First?

Third?

if mark is truly repentant than this sermon is him explaining how he persecuted and publicly stoned stephen to death which was actually mark stoning Jesus to death publicly and with no remorse.

if mark is not truly repentant, (which is totally conceivable since he has never apologized for anything except being too unkind in firing people and running people into the ground under his “God given authority”) then this could be compared, (by sin levelers who will be quick to show up here and defend him)this could be compared to Jordan Root getting right back in the mission field and preaching about what happens when women and heathens in the press persecute godly people accused of child porn addictions with no evidence. love to hear that sermon.

kudos to the hosts of the aussie tv show that made brian huston look at the absolute facts and rediculousness of his supporting (and paying for) an american mega pastor ‘who is well known in christian circuits’ I use the term rediculous because I don’t want to be mean or judgmental, but I believe that brian was all for helping mark get back in the saddle until it cost him some publicity.
now i am going to see if i can stand to listen to the whole mark speaks video.

I strongly recommend the brief article by Jon Zens at Searching Together entitled Going to the Root – Mark Driscoll and the Celebrity System. Mark was one cog in a system that should never have been in place. Yet it’s everywhere in the US and Australia. It’s a professional, corporate institutional model based on an unbiblical clergy/ laity distinction. Well-meaning people are attempting to put Jesus in structures that do not foster the expression of his life in the saints. Christian institutions are trying to express an organic Jesus in non-organic structures. Why should we be surprised?

According to the Pastor John Lindell, Driscoll has spoken there on three other occasions. In his introductory remarks, he spoke of Mark’s kindness, humility,

Humility? These “leaders” are lacking even a basic level of discernment or judgement. There is no painting a happy face on Driscoll. Even setting aside his vulgarity, what of his abusiveness, his corruption? Anyone who knowingly overlooks all this has no judgement. Anyone who invites Driscoll without knowing his background also displays no judgement.

Here's the latest I wrote.

https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/06/12/how-to-respond-to-a-faith-crisis-establishing-and-building-trust/

Plus I put up some Mozart for you guys. Now I am working on something for Monday.

well i cant finish watching the whole thing. mark is finally preaching more accurately who Jesus is and the fact that salvation is found in Jesus but then he goes off into marks interpretation of the bible as usual. full of manly manness and praise of human strength and wisdom and all the attributes mark has himself. here is a bit of what i could type out as he was speaking, would love to see a transcript of it instead of having to listen to it though. i am going to get a can of alpha-wolf-away and spray out my apartment now.

some things i noticed are in (parenthesis)
when the pastor first says, ‘his humility’ he almost breaks out laughing (cause maybe he knows how stupid it is to say that).
pastor says:
‘mark chose to step down’ not mark was removed. ‘notable pastors have been pouring into his life’. (he is still famous and worthy of famous people helping him) things you have heard about mark are not even close to true, what you read on the internet isn't true. (if you heard anything on the internet its not true, mark scrubbed his site already so if its on the internet a bunch of liars wrote it) we don’t want to shoot the wounded. (we want to prop mark up so he can do it himself)

Mark says:
luke was paul's dr and paul was luke's pastor. (?)
paul was the most influential person in christianity after Jesus.
(glorifies paul. paul was all about not having followers or being glorified.)(mark is apparently not impressed with peter baptizing 3,000 followers in one day cause peter isn’t able to be made into a complementarian I guess)

interestingly mark points out how stephen handled it but not how mark handled slight persecution which was actually not persecution but truth leveled against him)
‘stephen doesn’t blameshift, doesn’t lose his temper, stays calm. peaceable disposition. he smiles and there is love in his heart. his heart is revealed by the countenance of his face.’ (I guess angles smile a lot)
15 And all that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel. Acts 6:15

‘they were enraged. starting to act animalistic the resistance is increasing, how will stephen respond?. stephen is going to be filled with the Holy Spirit.’ (mark doesn’t say that stephen was already filled with the Holy Spirit, the bible doesn’t mention stephen being filled at that time at all) ‘pure in heart shall see God. he sees God. saul walks onto the stage of history. what would you say and do (if they stoned you) angry mob is murdering him openly publicly and shamefully. rocks are flying people are shouting opposition and accusations.’

‘in christian language christians are like sheep, opponents are like wolves, alpha, saul. they warm up to stone people like baseball players and lay their coats at the feet of saul to show he is the alpha.’ (I would have thought he was the lazy one who didn’t want to get his hands dirty by actually doing anything but talking a lot)

‘takes it from daniel where god becomes man, if you saw Jesus you would not likely see him as you expect. he was in glory then entered into human. rather than come in glory he came in humility. think of him as he is pray to glorified jesus…king of kings lord of lords worshiped by angels.’ ‘stephen says I’ve gotta find jesus on the worst most devasting difficult damaging day of my life I have to find jesus’ (more mark interpreting the bible for all of us non pastors, stephen already knew where Jesus was) ‘and he sees jesus, what is jesus doing? standing. kings sit. king does not stand up for you. (remembering marks sermon about mark being king) ‘jesus is seated and he stands up for stephen. if your a sports fan theres a point of where something amazing is about to happen…football baseball in the middle of a game changing moment they jump out of their seat. jesus gets out of his seat yelling forgive him forgive him forgive him, jesus cheers for forgivers who forgive their enemies.’ (I always pictured Jesus in that moment comforting stephen with great love and compassion, not screaming at him to make sure and do this thing right)
‘sheep are watching and wolves coming. stephen the shepherd is dying. (stephen the shepherd? he was chosen because the apostles couldn’t be bothered by distributing food to widows) ‘first martyr in church. these were murders not trials. some have suffered unjustly. stephen is suffering for doing right. jesus example they put a robe on him a mockery of his kingship. he’s a wonderful pastor to the very end. (Jesus is a pastor?) they get tired of hearing his kind words they shove it into his mouth. sponge is used as toilet paper. vinegar is disinfectant for wiping yourself. plausible they shoved that in jesus mouth, with that taste on his lips.’ (the death of Jesus on the cross as written in the bible is not enough, mark adds something more exciting and sickening like they shoved an a##-wipe sponge in Jesus’ mouth.)
then mark goes on to teach us that we must forgive even if the person never admits wrong or says I am sorry:
‘vengance is where you make someone pay. forgiveness means its paid in full. pure grace… are you or have been in similar situation to stephen? this discussion you make today determines your destiny, God wants you to forgive. He wants to release you from that burden and bondage, they haven't asked for forgiveness? was paul asking for forgiveness? no.’

to forgive them prepares you to see jesus. we will see jesus face to face I don’t want you to take your… slander… etc with you. he (stephen) probably had a ministry, forgiving means you transfer judgment to Jesus, that’s what he does,’ (stephen transfers it to jesus to judge paul)

i tweeted:
#driscollreturns ‘paul most influential christian’ ‘wrote most books’ this explains marks love of also writing books

actually, i still think mark has a phenomena called mixture of spirits that derek prince wrote about. i think He has some Jesus in him, it just gets mixed up with other stuff. of course i have no idea really what is driving mark driscoll but thats what i think it might be. until he apologizes to the elders and church members he hurt so badly i dont think there will be a true repentance that God can use. i havent seen any video or statement where he has actually apologized for anything except being mean when he should have been nicer in throwing people under the bus, shoulda offered them a pillow maybe so they didnt hit the ground so hard, but totally right in throwing them. until he says otherwise what else can a person think?

For those who follow celebrities, I don’t, this is the church that made it into the news last year. Brad Pitt cancelled his wedding there due to the church’s anti-gay preaching. Regardless of your tilt on the subject, Lindell appears to go out of his way to make it into the news on the subject.

I wonder how much of this concern over gay rights is to deflect people from considering their own deficiencies. Considering the level of corruption I impute to mixing with Driscoll, I’m not wondering much.

