust-up at TgC between Tullian Tch and the others?

  89. Gram3 wrote:

    it is almost like they have a manual or a playbook or something.

    I’m trying hard not to be a conspiracy theorist here, but I’ve decided too that there is a manual for this. One may have to go to a conference to get it, though.

    The husband of the family that left, interestingly, is the one who introduced Dever’s book “9 Marks of a Healthy Church” a few years ago. But I think our church hasn’t moved soon enough on this, so he’s moved to one that has. We’re still good friends, but I just don’t get this. Have they read 1Corinthians 1, or Galatians 1 & 2? Acts 15? Oh, well.

  90. @ Gram3:
    Gram3, I believe there is a great deal of works-sanctification in this, in spite of Ephesians 2:8-9.

    There is also some stress introduced by the chief proponent about believers’ assurance—that if one is not acting out a Christian life, one should re-consider whether one is really saved. I have heard this several times, but thankfully not from my pastor.

    Old-time Calvinists don’t bother me; their theology is mature enough. It’s this New-Calvinism that’s starting to get freaky.

  91. Gram 3 you might think but I think that it is not simply because I have seen what has transpired in this church and because they are Piperettes and MacArthurites I doubt it.
    The way Gospel is loaded it encompasses all – justification and sanctification combined. You can never truly step away from the chain of justification. Salvation is taught not as a one time deal, but an ongoing process. Sure they teach that salvation is only by Gods doing but then they carry on the fact you can do nothing as in your sancitification as well. The Gospel is usually portrayed in Calvinista terms as the Good News (salvation) and this comment that I posted the Gospel is portrayed as needing to be preached ongoing to even believers.
    Lydia may have a better way of explaining it then I do

  92. I would add, that historically, areas and even countries that embrace strong Calvinism often evolve to very secular societies over time.

    Switzerland,the Dutch, and New England come to mind as as areas that were permeated with Calvinistic doctrine enforced by church and Government, only to become very secular over time.

  93. Because you were not able to see the whole lesson of the Gospel in this series of CORE, I will tell one thing that was missing that you just mentioned “sanctification works” . Not one mention of the word sanctification in the Christian life was located in this lesson. It was stated that if a Christian tries to live a moral life they have missed it and it is stated as legalism.

  94. Ted wrote:

    But I think our church hasn’t moved soon enough on this, so he’s moved to one that has. We’re still good friends, but I just don’t get this.

    I’m glad you are still friends, and the old-style P&R are just as upset about this as the old-style Baptists like me.

    Let me throw this out there and see what you think. It seems to come down to control and coercion. There is no freedom or love without it being coerced, which I think is not love at all. Putting this together with JeffS and his analysis of their anthropology, ISTM that they cannot conceive of a God who loves without coercion or who is sovereign without being in absolute meticulous control-freak.

    That seems to go along with their fierce commitment to a weird notion of gender as being, once again, a question of who is in control rather than a question of who can love and serve more in a relationship of free and mutual commitment. Gramp3 remarked to me that they really want a synthetic female (not the term he used) rather than a real-life equal-but-different and fully-individual person who freely chooses to love them and be committed to them without coercion. Is this a failure of imagination?

  95. @ Faith:
    Faith, I apologize, but I’m not understanding what you are saying. That’s probably because the whole sanctification discussion going on at TgC is confusing to me. I don’t want to miss what you are saying.

  96. Well I might be the one that is missing what you are saying also- what is it again that you are picking up about sanctification at TgC?

  97. This is what is tragically wrong about the whole Calvinist thing going on- watch the loaded language. It seems like when they do mention sanctification it applies to our Christian walk and what we do to follow God, but you can easily miss the fact that it intertwines or links in with justification. As I said before, they do not teach that the Holy Spirit indwells the believer and co-labors, allowing us to work with God in our daily lives. In fact, working (in Calvinista terms) is like being a legalist. Of course we know that we cannot work for our salvation and Calvinists teach this also, but they go further by stating that as a Christian one cannot work to live a godly life in sanctification alone. You must “rest” by faith that He will do a good work in you hence comes perseverance. If you did not persevere (the chain of justification fused with “sanctification”) you obviously did not “rest” enough and, by the way, we question your salvation. This is where doubt and despair sets in as it did for me at the church I just mentioned above. MacArthurs Lordship Salvation is just another spin latched onto Calvinism.

