First!?!

And me!

Some time back, I saw a copy of the IX Marks book on my pastor’s office side table where he puts books he’s intending to get around to. He said one of the elders had given it to him. (Huh-oh, I thought.) He said he’d only been able to give it a light skim. He didn’t seem too enamored with it and it disappeared after a decent amount of time. Good.

By the way, I saw on the internet that when Mark Dever came to Capitol Hill Baptist Church he kicked out some 256 church members who didn’t want to do things his way. Can this be substantiated?

Todd W., if you read this do you know anything about that?

Velour wrote:

By the way, I saw on the internet that when Mark Dever came to Capitol Hill Baptist Church he kicked out some 256 church members who didn’t want to do things his way. Can this be substantiated?

Todd W., if you read this do you know anything about that?

I was there in the early 00s, and the way it was explained to us newbies was “You see, there were all these people who were still on the membership rolls who hadn’t set foot in this building in YEARS! All we did was call them and ask if they would come back. If they didn’t, we dropped them.”

Now, I also heard that there were several prominent elders (in both senses of the word) who did leave/were asked to leave due to their disagreeing with the new direction of the church. I have no details on this, other than their departure was portrayed as the jettison of folks who would rather have had the old congregation die as it was than make the change to the more “biblical” model.

The dropping of people who no longer attend (unless it was for health reasons), I don’t have much issue with. The elders thing didn’t seem fishy to me at the time (and I *have* seen bad examples of “we’d rather die than change!” congregations), but the almost total lack of any overlap between the old leadership and the new did bug me, especially since all the new leadership was young post-seminarians who were personally (and constantly) mentored by Dever. And that was the key to my problems with the place – the leadership was, I guess still is, VERY insular. The Devers and most of the interns all lived on the same block on Capital Hill. They did *everything* together. If they had any other interactions with the congregation other than church functions and small group leadership, I wasn’t aware of it. And it was very clear that if you weren’t in that in-crowd, you weren’t “in”. And the authoritarianism was very strong, even then. A 25yo “elder” lecturing a 40yo congregant about how to treat customers at the church bookshop was not considered out of line in any fashion.

But again, all this was/is sold as the “biblical” model, and they sell themselves pretty hard to people who want to be seriously Christian in an increasingly non-Christian culture. Which can make it hard to leave, even if you do recognize that they have fatal flaw. It was hard for me to leave because of that very thing (thank God I still had friends on the outside who could talk me back from the end of the branch).

Velour wrote:

By the way, I saw on the internet that when Mark Dever came to Capitol Hill Baptist Church he kicked out some 256 church members who didn’t want to do things his way. Can this be substantiated?
Todd W., if you read this do you know anything about that?

Yep, the number is accurate.

“So, after we revised that covenant, then we were in the position to begin asking people to either sign it, well, forget the either, just to sign it in order to be a member of the church. And so, in the Spring of ‘96, we went through a several month process of weeding through our church membership and getting our membership from about 500 down to about 250. When we dismissed at one members meeting, back in May of ’96, I can’t remember, about 256 members, I think. I think that was a crucial point for the church. I think the church began to understand that someone isn’t saved by having their name on the members list. Someone is saved by having a relationship with Christ, and if they’re not evidently living that out in front of us, it’s not appropriate for them to be a member. It doesn’t mean we don’t think they’re not a Christian, it just means we’re not in a position as a church to know. So, if you’re interested, you can certainly contact the Center for Church Reform to find out more about how we specifically did that.”
-From an interview of Mark Dever
http://sites.silaspartners.com/cc/article/0,,PTID314526_CHID626262_CIID1639966,00.html

Here is an article by Jonathan Leeman, Dever’s Lieutenant, where he fondly tells of a church that excommunicated 575 members!
https://9marks.org/article/church-disciplines-575-members/

I think it was Brad the futurist guy that recommended a book to me titled “The Shepherding Movement: Controversy and Charismatic Eccliesiolgy” by S. David Moore.

I am currently reading the book and the similarity between 9Marx and the Shepherding movement is erie. It is almost as if Dever has lifted all the Shepherding concepts and repackaged them for our day.

“The movement taught that submission to a shepherd provided spiritual “covering” by being in a right relationship to God’s delegated authority in the church. The shepherd assumed responsibility for the well-being of his sheep.” (page 74)

“Prince illustrated the depth of these covenant commitments by comparing them to the marriage covenant…
Practically, covenant meant “abandoning the option to quit” in relationships.” (page 77)

“The movement stressed the need for male leadership, with strong fathers and husbands in the home. It was understood that women were not to have governmental leadership in the church, and emphasis was placed on the very different roles in the Scriptures for men and women. Women had assumed roles that properly belonged to men. They were also concerned over the weak, effeminate stereotypes often ascribed to ministers and pastors.” (page 79)

Mumford disciple Dick Key and other men signed written covenants to be committed to their pastor and fellow leaders. Scott Ross, who had only been with the movement a month, was one of the few men who did not make a commitment. He stood and said he needed to talk to his wife before he could take such a major step. Mumfrod recalled, “It was like putting a wet blanket on the whole thing.” (page 90)

“DuPlessis commented that “Mumford has become known as the Pope in Ft Lauderdale.” He continued: “I am almost convinced that these brethren are establishing their own kingdom or Church, and that they are definitely anti-other churches.” (page 99)

“Pat Robertson was the first to raise concerns after the agenda was set. He was forceful in expressing his charges and asserted, “The authority is the Bible not the shepherd; our covering is the blood not man.” Robertson charged the CGM teachers with usurping the role of the Holy Spirit in the live of a believer and demeaning all Christians by calling them “dumb sheep.” Robertson told the group that the Ft Lauderdale leaders taught one thing publicly and another privately. He said the cell group approach was divisive and exclusive.” (page 102)

Also contributing to this decision to stop the conferences was their emphasis on the role of male leadership. The conferences, especially daytime sessions, were attended mostly by women. They believed this was counterproductive to establishing male leadership in the home, since they were making wives more spiritual than their husbands.” (page 58)

=================
From the 9Marks website:

Who Should Attend a Weekender?

The Weekender is designed for men who are, or aspire to be, church leaders. This includes pastors, elders, deacons, lay leaders, seminarians, and more.

“May I Bring My Wife?”

Men often ask if they can or should bring their wives to the Weekender. We generally discourage it because the schedule is extremely full and the sessions are only open to the registered participants. If wives do come, they are welcome to attend the church’s public meetings (Membership Matters, Core Seminars, Sunday AM and Sunday PM services).

@ Eeyore:
Eeyore, the insularaty, etc sounds frighteningly like SGM/ Sovereign Grace Churches I knew. I had no idea someone who bragged of such a healthy church could have ever functioned in such ways. Has Satan so truly gotten ahold of the church that bad is confused with good and good confused with bad? Say it isn’t so. This grieves me.

An Attorney wrote:

The ONE MARK of a true Christian is LOVE! It is the first characteristic of God and to be Christ-like, aka a Christian, is love. Legalism is the antithesis of love.
A church should be governed by the body of believers, and those who have been Christians for decades, true elders, should lead, with a huge dose of humility.

Yes! The whole thing! Especially the love part!

@ Stunned:
Dear Stunned,

I agree with you. These young guys don’t have enough life experience or God experience to lord it over us. We’ve fought the good fight all our lives — and they want us to lick their boots?

I’d like to ask another question.

$100,000 really isn’t very much money. I’m sure other people at Dever’s church have given that amount and even more.
Are we sure that’s all C.J. Mahaney or CLC did for Dever?

Mahaney has admitted to blackmail in the past, which is why he lost his position. Could there be something in Dever and others’s lives that that warrants this level of fawning?

So people were part of a church their whole lives yet wrote off when they were too old to attend regularly? IE, wouldn’t capitulate to the young punk demanding they sign something? And people aren’t ashamed of this?

Stunned wrote:

Am I just being a total crank about this?

No you’re not, but I don’t know exactly what happened so I don’t’ know what to say.

In general, though, I find some of these people display a distinct lack of love for their elders that is very troublesome. People (and women in particular) do not lose their value simply because of age. Maybe this is all just a financial calculation to them, but I hate this emphasis on younger people as the most important thing, and everyone else as disposable. A healthy church will have the old and the young. The elders (!!! I said it this way on purpose !!!) should be valued. What is wrong with this bunch of pastors that they are willing to dismiss them so quickly?

(Waves five-six-figure check)
“And THAT’s how you get invited back! (chuckle chuckle)”

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

winsome courage

!!!! Why are they so obsessed with that word?

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

winsome courage

Super creepy expression. Sounds like they are applauding manipulation. Why doesn’t other people’s creep meters go off over this kind of stuff?

Stunned wrote:

Super creepy expression. Sounds like they are applauding manipulation. Why doesn’t other people’s creep meters go off over this kind of stuff?

I got a kick out of the “gospel-captivated staff.” I believe one could open himself up to church discipline if you author a press release without at least one reference to “winsome” and “gospel” something or other!

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

Grant Castleberry became the Executive Director of the “Men are Better Than Women Club” at the tender age of 29!

Pursuing a PhD at Southern Seminary, with extensive re-tweeting and flattering of New Calvinist who’s who are sufficient qualifications for the job!

As far as an obsession with the word ‘winsome’ goes, it’s probably because they’re having more trouble winning over Christians to their way of thinking than they’re letting on.

“Staring Down at a Bulldozer” paragraph in link below:
http://wamu.org/programs/metro_connection/15/02/06/capitol_hill_restoration_society_celebrates_60_years_of_battles_won_and_lost This was in 1972. For what it’s worth.

Stunned wrote:

Another thing struck me on this article. MD wrote his 9 thing-a-ma-bobs when he was just 31? 31? Isn’t the average person probably better off learning about life rather than correcting everyone else around you at 31? I know the scripture where Timothy is told not to let people look down on his age, but from what I understand, Timothy was 44 by then. Wasn’t THAT the age considered an elder?

I’m not 31 yet, but your point is sound. Joshua Harris was 21 when he wrote ‘I kissed dating goodbye’ and then he was promoted to lead pastor. He stepped down just last year – at about 40 years old to go back to seminary. The Reformed corner tends to promote young men into high positions of leadership / as elders and kicks out it’s elderly elders for being too old – not having the right ‘image’. It saddens me that a certain musician in my family wouldn’t be asked to play on stage because of it.

Bridget wrote:

And CBMW is proud that these men are young and unmatured in life.

With lotsa Precious Bodliy Fluids.

@ Todd Wilhelm:

““May I Bring My Wife?”

Men often ask if they can or should bring their wives to the Weekender. We generally discourage it because the schedule is extremely full and the sessions are only open to the registered participants. If wives do come, they are welcome to attend the church’s public meetings (Membership Matters, Core Seminars, Sunday AM and Sunday PM services).”
++++++++++++++++

so much to be annoyed, disappointed, frustrated about here. but what stands out at face value, like mt. Fuji: ‘wives’

I understand that this quote in particular above was directly relating to the partner of the Weekender attendee. however, in observing reformed world (or YRR world, or whatever it all is), it often seems that adult people are referred to as either being 1) men, or 2) wives.

my short stint at a church which unbeknownst to me had a reformed background was constantly referring to ‘men and their wives’.

how do I find the right words to describe what it’s like being female and on the receiving end of this?

if you’re a female who is married, it’s as thought you cease to be a person, an individual. the sum total of who you are (the multi-faceted diamond of you, your natural-born complex prisms and especially those you’ve cultivated and earned) is subsumed by your relationship to a man — who is allowed to keep his individuality. but not you.

if you’re a female who is not married, you are invisible. irrelevant.

if you respond to my comment here with an internal “well, of course not! of course you’re an individual. of course you’re relevant.”, think again. honestly appraise the reasons why such language is used in the first place. and awaken your empathy potential.

elastigirl wrote:

it often seems that adult people are referred to as either being 1) men, or 2) wives.