Peter Lenton wrote:

I strongly recommend the brief article by Jon Zens at Searching Together entitled Going to the Root – Mark Driscoll and the Celebrity System.

thanks for sharing that peter, i agree with the article but havent read any of his other posts.

i was thinking about how i probably sound critical to some people when i post on here about how i dont think people are apologizing right. they may think i just sit around judging peoples apologies or repentance. well this world is full of executives that get caught in sin and crime and immorality that give wonderful speeches of how sorry they are and then they turn around and get a promotion and never give a single thought to the people they destroyed on their way to the top. Christians have to be different than that.
I am not the most wonderful guy in the world, i am not a saint, but when i asked Jesus to forgive me and fill me with His Spirit i changed inside. i found it impossible to take advantage of people, i found that if i hurt someone even unententionally i couldnt sleep until i made it right. sometimes i have hurt people because i have gotten caught up in the excitement of a new orginazation or enterprise but i have never been able to stay that way long, my conscience pricks me until i stop and go back and make things right with people i have hurt. i dont have that conscience when i am running off on my own and not caring about serving Jesus, but instead caring about how big my kingdom is or how big an influence i am making or how much press i got this week or how many people got baptized. I find that when the Lord is using my mouth it is never vulgar or rude.
Right now i am in the second week of trying to help sort out a custody battle between two very wonderful young people. one had an alcohol problem 3 years ago and one has a drug problem that recently occured due to overprescribing of pain medication turned to street drug use. there is a minor child involved that both of them love deeply. As the one did previously now the other is going thru the hoops of treatment and being checked on by outside agencies because being around the child is worth it. it is heartbreaking to have to help them get through the transfer of custody until the one can get through a treatment and be able to be around the child again. It is anguish because i love them, and see the pain of all three of them. it isn’t anguish if i dont care and i am just a head of some church deciding that someone can’t seperate or divorce or annul because i dont have time to look into it right now and i will get back to them with my judgment when i think its appropriate. that is not walking in love that is running a business, and i am not a judge.
a couple months ago a young under legal age man near where i live went to a party and drove home with other kids in the car and wrecked. one passenger died. that young man is in jail, he didnt receive a huge sentence and is receiving a great outpouring of care and compassion from the community. The reason for this is that he wept, his remorse was written on his face for months and he still is remorseful, he didnt once make any excuse for his behavior, he accepted responsiblility and reached out to the family of the victim. He is not going to go run to a car dealership the minute he gets out of jail. actually getting behind the wheel of a car again will probably be the hardest thing he does, if he ever even wants to drive again.
pastors that use their position to wreck people’s lives arent expected to go to jail or show tears publicly and thats ok if its not warranted but it is very reasonable for people to see something, anything, that looks like actual remorse before they think its ok for them to go back to influencing the lives of people. Pastors that don’t understand the devestation they cause by playing God in peoples lives, especially women and childrens lives, have no business calling themselves christians and certainly shouldnt be in positions where people might think they are speaking for God Himself when they tell them how to live.
Mega churches are asking people to step back from the reality of how they effect people and just go along with a bunch of rules and covenants and christianeese and let them stay in their positions cause their friends say they are changed. Judging a pastors or missionaries repentance is not being critical of pastors, its saying, this is a position that has really high moral qualifications and if you dont have them, get out of the pulpit.

Deb wrote:

“Houston, we have a problem…” 

LOL! That’s exactly what I was thinking last weekend! 😀

Bridget wrote:

Did Driscoll forget about the part where Saul went away for years after his conversion. Yes he was forgiven, but be spent years away from his former life, maybe to relearn what Christ Jesus was about.

Saul did get out of Dodge for some years. And later did sort of brag about how beneficial it was to him in his spiritual life. I am thinking that is no doubt true, but Saul/Paul was also a religious activist who had double crossed his former sponsors in Jerusalem who had given him credentials to go seek out believers for persecution. And he was not originally trusted or met with open arms by the Jesus believers of the day. He later boasts that he did not immediately go get instruction from the apostles in Jerusalem, but he does not say exactly why. Maybe the apostles did not want to be found by a major persecutor of the movement and Saul/Paul had no alternative but to put some distance between himself and his previous life until things calmed down a bit. Sometimes life circumstances have to kind of help people do the right thing.

Which is all to say that if he was a wanted man back in Jerusalem and the believers did not trust him, then some of the ‘credit’ for his going away for a few years goes to those who did not let him just keep on keeping on, despite some abrupt lateral entry into proto-christianity.

Not that I don’t admire Saul/Paul. Not that I think he failed to tell the truth. I just think that there is not much reason to listen to just his side of the story and think that is all there may be to it.

Having heard MD’s messages for several years now, I believe he is trying to lead people into thinking it’s about him. Well, Jesus, Stephen, Paul, and Mark Driscoll.

But here is the underlying issue: we in evangelical Christianity have become so good at eisogeting the scriptures (reading ourselves into the story) it has gotten to the point of narcissism, or as one preacher puts it, “narcigesis.”

Don’t believe me? Ever heard a sermon about “Slaying your giants”? How about “when people stone you for your faith”? Or (referring to Joseph) “how to achieve your dreams”…

I used to buy into this,thinking it is such wisdom to see ourselves in the examples of scripture, until I realized that we never seem to see ourselves as the villain. Only the hero. News flash: Jesus is the hero of scripture. Not me, not you, and definitely not Mark Driscoll.

  __

“Join Us As we Welcome Our Speaker, ‘Apostle’ Mark Driscoll, “The Forgiven…”

-snicker-

The potential of  divert’d attention?

(no kidding.)

‘GrandMa’ what big teeth you have…

hahahahahahaha

Sopy

🙂

—

__

“Penalty Flag?”

hmmm…

sam,

hey,

  Sure, It is very reasonable for kind folK to see something, anything, that looks like actual remorse before they think its ok for them (missive pastors) to go back to influencing the lives of the folks that they wish to shepherd. 

Under the circumstances, Mark Driscoll needs a time out, huh?

ATB

Sopy

🙂

—

Bridget wrote:

Maybe Driscoll feels a notch above Paul since he’s not called for any one’s death?

I never thought of that but that certainly might be the case.

What I don’t get is that those pastors don’t care if they look completely dishonest in their statements.

No one – except lemmings following blindly to where the MoG leads – believes them when they say that they only learned about certain facts recently. This is either a complete falsehood or shows their utter lack of interest in the facts, because, as HUG so aptly quotes GK Chesterton, and let me paraphrase her, “celebrity pastor unto celebrity pastor is brother”.

Of course BHouston can know about MD’s statements in the past – 5 minutes of Googling will turn up Wenatchee The Hatchet’s meticulous documentation, screenshots and all, and Warren Throckmorton’s extensive documentation, the mp3 of the infamous sermon in Scotland, etc pp.

And of course JLindell can know that MD has NOT repented and sought reconciliation with those he threatened with breaking their nose, and then expelled and shunned. Nor to any of the other dead bodies behind the bus.

It’s all PR spin, because they got caught with their (or, pardon the metaphor, MD’s) pants down.

The “world” has a lot higher standards and integrity than the whole xtian celebrity machine put together, and the internet helps everyone to see that. And then they wonder that people not in their bubble have very little understanding for their version of religion and cry persecution.

I prefer dealing with an honest atheist (and I know a lot of those) to dealing some self-professing christians.

As much as I distrust Acts29 and the YRR, and as much as many see Matt Chandler’s action as mere damage control, at least he admitted that they screwed up, and there is still hope that he really meant it and that they will really act differently in the future because they’ve learned something.

With BHouston, JLindell and MD there is no hope. They don’t (want to) get it.

Gus wrote:

What I don’t get is that those pastors don’t care if they look completely dishonest in their statements.

They are used to being believed no matter what they say. Having a large following for a while, being insulated from most of reality, produces this result.

Think of it as telling a kid how special they are every day and giving them a trophy daily. The kid starts expecting it.

JeffT wrote:

Same old Driscoll, full of male bovine meadow muffins

LOL! I really do believe that Driscoll has sociopathic tendencies. (Note I did not diagnose) I do believe seen in that light, it makes it simpler to see how he gets by with it and why some who also make their living in similar ways are promoting him. He is a draw. All the celebrity has to do is play the victim/repented card and teach cheap grace. Very simple. Don't you know that the way he behaved and treated people is no big deal? All he has to do is say "I repent" and it has to be forgiven and forgotten or we are the meanies. (He repented quite often in the past when some were afraid to put his vulgarity on their conference stages.Piper shilled for "repentance")

According to the Pastor John Lindell, Driscoll has spoken there on three other occasions. In his introductory remarks, he spoke of Mark’s kindness, humility…

Did he write (with $200k ResultSource juice job) a Best-Seller on His Humility (chuckle chuckle)?

Did he have liveried Armorbearers blowing long trumpets before him to announce how HUMBLE(TM) he was (chuckle chuckle)?

And did he threaten to punch Pastor Lindell in the nose and throw him under the bus if he wasn’t given the gig?

Lydia wrote:

He is a draw. All the celebrity has to do is play the victim/repented card…

Somebody cited a study that the most common characteristic of a Sociopath (well over 90%) was successfully Playing the Victim Card when caught. And Shifting the Blame.

Some guys I knew in Tucson called this “shining the Stupid Ray on people.”

Lydia wrote:

Think of it as telling a kid how special they are every day and giving them a trophy daily. The kid starts expecting it.

And we in the real world of Jobs & Lives have to deal with the resulting Speshul Little Snowflakes.

Velour wrote:

sam wrote:

i tweeted:
#driscollreturns ‘paul most influential christian’ ‘wrote most books’ this explains marks love of also writing books

Did Paul hire a company to buy his books and get them on the bestseller list?

At a cash price of 2600 Denarii ($210,000 in Roman money) a book?

So quick question if anyone wants to take a whack at it. Do any of you who oppose Driscoll preaching or running a church again, is there a way he could ever get forgiveness from y’all to do that sort of ministry again?

Bridget wrote:

Did Driscoll forget about the part where Saul went away for years after his conversion. Yes he was forgiven, but be spent years away from his former life, maybe to relearn what Christ Jesus was about.