    It is really hard to even get a grasp on this stuff because it completely goes against the simplicity of the Good News.

  98. @ Faith:
    Tullian was asked to leave TgC because he teaches a view of sanctification that does not align with theirs. When I read the discussion, I get lost in the weeds of the discussion and I speak passable Presbyterian. There is always something percolating about the issue of how law works (or doesn’t work) in sanctification. I think the Holy Spirit works within us and renews us as we strive toward the goal of imitating Christ. That is very different, ISTM, from the law-based sanctification, which is how I see the other view. That is probably not an accurate representation of the debate or of the reasons Tullian was asked to leave, but the entire thing exhausts me. And there is no doubt more to the story. It’s a little OT, I think, but I didn’t want to misunderstand.

  99. Ted it is a good thing to start questioning all this in the church. Means we are being Bereans.
    Take heart and fight the good fight! 🙂

  100. “I think the Holy Spirit works within us and renews us as we strive toward the goal of imitating Christ.”

    I understand how exhausting it is. What you have mentioned here is co-laboring (as you already know that). Holy Spirit works within us and we strive/work toward the goal of imitating Christ.
    We both work. In Calvinism as taught today largely- as a Christian you don’t work because work is of the unbeliever. Tullian probably was put in the hot seat for even mentioning it. I don’t know where he stands at this point.

  101. Ted wrote:

    First the men’s videos; then the idea of elders.

    What was there before elders in your church? What are they transitioning from?

    I am great with elders as long as they honestly see themselves as servants.

  102. Gram3 wrote:

    I get lost in the weeds of the discussion

    Wow, if you get lost in the weeds then there is no hope for me. If you can’t figure it out why is it so important a distinction to push Tullian out? (rhetorical question this time)

  103. Bill M wrote:

    why is it so important a distinction to push Tullian out?

    I love to answer rhetorical questions. Some suspect it had more to do with Boz and SGM. I suspect it is that and also that his system does not match their system, and The System is what matters.

    And that is the reason I get lost in the weeds. I don’t think God can be systematized, however much we would like to pretend that a System captures what God has done, is doing, and will do. Never mind capturing Who he is. But when you make your living defining the True System that Explains Everything, then you must defend your True System against the challengers. That’s a general principle that seems to apply even outside the church. Atkins or South Beach? Weight Watchers or Jenny Craig? Phooey, and please pass the ice cream so I have some place to put my hot fudge sauce while you all talk about broccoli and kale.

  104. Eagle wrote:

    In regards to Sovereign Grace I have wondered if this is why SGM dealt so much with child abuse. You are dealing with a determinist theology system where there is no free will. Everything is planned, orchestrated by God. I wonder if this is why SGM protected child abusers, and molesters. When you think about it the child abuse was foreordained by God and it was an act of worship to God. Going to the police is an act of sin and rebellion as you are challenging that mindset. CLC was ground zero and any church that brings on someone who came out of Sovereign Grace will be bringing this corruption with them.

    I think you’ve nailed it, Eagle. (The thought of people who call themselves “Christian” acting this way makes me sick).

  105. Gram3 wrote:

    The problem with the authoritarians is that they cannot control the Holy Spirit who is like the wind that blows where it will. I think they are afraid of the Holy Spirit in more ways than one.

    That, in essence, was the problem with the rejection of all things charismatic (and I don’t mean the weird stuff, I mean genuine ordinary believers wthout M.Divs who wanted to be filled with the Spirit and experience gifts and graces).

    It’s still very much a problem today. Ironically, the Holy Spirit shows God’s sovereignty in action, and some straitlaced Calvinists can’t cope with this because it means they – and their Doctrines – cannot simultaneously be in control if the Spirit is at work.