So true. And ‘pastors wives’ are the only women allowed to do anything in their churches. When the bible (which they claim to be so fond of) specifically talks about the elder women, and widows, teaching the younger. It says not a thing about ‘pastors wives’ as an official church function.

It also means that in their world, many of us don’t even exist.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
P.S. This was in the mid-Seventies during the peak of The Gospel According to Hal Lindsay and Christians For Nuclear War.

Lea wrote:

And ‘pastors wives’ are the only women allowed to do anything in their churches.

Not “Pastor’s Wife”.
QUEEN BEE.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Not “Pastor’s Wife”.
QUEEN BEE.

By virtue of who she’s sleeping with.

So Christian!

elastigirl wrote:

awaken your empathy potential

Yes! Great phrase. Think they can replace the creepy “winsome” speech with empathy potential? One encourages manipulation while the other encourages love.

elastigirl wrote:

how do I find the right words to describe what it’s like being female and on the receiving end of this?

if you’re a female who is married, it’s as thought you cease to be a person, an individual. the sum total of who you are (the multi-faceted diamond of you, your natural-born complex prisms and especially those you’ve cultivated and earned) is subsumed by your relationship to a man — who is allowed to keep his individuality. but not you.

if you’re a female who is not married, you are invisible. irrelevant.

It reminds me of the video I saw where egyptian men would just dodge the question: “What’s your mother’s name?” In public, a woman would always be known as so-and-so’s wife, or as the mother of her oldest son.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF4ZslUqgDY
Being a woman in that environment is losing your identity and your name.

Stunned wrote:

I could not understand why all the women in their young 30’s would cluster together and chat with each other, instead of hanging with these older women. We had so much to learn yet they seldom hung with them the way I tried to. Made zero sense to me

I saw a church that advertised it’s ministries like this: High school (9-12th), College and Career (18-25), Adults 1 (30-39), Adults 2(40-49), Elders 1(50-59), and Elders 2 (60+). The stratification of age groups makes it difficult for the generations to interact, particularly for those of us in the non-existent 26-29 age group who don’t seem to fit into any neat categories. Almost every single elderly woman in my church was married and had one or two kids by the time they were my age, we’re just so different that I’m not sure how to relate to them and I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t know how to relate to me or my experiences. Discipleship / mentor programs don’t usually exist to pair up people across the generations, so there isn’t really any encouragement to interact with elders or youth. It’s not as if any elderly woman has approached me and said: “I’d like to form a friendship” or anything like that, it’s just common to leave everyone to their own devices these days.

@ Gram3:
It also has nothing whatsoever to do with the Gospel. The pure Gospel of Jesus Christ, that is.

Deb wrote:

Mark: Now the congregation lives not in the suburbs, but here on the Hill. The last time we had somebody count, 55% of our members lived within one mile of the building. When I came here, very few people lived within one mile; even most of the pastors before me lived out in a parsonage somewhere in Virginia.

That is a VERY expensive area of Washington, D.C. The church itself is catty-corner (ed.) to one of the Congressional Office Buildings … if the congregation lives that close, it is comprised of both the fabulously wealthy and young congressional staffers who live 4 to 6 in a house.

My sister and her husband lived behind the Supreme Court building for a couple of years. He is a physician, she worked for one of the various government agencies. Together, with a very healthy combined income (especially by NC standards), they could only afford a small one-bedroom apartment.

@ Deb:

Thanks, Deb, for the additional information about Capitol Hill Baptist Church.

Eeyore wrote:

But again, all this was/is sold as the “biblical” model, and they sell themselves pretty hard to people who want to be seriously Christian in an increasingly non-Christian culture. Which can make it hard to leave, even if you do recognize that they have fatal flaw. It was hard for me to leave because of that very thing (thank God I still had friends on the outside who could talk me back from the end of the branch).

Thanks for your insights about Capitol Hill Baptist Church/Mark Dever/9Marks. I’m glad you got out. (I had a similar experience at a 9Marxist church. I’m glad that I’m out.)

Burwell wrote:

Deb wrote:

Mark: Now the congregation lives not in the suburbs, but here on the Hill. The last time we had somebody count, 55% of our members lived within one mile of the building. When I came here, very few people lived within one mile; even most of the pastors before me lived out in a parsonage somewhere in Virginia.

That is a VERY expensive area of Washington, D.C. The church itself is catty-corner (ed.) to one of the Congressional Office Buildings … if the congregation lives that close, it is comprised of both the fabulously wealthy and young congressional staffers who live 4 to 6 in a house.

Close to the MONEY and POWER.
“AVE, CAESAR!”

Bill M wrote:

“generous donation”
If true, the donation came from Mahaney, there are more accurate words for secreting funds out of an organization to fund something else.

IIRC, 9Marks operates as a ministry of Capitol Hill Baptist Church. That makes it difficult for outsiders to trace the flow of money.

Looking at the interests involved in the Fab Four and how they might help each other, I note that Mahaney had lots of money and a demonstrated model for franchising his enterprise. But Mahaney lacked (and still lacks) academic respectability. Enter Dever with his academic credentials. But Dever was operating a small church with not so much influence. So, I think someone who knew both Dever and Mahaney (or possibly one of those two men) realized the potential of a partnership. Not for the Gospel, however. For their own legacies. Mohler had access to the resources of the SBC to promote the biannual trade show and produce a glut of young men eager to make their own place in the sun, and with OPM which is the very best kind of money. Duncan is/was a bridge between the generations in the PCA, so he brought that to the table.

The T4g/9Marks enterprise formed twenty-odd years ago cannot be allowed to fail at this point or the legacies of all the men will be jeopardized. That, I believe, is why they have made the decision to hang Together and have “encouraged” young and ambitious lieutenants like DeYoung and Leeman and Jared Wilson to take point for them.

Jamie Carter wrote:

The Reformed corner tends to promote young men into high positions of leadership / as elders and kicks out it’s elderly elders for being too old

They promote the young, inexperienced guys and isolate them from their wives’ influence, physically (she can’t attend, sign here before you talk with her, etc.) and mentally/emotionally (you’re supposed to make the decisions). These guys think they’re in charge when they’re actually being manipulated.

elastigirl wrote:

my short stint at a church which unbeknownst to me had a reformed background was constantly referring to ‘men and their wives’.

I also get red flags when I hear the phrase, “The leaders and their wives.” Because obviously, women can’t lead.

One if our local church plants admits that they are going after men 20-40, because if you get the man, you get the whole house. They are tone deaf to how that sounds to women, and singles of both sexes.

Devaluing women seems to be a core component of most religions.

R2 wrote:

Dever was not without influence.

It would not surprise me if Dever also had other contacts with politically-minded Christians on Capitol Hill, based on my very tangential relationship to a Congressman and how he functioned with other Christian politicians and their staffers. I think Dever’s ambitions and Mohler’s and Mahaney’s and Duncan’s exceeded their spheres of influence at the time. Mahaney certainly brought in money and filled pews. For some reason I do not understand. Kind of makes me think this was and still is a political operation complete with operatives and propaganda.

It is an intriguing puzzle to figure out how Mahaney fits with the others and why. Money and a road-tested business model is all I can come up with. Based on the fruit of this enterprise, I conclude (no doubt due to Bitterness) that this was about money, power, and legacy from the very beginning.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:
Unfortunately, i have seen first hand this type of deception proudly talked about in campus ministries… how we need to trick people to get in the door….
It goes back a long time. I remember some questionable on-campus advertising for Campus Crusade events. One was a stage magic show featuring an “Andre Cole”; it was advertised as such, but failed to mention that Andre Cole was a CHRISTIAN(TM) stage magician whose show included his Testimony(TM) and ended with an Armageddon scare job and Altar Call.

I know of similar, and actually more deceptive examples that this… it bothered me back in the day, and it still does…. but, when numbers are what you are evaluated on….

Gram3 wrote:

@ elastigirl:
Yes. Yes. Yes.

A female is only an accessory to a male whose purpose is to mirror the male’s idealized self. This is a movement by and for narcissistic and insecure males. There is no need to denigrate women or cover such denigration with deceitful words in order to “joyfully” serve “their wives.” That is merely their cover story. This is about pure power over other human beings. This has nothing whatsoever to do with either the actual texts of scripture *or* with the example of our Lord. It has everything to do with the way of the world.

All of this. Yes.

Sidenote: How on EARTH are they getting a thousand people in CHBC? They must have done some major remodeling. That place is small.

You're going back to the 90's and were right to be alarmed but let me tell you that Prince, Mumford, the Shepherding movement, to my knowledge began in the late 70's. Maranatha which was a serious control cult was going on during that time. Bill, snake in the grass, Gothard who was into submission, control, taking advantage of people and holding coliseums full of people seminars to the tune of big bucks with expensive books written by his sex maniac pervert brother. I guess all the hippies coming out of the dope fueled time were looking to be controlled because the number of none Christian cults such as TM, occult, etc were abundant and growing all over the place. A voice of sanity was not easy to find. I'm not excusing it but saying that it was a time filled with opportunists with evil motives and plenty of gullible being taken in.

I wrote this the other day about gossip and slander.

https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2016/05/16/what-is-gossip-what-is-slander-addressing-the-issue-of-bitterness-finally-the-word-bitter-will-be-banned-at-the-wondering-eagle/

Velour wrote:

Mark Dever stresses in 9Marks that you can’t let church members escape through the back exits. Why are they escaping? Why aren’t they free to leave? What’s wrong with you and your elders?

Why does Mark Dever advocate a system that sounds strikingly like the one totalitarian regimes use to subject their citizens to tyrants? Possibly because he is a tyrant and leads a regime as totalitarian as he can legally make it.

bc wrote:

You’re going back to the 90’s and were right to be alarmed but let me tell you that Prince, Mumford, the Shepherding movement, to my knowledge began in the late 70’s.

I think it goes back further than that, though not under that name. The not-a-cult I was involved with from approximately 1973-76 was classic Shepherding(TM), though they just called it being Truly Born Again and Spirit Filled.

But then, there have always been control freaks who salivate at the thought of having their boots on the faces of the powerless. “For the hearts of Men are easily corrupted, and a Ring of POWER has a Will of its own.”

Gram3 wrote:

I think that they fancy themselves as the Calvin and Moses of their time.

If not God Himself.
“*I* WILL EXALT *MY* THRONE ABOVE THAT OF THE MOST HIGH!”

R2 wrote:

It’s possible that the “generous neighbor” could have been a wealthy person in the area, but timing of Mahaney’s takeover of SGM cannot be ignored. Its definitely something to keep in mind and explains why they won’t or can’t boot Mahaney from the inner circle.