Interesting how that was overlooked.

Video comes off to me as MD justifying his return to the pulpit. ( a stage really ) Same old spin ….different tune.

__

“Lead Us Back?”

hmmm…

God, I am running for your heart until my soul is on fire?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i7lv9oMjv_0&sns=em

🙂

—

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

Lydia on Sat Jun 13, 2015 at 12:48

He can be forgiven. But forgiveness doesn’t mean he should ever be in the same position in a church again.

What do you think, Albuquerque?

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

So quick question if anyone wants to take a whack at it. Do any of you who oppose Driscoll preaching or running a church again, is there a way he could ever get forgiveness from y’all to do that sort of ministry again?

That’s a great question to think about. From my perspective, the problem with Driscoll’s repentance is the same as the problem with the Chandler apology. There has not been a frank identification of the flaw in the system that produced the horrific results. Until that flaw is named and claimed, it is reasonable to expect this kind of thing to happen again.

Also, there is a difference, IMO, between forgiveness and trust restoration. I can forgive someone even without an apology. But that does not restore the trust in the relationship, and trust is the blood of good relationships.

Another aspect of the way I approach this is to consider where the burden of proof lies. Does it lie with Driscoll/Chandler or does it lie with the people whom they want to trust them? I think it should lie with the one who broke the trust in the first place. So, that is why I think it would have been wise for Driscoll to remove himself from the limelight and assume a servant posture. Returning so soon to the limelight reinforces the idea that it really is all about Mark. In the case of Chandler, the fudgy language in the apologies does not instill much confidence that the root has been exposed so that it can be dug out. Actually, they have as much as said that there is a good root (their doctrines/practices that accidentally produced some bad fruit. That is certainly not an idea they got from the Bible.

How do you see this as someone looking in?

@ Bridget:
I think the guy’s a jerk and there’s plenty of evidence out there for it. On the other hand though a lot of people obviously like the guy enormously and his business model for his church is pretty successful.

Bah, hit reply to soon.

As for my outsider perspective he seems like someone you’d want as a pastor if you wanted to get big and have lots of revenue streams. The man can speak pretty well and seems to fill the pews. Actually are pews still in general use? So I can see why some churches would want him on board.

Melody wrote:

I guess Calvinism for these guys means never having to take personal responsibility

My guess is that their Calvinism isn’t the root problem here. There are some Calvinists who go in the opposite direction and are very humbled by their monergistic view of salvation. We don’t hear about them so much, unfortunately, because they are not so concerned with informing the world about their humility.

Gram3 wrote:

It’s just that it isn’t what a NT pastor of a group of Christians should be doing. It shouldn’t be about raw numbers of attenders and financial statements if it is a true church.

I can appreciate that sentiment Gram3 and I applaud it. Mind you I find Driscoll a tool in case I haven’t made that obvious. What I’m curious though is how the church (corporate) can self regulate against that in the face of the money and power, both spiritual and temporal, that types like MD help create. Like the guy who was in charge of SGM, he got away scot-free and is doing well for himself despite the outcry against him.

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

As for my outsider perspective he seems like someone you’d want as a pastor if you wanted to get big and have lots of revenue streams. The man can speak pretty well and seems to fill the pews. Actually are pews still in general use? So I can see why some churches would want him on board.

Just like Jerry Springer would invite the Duggers on his show after the scandal? I mean this only works in some venues. The Reformed Neo Cal world is going, “Mark who?”

I don’t see him pastoring a church and I am not even sure his legal problems from the last one are over. I see him as a conference speaker on a different circuit. He needs a revenue stream and using Jesus is all he knows. CAn you see him in some sort of corporate environment working for a woman? He is young and using Jesus is all he knows.

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

Like the guy who was in charge of SGM, he got away scot-free and is doing well for himself despite the outcry against him

Doing well as opposed to what? I would argue the reverse. He was defended and protected by his peers and they even tried to help him plant a church here and give it street cred but his “family of churches” franchise is over for him and he is lucky if 50 people show (mostly SGM followers and family) up for his church in a room at the Marriot not far from where I live. Don’t forget his church plant was asked to leave my kids school at the time.

So where is the money coming from now? Where are all the former higly paid speaking gigs that were constant and kept his calendar full with travel?

I don’t think he would agree he is doing well at all. However, some of his employees and family were taken in by SBTS and seem to be doing ok.

LT wrote:

Come on Lindell, Morris, Kellogg and Johnston. You want to go all Colonel Jessup and rant about the truth? Well, we can handle the truth. So start telling us exactly what in the blogosphere is false. Otherwise, quit calling those 40 pastors and all those victims liars. You are doing exactly what you accuse the bloggers of. You have a holy responsibility to lead your flock in truth and light yet you are deliberately misleading them. MD should never have been a pastor based on how much contempt he has for his fellow man. You should be ashamed of yourself for supporting such a bully in the name of Jesus Christ. It’s appalling that through your words and actions you are able to re-injure the real victims with such ease all while smiling and chuckling on your stage. You need to check yourself Lindell then apologize and repent.

your post is so right LT, the whole post, and it really needs to be said again and again. i hope people will go back and read the whole thing if they haven’t yet.
Seems like the truth being covered, twisted, remade, ignored is what keeps these people in power and LT’s post brings the truth as it actually is back to the forefront.

sam wrote:

yelling at the referees for too many seasons.

Maybe Driscoll can do commercials like John McEnroe

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

Bah, hit reply to soon.
As for my outsider perspective he seems like someone you’d want as a pastor if you wanted to get big and have lots of revenue streams. The man can speak pretty well and seems to fill the pews. Actually are pews still in general use? So I can see why some churches would want him on board.

actually Jesus spoke to people He had healed early in His ‘ministry’ and told them not to tell everyone, they did anyway and He spent the rest of His ‘ministry’ having crowds pressing against Him and having to go hide sometimes. He sought out those that God sent Him to minister to in remote places away from crowds. i think you are addressing the biggest point actually. People think that Christians want filled pews and big churches, most do, i strongly disagree with that. as to revenue streams, Jesus paid His taxes with money a fish popped up with. His Father owns the cattle on a thousand hills and Jesus never asked a single person for a single penny. this is even a bigger bad root than the bad root of complimentarianism and authorityism.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

HIM.

Sorry, I don’t know why I wrote that, I’ve always thought of you as a him.

Lydia wrote:

No one has to agree with me.

I don’t feel I HAVE to agree with you. I agree more with you than I would like to. A cynical, weary part of me says they’ll never change. And probably they won’t. I completely understand why you are so skeptical.

But it would be encouraging if they did. (Not that I’ waiting with bated breath).

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

No I wouldn’t allow someone who was an embezzler or criminal back in charge, of course not. But MD has been a jerk as far as I’ve read, not a criminal or anything.

You’re right. That’s why I would use a better example: If you knew that someone is a recovering alcoholic, would you employ him as a barkeeper?

We know that Driscoll should never have been a pastor: lack of formal qualifications, lack of maturity in the faith (too young, and never been a member of a church before he started his own), lack of maturity in general;

What’s worse, total lack of good character. You can learn a lot about someone’s character from how they treat those who are below them in status. It’s easy to be friendly, humble, attentive, polite, …, to your peers and to your superiors. The true character of a man shows when you see how he treats those with less power who depend on him for his income.

Driscoll, IMHO, is completely unsuited for any position of authority. They are not good for him, and he not good for the people he “leads”.

So, if he became a member of a church, attended that for a while, accepting to do all kinds of unglamorous jobs that church members often do for their church, apprenticed with a pastor in a mainline church, where the position of pastor has a lot less power, tried to reconcile with the people he treated the worst … well, maybe.

Also, as Driscoll’s friend, John Piper, wrote: pastors are not professionals. There is no reason why he should be a pastor again.

If, as a teacher, you realise that you hate students, you must give up your job and find something else. Likewise, you cannot be or stay a pastor if you find out that you can’t respect people.

i was looking for my link to Rob Smiths orphanage and found that he has recently posted a great response to those propping up Mark Driscoll.

starts with:
‘Pastors who give Mark Driscoll a platform are adding to the abuse of those of us who were abusively treated by Mars Hill Church.’
https://musingsfromunderthebus.wordpress.com/

i want to again put a human face on what Mark Driscoll and others in Acts 29 insist on keeping free of anything but CEO Business speak and ‘mistakes’ that were made.

excerpts from rob smiths post :https://musingsfromunderthebus.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/mars-hill-church-true-religion-does-not-abandon-orphans-and-widows-in-their-distress/

In 2002, Agathos began as a ministry to rescue orphans in Africa during the peak of the “out-of-control” HIV/AIDS crisis.

In February of 2007, Mark Driscoll preached a sermon that included raising funds for Agathos.