  106. zooey111 wrote:

    Eagle wrote:

    In regards to Sovereign Grace I have wondered if this is why SGM dealt so much with child abuse. You are dealing with a determinist theology system where there is no free will. Everything is planned, orchestrated by God. I wonder if this is why SGM protected child abusers, and molesters. When you think about it the child abuse was foreordained by God and it was an act of worship to God. Going to the police is an act of sin and rebellion as you are challenging that mindset. CLC was ground zero and any church that brings on someone who came out of Sovereign Grace will be bringing this corruption with them.

    I think you’ve nailed it, Eagle. (The thought of people who call themselves “Christian” acting this way makes me sick).

    But then wouldn’t going to the police and involving the civil magistrate, as provided by God, also be an act of worship, and foreordained?

  107. Ken wrote:

    Ironically, the Holy Spirit shows God’s sovereignty in action, and some straitlaced Calvinists can’t cope with this because it means they – and their Doctrines – cannot simultaneously be in control if the Spirit is at work.

    Yes, that’s a good way of putting it. They are afraid of the power of the Holy Spirit in individual lives, and they are simultaneously denying the power of the Holy Spirit to effect whatever he chooses. Which might not be what they prefer. Besides, rules and procedures are so much more efficient.

  108. Gram3 wrote:

    That’s probably because the whole sanctification discussion going on at TgC is confusing to me. I don’t want to miss what you are saying.

    You don’t have to understand. All you have to do is be a bobble-headed-Hawaiian-doll-on-the-dashboard and realize that Anselm, Aquinas, Calvin, Luther, and all the other greats did the heavy duty thinking for you. Your only task is to get with the program.

  109. @ Bill M:
    I doubt especially if@ Gram3:
    This whole issue gets very complicated because Jesus accused the Pharisees of being “lawless”. another example is that we are told in first John that sin is lawlessness.

    we have a tendency to view the word ‘law’ as legalistic and always wrong when it comes to the NT.

  110. @ lydia:
    Thats right Lydia. We do tend to view legalism as the law. So that is why the Calvinists bring that up when they state as Christians when you “do the law” you are doing as the unbelievers do/you are a legalist. When really doing the law is a part of our sanctification and nothing to do with justification. The law however is this: Love the Lord your God and neighbor. So in essence we are not able to do this according to the Calvinist for that is a work in and of itself.

  111. @ Faith:

    I was trying to make sense of this about 7 years ago when I was studying Calvinism. In my research I met a lay person in business (who had an M.Div) who had many of the same sort of questions and had spent 20 years researching Calvinism and its roots. He told me that what we miss is that there has always been strains of Calvinism in Western Christianity that are so ingrained we do not question them. One of them he pointed out was the constant tension concerning good works/atonement/law. And he is right. I kept coming across it every where I researched.

    So when you take the Augustinian recipe for original sin, The Reformation’s backlash to the Catholic selling of salvation therefore causing the pendulum to swing totally the other way and Calvin’s systemitizing justification you have a recipe for total cognitive dissonance in living out the kingdom now. And so much of how we understand scripture comes from that era. Perhaps we should think again.

    The thing that really helped me put it all into perspective was to finally come to the realization: From Augustine to the Puritans it was all political. But we keep trying so hard to make it spiritual. It simply wasn’t.

  112. @ Lydia:
    Well I think that is why there is such a yo-yo effect. I know for myself the constant thoughts were in between the pendulum. I could not go either way but I felt stuck for there was no one else to answer the questions so I went along with whatever church I was attending at the time. Except nothing stuck.
    Calvinism engages in dualism. On one side you have to live right, but on the other don’t do anything for it is considered a work. Do you know how terribly confusing this is? It completely takes away from the simplicity and the Holy Spirit giving you knowledge. They “replace” the Holy Spirit.
    How many of my Calvinist friends have implored me to pick up a copy of Confessions and slobber all over this mans drivel.

  113. Gram, these are the sorts of tweets by Tullian that freak me out but back up his typical theme as I waded into his stuff a while back. He is off the charts antinomian.

    “I’m certain I am going to heaven because I can’t rememeber one truly good work I have ever done” you have to be really bad to get into heaven?

    “‘Just as I am without one plea’ is as true for Justification as it is for Sanctification” So there is no change? What was the point of it all?