The timing is just too convenient.

The Humble One gets to stay in the Inner Ring because he’s the bagman with the deep pocket$. And there might also be some behind-the-scenes blackmail taking place (chuckle chuckle); the right dirt on the right people (like all those FBI files in the hands of J Edgar and later Hillary) makes you untouchable.

Welcome to the Kingdom of God.

Dave (Eagle) wrote:

I wrote this the other day about gossip and slander.

Excellent article, Eagle.

I love how Elizabeth Esther compares what some call “bitterness” to a fear of dogs:

For those of us who have had bad/traumatic experiences with churches or church-people, we may develop an aversion to All Things Church. The problem is that we are often shamed by other Christians for not being able to “get over” our bad experience. But as stimulus generalization demonstrates, our wariness is not an issue of sin. It is not an issue of rebellion or allowing “bitterness” in our hearts. It is, quite simply, a normal, biological response.

If you have a fear of dogs, can you imagine someone telling you that you need to confess your grudge against dogs? Or saying you need to repent of bitterness? Can you imagine someone telling you that you need to forgive the dog that bit you—or worse, turn the other cheek?

Of course not! And yet, this happens ALL THE TIME in a church context.

http://www.elizabethesther.com/journal/2016/5/6/bad-church-experience-and-ideas-to-create-safe-spaces

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

FOR THE CAUSE, COMRADES!

Wouldn’t it be lovely if the only cause was to love the Lord with all your heart, mind and soul and to love your neighbor as yourself? Imagine how the world could change. Given that it’s His kindness which leads men to repentance, imagine those who would come to know Him, too! For it is not horses or might that this world changes, nor “correct” theology but by the blood of the lamb and the testimony of our mouths.

If only.

Velour wrote:

By the way, I saw on the internet that when Mark Dever came to Capitol Hill Baptist Church he kicked out some 256 church members who didn’t want to do things his way. Can this be substantiated?
Todd W., if you read this do you know anything about that?

You will find the answer here
http://sites.silaspartners.com/cc/article/0,,PTID314526_CHID598016_CIID1639966,00.html

And you will find further instructions on how to do it here

http://sites.silaspartners.com/cc/article/0,,PTID314526_CHID775978_CIID1826822,00.html

@ GSD:

“I also get red flags when I hear the phrase, “The leaders and their wives.” Because obviously, women can’t lead.

One if our local church plants admits that they are going after men 20-40, because if you get the man, you get the whole house. They are tone deaf to how that sounds to women, and singles of both sexes.

Devaluing women seems to be a core component of most religions.”
+++++++++++++++++++

oh, crimany, yes, heard that one, too. I swear Christianity causes people to turn off their intelligence (intellectual, emotional, social), and regresses them to 4 years old.

it is not true that ‘if you get the man you get the whole house’. i realize many church leaders believe that because MD said it, therefore it must be true (intelligence turned off, see?) but it is not — not here, not in America.

re: devaluing women as core component of most religions — perhaps it’s the Abrahamic religions that major in this.

@ Eeyore:
Danvers is one long example of pretending to use the Bible to support an agenda which has nothing whatsoever to do with the Bible. Pay no attention to the stench from the rot occurring inside of the church (the internal threat.) The church is under ATTACK from the culture (the external threat!) So, to defeat the worldliness of the culture (and God is depending on us to do that!), we just need to adopt the world’s ways only with churchy and pious language. Because as long as the language is pious enough, it is not propaganda.

I don’t think so.

elastigirl wrote:

it is not true that ‘if you get the man you get the whole house’.

Yeah. I’m thinking of people off the top of my head and I can’t think of many who dragged their wife with them to a church. I’m sure it happens, but it likely happens the other way around at least as often. And if a wife is not living in one of these ‘you must do as I say’ she may decide this new church is for the birds and leave, taking the whole family. Wouldn’t it be much easier and logical to attempt to make men and women happy in church?

I guess you would have to think of women as people first…

The following is the text from the section called “The Funding Provided”

While Mark was presenting portions of the 9Marks material at a new members’ class for Capitol Hill Baptist Church, an observant neighbor began quietly listening in from the back of the room, often attending the same sessions more than once. Encouraged, he made three very generous donations over the next three years that helped fund the nascent work of the Center for Church Reform (CCR), which has now become 9Marks Ministries. Since then, the congregation of Capitol Hill Baptist Church has functioned as the primary sponsor, with financial contributions from other churches and private individuals appreciated along the way.

Gram3 wrote:

I am certain, at this point, that the 9Marks do not apply to Leadership.

Of course. You have to have an impossible number of witnesses and convince the entire staff of handpicked, yes men elders in order to prove wrongdoing by a ‘leader’. And then when you have, they just wave a check around at their friends place and hang out there, until somebody lets them join their denomination so their members can get the seminary discount. Or something.

Deb wrote:

Mark: Like I said, the church was largely elderly. The building was in disrepair. But the people were faithful; they loved the Lord. I wouldn’t say they had been that well taught, and they’d had a long series of short pastors. They’d had a long pastor in the first half of the 20th century, but from the end of World War II on they would change pastors about every five years. These pastors were all evangelical with perhaps one exception. They were all Bible-believing men.

I think the congregation had adhered together around cultural things more than anything else: meals, certain kinds of music, programs, activities. And I think they took a sense of importance from where the building was located, you know, a few blocks from the Supreme Court and the Capitol building. That gave them a sense that we are in a place of unusual significance for the gospel to spread.

Because of this, they were big on evangelism, a kind of Billy Graham evangelism, with altar calls and the like.

It’s almost as if he thinks the old fuddy-duddies were wrong to take a “sense of importance” from the location of Capitol Hill Baptist Church–whereas his motives are pure. And, you know, the fogies no longer lived within a mile of the place, so let’s just take the building away and give it to ourselves. Yet he describes a functioning congregation, even as he disparages it.

The church where I grew up was firmly opposed to thinning the mailing list. That was considered to be a severe form of discipline, and an act of insensitivity toward people who might have held the place close in their hearts, even if they did not show up on Sundays. Keeping their names in the directory, and sending them an occasional newsletter, were forms of outreach if not plain decency.

What’s fascinating to me is that none of the nine marks have anything to do with New Testament ethics. I mean, if I were just guessing without reading them, I would guess that “love thy neighbor” would be the first mark. Nope. I don’t necessarily have anything against the nine marks, but I’m also not ignorant enough to pretend that they are Christian.

bc wrote:

I guess all the hippies coming out of the dope fueled time were looking to be controlled because the number of none Christian cults such as TM, occult, etc were abundant and growing all over the place. A voice of sanity was not easy to find. I’m not excusing it but saying that it was a time filled with opportunists with evil motives and plenty of gullible being taken in.

Having been there – we were not looking to be controlled. We were looking to repent, turn from the wildness, and be that new creation written about in Scripture.

So, from rebellious teens and twens, we did a complete 180 degree change. Overnight.

Drugs, sex, alcohol, self-centeredness, and a whole lotta of internal rebellion against any and all.

We were ripe for the plucking, for manipulative leadership who wanted to expand on what God had already done within us, using our grief for our former way of life as a prod to push us into obeying anything and everything they could come up with.

YES! The true marks of healthy churches and believers are shown in the fruit of the SPIRIT led saints… Love, joy, peace! Praise God for freedom in Christ to love!! @ An Attorney:

As my goddaughter explained to me WRT her “charismatic covenant community”: Her husband had a “head” who discipled him; and that head had a head, and that head had a head, and so on, all the way up to the Elders, who were self-appointed for life. This was directly based on the Sword of the Lord, a Protestant shepherding cult that had taken the Catholic charismatic renewal under its wing (at least the “living-in-community” wing of the renewal; the parish-based prayer groups never got suckered in as much).

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

I think it was Brad the futurist guy that recommended a book to me titled “The Shepherding Movement: Controversy and Charismatic Eccliesiolgy” by S. David Moore.

I am currently reading the book and the similarity between 9Marx and the Shepherding movement is erie. It is almost as if Dever has lifted all the Shepherding concepts and repackaged them for our day.

“The movement taught that submission to a shepherd provided spiritual “covering” by being in a right relationship to God’s delegated authority in the church. The shepherd assumed responsibility for the well-being of his sheep.” (page 74)

“Prince illustrated the depth of these covenant commitments by comparing them to the marriage covenant…
Practically, covenant meant “abandoning the option to quit” in relationships.” (page 77)

“The movement stressed the need for male leadership, with strong fathers and husbands in the home. It was understood that women were not to have governmental leadership in the church, and emphasis was placed on the very different roles in the Scriptures for men and women. Women had assumed roles that properly belonged to men. They were also concerned over the weak, effeminate stereotypes often ascribed to ministers and pastors.” (page 79)

Mumford disciple Dick Key and other men signed written covenants to be committed to their pastor and fellow leaders. Scott Ross, who had only been with the movement a month, was one of the few men who did not make a commitment. He stood and said he needed to talk to his wife before he could take such a major step. Mumfrod recalled, “It was like putting a wet blanket on the whole thing.” (page 90)

“DuPlessis commented that “Mumford has become known as the Pope in Ft Lauderdale.” He continued: “I am almost convinced that these brethren are establishing their own kingdom or Church, and that they are definitely anti-other churches.” (page 99)

“Pat Robertson was the first to raise concerns after the agenda was set. He was forceful in expressing his charges and asserted, “The authority is the Bible not the shepherd; our covering is the blood not man.” Robertson charged the CGM teachers with usurping the role of the Holy Spirit in the live of a believer and demeaning all Christians by calling them “dumb sheep.” Robertson told the group that the Ft Lauderdale leaders taught one thing publicly and another privately. He said the cell group approach was divisive and exclusive.” (page 102)

Also contributing to this decision to stop the conferences was their emphasis on the role of male leadership. The conferences, especially daytime sessions, were attended mostly by women. They believed this was counterproductive to establishing male leadership in the home, since they were making wives more spiritual than their husbands.” (page 58)

=================
From the 9Marks website:

Who Should Attend a Weekender?

The Weekender is designed for men who are, or aspire to be, church leaders. This includes pastors, elders, deacons, lay leaders, seminarians, and more.

“May I Bring My Wife?”

Men often ask if they can or should bring their wives to the Weekender. We generally discourage it because the schedule is extremely full and the sessions are only open to the registered participants. If wives do come, they are welcome to attend the church’s public meetings (Membership Matters, Core Seminars, Sunday AM and Sunday PM services).

bea wrote:

YES! The true marks of healthy churches and believers are shown in the fruit of the SPIRIT led saints… Love, joy, peace!

YES!! Why must we make up other things? Is His word not enough?

Beautiful, prodinov. That’s who I want to be like when I am her age.

sorry, my math was off, Mrs. Dunmire was actually 90 in 1987. The above Obit was from the Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1990/11/13/obituaries/6aa59d1c-a90e-4070-bcec-bbdbdbca3d69/
She was a pillar at the church in those years.

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

I am currently reading the book and the similarity between 9Marx and the Shepherding movement is erie. It is almost as if Dever has lifted all the Shepherding concepts and repackaged them for our day.

Yes – Another verse, same as the first.

I’ve watched this pattern repeatedly.

Frankly, it is what mankind does. From the earliest years of Christianity.