‘So Mars Hill…we’ve done this in the past…you probably don’t know this…some years ago you all purchased a large piece of land in India that now has on orphanage with 100 kids on it and you purchased the land. So this is kinda what we do… So in Africa we partnered and we have an orphanage there that now has – I think it is – 32 kids and 140 people in Mars Hill give monthly to help support them. What am I saying? Do your part with the people in your life, give to your church, beyond that have a global heart for widows, orphans, the poor and those in need…

I am going to ask you to support some widows and orphans in Africa, We have an orphanage, we have a village…members of Mars Hill have actually moved there to take care of widows and orphans.’

As some are aware, the result of me pleading for a fair trial and arguing for due deliberation when changing bylaws was that Mark Driscoll, in an abusive and vile manner, threatened to destroy me and my ministry. He threatened to make sure that I could never be in ministry again.

In December 2007, Merle and I quietly left Mars Hill Church.

This was not due to the kindness of the elders (who told us we could not leave because we were under “church discipline”). It was because of a backfire in strategy by then executive pastors Jamie Munson and Scott Thomas, who handled my “discipline case.” They did not want us to leave. In attempting to keep us from leaving they recruited the largest donor to Agathos (who was also a large donor to Mars Hill Church) to encourage us to stay. When that donor eventually supported our decision to leave peaceably, Jamie Munson was in a pickle. He could continue the stance that we could not leave because we were under discipline and offend the large donor, or he could let us leave in peace and not offend the donor. So we were “allowed” to leave in good standing.
Within a few months most of the members of Mars Hill Church withdrew their support of orphans under our care. The emails we received were similarly written. “We have been led by God to support another ministry.” Almost all of them pointed to God’s “leading.” It certainly looked like they had been coached on what to say.

At that time, although I led Agathos, I was not taking a salary from Agathos. We hunkered down and prepared ourselves for the impact of Mark Driscoll’s threat. It came swiftly and with great effect.

In February 2008, less than two months after his promise not to abandon “our” orphans, we received a letter from Scott Thomas. Mars Hill Church was ending its relationship to Agathos. What I did not know, was that Jamie Munson and Scott Thomas had called Marc Fulmer, who leads Agathos to this day, and threatened to pull support unless I resigned from Agathos and Mars Hill Church took it over and re-branded the ministry as a Mars Hill ministry. They proposed to keep Marc – but I had to go. Marc turned the “offer” down and we received the letter from Scott Thomas shortly thereafter.

I recently ran into Scott Thomas and asked him about his promise to never abandon “our orphans.” He was no longer at Mars Hill Church and was himself suffering a level of abuse from the Mars Hill Church leadership. He appealed that he had no say in the matter. He said that his hands were tied.

I recently had coffee with a staunch Mark Driscoll supporter who has chided any criticism of Mark Driscoll and strongly challenged me for every apparent infraction of the last year, yet at the same time vigorously excused or defended every one of Driscoll’s “mistakes.” The supporter said some awful things about me and Agathos, particularly its “misuse” of funds. I asked where he got such information. He had no idea. He had simply accepted the rumors. Rumors that circulated after the trial of Paul Petry. I also have recently spoken to another ministry leader involved in orphan care in Africa. She was warned not to work with Agathos. She came to me in sorrow that she walked away from a relationship with Agathos after that Mars Hill warning.”

where is Mark Driscolls apology to over a thousand children in two orphanages?

__

“Eye Hath Not Seen, Nor Ear Heard What He hath prepared for those who love Him?”

hmmm…

@ sam

Thanks Sam, for da scriptures…

The Bible tells us lotz of neet stuff before it happen/happens.

Pretty cool, huh?

—> What a wonderful God we serve!

YeHaaaaaaaaaaa !

ATB

Sopy

🙂

—

@ sam:
Hey Sam you may be interested in how Jews interpret the Mashiach (messiah) passages. http://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm
They have a very different take on the fulfillment of prophecy that you may enjoy learning as a contrast with your own beliefs.
http://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/answers/jewish-polemics/texts/christian-proof-texting/

Lydia wrote:

What I do really pray for is that the followers start questioning and thinking about what they support and find freedom in their own seeking of Christ instead of following a guru and his interpretations.

amen

Lydia wrote:

I see him as a conference speaker on a different circuit. He needs a revenue stream and using Jesus is all he knows. … He is young and using Jesus is all he knows.

Yep.
This is why I said above I don’t think Driscoll should even be allowed to go on speaking engagements, sell Christian books, or anything involving Christianity. He should not be making a buck off Jesus in any way, shape, or form, IMO.

It’s America and he’s free to do that if he wishes, but it’s not proper, again, IMO.

Lydia wrote:

I see him as a conference speaker on a different circuit.

I see inviting Driscoll anywhere in the same context as some dumb kid wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt. Do you know his history and what he represents?

@ Nancy:
I don’t see how or why the Jerusalem church could have trusted him at that point, even though they might (or some of them might) have believed his vision and repentance were real. In his case, trust had to be earned, for obvious reasons.

numo wrote:

In his case, [Paul’s] trust had to be earned, for obvious reasons.

That has made logical sense to me forever. Why would either (or any) group that knew him in his previous state ever trust him without lots of evidence of change.

Bill M wrote:

Others appear to draw some type of inspiration from Driscoll. How can they do that? He was an abusing thug. He doesn’t come near to meeting basic societal criteria for a decent person. How can a reasonable person look past that?

I wish I knew…it’s beyond comprehension. And equally astonishing is that other Christian leaders support his abusive style or at least overlook it.

I do feel bad for the guy in many ways. He made a lucrative living and lived what I would call a lavish lifestyle (higher standard of living than every single person in my church, for example), and he did it all with Jesus. It is all he knows, and I’m sure he has bills to pay, and is used to a certain standard of living. I wish he would try to get a corporate communications job or something though.

Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

I do feel bad for the guy in many ways.

Feel sorry for him instead as a burned out shell without compassion. If his values were disdained he would have a far better chance of turning away from the corruption that has engulfed his life so far. I wouldn’t want to walk in his shoes and succumb to the large amount of pride he exhibits, what an empty way to live.

Bill M wrote:

I wouldn’t want to walk in his shoes and succumb to the large amount of pride he exhibits, what an empty way to live.

So true. I still don’t think he understands the harms he has done. I don’t think there’s been any repentance at all. I think MD needs a ‘season in the wilderness’ to really think things out. I sometimes think the man has no friends, but if he does, they should help him now.

Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

I wish he would try to get a corporate communications job or something though.

Preferably with a female boss. :o)

Bill M wrote:

I wouldn’t want to walk in his shoes and succumb to the large amount of pride he exhibits, what an empty way to live.

His career has been a total focus on getting his narcissistic supply. Even his outrageous speak was a game where he would then delete then repent then do again…shampoo, rinse, repeat…. was an attention getter. You would have thought Piper would have caught on at some point. But the Pipers, Mohlers, Akins and others saw him as someone really catching the attention of the young guys…their followers.

Lydia wrote:

Because cheap grace for “Christians”

When and where did this start? I’m all for forgiveness but this complete whitewash of history when someone offers up an opportunistic “I’m sorry” is not something I see in day to day life. We saw a good deal of quick forgiveness/cheap grace from defenders of TVC. In Driscoll’s case he didn’t even offer up the grudging apology specifically for the lives he ruined, the corruption, or the abuse of those at Mars Hill.

There could be some better teaching on this but too many appear to receive their teaching from celebrity pastors who then take advantage of them.

Ok, I looked up Hillsong because I know in the past there’s been a bit of controversy about them. Mega-church Christianity with its rock bands, light shows, huge screens, and glitz reminds me more of Broadway than a church. Something has gone seriously wrong in Mega-Land and it ain’t just thinking about having MD speak at one of their conferences.

@ Darlene:

just a few helpful links re: hillsong lol

http://www.news.com.au/national/hillsong-church-linked-to-abuse-claims/story-e6frfkp9-1111115815321

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1989926/posts
Three women have now blown the whistle on a program operated by the Ministry, including allegations they entered as “independent” people, however came out of the program as “broken” and “suicidal”.
The women say as part of the program they were taught to believe that they were possessed by the devil, and have since been forced to receive years of professional psychiatric treatment.
The program includes signing over any welfare benefits to the Ministry, with the program alleged to contain little actual psychological assistance, and mostly prayer and “expelling demons”.

http://mercysurvivors.com/2014/03/06/mercy-ministries-peru-309k-and-no-cherry/#more-1348

also,
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/07/hillsong-pastor-brian-houston-found-fathers-sex-abuse-confession-agonising
Sex abuse inquiry to hear how churches responded to allegations against his father, Frank Houston, and two other men.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-07/royal-commission-child-sexual-abuse-investigates-hillsong/5795308
Hillsong church head Brian Houston accused alleged child abuse victim of ‘tempting’ father, inquiry told

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2783128/Hillsong-church-founder-offered-sex-abuse-victim-10000-meeting-McDonalds-restaurant.html

when mercy ministries was investigated at hillsong amazingly the leader Nancy Acorn opened up shop in the u.s. and has many supporters among the christian circuit
http://www.mercyministries.org/

though she scrubbed some posts referring to her involvement when it was hillsong ministries mercy ministries there are still a few unscrubs left here and there.
http://www.nancyalcorn.com/search?updated-min=2008-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2009-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=21
Monday, December 15, 2008
Also, I received another great message from one of our Australia graduates – thought this would bless you too…
“Hi Nancy, I am a graduate from Sydney and I just want to say thank you so very much for making Mercy a possibility for girls like myself to be able to go to here in Australia, it has truly saved my life and given me a future. THANK YOU!” -Katelyn
I’ll talk to you more tomorrow, so don’t forget to check back!
Love,
Nancy
Posted by NancyAlcorn at 1:06 PM 2 comments

Lori wrote:

I arrived a little late here, and this has likely already been mentioned (I haven’t read all comments). What I don’t get is why Hillsong and Assemblies of God (James River Church), who have extremely different views on women in the church would even consider someone like Mark Driscoll as a special speaker. This has nothing to do with the recent downfall of Mark and demise of Mars Hill. What in the world could someone with his outlandish views contribute to conferences at Hillsong or James River? These churches are both responsible for vetting their speakers, and they utterly failed on this one.