    There are many more but he is off the charts with it. Since he cannot do anything good even after the CRoss/resurrection I am thinking I should hide the silver if he comes over for lunch. :o)

  114. @ Lydia:
    Yet another good excuse for me to stay away from Twitter.

    For me, the key to remember is that Christ fulfilled the Law, he is the Law, and if I am in him, I, too, fulfill the Law both positionally at the point of regeneration and then in ever-increasing measure as I strive toward the goal of imitating Christ. Not following any particular system or regulations or any of that which is legalism. But by faith walking through life, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, following Christ. I think of it like a small child who loves his/her father and wants to be like that father. We become more like him by being with him and paying attention to what he is like. That doesn’t systematize very well.

    And I remember the whole MacArthur-Hodges thing however many decades ago. Same kind of thing for me then.

  115. Bill M wrote:

    What was there before elders in your church? What are they transitioning from?

    Bill M, our church is a small (150 people on typical Sundays) American Baptist Church, conservative evangelical. We currently have one pastor, a diaconate (usually 6 to 8 members, male and female), and a church council (consists of department heads, such as chairpersons of missions committee, Christian Ed, Worship team, Trustees (they’re in charge of the physical property).

    This system of church government has worked well for more than 100 years, and in the 23 years my wife and I have been there, there have been NO nasty issues concerning church politics. Refreshing change (still have flashbacks) from our previous church. But lately, that ain’t good enough, and some have become enamored of Mark Dever and things New Calvin. And elder board would be in addition to diaconate—and it’s been made clear that elders would be male. This is seen also as a better means of administering church discipline. I’ve pointed out that the deacons are already acting as elders, we just don’t call them that.

    I would have no problem if this church already had an elder board, as the Presbyterians do, or even if the church were officially Calvinist, as are Presbyterians and Dutch Reformed. These are already mature in their Calvinism, unlike the freaky New Calvinism that’s popping up like weeds. But to change for no damn good reason, other than “it’s more biblical” (the stated reason, but I suspect worse) seems contrary to the gospel.

    Lots of prayer about this.

  116. Faith wrote:

    How many of my Calvinist friends have implored me to pick up a copy of Confessions and slobber all over this mans drivel.

    Well, now you know what their Real SCRIPTURE is….

  117. “You are my Lord, because You have no need of my goodness.”
    ― Augustine of Hippo, Confessions

    Romans 13:3Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)

    3 For rulers are no terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you like to be unafraid of the person in authority? Then simply do what is good, and you will win his approval;

  118. @ Gram3:

    I agree. And Scripture is often interpreted so woodenly as in categorizing every single word or concept. People do this with marriage, roles for women, etc. you are right, we cannot systematize it. It loses its beauty and becomes oppressive

    Look at Romans 8:2

    2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you[a] free from the law of sin and death.

    The “law” of the Spirit. That is no “law” of Moses.

  119. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Faith wrote:

    How many of my Calvinist friends have implored me to pick up a copy of Confessions and slobber all over this mans drivel.

    Well, now you know what their Real SCRIPTURE is….

    Yes, indeed.

  120. Ken wrote:

    That, in essence, was the problem with the rejection of all things charismatic (and I don’t mean the weird stuff…).
    … the Holy Spirit shows God’s sovereignty in action, and some straitlaced Calvinists can’t cope with this because it means they – and their Doctrines – cannot simultaneously be in control if the Spirit is at work.

    The phrase “The Holy Spirit shows God’s sovereignty in action” expresses a very important truth. I might rephrase it as “The Holy Spirit shows God himself in action”, but I think we’re barking up the same hymn sheet here. Jesus explicitly described the Holy Spirit as another strengthener / comforter / or however else we want to translate parakletos – but the point is that Jesus is one such, and the Holy Spirit is another just like him. To the degree that we reject or exclude the Holy Spirit, we reject or exclude Jesus. By the same token, to the degree that dictate to the Holy Spirit what he can and cannot do, we dictate same to Jesus, and if we give the orders, then he isn’t Lord.