What Jesus laid a foundation for, was something unknown in this world.

Something that would be unique, appealing. A light in a world of darkness.

And what mankind did and does, is take His beautiful foundation and start building on it with the world’s wood, hay, and stubble.

And mankind always builds using the same worldly architectural plan.

So, that beautiful foundation laid by Jesus, the apostles and the prophets, keeps getting buried beneath the cr#p (ed.) that men keep piling on it.

@ prodinov:
Wow. Thank you so much.

lowlandseer wrote:

Velour wrote:
By the way, I saw on the internet that when Mark Dever came to Capitol Hill Baptist Church he kicked out some 256 church members who didn’t want to do things his way. Can this be substantiated?
Todd W., if you read this do you know anything about that?
You will find the answer here http://sites.silaspartners.com/cc/article/0,,PTID314526_CHID598016_CIID1639966,00.html

I read that document, followed the link. Dever said: “So, after we revised that covenant, then we were in the position to begin asking people to either sign it, well, forget the either, just to sign it in order to be a member of the church.”

Dever then: “…if we were actually going to use the covenant as an active document it had to be biblical.”

The sad truth is, this man was willing to construct a document and make it an absolute necessity to remain a member of the church, even if one had been a member there and had donated thousands of hard-earned dollars to support that church long before Mark Dever was a sucking infant. Mark Dever then cites the pretense of saying that the document by which the unwanted were purged had to be biblical–this is spite of the glaringly obvious fact that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever biblical about membership covenants, and in fact, there are strong statements against them (i.e., Jesus’ admonition to swear by nothing either in heaven or on earth).

I am left with the conclusion that Mr. Dever cares absolutely nothing about anything biblical unless it can be used cynically to support the agenda of Mr. Dever.

Stunned wrote:

YES!! Why must we make up other things? Is His word not enough?

It is never enough for a superapostle, a pharisee, a servant of hell, because if one merely uses the Word of God and it alone, it never advances their agenda. They must always add, and invariably what they add will become an idol to them of far greater importance than either the Word of God or God Himself.

@ anon:
Hi anon, would you, please, tell us more about what you know about this situation? Or rather, would it be OK if you told us how you knew it was an unbelieving neighbor? Thank you!

anon wrote:

The original seed money for 9Marks was given by a non-Christian neighbor, who had seen the things CHBC was doing in the surrounding area and wanted them to replicate it elsewhere.

That is interesting information. What was CHBC doing in the surrounding area that was so remarkable that it needed to be replicated? I have never been to CHBC and am not familiar with the Capitol Hill neighborhood.

Deb wrote:

In one of his messages (I'll try to track it down),  Mahaney shared that he once sat through a members meeting at CHBC.

That seems irregular and not customary at 9Marks churches. But exceptionally exceptional people obviously warrant exceptions from what is customary for everyone else.

anon wrote:

@ Stunned:

I’ve heard it several times from Mark and Matt Schmucker, the original executive director of the ministry. I don’t know if it’s somewhere on the web.

Do you happen to know how Mahaney and Dever became such fast friends despite their obvious theological differences? This is a mystery to many.

@ anon:
OK, but why not just say what CHBC was doing that an unbeliever wanted to replicate elsewhere?

Gram3 wrote:

Duncan is/was a bridge between the generations in the PCA, so he brought that to the table.

They needed a bonafide Presbyterian. There is a lot of connecting dots. Ligon’s brother, James, worked for Ligonier and was very involved with that financial scandal when it broke.

Gram3 wrote:

That is interesting information. What was CHBC doing in the surrounding area that was so remarkable that it needed to be replicated? I have never been to CHBC and am not familiar with the Capitol Hill neighborhood.

Does/Did the mission of the “Center for Church Reform” – to which this neighbor so generously gave to, have anything to do with ‘doing things’ in the surrounding area? Some sort of neighborhood ministry?

Quoting anon: “who had seen the things CHBC was doing in the surrounding area and wanted them to replicate it elsewhere.”

Anon, I am not questioning you, I don’t doubt that the above was asserted by those in the know.

But, something doesn’t line up. The neighbor had seen what CHBC had been doing in the neighborhood, and he then shows up to multiple new member sessions (different times, different days, different weeks?). I have been in a session or two for new members over the decades, ‘doing stuff in the neighborhood’ was never the topic under discussion.

And if doing things in the neighborhood was what got this unbelieving neighbor to open his wallet, why did his financial gift have nothing to do with ‘stuff in the neighborhood’ he was currently in OR replicating said services; and was instead to an organization focused on church authority & discipline?

R2 wrote:

I want to chase this rabbit trail. Mohler is loyal to his buddies but he has been known to disappear people who were close friends who did something to threaten his image. I suspect there is either a significant revenue stream or legal tie to Mahaney.

Bingo. But the ones i am familar with worked for him. Mahaney is not going quietly, i presume. I know a few who have worked around Mohler and they still quake to this day thinking about it. But then, they just could not do the sycophant. But they still feared the havoc he could wreck on their careers so they were careful in making the break. Both were a bit older and had secular careers before.

There were some very stupid things they tried to pull off at sbts in secret as an accredited academic institution that eventually became public so they dropped them like a hot potato. One was academic credit for SGM pastors college. Another was further back in teaming up with, i think Scott Brown, on integrating family centered worship into all their areas of study. It was an incredibly stupid idea that never went anywhere but lots of pew sitter money was spent on it. Oh and I moved they way SBTS laid off “family men” while they spent 150 million beautifying the campus.

It all makes me wonder what we don’t know. But Mahaney has money flowing now? I think not so the dynamic is even more interesting. I think Mohler is very secure in his power and knows it.

anon wrote:

I simply wanted to answer the main question of this article and debunk its insinuation. All the rest is outside my purview, and it’s likely nothing I say would sway popular opinion.

I’m going to explain why your comment may not be persuasive, though I am quite sure that you will not be able to hear what I am saying due to my gender and age (not male and not young.) But here goes.

Without further information, the info you provided only raises more questions. What interest does a non-believer have in what a church is doing? What part of 9Marks ministry emphasis would an unbeliever find compelling enough to want to kickstart?

When you use words like “debunk” and “insinuation” without offering much more than a bare denial, then you have not really increased the overall information which might lead to greater understanding. If you do not understand why people are perplexed by the relationship between Mahaney and Dever and the others **including Mark Dever’s own decision to obliterate his own message by sheltering Mahaney from the elders at CLC (though Mahaney was quick to exercise the power of the keys against pewpeons in SGM)**, then you have a huge blind spot. Please accept my apology for the odd punctuation.

Respectfully, you have a huge blind spot if you can ignore the real problems discussed here. Not that we do not individually and collectively have problems and blind spots. We do. But we are not claiming to have the power of the keys, and the 9Marks crew is claiming that power while being wildly inconsistent in applying it. It is almost like they are being respecters of persons or something.

Finally, here’s a style suggestion. “Blessings” does not seem sincere in the context of your comment. It is a common closing among the YRR that I have observed, and it is annoying. Do not take that personally, since I am easily annoyed because Genesis 3:16.

@ BL:
Beat me to it while I was attending to a household need. Great minds raise great questions. I meant that with the utmost humility, of course.

@ BeenThereDoneThat:
Love it. I would say wolves. Confess your fear of wolves! Your bitterness toward wolves!

Actually, it is healthy to fear wolves. To avoid them and warn others.

Friend wrote:

The church where I grew up was firmly opposed to thinning the mailing list. That was considered to be a severe form of discipline, and an act of insensitivity toward people who might have held the place close in their hearts, even if they did not show up on Sundays. Keeping their names in the directory, and sending them an occasional newsletter, were forms of outreach if not plain decency.

This was pretty much how it worked when I was growing up. Even if they moved or officially joined another church they often came back for the “homecoming Sunday” once a year. It was a huge deal. People seemed to genuinely love each other and a special church home back then. At least it seemed that way. Many times it was Seminary students who had gone on to other places but came back to the church they went to during Seminary for homecoming. Makes me smile to think of it now.

Law Prof wrote:

The real thing, the actual God, why would He give you a brain and then compel you to shut it down? He would not and does not.

Well, this is my big issue which goes right along with free will. If you believe God determined your thinking/behavior, you might just shut down and go along.

@ prodinov:
I love to hear about such women. Thank you.

@ Deb:
It sounds like he was actually mentoring, too.

My creep meter goes off!! But then, it also goes off WRT “season.” I’m not sure why. Maybe it’s the constant repetition? Why can’t they just talk like normal people?

Stunned wrote:

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

winsome courage

Super creepy expression. Sounds like they are applauding manipulation. Why doesn’t other people’s creep meters go off over this kind of stuff?

Lydia wrote:

Genesis 3:16

I loved that my childhood church sent the church bulletin every month. Def a great way to keep the unifying love flowing even for those who were far away. Precious.

Ken F wrote:

A few days ago I posted something about Mike Breen having come out of the shepherding movement. I’m not sure if that is true, but he seems to be following a very similar pattern.

They are flowing from the same stream.

They share many beliefs – a major one is the “five-fold ministry” ie. apostles, prophets, evangelists, etc, of which, it just so happens, they believe they are the apostles.

Lydia wrote:

The “frozen chosen”back then.

Yep, from “frozen chosen” to “unfrozen chosen.” The beast has been unleashed!

Gram3 wrote:

I’m going to explain why your comment may not be persuasive, though I am quite sure that you will not be able to hear what I am saying due to my gender and age (not male and not young.) But here goes.
Without further information, the info you provided only raises more questions. What interest does a non-believer have in what a church is doing? What part of 9Marks ministry emphasis would an unbeliever find compelling enough to want to kickstart?
When you use words like “debunk” and “insinuation” without offering much more than a bare denial, then you have not really increased the overall information which might lead to greater understanding. If you do not understand why people are perplexed by the relationship between Mahaney and Dever and the others **including Mark Dever’s own decision to obliterate his own message by sheltering Mahaney from the elders at CLC (though Mahaney was quick to exercise the power of the keys against pewpeons in SGM)**, then you have a huge blind spot. Please accept my apology for the odd punctuation.
Respectfully, you have a huge blind spot if you can ignore the real problems discussed here. Not that we do not individually and collectively have problems and blind spots. We do. But we are not claiming to have the power of the keys, and the 9Marks crew is claiming that power while being wildly inconsistent in applying it. It is almost like they are being respecters of persons or something.
Finally, here’s a style suggestion. “Blessings” does not seem sincere in the context of your comment. It is a common closing among the YRR that I have observed, and it is annoying. Do not take that personally, since I am easily annoyed because Genesis 3:16.

*applause*

anon wrote:

The original seed money for 9Marks was given by a non-Christian neighbor, who had seen the things CHBC was doing in the surrounding area and wanted them to replicate it elsewhere.

Entirely possible. In the end, matters not. This article is not an assertion, but a speculation, and not an entirely fanciful one based on the track record of the YRR crowd.

@ Gram3:
And this is where the problem lies. They (the Devers, Mohlers etc) give out vague info that invites speculation based on their patterns of behavior… then claim the speculation is gossip or slander.

Nothing was debunked. Just the opposite. It only brought more questions. Truth is the goal so why aren’t Christan leaders modeling transparency?

With all those heads, it’s starting to sound like a Hydra.

Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

As my goddaughter explained to me WRT her “charismatic covenant community”: Her husband had a “head” who discipled him; and that head had a head, and that head had a head, and so on, all the way up to the Elders, who were self-appointed for life. This was directly based on the Sword of the Lord, a Protestant shepherding cult that had taken the Catholic charismatic renewal under its wing (at least the “living-in-community” wing of the renewal; the parish-based prayer groups never got suckered in as much).

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

I think it was Brad the futurist guy that recommended a book to me titled “The Shepherding Movement: Controversy and Charismatic Eccliesiolgy” by S. David Moore.

I am currently reading the book and the similarity between 9Marx and the Shepherding movement is erie. It is almost as if Dever has lifted all the Shepherding concepts and repackaged them for our day.

“The movement taught that submission to a shepherd provided spiritual “covering” by being in a right relationship to God’s delegated authority in the church. The shepherd assumed responsibility for the well-being of his sheep.” (page 74)

“Prince illustrated the depth of these covenant commitments by comparing them to the marriage covenant…
Practically, covenant meant “abandoning the option to quit” in relationships.” (page 77)

“The movement stressed the need for male leadership, with strong fathers and husbands in the home. It was understood that women were not to have governmental leadership in the church, and emphasis was placed on the very different roles in the Scriptures for men and women. Women had assumed roles that properly belonged to men. They were also concerned over the weak, effeminate stereotypes often ascribed to ministers and pastors.” (page 79)

Mumford disciple Dick Key and other men signed written covenants to be committed to their pastor and fellow leaders. Scott Ross, who had only been with the movement a month, was one of the few men who did not make a commitment. He stood and said he needed to talk to his wife before he could take such a major step. Mumfrod recalled, “It was like putting a wet blanket on the whole thing.” (page 90)

“DuPlessis commented that “Mumford has become known as the Pope in Ft Lauderdale.” He continued: “I am almost convinced that these brethren are establishing their own kingdom or Church, and that they are definitely anti-other churches.” (page 99)

“Pat Robertson was the first to raise concerns after the agenda was set. He was forceful in expressing his charges and asserted, “The authority is the Bible not the shepherd; our covering is the blood not man.” Robertson charged the CGM teachers with usurping the role of the Holy Spirit in the live of a believer and demeaning all Christians by calling them “dumb sheep.” Robertson told the group that the Ft Lauderdale leaders taught one thing publicly and another privately. He said the cell group approach was divisive and exclusive.” (page 102)

Also contributing to this decision to stop the conferences was their emphasis on the role of male leadership. The conferences, especially daytime sessions, were attended mostly by women. They believed this was counterproductive to establishing male leadership in the home, since they were making wives more spiritual than their husbands.” (page 58)

=================
From the 9Marks website:

Who Should Attend a Weekender?

The Weekender is designed for men who are, or aspire to be, church leaders. This includes pastors, elders, deacons, lay leaders, seminarians, and more.

“May I Bring My Wife?”

Men often ask if they can or should bring their wives to the Weekender. We generally discourage it because the schedule is extremely full and the sessions are only open to the registered participants. If wives do come, they are welcome to attend the church’s public meetings (Membership Matters, Core Seminars, Sunday AM and Sunday PM services).

Gram3 wrote:

Aging or old guys who want a legacy and young and ambitious bucks who want their place and who are willing to please the power brokers in exchange for their own place in the sun.

Mao and the Cultural Revolution
Hitler and the Brown Shirts
Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge

May wrote:

Love is not one of the nine marks, however. Isn’t that interesting.

That is very revealing

Lydia wrote:

Nothing was debunked. Just the opposite. It only brought more questions. Truth is the goal so why aren’t Christan leaders modeling transparency?

There you go again, the sin of questioning

GSD wrote:

elastigirl wrote:

my short stint at a church which unbeknownst to me had a reformed background was constantly referring to ‘men and their wives’.

I also get red flags when I hear the phrase, “The leaders and their wives.” Because obviously, women can’t lead.

I read your post and remembered that very recently I came across that same expression (“leaders and wives”), and my reaction was pretty similar to yours.

Initially I couldn’t remember where I read it, but it didn’t take me long to find it again. It was in the Twitter account of a SG church in the UK, advertising a ‘leaders and wives’ conference at which CJ Mahaney will speak. Here is the twit, in case you’re interested in checking it: https://twitter.com/sovgraceuk/status/728467263322345472

Martos wrote:

GSD wrote:

elastigirl wrote:

my short stint at a church which unbeknownst to me had a reformed background was constantly referring to ‘men and their wives’.

I also get red flags when I hear the phrase, “The leaders and their wives.” Because obviously, women can’t lead.

I read your post and remembered that very recently I came across that same expression (“leaders and wives”), and my reaction was pretty similar to yours.

Initially I couldn’t remember where I read it, but it didn’t take me long to find it again. It was in the Twitter account of a SG church in the UK, advertising a ‘leaders and wives’ conference at which CJ Mahaney will speak. Here is the twit, in case you’re interested in checking it: https://twitter.com/sovgraceuk/status/728467263322345472

Mahaney traveling the world on OPM, modeling reprobation to the loyal fans.

zooey111 wrote:

Gram3 wrote:

Finally, here’s a style suggestion. “Blessings” does not seem sincere in the context of your comment. It is a common closing among the YRR that I have observed, and it is annoying.

Its also popular amongst Wiccans & other modern pagan groups. (Live long enough, & you meet all kinds of people).
Not saying there’s a direct link, just commenting on how odd that the 2 groups sound alike, dontchaknow….

I have solved the puzzle. The anonymous donor was a satanist who wants church to fail!

Blessings. Heh.

I feel very vindicated for my comment about the ONE MARK of a Christian (and church) is LOVE. And I appreciate the elaboration from other commenters none of the IX Marks is LOVE. My conclusion:

A IX Marks church is NOT a Christian church, at least not if the teachings of Jesus and the balance of the NT are the standard!

Of course, an organization calling itself a church, with a pastor that abuses members through loveless discipline and covers up the abuse of a child, is also not a Christian church.

Love to the Deebs, GBTC, and the commentariat here. May the Spirit be with you.

Stunned wrote:

Yeah. I believe 100% that two men told anon this. But, unless someone is willing to share more news, this story doesn’t make sense. There’s something off about it.

Cover story?

Bill M wrote:

Lydia wrote:

Nothing was debunked. Just the opposite. It only brought more questions. Truth is the goal so why aren’t Christan leaders modeling transparency?

There you go again, the sin of questioning

“Thinking leads to Questions.
Questions lead to Doubt.
Doubt leads to Heresy.
Heresy must be Dealt With.
Blessed is the mind too small for Doubt.”
— Warhammer 40K

Gram3 wrote:

It would not surprise me if Dever also had other contacts with politically-minded Christians on Capitol Hill, based on my very tangential relationship to a Congressman and how he functioned with other Christian politicians and their staffers. I think Dever’s ambitions and Mohler’s and Mahaney’s and Duncan’s exceeded their spheres of influence at the time. Mahaney certainly brought in money and filled pews.

There have been Congressmen who attended CHBC.

Mahaney brought in the home school crowd. Mohler wanted to open a school of education at SBTS but the financial crisis of 2008 nixed that. There was even talk of creating / publishing their own curriculum. That could’ve been a good revenue stream for them. Mahaney and Harris could have provided enough of a market to get it going.

R2 wrote:

There have been Congressmen who attended CHBC.

As in “Buying More Influence”?
“Congressmen” as in “Magistrates of the New Geneva”?

marquis wrote:

Has anyone looked at John MacArthur? He shares conference’s , the stage, and has these men speak at his TMAI and promote their books

Marquis, this is off-topic but it’s a thought that has been forming in my mind for a while and I just have to make it public: Considering that “Sola Scriptura” is an undisputable “doctrine of grace” touted by this crowd (TGC, T4G, YRR, CBMW, IXMarks), how is it that this group generates hundreds to thousands of books, essays, teachings and sermons every year, all because a god who desires to be known and understood requires them to be his interpreters and mouthpieces?

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

As in “Buying More Influence”?
“Congressmen” as in “Magistrates of the New Geneva”?

I would need to see more evidence before I’d think there was anything amiss going on there. Some Congressmen stay on Capitol Hill while Congress is in session. They were probably members of a church back in their district but attended CHBC for convenience of walking to church. I am not sure what those Congressmen could really offer CHBC other than some status. They’ve never made a big deal about it.

Janet wrote:

Considering that “Sola Scriptura” is an undisputable “doctrine of grace” touted by this crowd (TGC, T4G, YRR, CBMW, IXMarks), how is it that this group generates hundreds to thousands of books, essays, teachings and sermons every year,

A-MEN! Didn’t they learn from Martin Luther who, at the end of his life, supposedly said that he wished every book he ever wrote would be burned and people only read the bible?

anon wrote:

The original seed money for 9Marks was given by a non-Christian neighbor, who had seen the things CHBC was doing in the surrounding area and wanted them to replicate it elsewhere.

Interesting.

What were “the things” CHBC “was doing” and where exactly did this person want to see it “replicated”?

No offense but this sort of has the feel of urban legend to it.

Lea wrote:

I have solved the puzzle. The anonymous donor was a satanist who wants church to fail!
Blessings. Heh.

Actually, I think the donor was a “satinist” or possibly a “stanist”, but you have, indeed, discovered the (as they say) “nub of my gist”. (Or “jest”; but I digress). 😉

dee wrote:

Wow! So, he was so impressed with the strong authoritarian bent, the membership requirements, etc., that he couldn’t help but contribute even though he was a nonbeliever?

This is a JOKE:

Maybe it was one of the current male unmentionables 😉

Max wrote:

siteseer wrote:
No offense but this sort of has the feel of urban legend to it.

If the young, restless and reformed will lie their way into pulpits by deceiving search committees about their theological persuasion, it’s not beyond them to construct urban legends to advance their cause and protect their celebrity leaders.

The entire reason they changed the name to ‘9Marx’ instead of “Center for Church Reform” was because they wanted to lie about the fact that they were trying to change your church. They openly state this in an interview!

Maybe this is Mark10: Biblical Lying.

Janet wrote:

Marquis, this is off-topic but it’s a thought that has been forming in my mind for a while and I just have to make it public: Considering that “Sola Scriptura” is an undisputable “doctrine of grace” touted by this crowd (TGC, T4G, YRR, CBMW, IXMarks), how is it that this group generates hundreds to thousands of books, essays, teachings and sermons every year, all because a god who desires to be known and understood requires them to be his interpreters and mouthpieces?

Someone else may have addressed your question/comment, but I would like to either echo their response or contribute my own: in my opinion, it has very little to do with helping others understand God’s word, which is what the role of a teacher was designed to do. Perhaps the individual’s first book is so nobly written, but I would doubt any subsequent ones are. I believe that all the books serve a two-fold purpose(in no specific ranking): 1. perpetuate the industry that supplies the books and 2. put money in the pocket of the writer.

I have long thought that pastors or otherwise gainfully employed “full time Christians” who write books expounding on some Biblical theme, truth or chapter (i.e., in-depth study) should be willing to provide it to anyone who asks at no, or extremely low, cost, especially to those who live in areas of the world where such resources are not readily available. I would make an exception for those who live solely by their books and do not seek to use them to open doors to speaking engagements. If that is the case, then make a living off the speaking engagements and let the books be free, or nearly so.