FTR Hillsong is also Assemblies of God. They didn’t fail. They knew exactly what they were buying. Your mistake is in assuming that Driscoll was there to deliver a sermon. I believe these churches are using Driscoll as fallen pastor insurance. They want their congregations and the world at large to believe that there are no amount of misdeeds that a pastor can perform, no matter how egregious, that means they shouldn’t be instantly forgiven and returned to the pulpit ASAP. Lindell reused the Robert Morris line of chiding his congregation to stop shooting the wounded. Ironically, in giving this speech, Lindell was doing just that – shooting the wounded. He essentially called the Driscoll victims liars and persecutors.

Gus wrote:

We know that Driscoll should never have been a pastor: lack of formal qualifications, lack of maturity in the faith (too young, and never been a member of a church before he started his own), lack of maturity in general;
What’s worse, total lack of good character. You can learn a lot about someone’s character from how they treat those who are below them in status. It’s easy to be friendly, humble, attentive, polite, …, to your peers and to your superiors. The true character of a man shows when you see how he treats those with less power who depend on him for his income.
Driscoll, IMHO, is completely unsuited for any position of authority. They are not good for him, and he not good for the people he “leads”.

Yeah, these are the things that keep me from believing that MD has “changed”. His behaviour has been SO egregious, that I believe that he needs to stay out of anything that offers him a place of leadership or authority. Because he simply cannot be trusted not to repeat himslef–thus destroying more lives.

There is an old belief in bapto-evangelico circles that one of the criticisms that could for sure be said against certain other christian religious traditions is that ‘they’ have priests and ‘we’ do not, because ‘they’ let the priests tell them what to do and influence them too much but in our way of doing things that does not happen.

That idea was right before the idea that ‘they’ were always having to give a lot of money to the church while ‘we’ have voluntary giving.

Really? Do my eyes deceive me? Are we really talking about clerical influence/position/authority and money?

This stuff was high on the ‘why we are how we are’ list back in the day. I do hope that nobody is still saying these same things before they clean up their own act.

Nancy wrote:

There is an old belief in bapto-evangelico circles that one of the criticisms that could for sure be said against certain other christian religious traditions is that ‘they’ have priests and ‘we’ do not, because ‘they’ let the priests tell them what to do and influence them too much but in our way of doing things that does not happen.

They were perceived as “mediators” between the person and Christ. One needed them because they were somehow spiritually qualified (?) to confer grace through the sacraments.

It was never presented to me as something evil just something totally unnecessary and potentially dangerous.

And yes, Baptists and other evangelicals have evolved to believing similar using other methods of “mediation” for people. Covenants, ruling elders, etc.

LT wrote:

FTR Hillsong is also Assemblies of God. They didn’t fail. They knew exactly what they were buying. Your mistake is in assuming that Driscoll was there to deliver a sermon. I believe these churches are using Driscoll as fallen pastor insurance. They want their congregations and the world at large to believe that there are no amount of misdeeds that a pastor can perform, no matter how egregious, that means they shouldn’t be instantly forgiven and returned to the pulpit ASAP.

That’s an interesting thought. Hadn’t considered that a pastor would brainwash to that length. Silly me!

Bill M wrote:

Is this similar to “Radical Chic”? If so you may be onto something. The term was invented by Tom Wolfe back in the 70s to describe the superficial gliteratti associating with revolutionary thugs as a way to prove their bonafides. If so associating with Driscoll they can get the thug part down.

Great insight. I think that explains a lot of it. Have you noticed the more scandals from some thugs they actually become more popular? They are described as brilliant. we see this in culture and politics all the time. It is the normalization of sociopathy.

and it even works better when there is cheap grace and forgiveness all around.

Pastor John Lindell mentioned that Mark and Grace founded Mars Hill Church eighteen years ago. His statement is factually incorrect. The church, according to the web site, was founded by three individuals, Mark Driscoll, Leif Moi and Mike Gunn. Was Pastor Lindell’s statement just a slip or an attempt to rewrite history?

LT wrote:

believe these churches are using Driscoll as fallen pastor insurance. They want their congregations and the world at large to believe that there are no amount of misdeeds that a pastor can perform, no matter how egregious, that means they shouldn’t be instantly forgiven and returned to the pulpit ASAP. Lindell reused the Robert Morris line of chiding his congregation to stop shooting the wounded. Ironically, in giving this speech, Lindell was doing just that – shooting the wounded. He essentially called the Driscoll victims liars and persecutors.

It’s just too lucrative of a franchise, you don’t want to lose that. Also, you don’t want the sheep to get uppity.

Bill M wrote:

LT wrote:
In case this was not a rhetorical question,
No it wasn’t, thanks for the insights.
Mark also provided the all important yet elusive “authentic community”
Is this similar to “Radical Chic”? If so you may be onto something. The term was invented by Tom Wolfe back in the 70s to describe the superficial gliteratti associating with revolutionary thugs as a way to prove their bonafides. If so associating with Driscoll they can get the thug part down.

No. The “authentic community” I was referring to is the “it” term/concept in megas for 2015. It’s also called “community in a box”. When you go to these posh country clubesque entertainment centers their #1 priority is to get visitors “connected” and “plugged in”. Visitors are given special parking spaces, valets to accommodate them, some mega even have special VIP seating. They are showered with gifts and once you relinquish your highly prized “contact data” more “gifts” will follow to your home address. You will hear the Velcro bar/connect center mentioned several times in each service. They will also show several very slickly produced commercials that feature smiling, giddy, laughing people all celebrating together. They will promise to give you an authentic community to “do life with”. Don’t you want to be a part of that? This is what the giving unit is looking for, not God. Mark pretty much mandated participation in weekly Life Groups plus you had to use their social media platform The City to stay connected. It’s much harder to leave that way.

My old church Gateway has “atmosphere teams” in services to emotionally manipulate members and visitors. They sing and wave their arms and hug and praise other givers. It is all choreographed and it works! Before people know it, feeling loved and valued (and not realizing it was due to preplanned manipulation) they are plugged in several days a week, basically dropping out of their non-church activities. They are relinquishing 10-20% of their gross income.

It’s all good until (insert question or issue). Are you not voting? Are you not voting for the candidates and issues Gateway told you to? Is that leader with a criminal record hitting on your young teen? Did you miss a tithe payment? Have you not spilled all your dark secrets at Freedom Ministry? Are you not reporting instant healing to keep the “confirmed miracle” count up? You can’t speak in tongues? You’re not trying hard enough! You’re not one of us. Then the authentic community unravels like a cheap Walmart sweater. Connection ends, shunning begins and the cycle begins all over again with the next batch of newbies.

However, you are on to something with the radical chic concept. At his height of fame Driscoll was the bad boy of the Christian world. A grunge rock Lord Byron – mad, bad and dangerous to know. Above all he had that coveted edginess – he wore age and occupation inappropriate t shirts and chunky jewelry on the pulpit. He screamed and swore. He was the vulgar shock jock of American Christianity. You’ll notice the Pentecostals elevating him are in their 50’s and 60’s. They use lots of hair gel and work on their golf tans. They wear what they believe are trendy shirts – typically untucked to cover the middle aged spread – with skinny jeans. But with those reading glasses they are losing their hipness and relevance and megas feed off of young marrieds with children. Associating with Driscoll might make them feel younger and edgy. Plus Driscoll has to be way cheaper than Judah Smith or Carl Lentz, the current kings of radical chic. Great observation!

numo wrote:

@ LT:
Your facts are a bit off, beginning with the meaning of “Che.” I am no fan of his, but there are some big holes in your acvount of his life.
Not here to argue about this, just pointing it out.