    It grieves me no end whenever I come across Christian sub-cultures that conflate “the Holy Spirit” with “charismatic”, and then conflate “charismatic” with “weirdness”. (I realise that is what you specifically were not doing!). A church that is frightened of the Holy Spirit is a pretty good description of a dead church.

  121. Ted wrote:

    This system of church government has worked well for more than 100 years, and in the 23 years my wife and I have been there, there have been NO nasty issues concerning church politics. Refreshing change (still have flashbacks) from our previous church. But lately, that ain’t good enough, and some have become enamored of Mark Dever and things New Calvin. And elder board would be in addition to diaconate—and it’s been made clear that elders would be male. This is seen also as a better means of administering church discipline. I’ve pointed out that the deacons are already acting as elders, we just don’t call them that.

    Tragically, this is playing out in churches across the country.

  122. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    A church that is frightened of the Holy Spirit is a pretty good description of a dead church.

    That is true. But over here we have seen so much “weirdness” I don’t have the foggiest how to untangle it all.

  123. Gram3 wrote:

    I ask because nothing has been able to stop it in my former church. The people who are left from Before the Takeover have made what I would call a live-and-let-live bargain with the New Leadership.

    Like Good Germans?

  124. Muff Potter wrote:

    You don’t have to understand. All you have to do is be a bobble-headed-Hawaiian-doll-on-the-dashboard and realize that Anselm, Aquinas, Calvin, Luther, and all the other greats did the heavy duty thinking for you. Your only task is to get with the program.

    The relief of never having to think, only OBEY.

    “Ich habe nur meine Befehle ausgefert.”

  125. Gram3 wrote:

    That seems to go along with their fierce commitment to a weird notion of gender as being, once again, a question of who is in control rather than a question of who can love and serve more in a relationship of free and mutual commitment.

    THAT is reducing everything to Power Struggle and ONLY Power Struggle —
    My boot stamping on your face or your boot stamping on mine, nothing else possible.

  126. abi miah wrote:

    I have witnessed the deception as well. Do you have thoughts as to why the two (Neo-Calvinist theology and deception) seem to occur together?

    Because The Cause is so Cosmic and so Righteous it justifies any means whatsoever to bring it about. Just ask Citizen Robespierre or Comrade Pol Pot. Pay no attention to the headless bodies in the quicklime pits outside Paris or the fields of bones outside Phnom Penh.

  127. __

    “What Is The Gospel Of Calvinism?”

    hmmm…

    1. God is sovereign over all. (God controls and oversees everything)
    2. Man is completely dead in trespass and sin, therefore can do nothing to save himself.
    3. However, God sent his Son to save the ‘elect’, those that God has ‘chosen’ to save. 
    4. Man has absoutely no say in the matter.
    5. If you are one of the ‘elect’, God will extend irresistible grace to you and save you.
    6. Because you are of the ‘elect’, God will grant you perseverance as to be saved.
    7. Because God has chosen some to be damned and spend eternity in Hell, be thankful that as one of the elect, (if your are chosen by God to be so) that in His sovereignty, he has chosen you for His glory. Amen!
    8. According to Calvinism, if you are of the elect, you have nothing to worry about.
    9. If, per-chance, you are not chose by God to be one of the elect, it is nothing personal, John Calvin has written that God is glorified in such actions. 
    10. God sent His Son to save some, good luck, if you are fortunate enough to be of their number.

    This is the gospel according to John Calvin.

    ATB  🙂

    Sopy

  128. __

    What Is The Heart Of The True Biblical Gospel?

    hmmm…

    1. We are accountable to the God who created us. 

    2. We have All sinned against that God and will be judged. 

    3. But God has acted in Jesus Christ His Son to save us.

    4.  We take hold of that salvation by repenting from sin and having faith in what Jesus has done for us on the cross.

    Believe on the Lord Jesus, God’s dear Son and be You saved?

    huh?

    God so loved You that He gave His only Son, that if you will believe in Him, You shall not perish but have everlasting life. – John 3:16 (adapted)

    “All those who call upon the Lord, shall be saved.”

    This is the gospel as presented in the New Testament.

    ATB

    Sopy