R2 wrote:

There have been Congressmen who attended CHBC.

Yeah, and Bill Clinton sang in the choir at First Baptist Church, Hope AR. Not everything that goes to church is the Church – you know them by their fruit.

R2 wrote:

I would need to see more evidence before I’d think there was anything amiss going on there.

Yes, I was just throwing out ideas of how Mahaney and Dever might have crossed paths. Since there are so many Congressional staffers who are young, it seems plausible that some from Mahaney’s camp might have hung out with some from Dever’s camp. As I said, this speculation is based solely on very indirect contact with *one* Congressman and his supporters. I did not have in mind that either Mahaney or Dever sought favors or funding from government. But I am still puzzled by how such a seemingly odd pair got together and why. It makes sense that Dever might have introduced Mahaney to the others.

Max wrote:

Yeah, and Bill Clinton sang in the choir at First Baptist Church, Hope AR. Not everything that goes to church is the Church – you know them by their fruit.

Another example is our friend Marky Mark.

dee wrote:

anon wrote:
The original seed money for 9Marks was given by a non-Christian neighbor, who had seen the things CHBC was doing in the surrounding area and wanted them to replicate it elsewhere.
Wow! So, he was so impressed with the strong authoritarian bent, the membership requirements, etc., that he couldn’t help but contribute even though he was a nonbeliever? And the money didn’t even go towards the church but towards funding an organization that would go on to fulfill these amorphous ideals within Christendom. And he wasn’t a Christian? Fascinating. The nonChristian world is stunned by the 9 Marks program!

If this is true, then could there have been some under the table profit sharing agreement? Church for profit, surely not! *snark*

Muff Potter wrote:

dee wrote:
1. Expositional Preaching
2. Biblical Theology
3. Biblical Understanding of the Good News
4. Biblical Understanding of Conversion
5.Biblical Understanding of Evangelism
6.Biblical Understanding of Membership
7. Biblical Church Discipline
8.Promotion of Church Discipleship And Growth
9.Biblical Understanding of Leadership
Geez Louweez, the word “Biblical” has become so bandied, so tossed about, so over used, it’s become virtually meaningless.
As elastigirl would say:
“biblical schmiblical”

Maybe TWW should change its title to The Wartburg Watch, a Biblical Watchblog.

@ dee:

What has always bothered me about the 9 different marks of a “healthy church” according to Mark Dever, and the reason why I recommended that the leadership of the church where I was one of the elders not use the book (though they did anyway), is because he fails to include worship and prayer among the signs of health. I know he pays lip service to them in the introduction, but I am of the opinion that prayer (especially) is the highest mark of a healthy church.

I have found that most 9M churches don’t pray beyond a superficial level, and it shows.

Martos wrote:

Here is the twit, in case you’re interested in checking it:

I checked the twit (niiiice…) and found them flacking this:

Continuationist Pneumatology is an important value for Sovereign Grace Churches

I won’t bother looking it up. I assume it means we should remind ourselves to breathe during endless messages and praise songs.

Janet wrote:

, how is it that this group generates hundreds to thousands of books, essays, teachings and sermons every year, all because a god who desires to be known and understood requires them to be his interpreters and mouthpieces?

Of course, God doesn’t require them to be His interpreters & mouthpieces.

But, they want you to believe that without them and their ‘stuff’ you’re going to miss out on what God is doing.

Plus, if they actually taught that you should mature beyond gospel milk to eventually go beyond them and on directly to God (ie. John the Baptist “He must increase and I must decrease) – then you would eventually stop buying their stuff and coming to their conferences and THEN WHERE WOULD THEY BE?

.
“…even as there shall be false teachers among you, And through covetousness (greed) shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: ”

The “make merchandise” is translated from “emporeuomai”.

Defined as: ” I travel as a merchant, engage in trade; I traffic in, make gain or business of.”

.
Conferences, seminars, memberships, books, videos, study materials, magazine articles, recommendations of other’s same products, para-organizations, tithe-tithe-tithe, gotta keep coming up with a different package for the same old concept, music videos, teaching videos, and on and on and on.

.
Yep, sounds like they are engaged in trade, traffic, business and gain from those who call themselves Christians…

@ Gram3:
Gram3 I have no question whatsoever that you are involved in the discussion here in good faith. I believe when a person loves Jesus Christ as you do, and cares about the Gospel and the power that it has to save and set people free from the bondage of Satan, that when a wolf is discovered, there arises within your heart an adversion to the damage they’re causing to the cause of Christ and to the Gospel we all love. I think that is a natural response to these problems we read about here, and the solution is the truth.

Anyone can report on a story, no? But what’s the solution? Is there any answer? Yes! We know there’s an answer, and all of these events taking place can be understood when interpreted through the lens of Scripture.

This is a pretty significant story we’re discussing here, with large reaching ramifications. It’s drawn the attention of people inside and outside the church. And with that we will find people attaching themselves to the story for various different reasons, and there will be those who become involved for the wrong reasons. Some may seek, for example, to become the hero of the story, or align themselves with what’s going on for deceptive reasons – reasons aside from the one you have, that is motivated by your love and concern for Christ and the Gospel.

In the end, the problem we’re faced with is a problem that needs to be dealt with by those within the Church. This is not a secular concern although the world is affected. The authority to deal with this should be in the hands of those who know how to accurately handle and apply God’s word in response to the problem, in order to pronounce judgment on this. There are times when God uses people outside the church to bring correction to a problem such as this, but the Truth is something that should be proclaimed and declared by those God has entrusted it to.

My opinion is that Al Mohler, Mark Dever, and Ligon Duncan have been duped by Mahaney. They have believed him and share in his sin. I believe all of them are attached to each other by virtue of pride, and it’s pride that prevents Duncan, Dever or Mohler from ever admitting that they’ve been duped by Mahaney. After all, these men have established themselves as LEADERS, and they expect others to follow them because they’re speaking the truth, or at least they believe in what they’re doing enough to feel confident that they’re not misleading anyone.

But what would happen to their leadership, their integrity, their movement, if it were discovered that they, themselves, had allowed someone to come in among them that they failed to discern was a liar and a deceiver? How could anyone trust their leadership?

They couldn’t. People would lose their confidence in following them, just as anyone would if it were discovered, for example, that someone compromised our national security by allowing a mole to operate unsuspected among our top government officials, someone who didn’t love this country but was selling classified information just to make money. That kind of thing.

Mohler, Duncan and Dever have too much to lose if they were to question Mahaney, or reveal the extent to which, for example, they received money from him that was donated by SGM members with the understanding that it would be used for SGM purposes. I mean, essentially they’re all guilty, as far as I’m concerned, with taking money from Mahaney to build something that today stands as a means of hurting the people of SGM that supplied that money that helped fund T4G and 9Marks – organizations that have basically, along with Mahaney, stabbed CLC/SGM in the back. Dever’s 9Marks and his church took the Mahaney’s in when they fled CLC. That was a stab in the back. Mohler introduced Mahaney at T4G16 by dismissing the voices of all of us speaking out against him on the Internet. That was a stab in the back.

Burwell wrote:

I am of the opinion that prayer (especially) is the highest mark of a healthy church.

Amen. Prayer – real prayer – is the most important sign of church health! No prayer, no power. No prayer, no presence of God. The New Calvinist tribe are by and large not a praying bunch. Why ask God to do something if He has already preordained what He is going to do? Why pray for lost souls, when God has already predestined them to be saved or damned? Why pray for sick folks, when God wants them to suffer? Why humble yourself to pray and repent, if you have been elected regardless? Prayerlessness is not the Biblical pattern. The Calvinist God is not the God of Scripture.

Guys here is what I have heard and I live in the DC area. Housing is expensive, its difficult to comprehend unless you live here. Apartments in Fairfax, Springfield and Alexandria go for $1200 to $1600.00 a month. The more you move into DC the more it rises. The closer you live to the Metro (subway) the more expensive it is. On Capitol Hill the rent is obscene. I think you can get into the $2500.00 per month.

I have heard that there are a lot of people at CHBC that come from the suburbs. Plus there is a community of CHBC that is near Cheverly, Glenardon, etc.. (the name of the town is escaping me.) But there are a number of people who come from the suburbs. On Capitol Hill there is a house that has a lot of young guys stay in for work, congressional internship, etc.. It is called the Jonathan House, and its my understanding that there have always been a few guys from CHBC who stay there. I have known two people who have lived there and visited it once when I was involved in NCC.

@ Dave (Eagle):
Have you read Jeff Sharket’s, ‘C Street’?

@ Lydia:
Oops. Sharlet.

Velour wrote:

. They aren’t as innocent, naïve, and deceived as you think. They don’t care

Right. They were not deluded by Mahaney. Both Mohler and Dever see themselves as scholars/ theologians. I think the initial attraction to the bromance was numbers for the Reformed brand and money.

@ Dave (Eagle):
That’s interesting information, Dave. It leads me to wonder, as I have done before, why Dever would invent something like 9Marks if he were pastoring a large church of relatively wealthy congregants? What would motivate him to spend his attention outside of his church, the people there, serving their needs, especially when he’s being paid well, no doubt, to do so?

Also, what about the conflict of interest here? If Dever receives income through this 9Marks ministry of his, wouldn’t he be inclined to invest his time and energy into keeping the side of his bread that gets the more butter?

Additionally, do you know anything about how an organization like The Gospel Coalition works? What agreement do the churches enter into with TGC that join it, do you have any idea? I’m guessing some fees are involved. I’ve noticed the churches that are members of The Gospel Coalition advertise that on their websites, like it gives them credibility.

Found one of the Hanes ads about Inspector 12:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J-pnunLj6c

@ Velour:
Additionally, as far as I know, neither Duncan, Dever or Mohler has been involved in the type of scandal that plagues Mahaney and his ministry, all of which pre-dates his jumping on board the Conservative Resurgence Calvinist Baptist Reformed Protestant Resurgence.

Paula Rice wrote:

Additionally, as far as I know, neither Duncan, Dever or Mohler has been involved in the type of scandal that plagues Mahaney and his ministry, all of which pre-dates his jumping on board the Conservative Resurgence Calvinist Baptist Reformed Protestant Resurgence.

The same rotten root is there and perhaps both had less tyrannical opportunity until the last 15 years or so. However, Mohler did his fair share of throwing a lot of decent people under the bus when he took over sbts. And a lot is hidden so who knows. They put their seal of approval on Mahaney which was quite a feat for the SBC. Now Mahaney is SBC. Unthinkable 30 years ago.

Mohler aspired to Mahaneys dictatorial autonomy as head Apostle of a Shepherding cult. And he got it with yes men trustees.. but he does not need the title.

@ Gram3:
The good news is now that we are on the outside, we have discovered lots of people we know from several other churches who have had similar experiences. We did not know that prior to our unfortunate fall from grace. Discovering we are not alone has been encouraging to us in a weird sort of way. These are people we have known for decades in various places and times. Every one of them has served faithfully and knows the true Gospel, so there is something going on.

Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

I mean, if I were just guessing without reading them, I would guess that “love thy neighbor” would be the first mark.