Please fill me in Numo. I am always eager and willing to learn, so no argument here. I have learned much on this blog and often from your comments which are intelligent and insightful. I am sorry if anything I wrote about Che offended you. That was not my intention. I was mainly trying to establish there is a difference between lovable Hollywood Che and reality Che. Che’s rise and fall occurred before I was born so I’d sincerely appreciate any insight and correction. I know historical accounts can be skewed.

I have read many accounts that his nickname throughout life was el chancho (pig). I have read both accounts that Che was short for Chancho and also a play on his habitually calling everyone “che” which is slang for pal/friend etc. I suppose they could have been made up, although the accounts are supported by numerous descriptions of his pig like behavior. I am also pretty sure the accounts of his instrumental role in bringing Russian nuclear-armed ballistic missiles to Cuba to be used against the US were not purely fabricated, so I did not believe I was disseminating false information at the time I wrote that. I acknowledge that one person’s terrorist can be another person’s freedom fighter. I probably won’t be won over to the side of communism. But I never want to deliberately post any false information so I do appreciate any corrections you can add. I’m not invested in liking or disliking Che so I truly welcome your comments. Thanks for your help Numo!

Gus wrote:

What is tragic is that these events will lead everyone who has two braincells to rub together to come to the following default conclusions:
– If there are reports of a scandal or problems at a church, they are true.
– If a pastor makes a statement denying allegations, it’s a lie.
– If a pastor says anything positive about another pastor, they have something to hide.
– Any allegations are probably not as bad as the truth.

I have to disagree Gus considering you mentioned brain cells. :o) I would view it like this:

If there are reports of a scandal or problems at a church, they are worth investigating with openess and transparancy.
– If a pastor makes a statement denying allegations, it might be that his words and patterns of behavior, actions don’t match. It is ok to ask for openess and transparancy.
– If a pastor says anything positive about another pastor, and that other pastor has a history of patterns of behavior and teachings that are destructive it is wise to ask pastor 1 if he has checked him out before he promotes him.
-Any allegations are probably not as bad as the truths. All allegation deserve to be investigated with openess and transparancy. If not, why not?

oops, I hit send too soon.

The reason why I answered like that is because most of this stuff goes on because the pew sitters are not actively involved in the church operatons and are not demanding openess and transparancy of staff and leaders. They really believe that God has anointed the leaders to lead them. it is so sad it breaks my heart.

@ Gus:
Yes, well, my sense of humor doesn’t always translate well in the blogosphere… 😀

Oops. I didn’t edit that very well.

OT but of interest: the former pastor of a megachurch in Richmond, VA goes on trial tomorrow on charges of sexually abusing two minors in Texas some years ago.

http://www.richmond.com/news/local/city-of-richmond/article_4d131547-f913-5d43-bfc5-5a292f4c27e1.html

@ LT:
Like I said, I don’t want to get into an argument here. He apparently had many nicknames during the course of his life, but became known by “Che.” It is not short for “chancho.”

As I said, I am not a fan, but I can see the appeal of *his image,* from way back in the late 60s when posters of him 1st started appearing in college dorms. I seriously doubt that most younger people – then or now – who appropriate his image (here in N. America) know much of anything about him. His appeal, then and now, has much to do with his looks plus a perception of him being “anti-establishment,” which he was. Certainly, Fulgencio Batista (dictator of Cuba at the time of the communist takeover) was a very corrupt man, whose government did terrible things, as with Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, Papa Doc Duvalier in Haiti, and many others. I think people on all sides of these conflicts did some pretty horrendous things, as well as some decent things.

singleman wrote:

OT but of interest: the former pastor of a megachurch in Richmond, VA goes on trial tomorrow on charges of sexually abusing two minors in Texas some years ago.

Yes, thanks for this. I was reading related posts and noticed he’s playing the martyr role as Driscoll did. See here:

“As you all know, my family and I have been facing difficult trials and persecution. This has taken a toll on me and my family, as well as those close to me,” the former senior pastor wrote in a letter posted on the ROC’s website. “Unfortunately, during this difficult season, the focus has been taken off of Jesus and put on me, and that is not what The ROC is all about.”

http://www.richmond.com/news/local/crime/article_8c6b7719-c4af-523b-b3a6-3c6131e32fd3.html

LT: Certainly they all hire each other as guest speakers in order to pay large honorariums from tithe dollars that end up in each other’s personal bank accounts. In your mega travels Lydia, is this homogenization of bad practices the norm? Or is it just a GW thing? What’s the worst import/export that you’ve seen?
++++++++++++++++

In your mega travels, Lydia, what’s the biggest honorarium from tithe dollars you have been privy to?

@ sam:
Thanks for the link – i want to read more of the writer’s work. And i honestly had no idea that that phrase was in there.

@ sam:
Sam, I sincerely hope that nothing I’ve written ever makes you rethink your relationship with God. It’s meant only to address the deception of certain megas. I only write the truth about Gateway in order to warn others, never to discourage anyone. I know that tens of thousands left GW before I did and they walked away without the decency to help others. I wish just one person would have spoken up sooner. I saw many warnings but there seemed to be some explanation for most of it. I assumed that it was just me and 25,000 other people had no issue. I didn’t realize tens of thousands had already left. If one other person had confirmed my concerns then I would not have pushed my data points aside as just being something only I had an issue with. I don’t want other people having that same regret.

As Lydia has wisely pointed out, cult survivors are all at different stages in their recovery. Some are stronger and more capable of speaking out and as we feel able to I believe that we must. I hope more will speak up in the future. I know the utter devastation that these cults can wreak on their members. I’m not as strong or wise as Lydia, but I hope to provide valuable insights based on my experience so that those with eyes to see and ears to hear get out and get out quickly. I try to make sure my examples reflect current GW practice which is repellent to follow but important that people understand the stuff that I am posting is happening in real time. Every week seems to get more strange and more openly cult like. This is largely shielded from television audiences who only view a heavily edited 22 minute message. Internet users are also shielded from much of GW reality.

I understand exactly how you feel if that helps. Finding out who and what Robert Morris really is inherently taints many others on the religious and political right, thereby making me question all my prior values and decisions. When Robert brags about lunching with Greg Abbott, golfing with George W Bush or being Rick Santorum’s spiritual advisor, it makes me feel ill. I cannot respect or support these men knowing that they revere such a man as a pastor. It could be that they are as ignorant as I once was, but it makes me distrust their judgment and discernment and dislike them all the same.

I hope you don’t write off church altogether. A cult expert I spoke at length with said it may be harder to find the right one, but a smaller church is the way to go. He explained that “wide is the path” refers mainly to churches “posing” as Christian churches (mostly for millions in profit like GW) not the fringe Christian-like churches or belief systems (like LDS). Those ones aren’t even on the path. That’s why these massive megas aren’t likely to represent the narrow gate. My great concern is that people leaving megas to find these narrow gate churches are used to high level spiritainment and may not feel able to “reduce” their standards to go to a small church. That would be terrible. If I were Satan I would give the Wormwood who came up with that system a big raise (or give away their books so they’d get a fat royalty check ; )

I recently darkened the doors of a very small church in another city. It was dingy and old. The pews were uncomfortable. The bathrooms were tiny and not particularly nice. The carpet was worn. There was no light show. No coffee bar, etc. But guess what else happened? I met the pastor. That’s right, the head pastor no less! No body guards. No special event meet and greet for high dollar donors. The last time Robert Morris met and greeted anyone as part of his service he still had his braces/retainer on. I’m not kidding.

This pastor was humble! He genuinely seemed to care. When he walked up to speak with me I politely told him needn’t spend time with me because I lived about 4 hours away RT and, therefore, wouldn’t be attending his church again. He looked at me kindly and slightly amused and said, ‘that’s okay”. I felt like an idiot after I said that. I’m so used to the mega’s Velcro bars where they only care about you if they can slap some Velcro on you to make you come back so you can become a tithe payer. It genuinely didn’t occur to me that he was just a good, decent man who might care about God’s children regardless of their zip code. It didn’t occur to me because I haven’t seen that modeled in a very long time.

I’m a “done” for now but that one meeting made we wonder if I could someday find a narrow gate church like the cult expert said. For all the lack of American Idol production values I learned more in that one day of teaching at that little church then I did in all the years I attended Gateway. I didn’t feel pressured. There was an uncanny feeling to this experience. Like God might show up. Imagine that. And there were no acrobats, flying drummers, or the need to check out the latest cosmetic procedure on the head worship pastor there. BTW they didn’t have a head worship pastor. Just volunteers.

I believe this is the 2 Thessalonians time period so it will become increasingly more difficult to avoid false teachers. I hope others will join in at places like this blog and help shed light on local megas in their area. The worst of all the bad these churches can do (apart from sexual assaults) is brainwashing the kids into their cult beliefs so that they will not accept the true Word of God at a later date. That’s why places like TWW are imperative. That’s why every post they make against corrupt churches matters. The youngest generation may be leaving the church in record numbers but at least they have a fighting chance of finding the real God later. I hope you found some of the above helpful. I know how hard false teaching is to bear. Good luck to you Sam.