Ditto. I would have thought Jesus made it abundantly clear: ‘By THIS all people will know that you are my disciples: that you LOVE one another.’ Basically, love was Jesus’ only ‘mark’ of a true church. But it doesn’t even make number nine for Mark Dever & Co.

Very concerning. They can’t even grasp basics of the gospel.

@ Paula Rice:
Well, if we have not learned by now how easy it is to whip up concerns over gospelly issues and rally the troops around terms like inerrancy. Correct Doctrine, evil culture, etc i am not sure we have learned much about at all about the dangers of groupthink, movements, tribes, gurus, etc.

The difference is the CR took longer and was at least done by vote, not stealth, but without social media and instant celebrity guru status.

The total irony of the CR is that many of the bodies thrown under the bus sound like typical evangelical conservatives today. Sort of like listening to a JFK speech today. The guy sounds right wing! Funny how that works.

@ Lydia:

I have not no… what is it about?

dee wrote:

anon wrote:
The original seed money for 9Marks was given by a non-Christian neighbor, who had seen the things CHBC was doing in the surrounding area and wanted them to replicate it elsewhere.
Wow! So, he was so impressed with the strong authoritarian bent, the membership requirements, etc., that he couldn’t help but contribute even though he was a nonbeliever? And the money didn’t even go towards the church but towards funding an organization that would go on to fulfill these amorphous ideals within Christendom. And he wasn’t a Christian? Fascinating. The nonChristian world is stunned by the 9 Marks program!

Anon’s contention does sound like fanciful nonsense. Not impossible, but very unlikely. But as I said earlier, even if it’s true, it’s not really that relevant to the general thrust of what goes on here. Money that parishoners work hard to accumulate and then tithe does get passed around behind their backs rather freely by leaders one to another to curry favor with each other. Of course they get the credit for their great generosity when for the most part it was other people’s money all the way. They are parasitical to the core.

Lea wrote:

What I don’t get, apart from the fact that we’re supposed to be doing things in secret not in front of everyone from a Christian perspective, is why people didn’t absolutely die from the tackiness of this check giving in public!

I know. I thought maybe it was an American thing. True, if CJ donated money secretly and this was later uncovered (say by the wonderful Deebs) it would look bad. That’s why transparency – books and accounts being published openly – would be the healthy thing to do. Donations could be made public, while avoiding the whole tacky showmanship that CJ loves so much. My church publishes all its accounts annually, down to the last penny – including what the pastor earns.

In fact, one might call this transparency over finances a MARK of a HEALTHY CHURCH. Needless to say, it’s not on Dever’s list :/

Lydia wrote:

One of his first dirty acts as SBTS Prez at 34 was to fire a 60 something year old man 8 mos from his retirement because he dared to correct a chapel speaker using FACTS in a professional letter. He was some sort of library archivist who would know such facts. The chapel speaker was Tom Eliff. The fired man was Paul Debusman.

I think about the man who was fired from time to time. I worry about what has become of him and his family.

Paula Rice wrote:

But what would happen to their leadership, their integrity, their movement, if it were discovered that they, themselves, had allowed someone to come in among them that they failed to discern was a liar and a deceiver? How could anyone trust their leadership?

For quite a while now, I’ve believed that CJ Mahaney will fall from grace. And that he’ll bring the whole T4G/ TGC shebang down with him. And that they will deserve it.

He will be their nemesis.

Gram3 wrote:

. Discovering we are not alone has been encouraging to us in a weird sort of way.

Gram3, would you be willing to share your story? You probably already have so if you have, I’ll search for it somehow. Thank you.

@ May:
Yup

May wrote:

I thought maybe it was an American thing.

NO!!!! I’ve NEVER been in a church where such a tacky/embarrassing/crude thing was done. Not American, at all. Though all sin is everywhere, that’s one I’ve never even HEARD of ’til now.

Stunned wrote:

Velour wrote:

over the issue of protesting the pastors/elders bringing a Megan’s List sex offender/child pornographer to church, giving him membership, leadership, and access to children and telling NO ONE.

WHATTTT?!?!?!?!? What the heck!?!?!!? How, in this day and age with so much knowledge and data about re-offending, do some still persist in ignorance?!? HOW?!?!

The pastors/elders defended the Megan’s List sex offender because he was their personal friend, they visited him in prison, they’ve known him for decades, and they said that he’s ‘harmless’ to children (somebody who’s sexually attracted to kids?). The pastors/elders said they would entrust their own kids to him. The pastors/elders told me that fathers had ‘final say’ over their families and that if fathers permitted the sex offender to touch the kids that was ok and mothers ‘had no say’ and were ‘to obey’ and ‘to submit’. That’s a felony crime in my state (CA) and mother’s are required by law to protect their children, CPS can take them away for failure, and moms can land in state prison (and do).

The pastors/elders told me to never contact law enforcement again about the sex offender, that I was ‘to obey’ my elders in ‘all things’. In other words, obstruction of justice which is a felony and conspiracy (another felony) that the pastors/elders can be prosecuted and land in state prison.

May wrote:

@ Velour:

What happened to you, and in your former church, is truly shocking. Have you done a post on it at TWW? If so I think I missed it.

No, I haven’t written up my story for TWW, although they do know about it.
I think it’s taken me some time to calm down and collect my thoughts about a lot that was wrong with that church and many others like it. 9Marks/NeoCalvinism. Membership Covenants. Patriarchy. Nouthetic Counseling (Bible counseling for serious problems with no input from a licensed, trained professional like a physician). Young Earth Creation (earth is supposedly 6,000 years old). Excommunicatons and shunnings for anything.

May wrote:

For quite a while now, I’ve believed that CJ Mahaney will fall from grace. And that he’ll bring the whole T4G/ TGC shebang down with him. And that they will deserve it.

He will be their nemesis.

I personally think that ship sailed. They have managed to normalize it all and end up shaming and censoring any negative about them or the movement. People in the movement have no idea what a bubble they are in unless they engage outsiders like us.

Worse, Mohler, Dever, etc agree and seek to emulate the Shepherding cult structure. It is every despots dream.

siteseer wrote:

they are like-minded birds of a feather who have formed liaisons for mutual benefit. Remove Mahaney from the picture and you still have major problems. Read Galatians 1 and then Dever’s 9 marks and then tell me if you see anything remotely biblical in his entire program.

Agreed. And they use *Biblical* (“do it our way”) to shut down conversation, challenge, and any critical thinking skills.

Deb wrote:

Patriciamc wrote:
Maybe TWW should change its title to The Wartburg Watch, a Biblical Watchblog.
I like that!

LOL. Well, I thought, shoot, we can play that game too!

Velour wrote:

they said that he’s ‘harmless’ to children (somebody who’s sexually attracted to kids?). The pastors/elders said they would entrust their own kids to him. The pastors/elders told me that fathers had ‘final say’ over their families and that if fathers permitted the sex offender to touch the kids that was ok and mothers ‘had no say’ and were ‘to obey’ and ‘to submit’.

oh my gosh oh my gosh oh my gosh

this is grievous.

Lydia wrote:

But still, 8 thou went to hear a pedophile protector preach. That says it all.

🙁 Too much sadness here, at times. I guess that’s the way this world can be, though.

Lydia wrote:

despots

Good word. (I needed something good at this point.)

Max wrote:

R2 wrote:

There have been Congressmen who attended CHBC.

Yeah, and Bill Clinton sang in the choir at First Baptist Church, Hope AR. Not everything that goes to church is the Church – you know them by their fruit.

J. Vernon McGee said that you can put a pig in a 3 piece suit and take him to church but that doesn’t make him a child of God and if you turn him loose he’ll go back to the pig pen and roll in the muck (slight paraphrase)

Stunned wrote:

@ Velour:
When you’re ready to tell your story, we are/I am here to listen.

Thank you. I am getting much closer to telling it. It happened in Fall 2014, my excommunication/shunning over it.

My sister said that she’s glad that they kicked me out as I might never have left on my own. She said that all of the things I’d begun to question about this (cultic/heavy Shepherding Movement-type/9Marxist/John MacArthur-ite) church that everyone else who knew me and didn’t go there saw too and questioned (silently) and not to me.

I now call churches that do that “spiritual carbon monoxide poisoning”.

siteseer wrote:

This sure is weird. A “neighbor” (how is neighbor exactly defined? A guy who lives next door and happened to wander into the church?) -and not just ‘a neighbor’ but ‘an OBSERVANT neighbor’ (??) kept coming back and listening to the new members’ class? but he is not a believer and was not taking the class to become a member himself? Has anyone experienced anything like this before?

So, then, he liked what he heard about Dever’s laws and punishments and control that he thought it would be a great idea to fund it, so it could be spread to other places? Not that he stood to benefit, personally, in any way? He just had some extra money burning a hole in his pocket?

Is that the gist of it?

Only makes sense as an Official Cover Story.

siteseer wrote:

So, then, he liked what he heard about Dever’s laws and punishments and control that he thought it would be a great idea to fund it, so it could be spread to other places?

Too bad the Capitol Hill Baptist Church *neighbor*/financial backer isn’t willing to pay for psychotherapy and vacations for all of us who got burned by 9Marx and all of its abusive practices. Salem Witch Trials II. Incredible harm across the land. I know believers, including elderly conservatives, who’ve never stepped foot in a church again after experiencing these vicious 9Marxist practices (including excommunications and shunnings).

Velour wrote:

Protestant Pope Mark Dever believes that he and all of your other neighborhood church “popes” and “cardinals” (associate pastors/elders) have the right to excommunicate anyone who doesn’t agree with them as you surely must be “unsaved”.

And after America is taken back and becomes a REAL Christian Nation(TM) once more, he will have the right to burn all such Heretics.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

:
Paterfamilii Romani have absolute power (including sexual) over ALL their household and property, animate and inanimate.
AVE, CAESAR!

After hearing my ex-NeoCalvinist pastor, a graduate of John MacArthur’s The Master’s Seminary in Southern California, say that he wouldn’t marry a couple unless the bride agreed to *obey* her husband (JMac says same) in the wedding vows, I looked it up. It turns out it comes from ancient, pagan Roman marriage contract law and has NOTHING to do with Biblical Christianity, isn’t even used in most Christian countries!

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

I am currently reading the book and the similarity between 9Marx and the Shepherding movement is erie.

The connections are like untangling a can of fishing worms.

Reckless Abandon written By Larry Tomczak, has on the Dedication page “to the following pioneers whom I count as friends and who have impacted my life…” The list includes:
Paul Cain, Mike Bickle, Charles Simpson, Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, C. Peter Wagner – and the list goes on.

http://tinyurl.com/hquzett

Lydia wrote:

One of his first dirty acts as SBTS Prez at 34 was to fire a 60 something year old man 8 mos from his retirement because he dared to correct a chapel speaker using FACTS in a professional letter. He was some sort of library archivist who would know such facts. The chapel speaker was Tom Eliff. The fired man was Paul Debusman.

Mohler was making an example of an old man. Mohler has been the power monger Mohler for decades. Trust me, he and Mahaney were using each other. It has not affected him negatively. Mohler could care less what we think of him. We are nobodies in his world.

That poor old man was ‘eliminated’ because he tried to tell the truth to a neo-Cal god, so he was sacrificed (made an ‘example’ of). What kind of Christian would treat an old man this way? Somewhere between the money and the notoriety and the ego-trips and the need for control, these power-brokers have lost their souls. Or more likely, sold them.

Velour wrote:

After hearing my ex-NeoCalvinist pastor, a graduate of John MacArthur’s The Master’s Seminary in Southern California, say that he wouldn’t marry a couple unless the bride agreed to *obey* her husband (JMac says same) in the wedding vows

Funny, I can’t seem to remember where Jesus said this.

On a serious note, if Jesus showed up in these neo-cal churches, he’d end up under church discipline.

I like a few others here loved J. Vernon McGee, no nonsense Texas-born Presbyterian minister who was in CA and his radio program.
One of his witty sayings, “In the Bible times it was a miracle when an ass spoke, and now it’s a miracle when one shuts up!”

patriciamc wrote:

if Jesus showed up in these neo-cal churches, he’d end up under church discipline.

That’s what I’ve said. These NeoCals are a bunch of Pharisees. (Mohler, Dever, and the rest of them. JMac is too.)

@ Velour:

I have family in CA. I'd ask if you are in southern, central or northern, but I'm guessing since you are keeping your identity hidden (as do I), you may not want to say. But if you want to say, I am curious. We get out there from time to time and I love a few of the different areas we visit.

Nosy Stunned 🙂

Velour wrote:

a graduate of John MacArthur’s The Master’s Seminary in Southern California, say that he wouldn’t marry a couple unless the bride agreed to *obey* her husband (JMac says same) in the wedding vows, I looked it up. It turns out it comes from ancient, pagan Roman marriage contract law and has NOTHING to do with Biblical Christianity, isn’t even used in most Christian countries!

When my parents (conservative, bible believing Christians) got married in the 1950’s, my mom REFUSED to say “obey.” She said that was reserved for Christ alone. Smart woman.

patriciamc wrote:

if Jesus showed up in these neo-cal churches, he’d end up under church discipline

After tearing up all the books in the “church’s” bookstore and emptying out the tolls?

Stunned wrote:

@ Velour:
I have family in CA. I’d ask if you are in souther, central or northern, but I’m guessing since you are keeping your identity hidden (as do I), you may not want to say. But if you want to say, I am curious. We get out there from time to time and I love a few of the different areas we visit.

Nosy Stunned

I’m in Northern California. I’m in Silicon Valley.

@ Velour:
Darn, we don’t get up there very much. Hope it’s a nice spring for ya.

Stunned wrote:

@ Velour:
Darn, we don’t get up there very much. Hope it’s a nice spring for ya.

Thanks. It was lovely here today. Like summer. I hope you have a nice spring and summer as well.

@ Stunned:
Though I was direct with “anon” with his information about the donor, I have to say that I know several young men who might well have written what he(?) did. Some of them I believe are very sincere. Some of them I no longer believe are sincere. I know a handful who were true believers but could not ignore what they saw that was inconsistent with what they knew was true. I wonder what makes the difference? Why did I buy into a false teaching for so long? What else do I believe is true that is not? The best I can come up with to explain that is that I was so tightly focused on certain things that I did not see other very important parts of the picture. Lets hope that legions of young people are not as slow to see things as I have been.

Velour wrote:

Agreed. And they use *Biblical* (“do it our way”) to shut down conversation, challenge, and any critical thinking skills.

I’ve argued here and elsewhere that this mindset is not much more than 40-45 years old and almost exclusively American in origin. American fundagelicalism has done pretty much with the Bible as Wahhabi Islam has done with their Qur’an.

BL wrote:

Reckless Abandon written By Larry Tomczak, has on the Dedication page “to the following pioneers whom I count as friends and who have impacted my life…” The list includes:
Paul Cain, Mike Bickle, Charles Simpson, Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, C. Peter Wagner – and the list goes on.

Interesting. I found this quote in “The Shepherding Movement: Controversy and Charismatic Ecclesiology”

“Unofficial alliances were formed with Bob Weiner’s Maranatha Campus Ministries and Larry Tomczak’s People of Destiny.” page 164

This book was published in 2003. I wonder why Mahaney’s name was not mentioned, after all he and Tomczak were co-founders of the movement?

Todd Wilhelm wrote:

This book was published in 2003. I wonder why Mahaney’s name was not mentioned, after all he and Tomczak were co-founders of the movement?

I think that Tomczak was higher on the totem pole than Mahaney initially.

Ran across this on SGM Survivors:

http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/2012/03/10/five-questions-every-sovereign-grace-member-should-be-asking/

“Charles Simpson was a friend of CJ’s, and a speaker at many of their churches and
Celebration conferences. Simpson met with Dave Harvey, and spoke at the Philly church at the same time Harvey was putting together his Polity reference for SGM.

They definitely have their roots in the movement, and in most ways,
are the Shepherding Movement repackaged. Those roots have often been the subject of discussion, and main posts here for some time.”

So, looks like there is support for the commonality that you noticed.

@ Lydia:

“The whole ficus is on conformity while claiming it isn’t.”
++++++++++++++++++

the customary silk plants dotted around the church, sure, but the focus, as well.:)

as to church being not a place for real thinking, i this this has been the case in even in the best churches I’ve been involved in. how can this not be the case with the typical church service format? I mean, that is the point of the sermon — to receive information. stop.

now in a college class, there’s a lecture and you receive, but there is also great motivation to process it, analyze it, synthesize it with other relevant data. your grade depends on it (hopefully, at least).

Muff Potter wrote:

I’ve argued here and elsewhere that this mindset is not much more than 40-45 years old and almost exclusively American in origin. American fundagelicalism has done pretty much with the Bible as Wahhabi Islam has done with their Qur’an.

And the Wahabi begat the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and al-Daesh/ISIS.
Each trying to be more Islamic than the previous.

elastigirl wrote:

I mean, that is the point of the sermon — to receive information. stop.

I honestly think sunday school, the good kind with real study and give and take, is the best way to really learn in church. The sermon/liturgy is more communal/social.

Friend wrote:

exactly how is the Falls Church Anglican affiliated with the Gospel Coalition?

Its Rector John Yates is a longtime ‘Council Member’ of the calvinist fraternity:

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/about/council

Gram3 wrote:

Though I was direct with “anon” with his information about the donor, I have to say that I know several young men who might well have written what he(?) did. Some of them I believe are very sincere. Some of them I no longer believe are sincere. I know a handful who were true believers but could not ignore what they saw that was inconsistent with what they knew was true. I wonder what makes the difference? Why did I buy into a false teaching for so long? What else do I believe is true that is not? The best I can come up with to explain that is that I was so tightly focused on certain things that I did not see other very important parts of the picture. Lets hope that legions of young people are not as slow to see things as I have been.

Very similar to my experience. Being exposed to people like you has enabled me to better articulate/understand those days. I know a lot of families from Covenant Life (of old), Capital Baptist (my friend in NC heavily encouraged us to make the long drive and attend there several years back). Been involved in a handful of the Master’s Seminary, and also New Covenant reformed churches across the States and Canada. Have friends that are most likely now involved with Driscol in his new venture in AZ. Really has been painful letting go of relationships over the past ten years.

Reading about Bent Tree Bible’s journey in taking 25 years to allow women to participate in leadership was eye opening. He admitted “controlling passages” was a factor. I see “controlling voices” was the over-arching factor in why it took us so long to get out. Every group has its “controlling voices” (even blogs). Usually made up of the most intelligent, vocal folks with the mindset towards ‘biblical manipulation’ (aka… discipleship). I’d love to see/taste what genuine Spirit-led life in a community that is bound by the Love of Christ looks like. Seems almost unattainable, or rather like a pipe dream. Does it really exist somewhere in a group of more than just two or three gathered?

Velour wrote:

Pastors/elders discuss every single member, their spiritual development, attendance at church events, Bible studies, giving, etc in a closed door meeting.
It was common to be forced into meals and meeting with pastors/elders are restaurants and coffee houses. Not an invitation. An actual order and the threat of discipline for not “obeying” your “shepherds”.

It’s like they are “case managers” for members of their flock. And everyone in their flock is like a elementary age child? This makes me concerned about any pastor coming out of Southern Seminary or Masters seminary. Maybe all pastors coming out of Neocal seminaries should be treated with suspicion. There may come a time that being associated with Mark Dever and 9 Marks will be considered shameful?

Pastors are trying to systematize loving people. . Love does not work that way.

@ kin:

“I’d love to see/taste what genuine Spirit-led life in a community that is bound by the Love of Christ looks like.”
+++++++++++

I feel this can only really happen when money is taken out of the picture. when leaders are volunteers, not salaried. I feel that the need for the acquisition of money creates pressure, stress, worry, as well as distorting priorities — all of which serve to compromise the mission, the reason for existing in the first place.

elastigirl wrote:

@ kin:
“I’d love to see/taste what genuine Spirit-led life in a community that is bound by the Love of Christ looks like.”
+++++++++++
I feel this can only really happen when money is taken out of the picture. when leaders are volunteers, not salaried. I feel that the need for the acquisition of money creates pressure, stress, worry, as well as distorting priorities — all of which serve to compromise the mission, the reason for existing in the first place.

I feel this can only really happen in heaven. Maybe I’m a cynic but I have little hope for a pure church here. Even if there was legit persecution, I still think there’d be power struggles and lack of love. Yeah, maybe I am a cynic.

Mark wrote:

There may come a time that being associated with Mark Dever and 9 Marks will be considered shameful?

They will be excused by their successors as “men of their time.” As if they were victims of their “time.” That is the pass given to Luther, Calvin, Dabney, Furman, etc.

@ Gram3:
They were men of their time as we are of ours. They weren’t victims of their time as we aren’t of ours. How future generations see us or them will be their opinion, nothing more, nothing less. God alone gives out the passes.

lowlandseer wrote:

God alone gives out the passes.

Yikes. Were those passes given out before the world was formed?

Bill M wrote:

Bridget wrote:

Pastors are trying to systematize loving people. . Love does not work that way.

Institutionalized and mass produced, yes I have experienced that “love”.

Would you like fries with that membership covenant?

Lydia wrote:

Would you like fries with that membership covenant?

Not fries, they gave me a gift certificate to Starbucks, not caring that I don’t drink coffee. No to coffee? Heretic! Meanwhile the “pastor” spent hours a day at the local coffee shop.

Gram3 wrote:

It is difficult, I think. Not impossible, because we have been members of some really good churches without all of the power games and authoritariansm and oppressive overlording. But the pastors of those churches were not into being part of Something Big. They wanted to be pastors of their church family. Not lords over the pewpeons. When they retired, the moved to another church and served there in ordinary ways so that their “legacy” did not impede the new pastor. I think it takes a certain kind of leader and a certain kind of people in the pews. People who strive to be like Jesus and not like the current fave guru.

Thanks for the thoughts. We searched for smaller/low profile groups for about a ten year period, but most have eventually split or deceased. We aren’t actively searching to be part of any particular group any longer. Just learning to be part of the body of Christ to those around us while we rest in Him. Kinda lonely in one sense, but in another, we’re ok with it for now.

Velour wrote:

It was common to be forced into meals and meeting with pastors/elders are restaurants and coffee houses. Not an invitation. An actual order and the threat of discipline for not “obeying” your “shepherds”.

“We are told by the Commissar that we have Volunteered, Comrade.”