“It was clear to me that Mark’s attendance had the potential to divert attention from the real purpose…”

He diverts attention from the real purpose, the Gospel, to himself.

Driscoll has used this vague parallels to himself many times, framing the sermon in the context of his own life with the lives of other noble characters, most notably Jesus. His messages change in content, but not in root meaning. His most shocking was when just before he stepped down from the pulpit and was in the midst of many scandals, he did a sermon on the many mistakes of Jesus. It was so heretical that even the MH staff saw issues and took it down.

Its the same game he has played. “I am someone special, like Jesus and Paul. Persecuted, but You can’t criticize me for a moment”

Don’t give into his deception. Mark was talking about Mark. Its what he does. Its all he does. There is no uncertainty in that.

Van wrote:

Driscoll has used this vague parallels to himself many times, framing the sermon in the context of his own life with the lives of other noble characters, most notably Jesus.

Van, I agree with Deb. This captures precisely what I have been sensing as well.

__

“Those Who Win Souls Are Wise?”

@ Barb Orlowski,

hey,

🙂

Glad you liked da toon:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i7lv9oMjv_0&sns=em

It so important, huh, that we share that Jesus came to save us from sin, and to give us His life. 

The bible sayz dat soon the darkness is coming when no one will be listening…

(tears)

So now is the time ta share with kind folks the destination of their eternal soul?

yep.

Could b.

ATB

Sopy

—

elisabeth seton wrote:

COuld someone explain how it’s supposed to work without a leader . . . since we are all clergy??? Sincerely want to know what the alternative is. . . .

This is off topic but your question has been the basis of discussion with many associates for the last 6 months, many recently leaving an authoritarian church. So far I define church as more what it isn’t rather than what it is. It is definitely not where all leadership and vision is deferred to one man, and it is definitely not authoritarian. Also it is not where you sit in rows and hear a weekly lecture. The question may even be wrong, maybe it isn’t “what is” the church but “who is”.

I’ve recently read Wayne Jacobsen “Finding Church”, Frank Viola “Finding Organic Church”, Terry Stanley “The way Church Was Meant To Be” and found what they think the church should be an interesting concept but so far I’m not convinced. A group of followers dealing directly with each other and not with an institution sounds appealing. Unfortunately I don’t see loose associations of Christ followers functioning in my locale but I continually find more “dones”, those done with institutional church.

signed, Still Looking

And thus, I think that the only way to self regulate is to have benchmarks that people must reach to be in leadership positions. The problem is that the average pew-sitter has no idea what things a leader should be judged by, and they merely judge based on either looks, speaking ability, or how fun the service is.

Bob M wrote:

I think that the only way to self regulate is to have benchmarks that people must reach to be in leadership positions. The problem is that the average pew-sitter has no idea what things a leader should be judged by,

The only two ways that I can think of for having said benchmarks, assuming by leadership you mean pastor(s) and not just chairman of some committee, is either having a system with central authority with established criteria which must be met prior to ordination and some written policies which are grounds for dismissal in certain conditions, That would be a denominational hierarchical system with designated people with authority and with something in writing, like an ‘official book of how we do it.’ Or else to have a savvy and informed and mature congregation who would agree with and co-operate with each other on what was necessary and what needed done and which would have the actual power (backing of the people) to get it done.

If the denominational system is rejected on doctrinal grounds, that only leaves the congregation. If the congregation, the pew sitter as you say, cannot do it what does that leave? Is there a third way that I have overlooked?

Van wrote:

Driscoll has used this vague parallels to himself many times, framing the sermon in the context of his own life with the lives of other noble characters, most notably Jesus. His messages change in content, but not in root meaning. His most shocking was when just before he stepped down from the pulpit and was in the midst of many scandals, he did a sermon on the many mistakes of Jesus. It was so heretical that even the MH staff saw issues and took it down.

i remember that, thanks Van, for the reminder

Bob M wrote:

The problem is that the average pew-sitter has no idea what things a leader should be judged by, and they merely judge based on either looks, speaking ability, or how fun the service is.

Bob, I loved your comment. I did disagree, however, with this one sentence. I think it underestimates those believers in the pews who are, themselves, filled with the Spirit and do exhibit the fruit of Galations 5. They may have been totally shocked when Mark began to spew his rude, humiliating, oppressive descriptions and warped perceptions of scripture and men and women. But over time became desensitized and swept up in “group-think” so as to eventually accept it as acceptable in the 21st century.

Vulgarity and filth get fed to us little by little until we hardly notice we’ve ignored those first red flags and become part and parcel of the heresy. At some point, with enough outcry and rage from outside, they may hopefully “see it” as you did looking up at that 3 x 5 card on your bulletin. Now the shock will be realizing how far they’ve strayed from those virtues.

I’ve seen desensitizing have the desired effect and it’s not pretty.

Bill M wrote:

elisabeth seton wrote:
COuld someone explain how it’s supposed to work without a leader . . . since we are all clergy??? Sincerely want to know what the alternative is. . . .
This is off topic but your question has been the basis of discussion with many associates for the last 6 months, many recently leaving an authoritarian church. So far I define church as more what it isn’t rather than what it is. It is definitely not where all leadership and vision is deferred to one man, and it is definitely not authoritarian. Also it is not where you sit in rows and hear a weekly lecture. The question may even be wrong, maybe it isn’t “what is” the church but “who is”.
I’ve recently read Wayne Jacobsen “Finding Church”, Frank Viola “Finding Organic Church”, Terry Stanley “The way Church Was Meant To Be” and found what they think the church should be an interesting concept but so far I’m not convinced. A group of followers dealing directly with each other and not with an institution sounds appealing. Unfortunately I don’t see loose associations of Christ followers functioning in my locale but I continually find more “dones”, those done with institutional church.
signed, Still Looking

first i wasnt refering to anything lindell wrote but only his intro for mark driscoll because i have never read anything he wrote and dont want to.
i think bills reply echos mine mostly, if your question is what church should look like if we are all ‘clergy’

especially i want to comment Bills comment: ” A group of followers dealing directly with each other and not with an institution sounds appealing.” i have seen this with great fruit but sooner or later they seem to join a church and then get into the organized one leader concept of church, usually a small church and then i have seen the vision they had and the practice of each one seeking the Lord individually disapear and be replaced by how to organize and raise funds to do more in the name of the Lord. i dont know what the answer is except to not get under the ‘pastor’ leader concept ever. i have very little church experience so i dont think i am qualified to even speak to these things though.

@ Bob M:
Some great insights there, Bob. Gramp3 and I were recalling today the first time we ever heard Driscoll’s name brought up in a church. One of the men had been to a conference in Seattle and was just wowed by his “missional” approach. There was another couple along with us who knew a bit more about him and we absolutely amazed that this man, who could have been an elder, could not see through the act which you described so perfectly. I think older people ignored the “bad boy” Driscoll because he seemed to be reaching the young people. But, as you said, there is no substitute for a work of the Holy Spirit.

Nancy wrote:

I never saw it tried in a church setting, but something like that was tried where I worked. At a certain level they wanted leaderless teams who would function by consensus. It was really bad, disastrous I might even say.

i think that it worked quite well for Youth with a Mission for several years and then it went awry and i dont know the particulars of what happened. in the first years of the organinazation they didnt do anything without consensus because they believed that if they were a group of believers the Lord would make them of the same agreement on specific issues and if they didnt reach agreement there was a reason that needed to be looked at. During those early years they had a great impact on hurting people and a great testimony of the work of the Lord in a group of people dedicated to doing whatever He led them to do. their ministry grew and even people that werent christians were thankful for them. like i said it went away from that and i didnt look into why.

sam wrote:

an important thing you wrote about gateway i think. i have met people that have told me that they went to gateway (and other churches that are similar) but no longer do without ever saying why. there is a scripture somewhere that says i wont speak against God’s annointed, which was david re saul i believe, and people have used this (or churches have used this to keep people quiet) as a reason to never say anything about church abuse. one person, after 6 months finally started to say why they didnt attend gateway anymore and it made me wonder why people dont warn others. kinda like a person who has been abused i think, they sometimes have to get past that people may judge them for being “stupid for falling for it”, or they have to reconcile with the results of them speaking out, shunning, slander ie: the church calls them heretics because they dont attend anymore. shuning is not always done professionally as in TVC but so often done whisperingly in churches but the effect is the same to the person shunned.
I dont think people that have fallen for false teachers are stupid, i think instead it reflects the degree of deceit in the false teachers and the seriousnes of the manipulations being used. any way i am still wrestling with my view of my world and churches and like you mentioned, gun shy when i go into a new church. appeciate your posts and the others on this blog

Thanks for your comments. You are so spot on. The ones leaving aren’t stupid. Gateway is so deceptive in all their practices. You don’t find out about some of the really bad stuff until you are pretty deep into it. After surrendering more than 10% of your gross income for years you are tens of thousands of dollars into them at that point and that can really bolster all the cognitive dissonance you feel and strangely work to prevent your leaving. Most people have more sunk into that cult than they do their homes. I think those that experience an event that is very bad or painful are often the lucky ones because you really can’t second guess leaving. It takes at least 6 months before you start seeing things clearly. Then you can better understand the depths of this deception.
.
The worship leaders are all carefully coached and choreographed on how to appear more “worshipful” and fake their collective ecstatic elation over being one with their maker. How they hold their hands, pat their hearts, stomp their feet, fall to their knees, wipe away fake tears, etc is all taught in classes. The worship leaders laugh about it. It’s just another singing and acting gig for many of them. The mighty Kari Jobe is featured in some of the faking it videos they play in the classes. None of them see anything wrong with this. I felt physically ill when I saw them. It is identical to another certain entertainment industry where faking it means everything and in my opinion the industry representing the older profession is less offensive. When you add “atmosphere teams” to further manipulate people’s “worship experience” that is too much. There is no glorifying God in any of that. It is deceiving men so they will be more inclined to pay those 500+ employees their hundred thousand dollar pay packages. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
.
Why exiles don’t speak out is a strange phenomenon. It’s kind of like that movie Winter’s Bone where the communities are closed to a fault. For a number of reasons Texans don’t want to say bad things about a church no matter how many people are being hurt. We saw the Dallas Morning News drop TVC story like it had Ebola germs on it despite knowing that parents were not being warned of a pedophile in their midst. You’d think they’d feel a sense of civic duty there. In my opinion Gateway is a cult not a church so they lose their Winter’s Bone protection status. I fully understand the depression and near paralysis that comes after leaving a cult. There is a distinct period of time that must pass before you can really objectively address the damage that that place does. However, with such a massive back door spanning 15 years, I still think more exiles should be speaking up for the good of the current and future naives. GW has a lot of bad stuff they are covering up.
.
I have also heard the thoroughly abusive interpretation of Psalm 105:15 ” touch not my anointed ones, do my prophets no harm”. It’s really big in Charismatic/Pentecostal circles – I think mainly because they are more predisposed to bad behavior (think TBN and Daystar whackos). I know you are already familiar with it but for anyone else not familiar, it was written in the context of David and Saul. The text is not prescriptive. It refers to protecting the King of Israel from physical harm, not preventing people from telling the truth. Where David cut the fabric from Saul’s garment in the cave, showing he could have killed Saul but didn’t, reflects God’s desire that David not physically harm Saul. However, we also see that David and Samuel were permitted to speak out publicly against Saul in truth. The prophets in that verse are likewise OT prophets and also refers only to physical harm. Robert Morris loves putting his flock under the law regarding Mosaic Law tithing and also under Deuteronomy so he can squeeze out extravagant gifts. But Christians are under the New Covenant and the NT calls Christians to expose false teachers, not facilitate their cover ups. Personally I do not believe God would ever anoint a blatant false teacher. It is profoundly ironic that false teachers twist this particular scripture in an abusive way to their advantage just so that they can continue abusing. There will be a day of reckoning.
.
I’m really glad that you are reaching out to GW and other exiles. I hope you encourage them to visit TWW. Many times it kept me from feeling like I was the only one who could see this stuff or understood how wrong it is. There is great comfort to be found in that.

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

So quick question if anyone wants to take a whack at it. Do any of you who oppose Driscoll preaching or running a church again, is there a way he could ever get forgiveness from y’all to do that sort of ministry again?

The question is not, “Can he be forgiven?” but rather “Should he be trusted in a position of power over people’s lives?” I would guess that many of the people who have been directly harmed by him have forgiven him. The issue, however, is character, evidenced by a pattern of behavior reported with regard to bullying behavior, narcissitic traits, etc. It is an issue of protecting other people. Analogously, there are certain qualities that police forces screen for, to hopefully screen out bullies who want a uniform. I think it’s much the same thing. Or there are people who were sexually abused by Uncle so and so who have forgiven him, and perhaps the man has “done his time,” but their forgiveness does not mean that they would ever allow their children in the same room with him. Mark Driscoll has shown that he’s capable of inflicting a lot of damage on many people. I would think that rehabilitation for him would be finding a job where he was not the boss and not the teacher. If after many years of that, he wrote a book about how God brought about change within, I’d be interested in reading it. Maybe then, someone would seek him out to lead and it would be safe again. But maybe power is just something that is too tempting for him to handle and in order for him to live out his life following Christ, it may be something he must never let pass his lips–much like alcoholics cannot drink again. I do hope he finds wholeness.

@ Abi Miah:
@ Nancy:
Thanks for sharing your perspectives Abi Mia and Nancy, I appreciate that.

Whenever I hear Mark Driscoll’s name, a passage keeps popping in my mind “Beware of Alexander the coppersmith – he has done us much harm.” Driscoll and his potty-mouth preaching made an everlasting “mark” on 21st century church in America. He dropped the moral bar for both pulpit and pew that has far reaching consequences on the way we do church. I believe in forgiveness, but cautious about putting such folks back on the platform.

It was just a matter of time before New Calvinism found a way to resurrect its leading icon. John Lindell, pastor of James River Church, represents a new breed of reformed Assembly of God pastors … yes Calvinism in the Assembly of God! Who would have thought that the message of the Cross for ALL people (the whosoever wills) would be diminished in pentecostal ranks?!

Albuquerque Blue wrote:

Do any of you who oppose Driscoll preaching or running a church again, is there a way he could ever get forgiveness from y’all to do that sort of ministry again?

Driscoll was never really qualified to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the first place – he proved that time and time again by his un-Christlike behavior in word and action. He set himself up as King of Acts 29 and operated with no accountability at Mars Hill. Those who challenged him were openly chastised, disgracefully removed from membership and/or shunned … until the organization he created finally said enough is enough and sent him packing (however, with a nice severance package). His style appealed to the carnal nature of 21st century Christians – he gave them what they wanted and they loved it so. Forgive him? Certainly, or we are no better than he is. But forgiveness doesn’t mean the church should open itself to his abuse again … no need to return him to the pulpit since he wasn’t a genuine minister to begin with; there was no evidence of the call of God on his life given his dismal run as a “pastor.” God knows that we don’t need that “sort of ministry again.”

As a follow-up (Sydney Morning Herald 1 July 2015), “Hillsong conference shows interview with controversial US Pastor, Mark Driscoll” – see link
http://www.smh.com.au/national/hillsong-conference-shows-interview-with-controversial-us-pastor-mark-driscoll-20150630-gi1y6d.html

What Mark Driscoll Told Brian Houston at Hillsong Conference (updated)
http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/june/distraction-down-under-hillsong-mark-driscoll-conference.html

What caught my attention:

Driscoll also distanced himself from past crude and misogynistic remarks, calling “the perception of what I think about women…entirely my own fault.

“I want to have the heart for the women in the future who will allow me to be their pastor that I have for my daughters,” he said, “and that is if they have spiritual gifts, and are called by God, and are godly, I want to help them achieve that intentionally and encourage that and be a support for that.”

Mot only do I think Driscoll is a wolf in sheeps clothing, but I think he’s opportunistic, and because being a preacher is all he knows.

He cannot or will not go back to school to become a plumber or a dentist or what ever, so he has to figure out how to get back into the Christian preaching / book writing / convention circuit.

Some Pentecostals or Charismatics are okay with women being preachers or teachers.

It’s more the non-complementarian position to argue that women should be allowed to preach/lead based on gifting – and that sounds like the argument Driscoll is raising in the quotes by him I placed in this post.

I’m guessing Driscoll’s trying to resurrect his career by going into Charismatic type denominations or churches. And he can’t really do that if he keep holding on to the more sexist, frat boy type of Christianity that Neo Calvinists support that he was espousing at Mars Hill.

Even if you’re looking at Christianity from a strictly business like mindset, I don’t see how it’s good marketing or profitable to do the sexist shtick. At least at one point, women made up about 50% to 50% of most churches. It seems foolish from a marketing and business view to alienate over half your “customers.”

Same goes for singles. There are now more single adults in the U.S.A. than married couples, but churches (even the mega ones) keep going after the married folks. The singles have a lot of money to be exploited as well, but churches are stuck in a rut of trying to fleece the married folks.

@ Max:

Yes, I have been witnessing first hand over the years of the Calvinism in the AG. What I didn’t know until this year is how much they are invading their universities as well. I just took a year of online classes at one of them. While I appreciate that we were exposed to different theologians, it seemed the bent was toward Calvinism. I need to talk to the president, he may be unaware what some of his professors are teaching.

Daisy wrote:

Mot only do I think Driscoll is a wolf in sheeps clothing, but I think he’s opportunistic, and because being a preacher is all he knows.

He cannot or will not go back to school to become a plumber or a dentist or what ever, so he has to figure out how to get back into the Christian preaching / book writing / convention circuit.

Bingo.
There is a very strong argument for both priests and politicians to have both life and work experience before they ‘enter the fray’, however this is the age of the “career priest and pollie”.